Could Thailand become the first Asian country to legalize same-sex civil unions?

[Jingthing]

The biggest current obstacle to Thai Civil Unions doesn't seem to be the level of opposition but the level of support/interest. The Bill requires a minimum of 10,000 signatures to be tabled in Parliament and so far it has barely received 4,000.

That's very interesting.

My feeling is if the Thai gay advocates can't get a measly 10,000 signatures they pretty much deserve nothing.

Sorry if this sounds harsh.

I think in general the Thai gay rights movement has been PATHETIC.

If they don't care, I don't care, and why should anyone care?

I can't begin to count the number of times you've told us that US gay rights problems are unique to the US and can only be solved by Americans. Perhaps you'd allow the same for other countries in the world and let them solve their own problems in their own way without lecturing them on how badly they're doing.

That's pretty much EXACTLY what I was saying in that post. It's THEIR business. Yes they do it as they like, as they care, but I still am allowed to think they are PATHETIC as an outside observer. Their most famous "leader" who I won't mention again, is not someone I would recommend following to a cocktail party, much less a movement. But yes ... THEIR choice.

Edited July 26, 2013 by Jingthing

[ToddWeston]

I'm married to a Thai and I can honestly say he didnt care either way, he still refers to the ceremony as "the show" we did it for love but also for end of life, hospital issues etc we are both in health care and saw some extreme cases of ignorance. We were also tired of the dual class within our family as the young ones were all getting married and why not Uncle Todd and Uncle Nem.

We are not flag waving change the world sort - heck we've never even been in a gay bar or a parade we just wanted a simple life that worked for us in Canada and the UK, we didnt need a piece of paper to validate our relationship but we did it and no regrets at all. It's still an adjustment when I fill out forms and mark married, when we did our first joint income tax that was a very strange feeling.

He has said for the last 22 years Thais won't give a hoot over gay marriage as long as their family accepts them who gives a hoot.

For me personally it's not just a gay persons issue it's a family issue, my parents sibs cousins aunts and uncles were more upset that the law didnt allow same sex marriage back in the day than we were in all honesty, it's society as a whole that needs to accept, I do believe whilst the gay community here likes the idea of gay marriage the family unit as a whole is still a ways off here in Thailand. Face and acceptance are so important and if your Thai parents are ashamed of you being gay in the first place there is no way in hell they will bless the marriage, we are so damn lucky all the parents love each other and visit often.

[Jingthing]

Fine. If Thai gays really cared, they could find a leader who could be bothered to ORGANIZE to get a measly 10,000 signatures. It's not a million signatures. It's 10,000. You could get 10,000 signatures to declare National Llama Day, if you wanted to.

If Thai gays really do care (I see no evidence but maybe they do) then indeed they could learn from the west about the concept of forming competent effective modern political lobbying ACTIVIST organizations around gay rights. But I still think they do not care. What foreigners care about or want is irrelevant.

Now obviously SOME Thai gays care. But enough to create effective leaders to get things done, such a formulate a coherent agenda and yes to gather a measly number of signatures when needed ... not good enough.

Thailand does have a "special" problem around these issues. In the public's mind gay is the same thing as transgender. That confuses a lot of issues. Sexual orientation and gender are NOT the same. In the west gay and transgender are ALLIED but very few people are confused enough to think they are the same thing.

Edited July 27, 2013 by Jingthing

[Scott]

An inflammatory, off-topic post and reply have been deleted.

[Credo]

As the gay population ages in Thailand, the issue of same-sex unions may be come more important. The problems of ownership of property, inheritance, medical treatment and decisions will become more important.

[Jingthing]

It's a low priority for Thailand even clearly among most Thai gays. Maybe someday. Soon? I doubt it.

[LeCharivari]

As the gay population ages in Thailand, the issue of same-sex unions may be come more important. The problems of ownership of property, inheritance, medical treatment and decisions will become more important.

I don't follow you - Thailand has always had a visible "gay population", so it's always been aging - there's nothing new here.

I also don't understand what "problems of ownership of property, inheritance, medical treatment and decisions" you're referring to - I have a Thai male partner (my Civil Partner under British law, so totally irrelevant here) and there are NO "problems of ownership of property, inheritance, medical treatment and decisions" that would have been resolved any more easily if I had a legally married Thai wife.

[LeCharivari]

Fine. If Thai gays really cared, they could find a leader who could be bothered to ORGANIZE to get a measly 10,000 signatures. It's not a million signatures. It's 10,000. You could get 10,000 signatures to declare National Llama Day, if you wanted to.

