Abstract
The relationship between HIV/AIDS and gay activism has been primarily informed by the American experience and understudied in nondemocratic contexts. Drawing upon qualitative research on China and Singapore, we refine understanding of HIV/AIDS’ influence on the development of gay activism under authoritarian conditions, by examining the processes through which activist organizations interact with laws and regulations, political norms, HIV/AIDS funding, and government responses to both HIV/AIDS and collective organizing. We show how HIV/AIDS’ influence plays out in multiple patterns, depending on the strategic responses that gay activists select from a constrained range of options to shape their organizations’ destinies. Therefore, we provide insights for development agencies and international donors into whether and how international assistance intended to encourage activism and wider social change are mediated by political and legal controls on local activism.
Résumé
La relation entre le VIH/SIDA et le militantisme gay s’est essentiellement enrichie des informations tirées de l’expérience américaine et a très peu fait l’objet d’études dans les contextes nondémocratiques. Nous fondant sur les éléments d’une recherche qualitative effectuée en Chine et à Singapour, nous affinons la compréhension de l’influence du VIH/SIDA sur le développement du militantisme gay dans un environnement politique autoritaire. Nous nous attachons à l’étude des processus grâce auxquels les organizations militantes interagissent avec les législations et réglementations, les normes politiques, le financement de la lutte contre le VIH/SIDA et les actions du gouvernement tant à l’égard du VIH/SIDA que de l’organization collective. Nous exposons comment l’influence du VIH/SIDA se manifeste selon des facettes multiples, en fonction des interventions stratégiques que les militants gay choisissent parmi un éventail limité d’options pour donner forme aux destinées de leurs organizations. Ce faisant, nous apportons des éléments de réflexion à l’intention des agences de développement et des donateurs internationaux sur la question de savoir si et comment une assistance internationale ayant vocation à promouvoir le militantisme et un changement social généralisé passent par le filtre d’une médiation des contrôles politiques et juridiques sur le militantisme local.
Zusammenfassung
Die Verbindung zwischen HIV/AIDS und Homosexuellen-Aktivismus wurde vornehmlich von der amerikanischen Erfahrung geprägt und fand in nicht-demokratischen Kontexten bislang wenig Beachtung. Wir stützen uns auf qualitative Forschungen in China und Singapur und erweitern unser Verständnis des Einflusses von HIV/AIDS auf die Entwicklung des Homosexuellen-Aktivismus unter autoritären Bedingungen, indem wir die Prozesse untersuchen, mittels derer aktivistische Organizationen mit Gesetzen und Vorschriften, politischen Normen, HIV/AIDS-Finanzhilfen und Maßnahmen der Regierung im Zusammenhang mit HIV/AIDS und kollektiven Organizationen interagieren. Wir zeigen, wie sich der Einfluss von HIV/AIDS in mehreren Schemata zeigt, abhängig von den strategischen Reaktionen, die homosexuellen Aktivisten aus einer beschränkten Anzahl von Möglichkeiten zur Gestaltung des Schicksals ihrer Organizationen zur Verfügung stehen. Somit geben wir Entwicklungsagenturen und internationalen Spendern Einblicke dahingehend, ob und wie die internationale Unterstützung zur Förderung von Aktivismus und ein weiteichenderer sozialer Wandel durch politische und gesetzliche Kontrollen des lokalen Aktivsmus aufgehoben werden.
Resumen
La relación entre el VIH/SIDA y el activismo gay ha sido indicada fundamentalmente por la experiencia americana y ha sido infraestudiada en contextos no democráticos. Recurriendo a una investigación cualitativa en China y Singapur, perfeccionamos la comprensión de la influencia del VIH/SIDA en el desarrollo del activismo gay bajo condiciones autoritarias, mediante el examen de los procesos a través de los cuales las organizaciones activistas interactúan con las leyes y las reglamentaciones, las normas políticas, la financiación del VIH/SIDA y las respuestas gubernamentales tanto al VIH/SIDA como a la organización colectiva. Mostramos como la influencia del VIH/SIDA evoluciona en múltiples patrones, dependiendo de las respuestas estratégicas que los activistas gay seleccionan a partir de una gama restringida de opciones para dar forma a los destinos de sus organizaciones. Por consiguiente, proporcionamos percepciones para agencias de desarrollo y donantes internacionales sobre si y cómo la ayuda internacional dirigida a alentar el activismo y el cambio social más amplio está mediatizada por los controles políticos y legales sobre el activismo local.
