Everything we should know about lesbians who became refugees in the Netherlands

(1)

Refugees and migrants from LGBTQI community asking for recognition in The Hague*

Everything We Should Know About Lesbians Who

Became Refugees in the Netherlands

Fernanda Martinelli Sobreira Student number: 11253177

E-mail: fe.sobreira@yahoo.com.br Master’s Thesis in Sociology

Track: Migration and Ethnic Studies University of Amsterdam (UvA) Supervisor: Dr. Margriet van Heesch Second Supervisor: Dr. Sarah Bracke July 2018

(2)

Acknowledgements

I am extremely grateful to a wonderful, brilliant and sweet person, Margriet van Heesch, the academic expert on Gender and Sexuality who supervised my thesis, giving me such strong motivation to study this topic. And I must also offer my sincere thanks to my other supervisor, Sarah Bracke, the academic expert on Gender and Sexuality, and Hein de Haas, the expert in Migration, who helped so much by reading my work.

Moreover, since this monograph could not exist without the heartbreaking yet inspiring stories of those who suffered so much because of their sexual orientation, I am eternally thankful to the nine courageous women who agreed to participate in this research. It is my greatest hope that they will be granted refugee status soon and thus can start a new and better life.

My warm appreciation goes to John Amacker, my lovely mentor, whose advice was crucial to my decision to study Migration at UvA.

And I cannot fail to mention how indebted I am to my Brazilian friends, and to all amazing native English-speaker friends, who devoted so many hours of their precious time to correcting the grammar of this research.

Last but not least, for my astonishing brother, wonderful mother and incredible father, who always support me in new challenges, my gratitude is boundless – and my love for you is, always, unconditional.

(3)

Summary

This sociological research is about lesbian refugees / asylum seekers in the Netherlands. It was urgent to research their plight because they are “invisible” in social science research, in LGBTQI movements, and in society at large.

The main idea was to understand the heteronormativity imposed in their lives: in their countries of origin, where they suffered violence; in the way they negotiated their sexual orientation; and in the Netherlands, where they have to prove to be “real” lesbians to acquire refugee status. I answered the following research question: How do lesbian refugees / asylum seekers prove their sexual orientation when seeking asylum in The Netherlands? Subsequently, I answered the sub-questions: How have lesbian refugees / asylum seekers experienced persecution in their countries of origin while having to hide their sexual orientation? How do lesbian refugees / asylum seekers negotiate their sexual orientation? Data for this study were collected through a qualitative research method by recording (audio recording) and analyzing interviews. I contacted different organizations related to refugees in the Netherlands. They were the “gatekeepers,” who provided me possible interviewees. Moreover, snowball sampling was used to gather more possible participants. The analyses of the interviews were done using content analyses. The theories used to analyze the interviews were from Foucault (1987 & 1988), Ahmed (1999 & 2006), and Butler (1990), all of which can relate to heteronormativity.

Results show that heteronormativity played a role in the lesbians lives: In their countries of origin, they suffered physical, verbal, and psychological violence, and they endured torture, beatings, and near death. They also had to negotiate their sexuality by pretending to be heterosexuals at some point in their lives. In the Netherlands, they had to prove their sexual orientation to the Immigration Naturalization Service, which imposes heteronormative assumptions about who is a lesbian, sometimes denying their refugee status.

As an outcome, lesbian refugees / asylum seekers stay in the asylum process for years, without having the necessary documentation to start a new life in the Netherlands. Therefore, it was important to do this research about the plight of lesbian refugees / asylum seekers because they are suffering not only in their country of origin, but also in the Netherlands by waiting often years to acquire refugee status to start a new life.

(4)

1

Lesbians Who Become Refugees

1.1 Introduction: “Correcting” a Lesbian and Becoming “Refugee”

In my little room in Amsterdam is Nantale, in her early twenties, a smiling middle-class woman. She speaks English and wears her hair short .

In a Ugandan prison, Nantale was told by the police that she had to be “cured” of being gay. The method for that? “Corrective” rape. She was raped by police officers (employees of the state) in a prison (state institution), as well as by other inmates, who had free access to her cell in order to “make her straight” with the police officers’ authorization. The 1950 Penal Code of Uganda, which is still valid today, emphasizes that the punishment for homosexuality is imprisonment for life, for both women or men, according to ILGA (2017). Not only the state, employees of the state prohibit homosexuality, but also families, neighbors, churches, schools, work places, etc. As a result, individuals like Nantale are persecuted and have their rights violated only because of who they are: lesbians.

Unfortunately, her experience is shared with many LGBTQI individuals in the world.1

Homosexuality is a crime in 71 countries and may incur the death penalty in 8 countries (ILGA 2017). According to WorldAtlas (2018), there are 195 countries in the world, which means that 36.4% of the world forbids homosexuality. As may be expected, persecuted lesbian women seeking a better life often flee to other countries – such as the Netherlands – in order to claim refugee status. After acquiring this “status,” the person is considered a refugee.

However, when persecuted lesbians arrive in Dutch society, it takes months or years, if ever, to acquire “refugee status.” Kortekaas, S., President of LGBT Asylum Support organization, shared important details of the application process with me, when we met in Amsterdam to talk about this research. Particularly, lesbian refugees must prove to the Dutch Immigration and Naturalization Service (IND) that they are indeed lesbians and either have

*_{The cover picture was retrieved from:}

http://www.middleeasteye.net/in-depth/features/lgbt-refugees-being-turned-away-netherlands-not-being-gay-enough-782643191

1_{The official term as presented by the UNHCR (2015) is LGBTI, which means “lesbian, gay, bisexual,}

transgender, and intersex.” However, I added the equally important category “queer,” which means “non-heterosexuals,” as stressed in Ahmed’s article “Orientations: Toward a Queer Phenomenology” (2006).

