Navigating the ethnic boundary: From ‘in-between’ to plural ethnicities among Thai middle-class migrant women in Hong Kong

Abstract

The article examines the self-ethnic identification of Thai middle-class migrant women in Hong Kong. It looks into how different generations of Thai middle-class migrant women identify themselves differently in the host community. Drawing on a one-year ethnographic study and interviews with 20 participants, we found that the process of self-ethnic identification evolves from in-between ethnicity for the older generation to plural ethnicities for the younger generation. The way they perceive themselves, as we argue, determines how they navigate the ethnic boundaries in the host community. The results suggest that the older generation oscillates between being Thai and Hong Konger whereas the younger generation go beyond the dual ethnic identification and in so doing, they disrupt, transgress, or even subvert the ethnic boundaries set between the Thai and the Hong Kong people in the era of globalization with increasing mobility and the use of information and communication technologies.

Keywords

ethnic boundary Hong Kong in-betweenness middle-class migrant women plural ethnicities Thailand

Ethnic boundaries are patterns of social interaction that give rise to, and subsequently reinforce, both the self-identification of members within groups, and the confirmation of group distinctions by those outside (Sanders, 2002). To speak of a ‘boundary’ was formerly to employ a metaphor that highlighted observance of a degree of social distance, but contemporary scholarship on the subject of ethnic boundaries has emphasized their blurred and porous nature, especially in the age of migration and globalization (Ahmed, 2005; Jiménez, 2004; Kandiyoti, 2003; Meintel, 2000; Miller and Castles, 2009; Ng, 2016; Vasquez, 2010). As many scholars have argued, geographic boundaries are losing their significance in the context of globalization and intensive flows of people and capital; national identities can either be reinforced or reconstructed within immigrant communities (Anderson, 2006; Ng, 2016; Scholte, 1996, 2002). Moving from one country to another not only affects expectations of one’s role, but also calls into question one’s ethnic identity. As Freedman and Tarr (2000: 5) assert, ‘within their families, as well as within society as a whole, women of immigrant origin are in a dynamic process, creating new social spaces and negotiating new identities’. Definitions of a person’s ethnicity and his or her sense of belonging are structurally unstable, often incomplete and contingent, owing to the intersections of class, gender, religion or ideological orientations in a particular time and space (Ang, 2003; Fresnoza-Flot and Shinozaki, 2017; Hall, 1997; Massey, 2013).

This study investigates how a group of Thai middle-class migrant women in Hong Kong cross or even subvert the ethnic boundaries which are very often prescribed by the host or home communities. We examine how globalization facilitates this transgressing of ethnic boundaries that were once considered fixed and immutable. We also analyse how the experiences of mobility contribute to the rupture of ethnic boundaries, recognizing that different generations could be exposed to different types of experiences – whether through virtual reality (internet) or actual reality – and examining how these different experiences of different generations may contribute to changes in the way that they define their own ethnicities.

We focus on the Thai middle-class migrant women because studies on Thai migrants in intra-Asian migration are few, and have largely focused on working-class or rural women who work as domestic workers and within related occupations (Chan, 2015; Esara, 2004; Hewison, 2004; Mills, 1999, 2017; Peth and Sakdapolrak, 2020). In recent decades, Thailand has undergone dramatic levels of urbanization, producing a new middle-class that is well-educated, sophisticated and highly mobile (Charoentrakulpeeti et al., 2006; Funatsu and Kagoya, 2003). Yet, there has been no research to date exploring how this class thinks of its own identity in the context of increasing mobility and globalization that could potentially blur the previously clear ethnic divide.

Our research attempts to advance previous scholarship in two dimensions. First, we want to focus on the self-defined ethnicities of middle-class migrant women from a developing country – a topic which has been under-studied in the migration literature. Second, we seek to understand how generation could intersect with gender, leading to different ways of navigating and crossing ethnic boundaries that result in changes to the migrants’ self-defined ethnicity. In this article, we intend to argue that different generations have a very different perspective when it comes to defining their own ethnicities and that these definitions are subject to the impact of globalization and the technological advances that are conducive to mobility and other changes.

The article draws on ethnographic data collected over 12 months from 2016 to 2017, and interviews with 20 migrant women between 29 and 62 years of age. In discussing the findings, we first explore the ethnic self-identification of the Thai migrant women in Hong Kong. Did they perceive themselves as Hong Konger or as Thai? Did they feel a sense of belonging in Hong Kong? We then examine the how the women experienced, negotiated and navigated the ethnic boundaries there.

Southeast Asian and Thai migrants in Hong Kong

Hewison (2004) provides a general picture of Southeast Asian migrants in Hong Kong. Hong Kong saw a marked increase in migrant labour from the late 1960s, and since then, Southeast Asian migrant workers have been important for Hong Kong’s socio-economic development. Hong Kong remains an immigrant society, with close to 40% of the population being born outside the territory. Most of the Southeast Asian migrants who work in Hong Kong come from the Philippines, Indonesia and Thailand as domestic workers in middle-class families. However, little is known of the current situation of professional migrants from Southeast Asia, especially married migrant women who live in Hong Kong.