摘要
一直以来,对于艾滋病(HIV/AIDS)与同性恋行动主义的关系的了解,主要来源于美国的经验;而在不民主的大背景下,对此关系一直未有深入的研究。在中国与新加坡的定性研究的基础上,通过研究同性恋行动主义者组织与法律法规相互作用的过程、政治标准、艾滋病资金来源、政府对艾滋病与集体组织的反应等,我们试图进一步探究和理解,在独裁主义背景下艾滋病对同性恋行动主义发展的影响。我们试图展示艾滋病如何通过各种方式的施加影响。这些影响取决于同性恋行动主义者为了塑造自己组织的命运而从有限的选择中所选取的策略性反应。旨在鼓励行动主义和更广泛的社会变革的国际援助是否受到针对当地行动主义者的政治与法律控制所干预?这些国际援助又如何受到这些政治、法律控制所干预?对此两个方面,我们为发展机构与国际捐赠人提供深入理解。
ملخص
تم الإبلاغ عن العلاقة بين فيروس نقص المناعة البشرية/الإيدز ونشاط مثلي الجنس في المقام الأول عن طريق تجربة أمريكية والدراسة في سياقات غير ديمقراطية. بالإعتماد على البحث النوعي على الصين وسنغافورة، نحن نصقل فهم تأثيرفيروس نقص المناعة البشرية/الإيدزعلى تطوير نشاط مثلي الجنس بموجب حالات ترخيص، من خلال دراسة العمليات من خلال تفاعل المنظمات الناشطة مع القوانين و الأنظمة والأعراف السياسية، تمويل فيروس نقص المناعة البشرية/الإيدز والردود الحكومية على حد سواء فيروس نقص المناعة البشرية/الإيدز وتنظيم جماعي. نحن نبين كيفية تأثير فيروس نقص المناعة البشرية/الإيدز يلعب في أنماط متعددة، إعتمادا˝ على إستجابات إستراتيجية يختارها نشطاء مثلي الجنس من مجموعة مقيدة لتشكيل مصائر منظماتهم. لذلك، فإننا نقدم رؤى لوكالات التنمية والجهات المانحة الدولية فيما اذا و كيف أن المساعدة الدولية تنوي على تشجيع النشاط وتوسيع التغيير الإجتماعي يتم بوساطة الضوابط السياسية والقانونية على النشاط المحلي.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
We use the term “HIV/AIDS” irrespective of the time and context. But we do so with an understanding that it did not come into wide usage until later years of the crisis, and that other terms were initially used, such as “gay cancer” and “GRIDS” (gay-related immune deficiency syndrome).
We adopt a broad definition of “gay activism” to include areas such as rights advocacy, consciousness-raising, identity formation, and social services. We also use “gay” to cover lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered peoples, though we understand that activism at the local levels may tend to emphasize certain groups over others. The important point for us is to differentiate “gay activism” from activism that focuses on HIV/AIDS beyond gay populations.
Hereinafter, we use “NGOs” and local “organizations” or “groups” interchangeably.
Even though we focus on organizations and not social movements per se, social movements scholarship is still useful for analyzing how groups of social actors navigate difficult political and economic terrain, especially as nonprofit organizations concerned with social change. We are grateful to an anonymous reviewer for making this point.
The political process model is a synthesized theoretical framework that considers both the political and economic resources, but tended to emphasize the former.
Of course, groups may also become beholden to private funders’ agenda.
In terms of quantitative measures of political liberalism, China has consistently posted a −7, whereas Singapore maintained a −2, since independence (Marshall and Jaggers 2010). We understand that authoritarianism comes in many shades, and the lines dividing modern political regimes into such types as democratic, authoritarian, and totalitarian governments (Friedrich and Brzezinski 1956; Linz 1975; Perlmutter 1981) are also blurry.
Company registration also imposes criteria that can make it difficult for organizations to sustain their activities. Once identified legally as companies, Chinese groups can no longer enjoy tax-exempt status, which increases operational costs considerably. In Singapore, “companies” may additionally seek “charitable” status for taxation purposes, but the latter comes with constraints on their activities, too.
In both countries, antigay discrimination exists, but individual experiences range from support and acceptance to persecution and rejection, depending on their family, professional, and social circles.
China’s earliest HIV infection cases (1985–1988) were not “indigenous,” whereas the “spreading” phase (1989–1995) primarily affected intravenous drug users in the southwestern region (Zhang 2004). The current expansion phase traces infections to commercial plasma donors and recipients and sexual transmission. By 2005, 44 % of total HIV/AIDS cases were spread sexually: 20 % from commercial sex workers, 17 % from different-sex partners of infected individuals, and 7 % from men who have sex with men (Ministry of Health 2006; Wu et al. 2007).