(6)

suffered or could suffer persecution in their home countries.2

This fact was disappointing to me because I have never before heard a procedure of having to prove one’s sexual orientation. The approval for refugee status is based on the “credibility of the asylum seeker’s sexual orientation” (IND 2018a). But, how and why to prove to be a lesbian? What kind of evidence can a woman offer to a bureaucrat to “prove” that she is a lesbian, or more exactly, that she practiced a lesbian lifestyle in a country that would have arrested and even executed her for such behavior? And how do the Dutch authorities expect that a lesbian woman – who was seen as “deviant” in her home country – talks openly about her sexuality to an IND officer?

Anecdotal evidence indicates that some IND officers deny such status by alleging that a candidate for refugee status is not a real (credible) lesbian. Or that, if she has already had some kind of heterosexual relationship, she can be sent back to her home country and find a man, thus putting herself out of danger.3

But how can an officer define the sexuality of a person, based on credibility? Is it even possible to prove or “measure” one’s sexual orientation? Moreover, is it human to do it?

I want to gain a deeper understanding of this process by which a woman settles in the Netherlands as both a refugee / asylum seeker and a lesbian, to understand the violence and discrimination that they suffer. I myself am a lesbian and a Brazilian migrant studying in the Netherlands.4

Although as a Master’s degree student at an elite university, in which I am in a relatively good position, I have suffered discrimination – my adaptation to life in the Netherlands was anything but easy. Moreover, while my coming out as a lesbian in Brazil caused serious problems interpersonally with family and friends, I was never physically abused or threatened. Then, how is it for a lesbian from a country that attacks homosexuality, considering it a criminal behavior to be in the Netherlands? If such a woman’s human rights were violated at home, what must it be like for her to go through the nightmarish process of establishing legal residency as a lesbian refugee?

These are questions that need answers. Since sexual orientation can immerse a lesbian in discrimination and violence in her home country, such an orientation may almost become a curse; a condition that, on one hand, she must hide in her home country, and on the other hand, must prove in her country of refuge. Hence, my research question for this paper is:

2_{Kortekaas, S., President of LGBT Asylum Support organization, Personal Communication, 21 February 2018.} 3_{A.A., V.B., Personal communication with colleagues from Thesis Seminar, 19 February 2018.}

4_{A migrant is someone who moves permanently or semi-permanently to a new place (De Lee 1996).}

(7)

How do lesbian refugees / asylum seekers prove their sexual orientation by seeking asylum in The Netherlands?

Subsequently, I have to ask the following sub questions:

How have lesbian refugees / asylum seekers experienced persecution in their country of origin, while having to hide their sexual orientation?

How do lesbian refugees / asylum seekers negotiate their sexual orientation?

It is important to study the plight of lesbian refugees / asylum seekers, especially because lesbians tend to be “invisible” in the social sciences academy, in LGBTQI movements, and in society at large. Rather, the focus is usually on gay men, a fact that shows how sexism can exist almost anywhere. When tracking down research material, I indeed found some articles about LGBTQI refugees, but even these reports almost always concerned gay men – lesbians in general were ignored. I believe that overlooking this urgent social phenomenon will not make it go away. Thus, it is time to study the situation of lesbian refugees / asylum seekers in the Dutch society.

In order to guide the reader, the next sections of this chapter are divided as follows: section 1.2 presents the methods used to gather and analyze data in this research; section 1.3 provides information on various backgrounds of lesbians in the world, and narrated lived experience of a refugee / asylum seeker in the Netherlands; section 1.4 illustrates the theoretical background in heteronormativity that was used to analyze the data; and finally, section 1.5 presents the outline of this thesis.

1.2 Methodology Used to Gain and Analyze “Knowledges”

As stressed by Haraway (1988: 590), in any research, it is important to gain knowledges from everywhere, and from different perspectives, referred as the “situated knowledges.” Thus, knowledge comes not only from theories, but perhaps more importantly from stories of individuals who participate in the research, which in this case are lesbian refugees / asylum seekers. They are the ones most able to answer my questions, they are the experts. International authorities, the Dutch government, social scientists, and the world community as whole, should listen and hear their stories. Thus, the lived experiences of these women constituted the main part of this work.

Data for this study was collected through a qualitative research method, by recording (audio recording) and analyzing interviews. Also, while taking into consideration the importance of “situated knowledges” (Haraway 1988: 590), a comparative literature review

(8)

was done to integrate theories of heteronormativity, and other studies of LGBTQI refugees in the Netherlands. As mentioned earlier, there is currently no scholarly research available which specifically examined lesbian refugees in the Netherlands. The few studies that are related to the topic are in regards to LGBTQI refugees in general, and are from a variety of disciplines, including international law, philosophy, anthropology, sociology, official reports, and unpublished master’s theses. Thus, this study has used all that is available.

Moreover because it was hard to find lesbian refugees / asylum seekers in the Netherlands, different strategies to gather their stories (or the data for this research) were implemented. Firstly, 350 e-mails were sent to gatekeepers (people who connected me with lesbian refugees / asylum seekers). These gatekeepers are the staff from LGBT Asylum Support, Vluchtelingenwerk, COC Netherlands, Cocktail, Stichting Secret Garden, I-PSY, and UNHCR. Sandro Kortekaas, President of LGBT Asylum Support, connected me with three potential participants; Dennis Van Galen, Jan Janssens, and Linda van Vilsteren (from Vluchtelingenwerk), who then connected me with six other potential participants. I also contacted, through my supervisor’s network, Azadeh Jaryani, from Stichting Secret Garden; Niels van der Spijk, from COC Netherlands; and Sabine Jansen, one of the most known lawyers for LGBTQI asylum seekers in the Netherlands. Although the three of them responded to my e-mails, they did not have any contacts to provide. Additionally, the UN office for refugees, UNHCR, did not reply to my e-mail. Moreover, I contacted Hugo Konz, from I-PSY (an organization that provides psychological treatment for people in vulnerable situations), who replied saying that there were two Russians and one person that speaks Persian, who are lesbian refugees, but the contacts were not shared with me. Last but not least, I have a gay asylum seeker friend in the Netherlands (V.E.), who took me to one meeting of Out and Proud, where I got six more potential participants.