In 2016, 584,383 people belonging to ethnic minorities (i.e. non-Chinese) were living in Hong Kong, constituting 8% of the total population. Among Asians, the majority of these were Filipino (2.5%) and Indonesian (2.1%). The remainder included Indian (0.5%), Pakistani (0.3%), Nepalese (0.2%), Japanese (0.1%), and Thai (0.1%) (Census and Statistics Department, 2017: 18). With Indonesian and Filipino migrant workers being the largest of these minority groups, existing research has tended to concentrate on domestic workers from these two countries (Cheng, 1996; Chung et al., 2020; Constable, 2007, 2014; Paul, 2011, 2015; Sim, 2009), focusing on economic perspectives, the impact of migration on the host as well as the home countries, and migrants’ personal experiences. While a voluminous amount of work has been done on these two groups of Southeast Asian migrants, Thai migrant women – probably the earliest group of female foreign migrants to live and work in Hong Kong – have been relatively under-studied. Moreover, most studies on Thai migrants focus on those from the working class and the ethnic clusters (Chan, 2015; Hewison, 2004); while recognizing the intrinsic differences in terms of socio-economic class, they do not pay attention to Thai middle-class migrants. Yet while Thai migrant women accounted for 8879 of the total 10,215 Thai migrants in Hong Kong in 2016, 7156 of these 8879 were not domestic workers (Census and Statistics Department, 2017) – a significant difference from the Filipino and Indonesian migrant workers.

In Hong Kong society, Southeast Asian women are generally perceived to be of low status, and often report feeling a sense of exclusion from other residents in Hong Kong. Some research informants have noted that they sometimes faced discrimination because of their ‘Southeast Asian ethnicity’ (Wee and Sim, 2005). For Thai females migrating into Hong Kong society, the definition of ‘ethnicity’ refers to the concept of the ‘ethnic boundary’ that defines the group rather than the race (Barth, 1969: 68). These migrant women are caught in an ethnic dilemma in which they struggle to position themselves between Hong Kong and Southeast Asia and the world. This paper examines how middle-class migrant women from Thailand navigate this ethnic boundary and negotiate their ethnic identity in Hong Kong, and how they perceive themselves in Hong Kong.

Lai (2011) has discussed the diasporic identity of migrants in Hong Kong. In contrast to the assimilation and integration paradigms advocated by past studies of (im)migration, current theorization of migrant identities tends to stress and celebrate interconnections across borders and negotiations of multiple affinities and relationships, notably in a transnational framework, leading to a reconfiguration of diaspora (Bauböck and Faist, 2010; Cohen, 1988; Levitt, 2004, 2009). The increase in cross-border movement is believed to bring about a destabilization of the link between place and identity, and a concomitant weakening in the sense of settlement. Thus, rather than an identity tied to a singular ‘imagined community’ in which one currently lives, migrants simultaneously maintain multiple connections with, and define themselves in relation to, kin, relatives and ethnic communities in different places besides the society in which they reside. Such a lateral, multipolar nexus cultivates an unfixed, moving and morphing identity that is a hallmark of contemporary conceptions of diaspora.

While Ngan and Chan (2013) have argued that an outsider is always an outsider, the dynamics of social inclusion and exclusion form a complex and multidimensional process shaped by institutional frameworks as well as informal practices. While some of these frameworks are justified by economic rationality, migrants of low socio-economic status are often excluded from aspects of labour and social protection, therefore reinforcing hegemonic ideas about ‘insider-ness’ and ‘outsider-ness’. According to Noels and colleagues (2010), it is important to examine how migrants’ feelings of identity align with their perceptions of how other people see them in the host society, and how these reflected appraisals from others contribute to migrants’ experience of discrimination and integration.

Apart from domestic and sex workers, a sizable population of middle- to upper-class Thai women migrate to Hong Kong through marriage to Hong Kong husbands (Hewison, 2004; RTHK, 2016). Scholars such as Ong (1999) have shown that migrant experiences may vary because of socio-economic status, across generations, in particular among women from developing nations. This article therefore uses social class and socio-economic background as indicators to understand the life experiences and identity of this population in Hong Kong from an intersectional analysis perspective. It shows what ethnic values people imagine for themselves, and how they navigate ethnic boundaries and re-define their identities.

Theoretical background: from in-between to plural ethnicities

According to Smith (1986: 22–31) an ethnie is ‘a community characterized by a common collective name, shared myth of common descent, shared historical memories, one or more elements of common culture, an association with a specific territory and a sense of solidarity’. The term ‘ethnic group’ is thus generally defined as a group of people whose members identify with each other through a common heritage, often consisting of a common language, a common culture, including a shared religion, and an ideology that stresses common ancestry or endogamy (Seidner, 1982). Ethnic identity refers to one’s sense of belonging to an ethnic group and the part of one’s thinking, perceptions, feelings and behaviour that is due to ethnic group membership, the ethnic group being the one in which the individual claims heritage (Phinney, 1996).

Sociologist Andreas Wimmer (2008: 973) defines ethnicity as ‘a subjectively felt sense of belonging based on the belief in shared culture and common ancestry’. This belief refers to cultural practices perceived as ‘typical’ for the community, to myths of a common historical origin, or to phenotypic similarities. Ethnicity, according to contemporary sociologists, is separate from and more complicated than one’s personal identity as an individual, although the two may mutually influence each other (Malesevic, 2004, 2006). Early scholars like Barth argued that ethnic boundaries are maintained even when ethnic groups’ cultures are similar, and social interactions could reinforce in-group members’ self-identification and outsiders’ confirmation of group distinctions (Barth, 1969; see also Sanders, 2002).

More recent scholarship on migration has suggested that migrants’ ethnic identity is fluid and ‘in-between’ (Ahmed, 2005; Ip, 2008; Marino, 2019; Ng, 2016; Van Zevern, 1995; Vasquez, 2010). Transnationalism literature concurs that a borderless identity and sense of belonging among migrants and migrant children is not only common but also necessary because of the multiple options and unlimited mobility offered by a post-territorial and globalized socio-economic and socio-cultural setting. For this reason, the construction of identity among migrants and their children today is frequently hybrid and channelled, multi-positional and network-bound, transgressive and affiliative, freely formed – albeit socially determined (Ip, 2008). Transnational migrants experience significant changes in the social space from their home country to the host country. When migrants move from one country to another, they are usually confronted with new cultural identities from the host society, but they also bring their own culture, language, values, beliefs and behaviours. Migrants will undergo a complete reinterpretation of their roles and identification in the host country.