If Thai gays really do care (I see no evidence but maybe they do) then indeed they could learn from the west about the concept of forming competent effective modern political lobbying ACTIVIST organizations around gay rights. But I still think they do not care. What foreigners care about or want is irrelevant.

Now obviously SOME Thai gays care. But enough to create effective leaders to get things done, such a formulate a coherent agenda and yes to gather a measly number of signatures when needed ... not good enough.

Thailand does have a "special" problem around these issues. In the public's mind gay is the same thing as transgender. That confuses a lot of issues. Sexual orientation and gender are NOT the same. In the west gay and transgender are ALLIED but very few people are confused enough to think they are the same thing.

"If Thai gays really do care (I see no evidence but maybe they do) then indeed they could learn from the west about the concept of forming competent effective modern political lobbying ACTIVIST organizations around gay rights. But I still think they do not care."

I still don't understand what "gay rights" Thai gays are expected to care or not care about when THEY'VE ALREADY GOT EXACTLY THE SAME RIGHTS AS EVERYBODY ELSE, except gay marriage.

Its the West that has a lot to learn from Thailand where getting those rights was achieved by integration and acceptance, not by "competent effective modern political lobbying ACTIVIST organizations".

[Jingthing]

The concept of gay as an identity group is a relatively recent MODERN concept which comes from outside of Thailand. So of course all kinds of people are always aging in Thailand and all countries But only in more recent history has there been a self aware recognizable identity group ... Thai gays ... in Thailand. You can place value on that change, good or bad, but it is a change.

[Credo]

Being gay in Thailand has changed over time. There is now a little more of a gay identity than years ago. There is also that large group of people from the time when the birth rate here was really high. Twenty years ago, you would be hard pressed to find anything more than a handful of older gays. Now there are a lot of them.

The country was poorer as well.

I know a few Thai gays who are older now and they have property and concerns about what will happen to them when they get older. It's not the same as with Westerners, but there is the occasional conversation that points toward a concern for the future.

[Jingthing]

Exactly. Things change over time. Yes, Thailand is influenced by global forces.

[LeCharivari]

Being gay in Thailand has changed over time. There is now a little more of a gay identity than years ago. There is also that large group of people from the time when the birth rate here was really high. Twenty years ago, you would be hard pressed to find anything more than a handful of older gays. Now there are a lot of them.

The country was poorer as well.

I know a few Thai gays who are older now and they have property and concerns about what will happen to them when they get older. It's not the same as with Westerners, but there is the occasional conversation that points toward a concern for the future.

After living here for over twenty years (and coming here for longer) I'm not sure that I'd agree with you over the position for "older gays". More are living and retiring in the urban centres, such as Bangkok and Pattaya, and there is a clearer "gay identity" identifiable there, but up-country I haven't seen any such changes and there have always been "gay oriented" bars, etc, there where gay Thais (old and young) meet.

Maybe because, like the rest of us, you are twenty years older than you were twenty years ago so you are more aware of Thai gays who are also older?

I still don't see why "the issue of same-sex unions may become more important" to gay Thais as they get older, particularly where "property and concerns about what will happen to them when they get older" is concerned. As far as I am aware (and because of my Thai Civil Partner I've looked into this quite carefully) there are no inheritance or other tax/financial issues as there often are in the West, no joint or transferable pension rights, and no inheritance rights or rights as next of kin, hospital visitation rights, etc, that are available to a married couple that are not also available to us, as a gay couple with no legally recognised relationship in Thailand, through other far simpler and less restrictive means such as wills and living wills.

A "same-sex union", whatever its called even up to and including a fully fledged marriage, just wouldn't make any difference to us here (except that I could change my Visa from a Retirement Extension to a Marriage Extension) and I can't see anything from a purely objective point of view that would make any difference to a Thai LGBT couple. We'll convert our UK Civil Partnership to a marriage next year as there are some minor financial pension benefits that aren't available to Civil Partnerships for a few more years (assuming the worst!) and I prefer the "privacy" of ticking the "married" box when we travel, but having chatted about it we're really not going to lose any sleep over whether the Thai Civil Unions bill is passed or not as it won't make any difference to us or to our relationship.

Its quite possible (probable?) that I may have missed something that would make a difference to us, so if you can think of it I'd genuinely appreciate knowing.