Snowballing sampling, which consists of recruiting more respondents through the social networks of the interviewees (Browne 2005), was applied to gather data. Two interviewees connected me with four other potential participants. Further, through the use of social media (Facebook), I found a meeting of LGBT Refugees Den Haag, which takes place every month. I added some women that confirmed their presence in the meeting, explaining my research, and asking if they knew lesbians refugees / asylum seekers to participate. One of them replied saying that she is a lesbian and an asylum seeker and that would like to be interviewed.

In total, I talked to twenty possible participants for data gathering from the following countries: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Gambia, Jordan, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Tunisia, and Uganda.

(9)

However, not everybody was willing to participate: some lived through traumatic situations that they did not want to discuss, others were afraid to be exposed (although the anonymity was guaranteed), some were busy, and others simply did not answer.

As a result, through this extensive fieldwork, there were nine respondents accountable for all the data. They are self-identified lesbians, who are living in the Netherlands as refugees or who are applying (asylum seekers) or awaiting refugee status.5_{They came from}

the following countries: Azerbaijan, Jordan, Palestine, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, and Uganda. Participant age range was 20 - 50, six have black skin color and three have white skin color, three identified as Muslim and six as Christian.

In order to establish a good rapport with the respondents, all the interviews were face to face. I believe this method is more respectful because if the interviewee started to cry, I could give her a hug or demonstrate support. Also I can imagine that respondents might feel uncomfortable and distrustful to tell their coming out stories to an unknown individual by Skype or telephone, and face to face interviews help to build rapport which overcomes these discomforts. Thus, I preferred to do it personally. I used semi-structured interviews in order to have a guide of questions, and also to have more “freedom” to raise any question during the interviews. Appendix I provides a list of research questions that were used to gather data. All the interviews were in English language. Most of the time, I met the participants in their areas of residence, in asielzoekerscentrum (asylum centers), shelters, and apartments in Amsterdam, Drachten, Gilze, Nijmegen, and Wageningen. One interview was conducted at my little room (Amsterdam), and two interviews that were conducted in a café. The participants were asked to decide the place of our meeting, in order for them to be more comfortable talking to me. The interviews lasted from 1 to 2.5 hours, and most of the time had a companion of teas, coffees and cookies. They were recorded by a phone and transcribed later, with the exception of one interview, in which the respondent did not want to be recorded, justifying that her voice is very recognizable. Of course, I respected her will and I did not record it, but I took notes. Right after the interview, I wrote everything down, with all the details remembered.

5

I heard once from a friend of mine who is living in Brazil as a refugee, S.P., that when we refer to a person as a “refugee,” we are in fact reinforcing discrimination against refugees. For him (and for me as well), it is more humane to use the term “a person who is a refugee,” as circumstances, rather than a conscious (and enthusiastic) desire, make a person seek refugee status. While I completely agree with him, in this study I use the term “refugee” because it is more practical.

(10)

It is important to keep in mind that most of these refugees / asylum seekers suffered persecution and violence in their countries of origin by the state, family, civil society, as well as in Dutch society, as some of them were brought to the Netherlands through human trafficking. Thus, as an ethical consideration, specific attention was placed on anonymity and confidentiality through an informed consent form. Therefore, in order to protect them, I used fake names in this research, and also divided the interviewees into only two categories: from an African country (Nigeria, Sierra Leone, or Uganda); and from a Middle Eastern country (Azerbaijan, Jordan, or Palestine). Age and other information was mentioned in the analysis part.

Regarding data analysis, this research relied on content analysis because “it seeks to analyze data within a specific context” (Krippendorff 1989: 403), in which the stories were divided by themes. I concluded by attempting to come up with a solution, or solutions, to improve the lives of lesbian refugees / asylum seekers in the Dutch society. Before going further, it is essential to understand the background of lesbians in the world, and their situation as refugees in the Netherlands.

1.3 Background: Being a Lesbian in the World and a Refugee in the Netherlands

According to ILGA (2017), as stressed previously, in the following 71 countries homosexuality is a crime:

Continent Countries

Africa Algeria, Angola, Botswana, Burundi, Cameroon, Comoros, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Kenya, Liberia, Libya, Malawi, Mauritania, Mauritius, Morocco, Namibia, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Swaziland, Tanzania, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

Americas Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, Dominica, Grenada, Guyana, Jamaica, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Trinidad and Tobago.

Asia Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Brunei Darussalam, Gaza, India, Indonesia (in two provinces), Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Lebanon, Malaysia, Maldives, Myanmar, Oman, Qatar, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Syria, Turkmenistan, United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan, Yemen.

Oceania Cook Islands, Kiribati, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu.

(11)

In eight countries homosexuality is punishable by execution (ILGA 2017). These countries include Iran, Iraq, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen, and as well as territories controlled by the Islamic State. According to a report from ILGA (2017), in Afghanistan, Mauritania, Pakistan, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates, while the law specifying the death penalty for same-sex behavior is not enforced, the state, society, families, etc. either look the other way or actively participate in using discrimination, persecution, violence, corrective rapes, death threats, and actual murder to deal with homosexuals. As it may be expected, persecuted lesbian women seeking a better life often flee to other countries – such as the Netherlands – in order to claim refugee status.