While maintaining their network with their home countries and retaining their identity, migrants are also exposed to other ideas and concepts of the world, and merge all these into what Ahmed (2005: 99) calls ‘one imagined space’. Migrants will juggle and (re)negotiate their identities, consciously and sometimes unconsciously crossing the ethnic boundary. The negotiation of ethnic boundaries becomes even more complex with the intersections of race, class, age and gender (Ahmed, 2005; Jiménez, 2004, Meintel, 2000; Ng, 2016; Rayaprol, 2005; Vasquez, 2010). Ahmed (2005: 121) points out that Bangladeshi migrant women to the UK may vary in terms of the way they define their own identity; whereas the first generation may embrace a more ‘essentialist’ and ‘fixed’ element in terms of defining their identity through religion and culture, the next generation will have a more ‘in-between’ identity. They move between being Bangladeshi and British and are ready to identify themselves as both to capture employment and education opportunities.

Rayaprol (2005), when researching second-generation Indian Americans, also noticed the tendency to oscillate in ethnic and racial self-identification. While they clearly know that they are American, and India is ‘only a place to pay occasional visits to meet grandparents’ (2005: 139), their race also makes them a target of racism. In his study, Jiménez (2004) noticed that Mexican Americans have different ways of defining their own ethnicities and situations. They adopt multiple approaches to navigate ethnic boundaries, and sometimes use a combination of them all. Vasquez (2010) examines third-generation Mexican Americans by looking into how race and gender intersect and contribute to the diversity of experience. She refutes the notion that the choice of ethnicity by migrants is based on purely strategic motives. Using the concept of ‘flexible ethnicity’, she discovers that female and light-skinned individuals could exercise flexible ethnicity more easily than male and darker-skinned individuals. Meintel (2000), in her study of the younger generations of Canadian immigrants of different countries of origin, found that their self-identified ethnicity is plural and multiple. The literature of ethnicities provides invaluable insights into how ethnicities and ethnic boundaries are messy and blurred, and very often unstable.

In our study on Thai middle-class women migrants in Hong Kong, we intend to shine a light on intergenerational differences to examine how ethnicity and generations intersect with each other; through the lens of generation and ethnicity, we examine the diversity of experiences and the factors that contribute to this diversity. We also want to look into how different generations navigate ethnic boundaries.

Ethnicity in the context of Thai women

Numerous academic studies (Anderson, 2006; Sattayanurak, 2002; Tejapira, 2002) have explored how Thai identity was created and have examined the ways this concept affects Thai people and Thai society. Sattayanurak summed up Thainess as a kind of trinity of ‘nation’, ‘religion’ and ‘king’.

Ethnicity in the context of Thai women follows the definition of Thainess: to be a good Thai woman requires loyalty to the nation, the religion and the king. Previous studies have concluded that Thai working-class migrants view their time in Hong Kong as providing them with an opportunity to support their families, including parents and younger siblings. There is strong cultural pressure for Thai women to perform their duties as a ‘good Thai woman’ (Harrison, 1997, 2000).

However, Thai middle-class migrant women, especially many of the younger generation, who have moved and been educated in the host country or other countries, might have strayed from the principles of Thainess after enjoying autonomy and freedom in the host countries – have they transformed their idea of their own ethnicities? Our study aims to fill a gap in the existing literature, which has not addressed this emerging group and how they compare with older-generation Thai middle-class women.

Based on our fieldwork and interviews with the migrant women, we found that Thai migrant women in Hong Kong navigate their ethnic boundaries and negotiate their identity strategically in order to respond to the different local perceptions toward them. The exposure to other cultures because of mobility and information and communication technologies (ICTs) and intergenerational differences also (re)shape their perceptions towards their own identity and how they perceive their relationship with the host and home communities. We aim to address the lack of knowledge about how Thai middle-class migrant women define their own ethnicities, and to determine how they think of their own ethnicities, whether there are any differences across different generations, and what factors influence the way they see themselves. In other words, how do they define their own ethnicities and navigate ethnic boundaries?

Research methodology

The data presented in this article originate from a study we conducted in 2016 and 2017 focusing on middle-class Thai migrant women in Hong Kong. To meet Thai migrant women, the second author, Herbary Cheung, carried out ethnographic fieldwork at two sites: Wat Buddhadhamaram, a Thai Buddhist temple built in 2006 in Yuen Long, Hong Kong and managed by the National Office of Buddhism, Thailand; and the Thai Regional Alliance in Hong Kong (TRA-HK), which was established in 2001 in the face of a proposed wage cut for foreign domestic helpers.

During this fieldwork, we adopted qualitative data-gathering methods such as participant observations, informal conversations and semi-structured interviews. In this article, we draw from our observations and interviews with Thai migrant women in Hong Kong. Accessing the Thai migrant community presented no difficulties as the monks from Wat Buddhadhamaram and the chairperson of TRA-HK were willing to facilitate the research process. Cheung started his ethnographic observations as a volunteer at the two field sites and attended weekly gatherings and activities. He also took part in events organized by Thai migrants’ communities, such as cultural festivals, religious festivals and Thai New Year celebrations (Songkran). The first author, Isabella Ng, joined the research later, and observed some of the Buddhist activities that were run by a women’s organization in 2017. A total of 20 Thai migrant women were interviewed. Their average age was 43 years, and the majority of them came from Bangkok or Chiang Mai in Thailand; most of them had been resident in Hong Kong for more than 10 years, and were able to speak Cantonese and additional languages. All but three of the participants had children. The majority of the participants had a university education and a professional job, such as banker or businesswoman, or academic, and they all possessed Hong Kong permanent resident status. All the women were married to Hong Kong husbands, and their in-laws lived in Hong Kong. Of the 20 women, 15 were Buddhist while five were Christian. To protect their privacy, they have been given pseudonyms in this article.

