The Sexual in Chinese Sociology: Homosexuality Studies in Contemporary China

Abstract

Through a meta-literature review, this paper examines the changing contours of Chinese sociology of homosexuality in contemporary China. It unfolds the different theoretical orientations and methodologies that construct the modern male homosexual subject under major socio-economic and political changes. Chinese sociology of homosexuality started in the reform era and has been dominated by Western knowledge production and the political ideology of the communist party-state. Fused with the bio-medical model and the state's modernization project in the 1980s-1990s, the sociological study adopted a functionalist and positivistic approach with surveybased methodology in the main which focused on the etiology of homosexuality. A new transnational knowledge production of sociology of homosexuality has formed since the 2000s which has shifted towards a constructivist/ post-structuralist approach and reflexive qualitative methodology. The new sociological study examines the rise of male (as well as female) homosexual identity in China, questions the hetero/homosexual binary and discusses how an individual makes sense of homosexual identity to form same-sex intimate relationships. By tracing the epistemology of homosexuality in contemporary China, this paper rethinks the dominance of the Western construction and the role of the state in shaping the knowledge of homosexuality and proposes alternative spaces for theorizing Chinese sexual identities, desires and practices.

A nationwide cross-sectional study of 15,611 lesbian, gay and bisexual people in China: disclosure of sexual orientation and experiences of negative treatment in health care

“…First, contrary to the research literature that questions the willingness to disclose sexual orientation among Chinese LGB people in general because of cultural and familial pressure [25,39], this study found that a high proportion of LGB people in this study were willing to disclose their sexual orientation to their health service providers. It was found that only 24.9% of the Chinese LGB people surveyed said they would not disclose to their doctor their sexual orientation if asked, 57.0% said it depends, whereas 18.1% said they would.…”

“…It has been argued that homoerotic practice enjoyed great tolerance in ancient Chinese literature, and same-sex behaviours were socially permitted as long as the man maintained his social obligations to the family (i.e., getting married and bearing children). Since the Qing Dynasty (AD 1644-1911) and the impact of modernity, Chinese society has turned to Western bio-medical knowledge to understand sexual behaviours [25]. Homosexuality was classified as a sexual disorder in the first version of the Chinese Classification of Mental Disorders (CCMD) in 1978 [26].…”

‘Hidden identities’: perceptions of sexual identity in Beijing

“…Although many academics have studied lesbian and gay sexualities in China (see Engebretsen ; Engebretsen, Schroeder and Bao ; Kam ; Kong ), non‐academic interest regarding Chinese culture and its effect on hidden or open sexual identities of Chinese lesbian and gay people helps to further substantiate the need for more rigorous academic study in this area. According to a report in the IBTimes, Veksler (), states there are an estimated 30 million homosexual people in China, and the majority of them are not willing to be open about their sexual identity.…”

Queer activism in Taiwan: An emergent rainbow coalition from the assemblage perspective

“…In fact, Japan's traditional perception of homoeroticism was similar to that of pre-modern Chinanamely, an expression and extension of one's social power (McLelland and Suganuma, 2009), but gender inequality had however made society turn a blind eye to female eroticism. However, such an ambivalent attitude towards China does not prevent the Movement from influencing relevant campaigns in China, especially when sexuality and gender studies become diversely prospered there (Kong, 2016). An intercommunicative dialogue of translocality and reciprocity promotes many aspects of lay politics compared to the official realm that has transcended the post-Cold War framework.…”