The Netherlands is internationally recognized for its attempt to guarantee human rights for most of its population. The country is seen as a guardian of human rights for homosexuals (Francken 2016: 17). As stated by Hekma et al. (2011), the Netherlands can be considered as one of the most liberal countries in the world in terms of sexual politics because in 1970, divorce, prostitution, homosexuality, and contraception were allowed, due to the separation of state and church. In 2001, the Netherlands became the first European country to legalize same-sex marriage. Furthermore, in 2012, the Dutch Minister of Culture and Education, Marja van Bijsterveldt, supported LGBTQI, stressing that everyone should be free to follow their sexual orientation and gender identity without fear (Alfama et al. 2016). Therefore, it would seem that the Netherlands must be a perfect place for lesbian refugees / asylum seekers to have a decent quality of life.

However reality suggests that the Netherlands is a free and open country only for the Dutch privileged individuals or for residents from more economically developed countries.6

So while this favored population enjoys the benefits of ample human rights, refugees and migrants, especially those from the global South, suffer widespread discrimination and racism that is overlooked by the government.7

For instance, during the process of acquiring the refugee status, some migrants are undocumented, with no permission to stay in the Dutch society, such as V.E., from Nigeria. He told me that undocumented people have no freedom in the Netherlands, mentioning that if there is a fight in a bar, he cannot intervene to help

6_{Here I am including most Dutch citizens who have a good life with opportunities and access: the majority of}

the people have quality education, health care, and public transportation. For me, this is to be privileged. We do not see egregious social inequality in the Netherlands. In Brazil, for instance, which suffers under extreme social inequality, only a privileged minority enjoy access to good education, health care, and public transportation.

7_{V.E., a gay man asylum seeker in the Netherlands, Personal Communication, 15 March 2018.}

As stressed by Krüger (2008), “North” and “South” refer to industrialized countries and less industrialized countries, respectively. “North” means the more economically developed countries. “South” means the less economically developed countries. (Krüger 2008: 2).

(12)

because he can be detained if the police caught him. Moreover, he said that employers take advantage of undocumented people by exploiting their work (low wages, poor hours etc.). With no documents to legally stay in the country, people can be imprisoned by the police at any time.8

This places lesbian refugees / asylum seekers in a double bind. In their home countries they suffered persecution, threats, discrimination by their families, society or the state for being lesbians. Then, upon their arrival in the Netherlands, if they arrive “undocumented,” they can be imprisoned, violating their rights of being free. Moreover, the fact that the government has been denied refugee status intrigues me a lot, since the country was the first one, in 1981, to recognize sexual orientation as a cause of persecution when applying for refugee status (Jansen 2010). This makes it all the more interesting that the Netherlands, an example to the world in terms of progressive sexual rights and policies, has maintained the conservative policy or requiring asylum seekers to provide proof of their lesbian identity.

Certainly, the lesbians relocation to the Netherlands may be eased by the support of family, friends, and acquaintances. But if they had been persecuted and threatened by family, government, and society, they had no choice, but to leave. As I talked to S.P., a gay refugee in Brazil in 2015, to be a refugee is not a choice, it is a circumstance, especially for lesbians and gays, when the person is expelled from home.9

Since lesbians and refugees can be discriminated, it is relevant to take into consideration some theories of heteronormativity – one of the reasons of all this discrimination – in order to understand their situation in the Netherlands as lesbian refugees / asylum seekers.

1.4 Theoretical Background

Theories regarding “heteronormativity,” or, in other words heterosexuality as a norm, were used in this research to analyze stories of lesbians refugees / asylum seekers. In their countries of origin they were persecuted since heterosexuality is mandatory, having to hide their sexuality. Heteronormativity also played a role in the way they deal or negotiate their sexual orientation. In the Netherlands, they have to prove their sexual orientation, whereas heterosexuality does not need a proof.

8 _{Presentation of A.M. in Migration Lecture at UvA, Personal Communication, 30 November 2017.}

A. M. does a volunteer work visiting the prisons for migrants in the Netherlands. There are three: in Rotterdam, in Zeist and also in Schiphol International Airport in Amsterdam. The detention places are managed by the Custodial Institutions Agencies, from the Dutch Ministry of Security and Justice (Global Detention Project 2018).

(13)

Heteronormativity is socially and culturally constructed in societies throughout history. Heterosexuality and heteronormativity are naturalized in a culture, based on history and articulations of power, which legitimized the idea of heterosexuality as the “right” form of sexuality (Petry et al. 2011: 196). These articulations of power mainly done by men, created what we came to know about sexuality nowadays.

For Foucault (1988: 18), human beings are inside a very complex relationship of powers in our “social fabrics” or societies. All these forms of power manage our mode of life (Foucault 1988: 6). But how? The varied forms of power relations, such us the opposition of men against woman, parents against sons, psychiatry against individuals with mental problems, medicine against populations, create laws, rules, and discursive production inside social institutions. These social institutions are families, hospitals, schools, churches, etc. One of these rules and discursive productions is that heterosexuality is the “right” form of sexuality. As a result, we internalized and reproduce the idea that heterosexuality is the norm, and that homosexuality is the “wrong” form.

For example, according to Butler (1990), the differences between females and males exist through the acceptance of heterosexuality as the center of society, which is considered the original form of sexuality, while homosexuality is merely a flawed copy. As mentioned by Cyfer (2017), Butler believes that since gender is a construction of expected actions, such us men acting like “males” and women like “females,” individuals try to fit inside the “heteronormativity.” Following this line of thought, individuals are not born straight, but they are converted to heterosexuals by the society’s influence (Ahmed 2006: 553). In the case of lesbian refugees / asylum seekers, they were forced in their societies to act like heterosexuals, to follow the “straight line” that must be obeyed by individuals in a society (Ahmed 2006: 556).

As a result, some countries have based their rules and laws in heteronormativity, and this automatically puts homosexuality on the wrong side. Individuals advocating for heterosexuality as a norm may engage in a benighted activism that can manifest itself in the persecution of lesbians, in beating or raping them in order to correct their “deviant” behavior. Thus, it is important to understand what happened to lesbians in their countries of origin, and all this process of establishment in the Netherlands. Therefore, it is essential and urgent to narrate their stories, that is, to get at the truth of a hideous situation that shames humanity everywhere.