Open-ended questions were asked about each respondent’s life experiences as an ethnic minority Thai woman from the individual, family, community and social perspectives. Using thematic analysis, the collected interviews and fieldnotes were organized to identify emerging themes. Based on the findings from the participant observation and interviews, we attempted to identify the intersectional categories that could affect the way the participants perceive their ethnicities; how would the respondents categorize themselves and how would they navigate the ethnic boundary?

Findings

Based on the findings, we identified generation as an emerging category that influences the way participants perceive their own ethnicities. Through inductive analysis, we classify the Baby boomer generation (born between 1946 and 1964) and Generation X (born between 1965 and 1976) as belonging to the older generation, and those who were born after 1976 as the younger generation. In this research, 8 of them belong to the older generation while 12 belong to the younger generation of Thai migrants in Hong Kong. This definition also corresponds to the gradual formation of the Thai ethnic cluster in Hong Kong, as it was during the 1970s that Southeast Asians started to migrate to Hong Kong and form their respective clusters (Hewison, 2004). Our research revealed that older-generation Thai migrants perceive themselves as an ‘in-between ethnicities’ group, whereas the younger generation very often consider themselves as possessing plural ethnicities. The way the generations perceive their ethnicities affects the way they navigate ethnic boundaries.

In-between vs plural ethnicities among Thai middle-class migrant women

Our findings suggest that of the 20 Thai middle-class migrant women interviewed, 8 who belonged to the older generation (as defined above) responded ‘both’ when asked whether they think of themselves as Thai or Hong Konger. Thai identity was reinforced in the communal and public sense at the temple, but our interviews suggest that Thai migrant women’s belonging and identity is a very complex issue. Even though most of the interviewees identified themselves as Thai and maintained strong ties with Thailand, many indicated that, at the same time, they also felt a sense of ‘belonging’ to Hong Kong.

One example is 56-year-old Am, who identified herself as both Thai and Hong Konger. Am asserted that there should be no need to distinguish between the two. She put it very clearly:

I feel I am Thai who lives abroad. I will never abrogate my native culture, but I cannot hide the fact that I got influence from other cultures in my life. So, I am not like other real Thai people who live in Thailand, I think we just come at different times or were born in different places, but we live in Hong Kong and here is our home. (Am, 56, Civil Service)

Namsai, 45, has lived in Hong Kong for more than 20 years and works in the media sector; she regarded her ‘double identity’ as holding dual responsibilities towards both places.

I like to present myself as a Hong Kong citizen coming from Thailand to others. Because I think I am a Thai, but also a Hong Konger. I have been a member of Hong Kong society for a long time and have a responsibility for doing something good to Hong Kong society. But as I come from Thailand, I am a Thai too, so I don’t want to ignore my identity as a Thai. I want to present them at the same time. (Namsai, 45, Media)

Similarly, Bungon, 50, who is a businesswoman and chairperson of an non-government organization (NGO), also identifies herself as both Thai and Hong Konger:

I think I am both Thai and Hong Kong citizen. If other people ask me where do I come from, I would say that I am a Hong Kong citizen and I’m living in Hong Kong right now, and my home country is Thailand. I’m proud to be a Thai and a Hong Kong citizen. (Bungon, 50, Self-employed/NGO)

Like Namsai, both the home country and host country impact Bungon’s identity. Because she originally comes from Thailand, being a Thai demands that she retain her connection and obligation to Thailand. There are many ways for her to fulfil her responsibilities to Thailand, such as money remittances and donations to Thailand, but the most important for her is social remittances, which implies that she can take the advanced ideas, skills, attitudes and knowledge from Hong Kong to benefit socio-economic development in Thailand. On the other hand, she has obtained permanent residency in Hong Kong; as a member of Hong Kong society, she has acquired more Hong Kong socio-cultural behaviours, actively participated in community services and fully integrated into Hong Kong society, giving her different ways to express her Hong Kong identity and meet her responsibilities to Hong Kong.

Unlike the older generation, members of the younger generation often find it difficult to identify themselves as Thai–Hong Konger or Hong Kong–Thai, because they have been brought up in different environments. Most of the younger-generation Thai middle-class migrant women that we interviewed lived or studied abroad before coming to Hong Kong. While they possess certain knowledge of the Thai culture, they find it extremely difficult to place themselves in one or two categories. They are, in their own words, the product of ‘plural ethnicities’.

Pattana, a 29-year-old Thai woman working for an investment bank in Hong Kong, told us:

It is hard to say and explain, because I am confused as well. I was born in a Chinese family in Thailand, both my parents are Thai Chinese, and they are of Teochew origin. For me, of course, I am a Thai by nationality, but by ethnicity and culture, I am more a Chinese. However, after I came to Hong Kong, I found our ‘Thai Chinese’ are different from my husband and my family-in-law’s ‘Hong Kong Chinese’. When people ask me, I have to spend time and tell them the whole story, I feel annoyed sometimes. I have many Hong Kong friends who have a foreign passport, how do they define themselves? I think it really depends on different people. (Pattana, 29, Banking)

Kitty, working in Hong Kong after getting her Master’s degree in the UK, also shared with us:

I am a Hong Konger, but not like other Hong Kongers, I am a Thai, but not like Thai people in Thailand. . .. When I did my Bachelor and Master in the UK, this question was easy to answer, I would just say I am a Thai. But after moving to Hong Kong, it is complicated, if I say I am a Thai, my local friends will say I am different from the other Thai people in Kowloon city. I have many Thai friends who study, live and migrate to other countries, people are moving all the time, so how you look at yourself, perceive your identity is not important at all, I mean in this globalization era. (Kitty, 36, Consulting Company)

The above cases of younger-generation Thai migrants all share interesting common features: as young middle-class Thai migrants, they have been in contact, one way or another, with other cultures, either through bloodlines, or through studying or living in other places before migrating to Hong Kong. As Meintel (2000: 14) discovered, the new generation of a variety of immigrants in Montreal regarded their ethnic identity as not ‘framed in a logic of closure, but rather [it] becomes the basis for wider solidarities both in the local setting and across transnational space’. This is not exclusively happening for those who are in their home countries. As we see in the younger-generation Thai middle-class migrant women, they also identify themselves as global citizens, fluid, multiple, plural. They are products of globalization whereby mobility and exposure to other cultures have constituted their plural identities.