[LeCharivari]

The concept of gay as an identity group is a relatively recent MODERN concept which comes from outside of Thailand. So of course all kinds of people are always aging in Thailand and all countries But only in more recent history has there been a self aware recognizable identity group ... Thai gays ... in Thailand. You can place value on that change, good or bad, but it is a change.

Looking at "the concept of gay as an identity group", while it may be "a relatively recent MODERN concept" in the West its nothing new in Thailand at all and its certainly NOT one "which comes from outside of Thailand". The West, as in so many things, is just playing catch-up - in this case a couple of thousand years of it.

Homosexuality and "the concept of gay as an identity group" was in the Pali Canon (the Tipitaka) over two thousand years ago and various Lanna religious texts as well as laws from the Ayutthayan Kingdom (12th to 18th century) on which the Tra Sam Duang legal code was based over two centuries ago.

"Thai gays ... in Thailand" weren't just "a self aware recognizable identity group", but they were formally identified and categorised as such and called nuppoongsaka.

The only "change" there has been in "relatively recent MODERN times" (say the last fifty years) has been the imported Western concept and fixation with "pigeonholing" gays into smaller, more specific groups such as gay men, kathoeys, toms and dees - a concept which has worked commercially in places like Pattaya and Patpong and socially with the minimal number of "Thai gay activists" and their supporters but which has been largely ignored by the rest of Thailand where being gay is just ... well ...being gay, so what? ... much as it has been for a couple of millenia and more.

[Jingthing]

What an absurd simplification and indeed a distortion.

Being gay? So what? What LC conveniently fails to mention was that in these ancient Lanna times homosexuality was mentioned in religious text to warn monks NOT TO DO THAT and if they did that, they were PUNISHED. That is hardly anything remotely similar to the modern WESTERN concept of gay as a demographic IDENTITY group, in the sense of the German Gay Rights Movement pre-Hitler, Stonewall, the gay rights movement, and gays seeking empowering and equal rights within the context of gay as an IDENTITY group.

Again, gay as an IDENTITY GROUP in the political/demographic sense is indeed a modern WESTERN concept. It never existed in Thailand in ancient times.

One can debate whether the export of the modern western concept of gay as an identity group is a good thing for the world or even the west where it comes from. But it is modern and it is western in origin.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identity_politics

LGBT issues

The earlier stages of the development of the modern gay movement were closely linked with identity politics. In order for gay and lesbian issues to be placed on the political agenda, gays and lesbians had to identify publicly with their homosexuality and 'come out' (See Weeks). By the 1980s, the politics of identity had become central to the gay movement's struggles. This opened the path for change but also critique.

Edited July 28, 2013 by Jingthing

[LeCharivari]

What an absurd simplification and indeed a distortion.

Being gay? So what? What LC conveniently fails to mention was that in these ancient Lanna times homosexuality was mentioned in religious text to warn monks NOT TO DO THAT and if they did that, they were PUNISHED. That is hardly anything remotely similar to the modern WESTERN concept of gay as a demographic IDENTITY group, in the sense of the German Gay Rights Movement pre-Hitler, Stonewall, the gay rights movement, and gays seeking empowering and equal rights within the context of gay as an IDENTITY group.

Again, gay as an IDENTITY GROUP in the political/demographic sense is indeed a modern WESTERN concept. It never existed in Thailand in ancient times.

One can debate whether the export of the modern western concept of gay as an identity group is a good thing for the world or even the west where it comes from. But it is modern and it is western in origin.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identity_politics

LGBT issues

The earlier stages of the development of the modern gay movement were closely linked with identity politics. In order for gay and lesbian issues to be placed on the political agenda, gays and lesbians had to identify publicly with their homosexuality and 'come out' (See Weeks). By the 1980s, the politics of identity had become central to the gay movement's struggles. This opened the path for change but also critique.

"an absurd simplification ... a distortion"?

Well that's a bit caustic, particularly as you're completely incorrect in your explanation of what the Tipitaka is about and Thai history. The Tipitaka preceded your "ancient Lanna times" by over a thousand years, and the Lanna and Ayutthayan Kingdoms were totally separate and their laws (and the Law of the Three Seals I mentioned) were loosely based on Brahmin/Indian/Dhammathat law and had nothing to do with the sangha, which must be the "religious text" you are referring to.

I was trying to keep it simple and avoid a full explanation, which would be a bit like trying to explain the Bible in two lines, but I'll give it a try (I converted to Theravadan Buddhism over 20 years ago, when I was still in the military, but I am very much a novice).

