Sexual minority expatriates as agent of change? How foreign same-sex couples won the recognition of same-sex relationship for immigration purposes in Hong Kong

ABSTRACT

Most previous research on sexual minority migrants focused on those who move from places where there are fewer legal rights for sexual minorities to where there are more. This paper distinctively fills a research gap through a focus on a subset of sexual minority migrants: sexual minority expatriates. It presents a five-year ethnographic case study of a judicial review in Hong Kong QT v Director of Immigration and other lesbian and gay couples who moved to Hong Kong, and business organisations that advocate for immigration equality. First, the analysis highlights that both subjective cultural assumptions and objective legal conditions play an important role in sexual minority expatriates’ assessment of gay-friendliness of the work destination. Second, this paper uncovers the agency of gay and lesbian expatriates’ impact on the local legal sexual landscape and illustrates how sexual citizenship could be reclaimed by relying on the homonormative logic that the same-sex couples are productive labour and beneficial to the economy. This paper contributes to a deeper understanding of sexual minority migration by theorising how sexual minority migrants may not only be constrained by the legal and social environments in the migration destination, but they may also actively change and shape them.

KEYWORDS:

• Sexuality
• sexual minority
• lesbian and gay
• relationship recognition

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Geolocation information

Hong Kong; Asia

Notes

1 It shall be recognised that it has been argued that there were accepted same-sex marriage arrangements in various regions across the world prior to colonisation.

2 The major area where there is recognition of same-sex relationships in Hong Kong is in the context of protecting people from domestic violence under the Domestic and Cohabitation Relationships Violence Ordinance which was amended in 2009. It provides protection from domestic violence for cohabiting couples, whether or not they are married, and includes persons in same-sex relationships. Until the Court of Final Appeal decision on the QT v Director of Immigration case, which is the subject of this paper, there was no recognition of same-sex relationships for purposes of immigration. Similarly, before the Court of Final Appeal had announced the decision on the Leung Chun Kwong v Secretary for Civil Service case, there was no recognition of same-sex relationships registered overseas for taxation and fringe benefits purposes.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by General Research Fund, University Grants Committee, Hong Kong [grant number 14606318].