Another reason for the discrepancy between the generations is that older-generation Thai women came to Hong Kong mainly because of marriage, so their lives are generally focused on work and family. By contrast, the younger generation came to Hong Kong for other reasons, such as Hong Kong’s international environment; living in Hong Kong – an international financial centre with a rich colonial legacy – their feelings of plurality in terms of ethnicities are more salient and consolidated through their experiences in the former colony, where diversity and plurality play a crucial role in Hong Kong’s success.

Here, we noticed, like Espiritu (1994) and Meintel (2000), that members of the younger generation tend to perceive themselves as having multiple and plural identities because of their exposure to other cultures. Ariely (2019), in his transnational study of the relationship between globalization and ethnic identity, also found that the older generation tends to see the ‘nation in more ethnic terms’ (2019: 772). What we found from our study seems to confirm that there is a generational difference among migrants when viewing themselves in relation to the host countries regarding their ethnicity. This difference in perception also affects the way they navigate ethnic boundaries in the host country, as the next section will explore.

Navigating ethnic boundaries – generational differences

Because of the different ways that different generations of Thai middle-class migrant women classify themselves, the ways they navigate ethnic boundaries are also very different. The older-generation Thai middle-class migrant women were more likely to make a conscious choice to ‘present themselves’ strategically to gain approval or ‘membership’. Like Jiménez (2004) and Vasquez (2010), who speak of racial identity being ‘relational’ and ‘situational’, because individuals can ‘amplify’ or ‘downplay’ their identity (Vasquez, 2010: 47), we also found that forms of relational and situational ethnicity are exhibited by Thai middle-class migrant women when they are with different people, and under different circumstances.

As Malee told us:

In Hong Kong, I like to present myself as a Hong Kong citizen, even when I travel in other countries, I like to say that I’m a Hong Kong citizen to others. But I like to show my Thai and Hong Kong identity at the same time when I am in Thailand. I think sometimes the Hong Kong citizenship makes everything easier in Hong Kong, for example, when I negotiate with official agencies, I like to present myself as a Hong Kong citizen very much. (Malee, 65, Self-employed)

Similarly, Nid also shared with us:

Usually I introduce myself as someone who is living in Hong Kong but I know that I am still a Thai. I love living in Hong Kong and I am still proud of being a Thai too. However, you know when you introduce yourself as Thai, people look down on you. For example, when I went to Singapore I saw a lot of Thai women working in sex industry, so I didn’t feel comfortable expressing myself as a Thai woman. But when you say you are from Hong Kong, people treat you nicely with respect. (Nid, 60, Businesswoman)

It is clear that Malee and Nid consciously choose to ‘present themselves’ in a certain ethnicity so as to make daily life easier. To ‘present oneself’ in this sense encompasses the way of talking, dressing and behaving in front of others. Presenting as a Thai is what each of the women was born with; presenting as a Hong Konger is their way to integrate into Hong Kong’s multicultural society. This is a very subjective approach, and its purpose is to increase convenience for those living as migrant women.

The older generation’s way of navigating sheds further light on the fluidity of their in-between identity. Our findings show that in different situations and contexts, the older-generation Thai migrant women choose to reveal one or other ethnic identity to avoid a situation of identity conflict. This also demonstrates that their navigating is conditioned by the otherness that local people in Hong Kong apply to migrants. ‘In-betweenness’ is the concept that grasps the essence of their dynamic identity. This in-betweenness goes beyond an attempt to stabilize the fluidity of the ethnic boundary. Rather, it situates that fluidity in a specific context embedded in the daily lives of the women, and clarifies what role they should play to articulate a specific ethnic identity.

Since transnational migrants live between the terrains of host country and home country, their decision making and behaviour involve concurrent connections between the two countries. The in-betweenness of transnational migrants reflects their inability to fully engage in either the country of the host or that of the home, so they describe themselves as simultaneously ‘belonging’ to one society but deeply connected to the other; some wanted to stay but some of them yearned to finally go back to where they originally came from. Having constructed a transnational identity hidden between the two cultures of Thailand and Hong Kong, Thai migrant women in Hong Kong struggle with issues of surveillance, assimilation, resistance and identity confusion. In their efforts to strike a balance between a survival strategy overseas and a primordial attachment to the motherland, their identification with group boundaries may shift in accordance with changing situations.

The idea of oscillating between two ethnicities and downplaying or amplifying a certain ethnicity does not seem to be a concern for the younger generation. As in Meintel’s (2000) analysis of the Canadian younger generation of different ethnicities, the younger-generation Thai middle-class migrant women identify themselves as being of fluid identity, of multiple and plural ethnicities, because of the multicultural environment to which they have been exposed.

Following David Harvey’s (1989) influential definition of globalization as a new round of ‘time-space compression’, we can note that globalization brings about an inwardly contradictory dynamic of in essence spatially defined reconfigurations of politics, culture, society, gender, race and ethnicity. Globalization’s effects on ethnic identity are widely disputed. While some regard globalization as undermining ethnic identity and increasing cosmopolitanism, others argue that it works in the opposite direction, possibly even reinforcing ethnic feelings in the form of a backlash – or that it impacts different segments in society in dissimilar ways (Halikiopoulou and Vasilopoulou, 2011; Tønnesson, 2004).