(14)

1.5 Thesis Outline

This research is divided in the following way: In chapter 1, I briefly introduce the social phenomenon of lesbians becoming refugees in the Netherlands. In chapter 2, I focus on the history of refugees worldwide and the definition of a lesbian. Moreover, I explain theories on heteronormativity in order to apply that analysis to the interviews. In chapter 3, I present the interviews in which lesbian refugees / asylum seekers explained their experiences of persecution in their countries of origin. The analysis was done based on theories of heteronormativity and Foucault’s (1988) idea of power relations between individuals. In chapter 4, I analyze how lesbian refugees negotiate their sexual orientation while understanding the role of heteronormativity in their lives. In chapter 5, I present interviews and paraphrases that focus on how a lesbian proves her sexual orientation, especially to an IND officer, basing the analyses in heteronormativity. In this chapter, I answer the research question. In the end, chapter 6, I synthesize the conclusions of each chapter and offer my solution to the research question.

(15)

2

Intersectionality: Refugee, Asylum Seeker, Lesbian,

Heteronormativity

2.1 Refugee: A Poor Individual Fleeing War?

Nobody chooses to be a refugee. Louison, a friend of mine who is living in Brazil as a refugee told me once, when I met him for the first time at the Caritas São Paulo (one of the most famous non-profit organizations for refugees in São Paulo) that he had never imagined that he would end up as a refugee one day.10

His father was wealthy, one of the most famous physicians in the Democratic Republic of Congo, and opposed the political party who was governing the country. One day, when his family was having tea in the afternoon, staff from the government came to Louison’s house and murdered his parents. Desperate, he ran away and eventually arrived in Brazil. He applied and got refugee status based on a well-founded fear of political persecution. “I have never thought in my life that I would become a refugee, with no parents anymore,” he told me crying when we met.

In a similar way, many of the lesbian women that I interviewed told me that they had never thought they would end up as refugees in the Netherlands. It was only once they became fearful of persecution and had their human rights violated that they fled to the Netherlands and became refugees / asylum seekers. Therefore, the term “refugee” does not exclusively refer to individuals fleeing war or poor subjects trying to find a job, as is frequently wrongly assumed. Any person can be forced to migrate and become a refugee due to religious differences, opposing the government (as Louison), or coming out as a lesbian (as the interviewees for this research), and so on.

However, to understand lesbian refugees / asylum seekers is a bit complex. Why? Because, there is an intersectionality between the categories involved (lesbian, woman, refugee, asylum seeker), which can be used to comprehend how individuals that have “multiple marginalized social identities are often excluded by social structures” (Battle et al. 2008: 3). It would be unfair for the reader to proceed in analyzing lesbian refugees / asylum seekers stories of persecutions without taking into account the definition of each term.

Thus, this chapter focuses on answering the following questions: What is the definition of a “refugee” and how is this concept used in the world? What are the requirements and

(16)

procedure of becoming a refugee in the Netherlands? What is the definition of ‘lesbian’ and ‘heteronormativity’? How is heteronormativity related to lesbian refugees / asylum seekers?

The “knowledges” (Haraway 1988: 590) in this chapter was gathered through methods of historical research and comparative literature review. Research on LGBTQI refugees, lesbians, and heteronormativity were gathered from a variety of sources, including official reports from organizations, international law, master’s theses on sociology, and other such sources.

The chapter is divided as follows: section 2.2 based on historical and international law research, provides the definition of the concept of a “refugee” and describes its creation and use in the international community. Additionally, a theory from De Haas (2014) is used to describe the misunderstanding of the “refugee” concept; section 2.3 based on “Fleeing Homophobia Report” (2011), and Coumans (2006), presents the number of asylum seekers and the process of applying for a refugee status in the Netherlands; section 2.4, based on work of Eliason et al. (1998), presents the theoretical framework on lesbian-ness; section 2.5, based on the work of Butler (1990), Foucault (1988), Ahmed (1999 & 2006), and others, reviews the theoretical framework on heteronormativity. Finally, the relationship between heteronormativity and lesbian refugees / asylum seekers is discussed.

2.2 How Did the Concept of “Refugee” Appear in International Community?

After two World Wars that had resulted in atrocities, genocide, blatant disregard for human rights, and the destruction of entire countries, a diversity of factors contributed to the strengthening of human rights around the world (Piovesan 2007: 8). One of these factors was the creation and expansion of international organizations dedicated to international cooperation, such as the United Nations (UN), founded in 1945 as an “answer to the atrocities and horrors committed during Nazism” (Piovesan 2007: 8). As a consequence, the creation of the UN represented hope for a better world. Within the UN, a landmark human rights resolution – signed by the Netherlands as well as 48 other countries – was adopted in 1948. This Universal Declaration of Human Rights was promulgated as a common goal for all nation-states and peoples. Its creation pointed the way to a world that honors human rights, especially the rights of minorities suffering from discrimination. Such minorities, of course, included refugees. For instance, Article 14 states that anyone persecuted has the right to seek asylum in another country (Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948).

(17)

At the same time, a concern for forced migrants or refugees arose in the world. Although the practice of offering asylum to persecuted individuals has existed since antiquity (ACNUR 2011b), official worldwide concern began after 1919. Until then, international law said nothing about such people: the acceptance or rejection of refugees depended on each country’s individual laws. However, this changed with the overthrow of the Russian Tsar in 1917, and the ensuing Bolshevik Revolution. Russians fleeing the country during the revolution were later forbidden to return because they had been “denatured,” implying that they were no longer Russian citizens. Thus, the international community started talking about what to do with them. As a result, a High Commissioner for Refugees was appointed and charged with dealing with the situation of the Russian refugees. Later, this commissioner began focusing on all nationalities, and in 1950 the position of United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) was created (Sobreira 2015).