Another provision in the Penal Code, Section 377, criminalized anal and oral sex between heterosexual and homosexual couples, but it was removed in 2007 as the government felt that the law no longer reflected heterosexual norms. Hence, Section 377A remained and singled out men.
According to the Ministry of Health (2012), infected persons in the majority of transmissions in Singapore identify as heterosexual at 47 %, followed by homosexual at 45 %, bisexual at 6 % and intravenous drug use at 0.4 %.
Altman (1994) points out that both sides have an interest in publicly denying such agreements. However, at international HIV/AIDS-related conferences, the Singaporean government openly acknowledges funding and partnering gay activist organizations, perhaps to bolster its international image.
A 2010 survey by a local university found that 64.5 % of Singaporean citizens and permanent residents held negative attitudes toward homosexuals (Detenber et al. 2012). In 2012, three gay citizens filed lawsuits—an individual and a couple—to challenge the constitutionality of Section 377A, the final outcomes of which are pending at the time of writing.
The situation of lesbian activism in both countries presents a number of different challenges that we are unable to address fully in this article and examine it in a separate article elsewhere.
We thank an anonymous reviewer for alerting us to this similarity.
References
Adam, B. D., Duyvendak, J. W., & Krouwel, A. (1999). Gay and lesbian movements beyond borders? National imprints of a worldwide movement. In B. D. Adam, J. W. Duyvendak, & A. Krouwel (Eds.), The global emergence of gay and gay and lesbian politics: National imprints of a worldwide movement . Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Altman, D. (1994). Power and community: Organizational and cultural responses to AIDS. London: Taylor and Francis.
Altman, D. (1999). Globalization, political economy, and HIV/AIDS. Theory and Society, 28, 559–584.
Androite, J. (1999). Victory deferred: How AIDS changed gay life in America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Armstrong, E. A. (2002). Forging gay identities: Organizing sexuality in San Francisco, 1950–1994. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Armstrong, E. A., & Bernstein, M. (2008). Culture, power, and institutions: A multi-institutional politics approach to social movements. Sociological Theory, 26, 75–99.
Bernstein, M. (1997). Celebration and suppression: The strategic uses of identity by the lesbian and gay movement. American Journal of Sociology, 103, 531–565.
Bernstein, M. (2002). Identities and politics: Toward a historical understanding of the lesbian and gay movement. Social Science History, 26, 531–581.
Bernstein, T., & Lu, X. (2003). Taxation without representation in contemporary rural China. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Blackwood, E. (2007). Regulation of sexuality in Indonesian discourse: Normative gender, criminal law and shifting strategies of control. Culture, Health and Sexuality, 9, 293–307.
Boudreau, V. (2009). Resisting dictatorship: Repression and protest in Southeast Asia. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, S. (1999). Democracy and sexual difference: The lesbian and gay movement in Argentina. In B. D. Adam, J. W. Duyvendak, & A. Krouwel (Eds.), The global emergence of gay and gay and lesbian politics: National imprints of a worldwide movement. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Chua, L. J. (2012). Pragmatic resistance, law, and social movements in authoritarian states: The case of gay collective action in Singapore. Law and Society Review, 46, 713–748.
Chua, L. J. (2014). Mobilizing gay Singapore: Rights and resistance in an authoritarian State. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Darsey, J. (1991). From ‘gay is good’ to the scourge of AIDS: The evolution of gay liberation rhetoric, 1970–1990. Communication Studies, 42, 43–66.
D’Emilio, J. (1998). Sexual politics, sexual communities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Detenber, B. H., Ho, S. H., Neo, R. L., Malik, S., & Cenite, M. (2012). Influence of value predispositions, interpersonal contact, and mediated exposure on public attitudes toward homosexuals in Singapore. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 15, 1–16.
Earl, J. (2011). Political repression: Iron fists, velvet gloves, and diffuse control. Annual Review of Sociology, 37, 261–284.
Epstein, S. (1996). Impure science: AIDS, activism, and the politics of knowledge. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Fernandez, L. A. (2009). Policing dissent: Social control and the anti-globalization movement. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.
Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison (S. Alan, Trans.). New York: Vintage Books.
Friedrich, C., & Brzezinski, Z. (1956). Totalitarian dictatorship and autocracy. New York: Praeger.