Transnational migration, a product of globalization, blurs and even transgresses boundaries and identities. Globalization promotes cosmopolitan identity rather than enhancing identification with a local or national community (Beck, 2006). Therefore, for the younger generation like Wasu, mobility is no longer a difficult issue in this 21st century when compared to the older-generation Thai migrants who moved to Hong Kong 30–40 years ago. Easier access to international travel, ICTs, and many other factors all facilitate young generation Thai like Wasu or Pim to assume plural ethnicities. For the older generation, however, globalization was just taking off in Asia. International travel and ICTs were not as advanced as they are now. Also, the 1970s was the golden era of Hong Kong’s economy and well into the 1980s, with its rapid growth, Hong Kong emerged as the Asian – and ultimately international – financial centre (Hewison, 2004). Working in Hong Kong during that era and identifying themselves as Hong Kongers already elevated their status as sophisticated and progressive individuals. The different social settings between the two generations explains their divergent approaches in identifying their ethnicities.

Wasu explained:

It really depends on different situations. But I think how other people look at me decides who I am, right? Also, I think identity is nothing important nowadays, I can be whatever I want to and I don’t have to say it to the others, I think where makes you feel like home, then where you belong to. . .. I think the local people can’t identify [where we are from]. They have a fixed image and thoughts on people from Southeast Asia, they don’t care and want to know about your background, they only judge you from your first look and skin colour. . .. So, if the people from the host society do not care, why should I be bothered? (Wasu, 38, Banking)

Pim expressed a similar opinion:

I don’t need to define whether I am a Thai or Hong Konger, it is not important. I think in Hong Kong, for a migrant, your occupation, and your socio-economic class is more important than your ethnicity. (Pim, 37, Finance)

Pim’s and Wasu’s opinions reflect an interesting phenomenon that differs from the old generation Thai migrants: with their elite globalized migrant status, their international exposure, the young generation Thai migrants like Pim and Wasu can easily be accepted and thus what identifies them is no longer simply their ethnicity, but their occupation and their socio-economic status. Through their transnational journeys, this younger generation themselves, as Kandiyoti (2003) suggested, have inherited particular social configurations of ‘here’ and ‘there’, shot through with globalization, transnational networks, or cross-cultural exchanges. For the younger-generation Thai migrant women, their diverse backgrounds and different life experiences in other countries have given them a plural ethnic orientation, which leads them to confront and renegotiate multicultural social structures and to navigate ethnic boundaries in different times and spaces. To them, this form of renegotiation is actually not their concern. By placing the concerns of ethnic boundaries onto the host community, this group of young Thai middle-class migrant women has subverted the ethnic boundaries that have been confining the older generation, constraining them to behave or to act in certain ways to amplify or downplay their ethnicities. This younger group of migrants are not perturbed by the fact that relational and situational features of ethnicities are being subverted and ethnic boundaries transgressed: they see this as a problem of the host community. Transnational migration provides opportunities for the younger-generation Thai migrant woman to challenge the pre-existing and emerging ethnic boundaries and social relations in Hong Kong. That is, individuals undertaking the same movements in temporal and spatial terms do not necessarily experience them the same way because they are ‘classed, raced and gendered bodies in motion in specific historical contexts within certain political formations and spaces’ (Smith, 2005: 238).

Conclusion

The aim of this article is to situate specific empirical findings from our fieldwork within studies of Thai migrant women’s identity across two different generations. The findings suggest that their identities are fluid, multidimensional and personalized social constructions that reflect the individual’s current context and socio-historical cohort. Identity is always contingent, owing to the dynamic quality of social life. The generational differences within the subgroup of Thai middle-class migrant women underlines the importance of socio-economic background that facilitates different perceptions of their ethnicities. Through the examples provided, we have illustrated different interpretations of ethnicities; these different interpretations influence the way in which different generations of Thai middle-class migrant women navigate ethnic boundaries in the host country. The older generation sees ethnicity as situational and relational between their host and home countries, and oscillates in the realm of in-betweenness, attempting to negotiate and sometimes to alter or problematize the ethnic boundaries. The younger generation, on the other hand, criss-crosses, disrupts and even transgresses these ethnic boundaries, as they see ethnicities not as a set of closed or semi-open systems, but as fluid, open and amorphous.

This research has shown that transnational migration is a process that is influenced not only by the host and home countries but also, for the younger generation, by an ongoing series of changes that they encounter as they move. For the older-generation Thai migrant women who became permanent residents of Hong Kong and simultaneously became wives, mothers and daughters-in-law, an in-between identity has developed. Due to their multiple social roles in both the home country and the host country, they encounter both the dilemmas and the opportunities of this in-between identity. They need to negotiate their conflicting worldviews and values to find a suitable position for themselves; this ongoing and lifelong negotiation process is what forms the in-between identity. This creates a situation in which transnational migrants not only subjectively identify themselves as from both the home and the host countries, they are also objectively pulled in different directions, as both identities make demands upon them. This in-betweenness is a fluid identity and a survival strategy; a rationale the women have developed based on their life experiences in both countries.

The younger-generation Thai middle-class migrants often have a wealth of different cultural experiences behind them, whether through studying or living in other countries, or through advanced information technologies. For this group, globalization has facilitated a plurality of identities; some believe that their identities go beyond the realm of ethnicities. They do not find the negotiation of identity necessary in Hong Kong because they are one and many at the same time. And in thinking that they are completely boundless, they have transgressed or subverted the ethnic boundaries which have been directing and constraining the older generation.