The Tipitaka is "three baskets" of which only the first (the Vinaya Pitaka) concerns the rules for monks and nuns - the sangha. The other two "baskets" are the Sutta Pitaka, which is primarily the Buddha's teachings, and the Abhidhamma Pitaka which is more philosophical. If you want to avoid ploughing through it all you could go straight to the Puggalapannatti (the fourth book of the Abhidamma Pitaka) or you could read Homosexuality and Buddhism which is available on line, which give a full explanation of the "identity groups" the Tipitaka identifies.

The Tipitaka categorised everyone into one of seven types based on their gender and sexual orientation, on the basis that that was how they were created (rather pre-dating the west on all counts) including gays. Nuppoongsaka was one of them - gay "versatile" men is the nearest equivalent in our parlance.

A "demographic IDENTITY group" is exactly what Nuppoongsaka was.

You're quite right, though, it has nothing to do with " .... Stonewall, the gay rights movement, and gay seeking empowering and equal rights ...." because according to the Tipitaka gays already HAD equal rights and were equally empowered, for better or worse, as discrimination was not based on sexual preference. Stonewall, etc, would have been an irrelevance.

There were no "gay and lesbian issues" so there could obviously be no "political agenda". Identity groups don't have to indulge in identity politics to be an identity group; your link to wiki is about identity politics, not identity groups, and while identity politics obviously need an identity group the reverse doesn't always apply and you are confusing the two.

The West is simply a couple of thousand years behind the times on gay tolerance, although its narrowing the gap by both progressing itself in the last couple of decades and dragging Thailand backwards for the last five or six ( a century, if you include the khwam-phit thaan khratham-cham-rao phit-thammada-look / sodomy law, which was never enforced before it was repealed).

[Jingthing]

Let's see some source documentation that these ancient Thai "gays" were treated equally as everyone else (because if they weren't they WERE being discriminated against) in ancient times and also any documentation that they ever had any self awareness as identifying their personhood relating to their sexual orientation and also that they would be self aware of being a member of a specific demographic group (gay men) in terms of their place in the larger society. I remain very skeptical this ancient Thai stuff is culturally/politically anything like the modern WESTERN concept of gay as an identity group which YES of course includes political awareness, but thanks for sharing your interesting and clearly Thaiphile perspective. Also one can invent fantasies that politics isn't vital to human life in all societies, in all times, but the reality is quite different. A small rural village living with pre-stone age tools still has politics.

Others, if you want to take the word of a self proclaimed "expert" on the internet at face value, be my guest.

To be clear, I am not suggesting that the way gay as a self aware (and yes POLITICAL) IDENTITY group has developed in the west is necessarily "superior" to other times/other cultures but I am saying it is modern and western.

Edited July 29, 2013 by Jingthing

[Scott]

Please post in a civil manner.

I think the general tenor of some of these threads gets a little caustic. It is certainly acceptable and intellectually stimulating to have divergent points of view, however, let's make sure that the discussion is aimed at the topic and not at other posters.

Your cooperation is appreciated.

[Scott]

Please post in a civil manner.

I think the general tenor of some of these threads gets a little caustic. It is certainly acceptable and intellectually stimulating to have divergent points of view, however, let's make sure that the discussion is aimed at the topic and not at other posters.

Your cooperation is appreciated.

[LeCharivari]

Let's see some source documentation that these ancient Thai "gays" were treated equally as everyone else (because if they weren't they WERE being discriminated against) in ancient times and also any documentation that they ever had any self awareness as identifying their personhood relating to their sexual orientation and also that they would be self aware of being a member of a specific demographic group (gay men) in terms of their place in the larger society. I remain very skeptical this ancient Thai stuff is culturally/politically anything like the modern WESTERN concept of gay as an identity group which YES of course includes political awareness, but thanks for sharing your interesting and clearly Thaiphile perspective. Also one can invent fantasies that politics isn't vital to human life in all societies, in all times, but the reality is quite different. A small rural village living with pre-stone age tools still has politics.

Others, if you want to take the word of a self proclaimed "expert" on the internet at face value, be my guest.

To be clear, I am not suggesting that the way gay as a self aware (and yes POLITICAL) IDENTITY group has developed in the west is necessarily "superior" to other times/other cultures but I am saying it is modern and western.

"Others, if you want to take the word of a self proclaimed "expert" on the internet at face value, be my guest. "

Please validate that observation.