Gamson, J. (1989). Silence, death, and the invisible enemy: AIDS activism and social movement “newness”. Social Problems, 37, 351–367.
Gerring, J. (2004). What is a case study and what is it good for? American Political Science Review, 98, 341–354.
Gevisser, M. (1990). A different fight for freedom: A history of South African lesbian and gay organisation from the 1950s to the, 1990s. In M. Gevisser & E. Cameron (Eds.), Defiant desire: Gay and lesbian lives in South Africa. New York: Routledge.
Ghaziani, A. (2008). The dividends of dissent: How conflict and culture work in lesbian and gay marches on Washington. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Goodwin, J., Jasper, J. M., & Polletta, F. (2001). Passionate politics: Emotions and social movements. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Gorman, E. M. (1991). Anthropological reflections on the HIV epidemic among gay men. The Journal of Sex Research, 28, 263–273.
Gould, D. (2001). Rock the boat, don’t rock the boat, baby: Ambivalence and the emergence of militant AIDS activism. In J. Goodwin, J. M. Jasper, & F. Polletta (Eds.), Passionate politics: Emotions and social movements (pp. 135–157). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Graff, A. (2006). We are (not all) homophobes: A report from Poland. Feminist Studies, 32, 434–449.
Grant, W. (1978). Pressure groups, politics and democracy in Britain. Hemel Hempstead: Philip Allen.
Gruszczynska, A. (2009). Sowing the seeds of solidarity in public space: Case study of the Poznan March of equality. Sexualities, 12, 312–333.
Harney, D. (1999). Lesbians on the frontline: Battling AIDS, gays, and the myth of community. In W. Elmwood (Ed.), Power in the blood: A Handbook on AIDS, politics, and communication. New York: Routledge.
Hildebrandt, T. (2011). The political economy of social organization registration in China. The China Quarterly, 37, 1313–1333.
Hildebrandt, T. (2013). Social organizations and the authoritarian state in China. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Huang, Y. (1996). Central-local relations in China during the reform era: The economic and institutional dimensions. World Development, 24, 655–672.
Inglehart, R. (1997). Modernization and postmodernization: Cultural, economic, and political change in 43 societies. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Jenkins, J. C., & Perrow, C. (1977). Insurgency of the powerless: Farm worker movements (1946–1972). American Sociological Review, 42, 249–268.
Kenney, P. (2001). Framing, political opportunities, and civic mobilization in the Eastern European revolutions: A case study of Poland’s freedom and peace movement. Mobilization, 6, 193–210.
King, K. (1992). Local and global: AIDS activism and feminist theory. Camera Obscura, 10, 78–99.
Linz, J. (1975). Totalitarian and authoritarian regimes. In F. Greenstein & N. Polsby (Eds.), Macropolitical theory. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Long, S. (1999). Gay and lesbian movements in Eastern Europe: Romania, Hungary, and the Czech Republic. In B. D. Adam, J. W. Duyvendak, & A. Krouwel (Eds.), The global emergence of gay and gay and lesbian politics: National imprints of a worldwide movement. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Lorway, R. (2006). Dispelling “heterosexual African AIDS” in Namibia: Same-sex sexuality in the township of Katutura. Culture, Health and Sexuality, 8, 435–449.
Marshall, M., & Jaggers, K. (2010). Polity IV Project. Accessed September 14, 2012, from http://www.systemicpeace.org/polity/polity06.htm.
Mauzy, D. K., & Milne, R. S. (2002). Singapore politics under the people’s action party. London: Routledge.
McAdam, D. (1982). Political process and the development of black insurgency, 1930–1950. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
McAdam, Doug, McCarthy, J. D., & Zald, M. N. (1996). Comparative perspectives on social movements: Political opportunities, mobilizing structures, and cultural framings. New York: Cambridge University Press.
McCarthy, J. D., & Zald, M. N. (1977). Resource mobilization and social movements: A partial theory. American Journal of Sociology, 82, 1212–1241.
Ministry of Health, People’s Republic of China. (2006). 2005 update on the HIV/AIDS epidemic response in China. Beijing: Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS, World Health Organization.
Ministry of Health, Republic of Singapore. (2012). Update on the HIV/AIDS situation in Singapore 2011. Singapore: Republic of Singapore.
Montinola, G., Qian, Y., & Weingas, B. R. (1996). Federalism, Chinese style: The political basis for economic success. World Politics, 48, 50–81.
O’Brien, K. J., & Li, L. (2006). Rightful resistance in rural China. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Oberschall, A. (1978). The decline of the 1960s social movements. Research in social movements, conflict and change, 1, 257–289.