Footnotes

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Isabella Ng

Author biographies

Isabella Ng is an Assistant Professor and the Associate Head (Teaching and Learning) in the Department of Asian and Policy Studies, The Education University of Hong Kong.

Herbary Cheung is a PhD Candidate in the Department of Asian and Policy Studies, The Education University of Hong Kong and an associate researcher at Institut de Recherche sur l’Asie du Sud-Est Contemporaine (CNRS). He is a recipient of the Hong Kong PhD Fellowship Scheme.

References

Ahmed

(2005) ‘Women in Between: The Case of Bangladeshi Women Living in London’, pp. 99–129 in M. Thapan (ed.) Transnational Migration and the Politics of Identity. London: Sage Publications.

Anderson

(2006) Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. London: Verso.

Ang

(2003) ‘Together-in-difference: Beyond Diaspora, into Hybridity’, Asian Studies Review 27(2): 141–54

Ariely

(2019) ‘The Nexus between Globalization and Ethnic Identity: A View from Below’, Ethnicities 19(5): 763–83.

Barth

(1969) Ethnic Groups and Boundaries: The Social Organization of Culture Difference. Bergen: Universitetsforlaget.

Bauböck

Faist

(2010) Diaspora and Transnationalism: Concepts, Theories and Methods. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

Beck

(2006) Cosmopolitan Vision. Cambridge: Polity.

Census and Statistics Department. (2017) 2016 Population Census: Thematic Report: Ethnic Minorities. Hong Kong: Census and Statistics Department, URL (consulted 30 December 2019): from http://www.census2016.gov.hk/pdf/EM.pdf

Chan

S.K.L.

(2015) ‘Segregation Dimensions and Development Differentials of Ethnic Enclave’, International Journal of Social Economics 42(1): 82–96.

10.

Charoentrakulpeeti

Sajor

Zimmermann

(2006) ‘Middle-class Travel Patterns, Predispositions and Attitudes, and Present-day Transport Policy in Bangkok, Thailand’, Transport Reviews 26(6): 693–712.

11.

Cheng

S.J.A.

(1996) ‘Migrant Women Domestic Workers in Hong Kong, Singapore and Taiwan: A Comparative Analysis’, Asian and Pacific Migration Journal 5(1): 139–52.

12.

Chung

R.Y.N.

Liao

T.F.

Fong

(2020) ‘Data Collection for Migrant Live-in Domestic Workers: A Three-stage Cluster Sampling Method’, American Behavioral Scientist 64(6): 709–21.

13.

Cohen

(1988) The Symbolic Construction of Community. London: Routledge.

14.

Constable

(2007) Maid to Order in Hong Kong: Stories of Migrant Workers. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

15.

Constable

(2014) Born Out of Place: Migrant Mothers and the Politics of International Labor. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

16.

Esara

(2004) ‘“Women Will Keep the Household”: The Mediation of Work and Family by Female Labor Migrants in Bangkok’, Critical Asian Studies 36(2): 199–216.

17.

Espiritu

Y.L.

(1994) ‘The Intersection of Race, Ethnicity, and Class: The Multiple Identities of Second-generation Filipinos’, Identities Global Studies in Culture and Power 1(2–3): 249–73.

18.

Freedman

Tarr

(2000) Women, Immigration and Identities in France. Oxford: Berg.

19.

Fresnoza-Flot

Shinozaki

(2017) ‘Transnational Perspectives on Intersecting Experiences: Gender, Social Class and Generation among Southeast Asian Migrants and their Families’, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 43(6): 867–84.

20.

Funatsu

Kagoya

(2003) ‘The Middle Classes in Thailand: The Rise of the Urban Intellectual Elite and their Social Consciousness’, The Developing Economies 41(2): 243–63.

21.

Halikiopoulou

Vasilopoulou

(2011) Nationalism and Globalization: Conflicting or Complementary? London: Routledge.

22.

Hall

(1997) ‘Introduction: “Who Needs Identity?”’, pp. 1–17 in Hall

du Gay

(eds) Questions of Cultured Identity. London: Sage.

23.

Harrison

(1997) ‘The “Good”, the “Bad”, and the Pregnant: Why the Thai Prostitute as Literary Heroine Can’t Be Seen to Give Birth’, pp. 325–47 in Somswasdi

Theobald

(eds) Women, Gender Relations and Development in Thai Society. Chiang Mai: Chiang Mai University Press.

24.

Harrison

(2000) ‘The Disruption of Female Desire and the Thai Literary Tradition of Eroticism, Religion and Aesthetics’, Tenggara 41: 88–125.

25.

Harvey

(1989) The Condition of Postmodernity. Oxford: Blackwell.

26.

Hewison

(2004) ‘Thai Migrant Workers in Hong Kong’, Journal of Contemporary Asia 34(3): 318–35.

27.

(2008) ‘Memories and Identity Anxieties of Chinese Transmigrants in Australia’, pp. 33–51 in Kuah-Pearce

Davidson

(eds) At Home in the Chinese Diaspora: Memories, Identities and Belongings. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

28.

Jiménez

T.R.

(2004) ‘Negotiating Ethnic Boundaries: Multiethnic Mexican Americans and Ethnic Identity in the United States’, Ethnicities 4(1): 75–97.

29.

Kandiyoti

(2003) ‘Multiplicity and Its Discontents: Feminist Narratives of Transnational Belonging’, Genders 37: paragraph 2, URL (consulted 15 May 2020): http://www.genders.org/g37/g37_kandiyoti.html

30.

Lai

(2011) ‘The Present of Forgetting: Diasporic Identity and Migrant Domestic Workers in Hong Kong’, Social Identities 17(4): 565–85.

31.

Levitt

(2004) ‘Transnational Migrants: When “Home” Means More than One Country’, Migration Information Source 1.URL (consulted 2 September 2019): https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/transnational-migrants-when-home-means-more-one-country

32.