Also in 1950, the UN General Assembly set up a conference in Geneva in order to develop standards for refugee treatment. While the resulting Convention on the Status of Refugees, adopted in 1951, represented great progress in the question of refugee rights, it still required modifications: it had been directed exclusively at the flow of refugees up to 1951 and concerned only events that had occurred in Europe, thus, ignoring refugees from other parts of the world. So, in 1967, the Additional Protocol was created to recognize the legitimacy of refugees regardless of time period or geographical location. Currently, the 1951 Refugee Convention and the Additional Protocol are together the main tools protecting refugees – both signed by the Netherlands. In 1969, a resolution from the Organization of African Unity was approved, widening the definition of the term “refugee” to encompass anyone whom serious violence and human rights violations have obligated to leave one country of residence to seek asylum in another country. This convention was applied officially in the Cartagena Declaration on Refugees, in 1967 (Sobreira 2015).

After all these modifications, a “refugee” is defined nowadays as a person who was persecuted or had a well-founded fear of persecution in a country of origin and was forced to flee to another country. The reasons for these persecutions can be nationality, religion, political opinion, war and violence, membership in a particular social group (e.g., lesbians), and “race” (UNHCR 2018a).11 As mentioned previously, one particular social group is clearly

11_{According to ACNUR (2011a), nationality applies to a person who is part of a different ethnical, linguistic or}

cultural group when comparing to the majority of the population in a country. Religion refers to a group which share common traditions, beliefs and religion practices than most of the people in a country. Ethnicity (“race”) refers to all ethnical or social groups of the same origin, that form a minority inside a population. Political

(18)

vulnerable: lesbians, especially because homosexuality is a crime in some societies and may incur the death penalty (ILGA 2017). In addition, before being a refugee, the person is an asylum seeker, a person in which the application for refugee status has not started yet (UNHCR 2018b).

Therefore, as stressed in the beginning of the chapter, it is important to point out that not only the poor or individuals fleeing war can become a refugee or an asylum seeker, but anyone with enough resources can migrate. Taking into account De Haas (2014: 27), a person (even forced migrants, such as refugees) cannot migrate without some kind of resources, information, and “social connections.” For instance, Louison who had financial resources, became a refugee in Brazil, based on well-founded fear of persecution due to political opinion, after his parents were murdered. Nowadays, Louison is studying medicine in one of the best universities in Brazil, and received an award from UNESCO for producing a project to end the malaria. Another example is Mirembe, a lesbian asylum seeker, from lower class, who used her social connections, in this case her ex-girlfriend, to travel to the Netherlands. Without her social connections, she would not have been able to afford the migration. However, Mirembe was trafficked. She was forced to have sex in a room here in the Netherlands by her ex-girlfriend, who disappeared later.

After describing historically how the definition of refugees appeared in the international community and the definition of a “refugee,” it is important to understand how the country of Netherlands defines a “refugee,” the institutions that are involved, the procedure to acquire refugee status, as well as the number of asylum seekers. I will elaborate on that in the next chapter.

2.3 Refugees in the Netherlands: the Procedure to Apply for Refugee Status

In the Netherlands, right after it is ratified, any international law is automatically transformed into a national law. Thus, the 1951 Convention of Refugees was adopted in the country as the first document protecting refugees. One of its principles is the non-refoulement, in which the countries cannot send the asylum seeker or refugee back to their country of origin where the

opinion refers to ideas that are not tolerated by the authorities, such us criticisms against governmental policies.

And membership of a social group are groups which share the same life style, such as lesbians.

Note that even in international agreements, lesbians can be “invisible:” there is no specific categorization for them. They are inside a group, LGBTI, that is inside another group: the “particular social group.”

Moreover, although the term “race” is used, however, seems to me old-fashioned. There is only one race in the world, the human race; therefore, I prefer to use the term “ethnicity.”

(19)

person’s life is threatened (Alfredina 2012: 42).12

However, in practice, the application of this law is more complicated. The Central Agency for the Reception of Asylum Seekers website says that asylum seekers who have the asylum or refugee request denied, will be prepared for repatriation, or returning, to their home country (COA 2018a).13

There are several organizations related to refugees in the Netherlands. One of the most important is Central Agency for the Reception of Asylum Seekers, which is the organization responsible for receiving, supervising and departure of asylum seekers, who are coming to the Netherlands. The Central Agency for the Reception of Asylum Seekers reports to Mark Harbers, the Minister for Migration, which is part of the Ministry of Justice and Security (COA 2018b). There are several locations of Central Agency for the Reception of Asylum Seekers, and the headquarters are located in Ter Apel, where the asylum application is initiated (Coumans 2016: 10). If the individual arrives in the Netherlands by plane, she/he/other can start the registration for asylum at Schiphol Airport in Amsterdam with the national police, the Royal Netherlands Marechaussee (IND 2018b). The Dutch Immigration and Naturalization Service is responsible for the application, reviewing and making the decision if the person will be granted refugee status (Coumans 2016: 10). For the duration of the procedure, the person is sent to live in places such as asielzoekerscentrum, the asylum centers. In the interviews that I conducted, lesbian refugees / asylum seekers told me that they receive a weekly payment of around 57 euros for living expenses, such as food, clothes, etc. Additionally, every week they are required to prove their residence at the asielzoekerscentrum. As stressed by Coumans (2016: 10), they receive free healthcare, and legal help from the organization VluchtelingenWerk. After acquiring refugee status, the person can stay in the Netherlands, initially, for 5 years (IND 2018b).

According to the interviews with lesbian refugees / asylum seekers and according to the Dutch Immigration and Naturalization Service website, if asylum seekers application is denied, they can ask for review. If the application is denied again after this review, the person can petition the court (IND 2018c).

When the court gives a positive answer, then it is submitted to Immigration and Naturalization Service, which will review the application, agreeing or not with the court.