[Jingthing]

This link was added on another thread:

http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/journal_of_lesbian_and_gay_studies/v005/5.3jackson.html

I have only skimmed it so far but it appears to touch on some of the issues here about the modern introduction of "gay" identity into Thailand and how within the existing Thai context, it didn't mean the same thing as in the west.

Enjoy!

[mike123ca]

If gay marriage becomes recognized here in Thailand and Thai man marries a foreign man. What type of (based on marriage) O visa will be offered to the foreign man. Will it be the <deleted> version that foreign men can get currently or will it be similar to what Thai men can get for foreign women.

My understanding is that it is the responsibility of the husband to be responsible for the family, so immigration make the requirements for foreign men much more difficult compared to foreign women.

If a Thai man marries a foreign man, I would have to assume they will be using the same requirements and rules as a Thai man who marries a foreign woman.

[Jingthing]

If gay marriage becomes recognized here in Thailand and Thai man marries a foreign man. What type of (based on marriage)

O visa will be offered to the foreign man. Will ib be the <deleted> version that foreign men can get currently or will it be similar to

what Thai men can get for foreign women.

My understanding is that it is the responsibility of the husband to be responsible for the family, so immigration make the requirements for foreign men much more difficult compared to foreign women.

If a Thai man marries a foreign man, I would have to assume they will be using the same requirements and rules as a Thai man who marries a foreign woman.

Those are great questions that nobody knows the answer to.

Where Thailand is at now is some kind of discussion about legalizing same sex civil unions.

Almost definitely those will have ZERO meaning as far as immigration.

If this even happens in the near future, which in my view, it WON'T.

So you might be talking about issues that might be discussed in 50 to100 years and by that time, probably those laws around heterosexual marriage might have changed as well.

So it's academic to put it mildly.

Edited July 29, 2013 by Jingthing

[Jingthing]

"Others, if you want to take the word of a self proclaimed "expert" on the internet at face value, be my guest. "

Please validate that observation.

I don't see the point or even the meaning of your request.

[LeCharivari]

"Others, if you want to take the word of a self proclaimed "expert" on the internet at face value, be my guest. "

Please validate that observation.

I don't see the point or even the meaning of your request.

The "meaning " is that you have said I am a "self proclaimed "expert" " - something I deny ever having claimed to be (in this thread I said I was "very much a novice").

The "point" is that if you fail to do so you are calling into question any credibility you have for posting the truth.

(Note: I am trying my best to remain "civil" despite breaches of Forum Rules 1, 4 and 5)

[Jingthing]

The "meaning " is that you have said I am a "self proclaimed "expert" " - something I deny ever having claimed to be (in this thread I said I was "very much a novice").

OK, thanks for explaining. I wasn't referring to your level of Buddhism.

I was referring to the authoritative tone of your pronouncements such as

"particularly as you're completely incorrect in your explanation of what the Tipitaka is about and Thai history"

I apologize if my meaning on that point wasn't communicated effectively or clearly enough, but now I trust that's cleared up.

As Scott requested, let's at least try to keep this civil and about the topics, not about personality frictions.

Cheers.

Edited July 29, 2013 by Jingthing

[LeCharivari]

Let's see some source documentation that these ancient Thai "gays" were treated equally as everyone else (because if they weren't they WERE being discriminated against) in ancient times and also any documentation that they ever had any self awareness as identifying their personhood relating to their sexual orientation and also that they would be self aware of being a member of a specific demographic group (gay men) in terms of their place in the larger society. I remain very skeptical this ancient Thai stuff is culturally/politically anything like the modern WESTERN concept of gay as an identity group which YES of course includes political awareness, but thanks for sharing your interesting and clearly Thaiphile perspective. Also one can invent fantasies that politics isn't vital to human life in all societies, in all times, but the reality is quite different. A small rural village living with pre-stone age tools still has politics.

Others, if you want to take the word of a self proclaimed "expert" on the internet at face value, be my guest.

To be clear, I am not suggesting that the way gay as a self aware (and yes POLITICAL) IDENTITY group has developed in the west is necessarily "superior" to other times/other cultures but I am saying it is modern and western.

"Let's see some source documentation that these ancient Thai "gays" were treated equally as everyone else (because if they weren't they WERE being discriminated against) in ancient times and also any documentation that they ever had any self awareness as identifying their personhood relating to their sexual orientation and also that they would be self aware of being a member of a specific demographic group (gay men) in terms of their place in the larger society."

You are, again, asking for validation of a negative (prove that man hasn't been to Mars, etc).