Palmberg, M. (1999). Emerging visibility of gays and lesbians in Southern Africa: Contrasting contexts. In B. D. Adam, J. W. Duyvendak, & A. Krouwel (Eds.), The global emergence of gay and gay and lesbian politics: National imprints of a worldwide movement. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Perlmutter, A. (1981). Modern authoritarianism. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Piven, F. F., & Cloward, R. A. (1977). Poor people’s movements: Why they succeed, how they fail. New York: Pantheon Books.
Polletta, F., & Jasper, J. M. (2001). Collective identity and social movements. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 283–305.
Rajah, J. (2012). Authoritarian rule of law: Legislation, discourse and legitimacy in Singapore. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Rayside, D. M., & Lindquist, E. A. (1992). AIDS activism and the state in Canada. Studies in Political Economy, 39, 37–76.
Rueschemeyer, D. (2003). Can one or a few cases yield theoretical gains? In J. Mahoney & D. Rueschemeyer (Eds.), Comparative historical analysis in the social sciences. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Schock, K. (1999). People power and political opportunities: Social movement mobilization and outcomes in the Philippines and Burma. Social Problems, 46, 355–375.
Silverstein, G. (2003). Globalization and the rule of law: A machine that runs of itself? International Journal of Constitutional Law, 1, 427–445.
Singer, M. (1994). The politics of AIDS: Introduction. Social Science and Medicine, 38, 1321–1324.
Snow, D., & Benford, R. (1988). Ideology, frame resonance, and participant mobilization. International Social Movement Research, 1, 197–218.
Spires, A. J. (2011). Contingent symbiosis and civil society in an authoritarian state: Understanding the survival of China’s grassroots NGOs. American Journal of Sociology, 117, 1–45.
Stern, R. E., & Hassid, J. (2012). Amplifying silence: Uncertainty and control parables in contemporary China. Comparative Political Studies, 45, 1230–1254.
Stern, R. E., & O’Brien, K. J. (2011). Politics at the boundary: Mixed signals and the Chinese state. Modern China, 20, 1–25.
Stoller, N. (1997). From feminism to polymorphous activism. In M. P. Levine, P. M. Nardi, & J. H. Gagnon (Eds.), In changing times: Gay men and lesbians encounter HIV/AIDS. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Terto, V, Jr. (1999). Seropositivity, homosexuality and identity politics in Brazil. Culture, Health and Sexuality, 1, 329–346.
Thayer, M. (1997). Identity, revolution, and democracy: Lesbian movements in Central America. Social Problems, 44, 386–407.
Tilly, C. (1978). From mobilization to revolution. Reading: Addison-Wesley.
Vaid, U. (1995). Virtual equality: The mainstreaming of gay and lesbian liberation. New York: Anchor Books.
Wachter, R. (1992). AIDS, activism, and the politics of health. New England Journal of Medicine, 326, 128–133.
Weiss, M. (2006). Rejection as freedom? HIV/AIDS organizations and identity. Perspectives on Politics, 4, 671–678.
Winnow, J. (1992). Lesbians evolving health care: Cancer and AIDS. Feminist Review, 41, 68–76.
Wu, Z., Sullivan, S. G., Wang, Y., Rotheram-Borus, M. J., & Detels, R. (2007). Evolution of China’s response to HIV/AIDS. The Lancet, 369, 679–690.
Wu, Z., Wang, Y., Mao, Y., Sullivan, S. G., Juniper, N., & Bulterys, M. (2011). The integration of multiple HIV/AIDS projects into a coordinated national programme in China. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 89, 227–233.
Zhang, X. (2004). The gathering storm: AIDS policy in China. Journal of International Development, 16, 1155–1168.
Acknowledgments
The authors thank Frank Munger, Michael Musheno, Hakan Seckinelgin, Mark Sidel, the anonymous reviewers, and study respondents. Research for this article was partially funded by the National Science Foundation (separately under Grant no. DGE-0549369 IGERT: Training Program on Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Development in Southwest China at the University of Wisconsin–Madison and under Grant no. SES-0962129: Law and Social Sciences Program), the Social Science Research Council, University of California, Berkeley, and the National University of Singapore (under Start-up Grant WBS No. R-241-000-101-133).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Chua, L.J., Hildebrandt, T. From Health Crisis to Rights Advocacy? HIV/AIDS and Gay Activism in China and Singapore. Voluntas 25, 1583–1605 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-013-9429-7
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-013-9429-7