12 _{According to International Organization for Migration – IOM (2018), “country of origin” is the country that is}

the starting point of migratory flows. In other words, it is the country in which the person lived before becoming a migrant or a refugee.

13_{“Repatriation” means that the country is sending people back to their countries of origin, where they had their}

(20)

As stressed by the respondents for this research, the interview with the Immigration and Naturalization Service happens in the following way: two officers interview the asylum seekers, the interpreter translates the whole conversation. The interview is in Dutch: the interpreter translates to the asylum seeker’s language. The asylum seeker answers in her native language, and the interpreter translates to Dutch to the officers. The questions are about their sexual orientation, the way asylum seekers came out as lesbians, how they were threated because of their sexual orientation in their country of origin, and so on. However, most of the respondents for this thesis explained to me that IND cut off the interviewees and they were not able to finish their stories. In addition, the respondents mentioned that it is “second hand” information because they cannot know if the interpreter is translating their statements correctly.

Perhaps Torpey (1998) is right when he wrote that nations have the power to control the movement of people through the requirement of written documents. A person is only considered part of a country by having a document. Without a document, they are almost considered not human. When Immigration and Naturalization Service allows lesbian asylum seekers to wait for years for a decision, it controls these women and gives them almost no rights. They have come to the Netherlands in desperation, fleeing from persecution, and are rewarded with a denial of their humanity, the same humanity which was also denied in their countries of origin.

In terms of numbers, according to the Asylum Trends 2017 report from IND, last year there were 31,327 asylum applications in the Netherlands; in 2016, the number was 31,642; whereas in 2015, the number of applications was 58,880 (IND 2017). However, the Netherlands and the majority of EU states do not have specific data about lesbian, gays, bisexuals, transgender, queer and intersex asylum seekers (Fleeing Homophobia Report 2011). This reinforces the idea that lesbians are “invisibles:” in estimations from the government, there is no estimations neither for LGBTQI, nor for lesbians. Thus, it is not possible to have an accurate number, but this report estimates that 200 homosexuals and transgender people seek asylum in the Netherlands per year (Jansen 2010). However, Sandro Kortekaas (from LGBT Asylum Support) reported to me that the number is higher, since his organization receives around 2 LGBTQI asylum seekers per week (which means 96 in a year), and his organization only sees one part of the flow of LGBTQI refugees / asylum seekers. Thus, in order to give more visibility to lesbian refugees / asylum seekers, it is important to define the concept of “lesbian.”

(21)

2.4 Theoretical Framework 1: Defining the Term ‘Lesbian’

In social sciences, the term “lesbian” is often used. However, what does it really mean? As stressed by Eliason et al. (1998), there is almost no consensus about what is the real meaning of being a lesbian, though there are a variety of terms used to express lesbian-ness: “gay women,” “queer,” “homosexuals,” “butch,” “dykes,” and so on.14

A research with ninety-nine self-identified lesbians by Eliason et al. (1998: 49), reported different types of lesbians. Thirty-five women reported to identify with the non-political definitions, sixty-four utilized non-political definitions. The first one encompasses: lesbians who love or have sex with women; lesbians as a true self, in which lesbian-ness is part of their identities; being a woman who just happen to prefer women, while rejecting to use the term “lesbian;” being a lesbian is only one part of them, their sexual orientation is not the main identification. The second one includes: lesbians who put women in all aspects of daily lives; and a lesbian with a world view, in which her sexual orientation interferes with all aspects of their lives. Their research suggests that there are several ways to identify and categorize lesbians, not existing a consensus, or a specific conceptualization of what is to be a lesbian. I would add that a woman can define herself as a “lesbian” not only as a political act, but also believing that she was born a lesbian and that it was not a choice. Otherwise she would have chosen to be heterosexual. Thus, the classifications can overlap, and one woman can identify with more than one category. I will give myself as an example: I am a lesbian who loves women, and I am a lesbian as a true self, in which my sexuality is intrinsically part of my identity. But I am in the process of integrating my lesbian-ness in all the aspects of my life because I am not “out” in every sphere of my life. For instance, at my work place I cannot be “out,” otherwise I can lose my job due to the discrimination and lesbophobia from the employers.

Although there are different definitions, in this research, the term “lesbian” is used to describe a woman who likes other women in an affectionate, emotional, attractive and/or sexual way. However, it is important to emphasize that because a woman is a lesbian, it does not mean that she does not feel attracted to men or that she has never had a relationship with a man. Taking into account the nine interviews conducted for this paper, seven of the women had relationships with men at some point in their lives. Moreover, taking myself as example: I

14_{In this research, the term “lesbianism” is avoided, since, according to Wilton (1995), cited by Eliason et al.}

(1998), it refers to something immoral, such as a sexual perversion, a way of deviance. Thus, the term “lesbianism” is outdated. Rather, I prefer to use the term lesbian-ness, since it does not give a negative connotation to homosexual relationships between women.

(22)

had relationships with men, until I understood that I love to have relationships with women. However, this does not mean that I will never have a relationship with a man again, or with people who are not part of the binary-gender categories.

It is important to emphasize that sexual orientation and gender identity are different concepts. The former refers to individuals that have emotional and sexual attraction to people of the same gender, different genders, or more than one gender. Gender identity, on the other hand, is related to how people experience their genders, which can correspond with the gender ascribed at birth or not (Yogyakarta Principles 2007: 6).15

Simply put, gender identity is the way individuals recognize their genders – as male, female, or other. As mentioned previously, the focus of this research is on lesbians (sexual orientation) and not on gender identity. Thus, the interviews were done with women who self-identified as lesbians, not taking into account the way they express their genders – for example, if they are femme, butch or other terms.16

Although gender identity and sexual orientation are different concepts, they are often seen as the same: Many people believe that a more masculinized woman is a “lesbian” or that a feminine woman is “straight,” but the opposite can actually happen, meaning that a masculinized woman can be heterosexual and a femme woman can be homosexual. This common sense is based on the social construction of heteronormativity that is explained in the following section.