The Tipitaka shows, beyond any doubt, that they were legislated for equally. Whether they were treated equally I don't know from personal experience as I wasn't there, but none of the histories of the time which I have read indicate that they were not - and gays do get a lot of mentions so they certainly weren't unnoticed or unreported on and I would have expected any such treatment to have been reported in the same way that discriminatory treatment of women, lower classes, etc, was reported on. It seems extremely unlikely that discrimination of one group would be noted but not another when that group was both visible, identified, and written about.

If you have already read the references I have given ("If you want to avoid ploughing through it all you could go straight to the Puggalapannatti (the fourth book of the Abhidamma Pitaka) or you could read Homosexuality and Buddhism which is available on line, which give a full explanation of the "identity groups" the Tipitaka identifies") and still need more I will happily give them, but you do not appear to have read those yet or you would not be asking this question in this way.

Your change from "the modern WESTERN concept of gay as a demographic IDENTITY group" to that of "the way gay as a self aware (and yes POLITICAL) IDENTITY group" is changing the goalposts. Firstly, as I have explained, the old Thai demographic identity group (Puggalapannatti) were both identified and self-identified as an identity group, but they had no "political awareness" as a group - they had no reason to have; secondly, far from all those identifying as gay and who see themselves as members of that "identity group" see it as a POLITICAL IDENTITY group - looking at the admittedly small sample of those posting here you are in a very small minority.

[Jingthing]

Debating the pros and cons of modern western gay men viewing themselves as an identity group with political implications is pretty much another topic, which has been discussed here before probably many times.

As far as the active posters here being validly representative of ANYTHING, of course they are NOT. Such a few number. I gave up doing polls on this forum as you're lucky to get three votes here on anything! Even something fun like what do you think about poppers ...

Edited July 29, 2013 by Jingthing

[LeCharivari]

If gay marriage becomes recognized here in Thailand and Thai man marries a foreign man. What type of (based on marriage)

O visa will be offered to the foreign man. Will ib be the <deleted> version that foreign men can get currently or will it be similar to

what Thai men can get for foreign women.

My understanding is that it is the responsibility of the husband to be responsible for the family, so immigration make the requirements for foreign men much more difficult compared to foreign women.

If a Thai man marries a foreign man, I would have to assume they will be using the same requirements and rules as a Thai man who marries a foreign woman.

Those are great questions that nobody knows the answer to.

Where Thailand is at now is some kind of discussion about legalizing same sex civil unions.

Almost definitely those will have ZERO meaning as far as immigration.

If this even happens in the near future, which in my view, it WON'T.

So you might be talking about issues that might be discussed in 50 to100 years and by that time, probably those laws around heterosexual marriage might have changed as well.

So it's academic to put it mildly.

Under the currently proposed Bill the only differences between a civil union and a marriage are the age a couple can register without parental consent - 17 for a marriage, 20 for a civil union. This has been made clear in many press reports, including those referenced here. End of story. Period.

A foreign man forming a civil union with a Thai national would, therefore, get exactly the same visa that a foreign man marrying a Thai national would get. I personally doubt whether a foreign woman forming a civil union with a Thai national would get exactly the same visa that a foreign woman marrying a Thai national would get, but that's purely my opinion and technically they probably should.

As JT says, though, this is all pretty academic as the Bill may be amended when it gets to Parliament and at the moment it doesn't have enough support even from Thai gays to get to Parliament. As I've said before, though, the net benefit (in Thailand) to a foreign man marrying a Thai national is minimal (the marriage visa) so its not really worth losing any sleep over.

[Jingthing]

Does anyone have any EXPLICIT text that states clearly that a Thai gay civil union law if passed will grant immigration rights? If not, there is no way one can assume that it does. The Thai immigration laws are written with the word MARRIAGE. The civilly united will not be married.

Edited July 29, 2013 by Jingthing

[Jingthing]

...

Your change from "the modern WESTERN concept of gay as a demographic IDENTITY group" to that of "the way gay as a self aware (and yes POLITICAL) IDENTITY group" is changing the goalposts. .

Actually I didn't change the bar at all. I merely expanded on what I meant to communicate initially. The word DEMOGRAPHIC I thought before was a good enough clue that I was referring to a POLITICAL entity in the identity group model. Thanks for your further expansion. I remain as unconvinced as ever about the equivalence of gay identity in ancient Thailand and the modern western concept of gay as I've described but I appreciate the effort you've made to make your case.

Edited July 29, 2013 by Jingthing