Levitt

(2009) ‘Roots and Routes: Understanding the Lives of the Second Generation Transnationally’, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 35(7): 1225–42.

33.

Malesevic

(2004) The Sociology of Ethnicity. London: Sage Publications.

34.

Malesevic

(2006) Identity as Ideology: Understanding Ethnicity and Nationalism. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

35.

Marino

(2019) ‘Thrown into the World: The Shift between Pavlova and Pasta in the Ethnic Identity of Australians Originating from Italy’, Journal of Sociology online first, doi: 10.1177/1440783319888283.

36.

Massey

(2013) Space, Place and Gender. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

37.

Meintel

(2000) ‘Plural Identities among Youth of Immigrant Background in Montreal’, Horizontes Antropológicos 6(14): 13–37.

38.

Mills

M.B.

(1999) Thai Women in the Global Labor Force: Consuming Desires, Contested Selves. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

39.

Mills

M.B.

(2017) ‘Gendered Morality Tales: Discourses of Gender, Labour, and Value in Globalising Asia’, Journal of Development Studies 53(3): 316–30.

40.

Miller

M.J.

Castles

(2009) The Age of Migration: International Population Movements in the Modern World. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

41.

I.F.S.

(2016) ‘Love Knows No Bounds: Redefining Ambivalent Physical Boundaries and Kinship in the World of ICTs’, pp. 197–213 in Schultermandl

Friedman

(eds) Click and Kin: Transnational Identity and Quick Media. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

42.

Ngan

L.L.S.

Chan

K.W.

(2013) ‘An Outsider Is Always an Outsider: Migration, Social Policy and Social Exclusion in East Asia’, Journal of Comparative Asian Development 12(2): 316–50.

43.

Noels

Leavitt

Clément

(2010) ‘“To See Ourselves as Others See Us”: On the Implications of Reflected Appraisals for Ethnic Identity and Discrimination’, Journal of Social Issues 66(4): 740–58.

44.

Ong

(1999) Flexible Citizenship: The Cultural Logics of Transnationality. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

45.

Paul

A.M.

(2011) ‘Stepwise International Migration: A Multistage Migration Pattern for the Aspiring Migrant’, American Journal of Sociology 116(6): 1842–86.

46.

Paul

A.M.

(2015) ‘Negotiating Migration, Performing Gender’, Social Forces 94(1): 271–93.

47.

Peth

S.A.

Sakdapolrak

(2020) ‘When the Origin Becomes the Destination: Lost Remittances and Social Resilience of Return Labour Migrants in Thailand’, Area 52(3): 547–57.

48.

Phinney

J.S.

(1996) ‘Understanding Ethnic Diversity’, American Behavioral Scientist 40: 143–52.

49.

Rayaprol

(2005) ‘Being American, Learning to be Indian: Gender and Generation in the Context of Transnational Migration’, pp. 130–49 in Thapan

(ed.) Transnational Migration and the Politics of Identity. London: Sage Publications.

50.

RTHK (2016) ‘Hong Kong My Home: Thai Beauty’ (video file). YouTube, 25 October. URL (consulted 20 July 2020): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pk25tc7URn4&t=340s

51.

Sanders

J.M.

(2002) ‘Ethnic Boundaries and Identity in Plural Societies’, Annual Review of Sociology 28: 327–57.

52.

Sattayanurak

(2002) ‘Intellectuals and the Establishment of Identities in the Thai Absolute Monarchy State’, Journal of the Siam Society 90(1): 101–24.

53.

Scholte

J.A.

(1996) ‘Beyond the Buzzword: Towards a Critical Theory of Globalization’, pp. 43–57 in Kofman

Youngs

(eds) Globalization: Theory and Practice. London: Pinter.

54.

Scholte

J.A.

(2002) What is Globalization? The Definitional Issue – Again. CSGR Working Paper. Coventry: University of Warwick.

55.

Seidner

S.S.

(1982) Ethnicity, Language, and Power from a Psycholinguistic Perspective. Bruxelles: Centre de recherche sur le pluralinguisme.

56.

Sim

(2009) ‘Women versus the State: Organizing Resistance and Contesting Exploitation in Indonesian Labor Migration to Hong Kong’, Asian and Pacific Migration Journal 18(1): 47–75.

57.

Smith

(1986) The Ethnic Origins of Nations. Oxford: Blackwell.

58.

Smith

M.P.

(2005) ‘Transnational Urbanism Revisited’, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 31(2): 235–44.

59.

Tejapira

(2002) ‘The Post-modernisation of Thainess’, pp. 202–27 in Tanabe

Keyes

C.F.

(eds) Cultural Crisis and Social Memory: Modernity and Identity in Thailand and Laos. Abingdon: Routledge.

60.

Tønnesson

(2004) ‘Globalizing National States’, Nations and Nationalism 10(1–2): 179–94.

61.

Van Zevern

. (1995) ‘Transnational Ethnic Identity’, Peace Review 7(2): 171–6.

62.

Vasquez

J.M.

(2010) ‘Blurred Borders for Some but not “Others”: Racialization, “Flexible Ethnicity”, Gender, and Third-generation Mexican American Identity’, Sociological Perspectives 53(1): 45–71.

63.

Wee

Sim

(2005) ‘Hong Kong as a Destination for Migrant Domestic Workers’, pp. 175–209 in Huang

S.H.

Yeoh

B.S.A.

Abdul

(eds) Asian Women as Transnational Domestic Workers. Singapore: Marshall Cavendish Academic.

64.

Wimmer

(2008) ‘The Making and Unmaking of Ethnic Boundaries: A Multilevel Process Theory’, American Journal of Sociology 113(4): 970–1022.