When it comes to marriage versus civil partnership, separate is definitely not equal. Even in cases where the country’s laws put the two things almost toe-to-toe, the slight differences in legalities and institutional phrasing can mean a world of difference in families. Although Taiwan has earned a reputation for being one of the gay-friendliest countries in Asia, this weekend’s referendum – where the majority voted against gay marriage – shows that the country still has a long way to go.
Speaking to SLEEK, Dafydd Fell of SOAS University of London’s Taiwan department says that the momentum gained from two decades of gay activism came to a head two years ago when the country elected a president that openly supported gay marriage. “An important turning point came in the 2016 election campaign when the DPP (Democratic Progressive Party) candidate Tsai Ing-wen came out openly in support of marriage equality in a number of election ads,” explains Fell. “Her landslide victory should have served as a mandate for legislation.”
But the government left legalisation up to the judiciary and just as the country’s Supreme Court ruled in May 2017 that it was unconstitutional to deny same-sex couples marriage certificates, religious and conservative opposition mounted and they brought a referendum to the general public, who voiced opposition to extending marriage equality. The referendum also prompted Taiwan’s pro-gay president to step down. While the results are not legally binding, they do put pressure on lawmakers who are tasked with upholding the court ruling with legislation by May 2019.
Fell says politics fall along generation lines in Taiwan with the younger generation largely supporting gay marriage and the older generation opposing it. But he adds that the results of the referendum are largely a product of a rich minority being able to finance the win.
“The centre of opposition is conservative evangelical churches,” Fell says. “Since Christians only make up about five per cent of the population this should not be such a problem, but they have some very rich funders such as, software giant, HTC’s Cher Wang. This meant that they were able to vastly outspend the LGBT rights movement in the recent referendum campaign.”
Still, the path to equality is not always linear, and too often, it’s a slow fight. In the United States, California’s courts legalised gay marriage in 2005, then took it away in a 2008 referendum before it was legalised on a national level seven years later. Many countries also plateau at the civil partnership stage, like Germany. Back in 2001, the country was one of the first to approve domestic partnerships with legal entitlements, but it took almost 16 years for its same-sex couples to actually enjoy equal rights in marriage.
Too often the debate is framed as a fight over a name, but the name usually carries certain rights with it regarding insurance, adoption, next-of-kin status and taxes. Even if all of these things were to be put on the same playing field, the question still remains how the name translates if you travel. If a person in a civil partnership travels to a country where marriage and civil partnerships are not equal, then they are still at risk of inequality.
“It has put hospital visitation rights into question for some, who, while still mourning the death of their deceased partners, may be forced into lawsuits with the relatives of their loved one over property,” Taiwan’s Alliance to Promote Civil Partnership Rights said in a statement. “The households of couples with children also face social and economic hardships when the law does not recognise the parental rights of both partners.”
Here’s hoping that someone becomes the first to legalise gay marriage in Asia sooner rather than later.