2.5 Theoretical framework 2: Defining Heteronormativity

Heterosexuality is a norm primarily in patriarchal societies – that is, heteronormativity, is strict. As stressed by Petry et al. (2011), heteronormativity is understood to be the standard of sexuality that rules a society and how it is organized. Heterosexuality and heteronormativity are naturalized in a culture by means of history and the articulations of power, which legitimized heterosexuality as “normal” (Petry et al. 2011: 196). According to Manuel Castells (2006), heterosexuality is understood to be mandatory due to culture, traditions, and values that are socially and culturally constructed throughout history, and due to a patriarchal

15_{The Yogyakarta Principles (2007) is a document made by experts in human rights, academics, UN staff,}

NGOs, judges, and so on. The principles state standards that guarantee human rights in terms of sexual orientation and gender identity that countries should follow in order to have a different future, with individuals free and equal. This Conference took place in Yogyakarta, Indonesia (YOGYAKARTA PRINCIPLES, 2018).

16_{“Femme” and “butch” are terminologies used between lesbians. Femmes are lesbians whose behaviors and}

style are more “feminine.” Butch are lesbians whose behaviors and style are more “masculine.” Personally, as a researcher, I do not like to use these definitions because they reinforce the traditional gender-binary categories: female or male. Currently, in gender studies, one of the biggest criticisms is that the two categories of woman and man were socially constructed , marginalizing people who identify as neither women nor men.

(23)

domination that requires a compulsory heterosexuality in society. This patriarchal domination, through the articulations of power (per Petry et al. 2011), presents heteronormativity as the only acceptable way to express sexuality. If we take into consideration the idea that 71 countries prohibit homosexuality, it is clear that culture, history, and patriarchal domination in those countries made heterosexuality the norm.

Thus, heterosexuality is seen as the “normal” form of sexuality because of the history of power articulations inside of cultures that implemented heterosexuality as the norm to be followed by individuals. Schools, families, neighbors, church, and everyday people observe whether their peers are following the norms of heterosexuality. These people and institutions act with a “disciplinary power” stressed by Foucault (1987: 195). Disciplinary power is, for example, the idea that inmates perform acts of micro-power disciplining toward other prisoners, almost like a guard, according to the rules of the prison. At some point, a guard is not necessary anymore. Social institutions follow the same idea when establishing what is allowed and forbidden – for example, allowing heterosexuality and forbidding homosexuality. Some people use this disciplinary power to achieve domination and power over others.

Butler, in an interview with Ahmed (2016), mentioned a similar idea: A rule can be repressive when human beings are exposed to it. Human beings internalize the rules of a society, and at some point, there is no need for external surveillance to check whether people are acting “correctly” because they are overseeing each other. If the rules impose heterosexuality as a norm, people will make sure that everyone is straight. These rules can be oppressive for minorities, such as lesbians.

This idea of heterosexuality as a norm implies that people must be not only heterosexuals but also that they must follow gender categories, such as men acting like “males” and women like “females” (Butler 1990). The social institutions, such as families, church, state, etc. make a surveillance in individuals’ sexual orientation and gender identities. For example, Bucar et al. (2012) noted that in Iran homosexuality is punishable by the death penalty. However, surgeries to change people’s sex are allowed and are, in fact, encouraged by the government. Thus, homosexuality is not acceptable, but submitting lesbians and gays to surgeries in order to change their biological sex is permitted, as long as the person follows heterosexuality.

As Butler (1990) advocated, heterosexuality is the center of societies, seen mistakenly as the original form of sexuality, whereas homosexuality is merely a wrong copy of sexuality. Thus, heterosexuality is the “matrix” that regards homosexuality as inferior, wrong, and abnormal. According to Butler (1990), this “original” sexuality is actually an idea of what is

(24)

original. Thus, an original form of sexuality does not exist in reality. However, heterosexuality is fostered in societies as this original form, and individuals try to fit into the heteronormativity, following gender-expected behaviors. As stressed by Butler (1990), the disciplinary form of gender is heteronormativity.

Ahmed (2006) presented an interesting point for the discussion on heteronormativity. For her, through the influence of the society, individuals are transformed into heterosexuals, they do not born as straight. This means that there is a route that must be followed by individuals, the “straight line” (Ahmed 2006: 556). This idea of straightness implies a heterosexual path that should be followed by everyone. That path includes being a kid and teenager, becoming an adult, marrying someone from the opposite sex, having children, and becoming old. To show a society that a person’s life is going in the right direction, this person accumulates some “points” at each phase of the path. With more “points,” the individual presents a more decent impression to others. It is like a social investment: The person has to follow this straight line or path to acquire more and more good impressions and responses from the society.

This “straight line” is generally presented and reinforced in families (Ahmed 2006: 556). For example, in main rooms of some houses, photographs of heterosexual weddings of the family members are shown (Ahmed 2006: 559). This is a subtle way to reinforce the idea that in order to be happy, a person has to follow the “straight line,” being an heterosexual. Ahmed’s idea makes sense, especially because a picture of a lesbian couple is rarely exhibited in a room in a heterosexual family, where the impression is given that to be happy, it is important to be heterosexual.

A person who does not follow this “straight line” can be seen as queer, deviant, and acting in the wrong way, such as a lesbian (Ahmed 2006). Moreover, as Ahmed (2006: 558) mentioned, taking into account Butler, any feeling that could put individuals out of the “straight line,” such as having a romantic feeling for a same-sex person, must be oppressed. This is the concept of mandatory heterosexuality: men should love women and women should love men in order to be “accepted” in the eyes of society. Any deviation from that is unacceptable. That is why some people resist having any feeling toward a person of the same-sex.

Moreover, if a person decided to get out of the “straight line,” or not following the heterosexuality, for example by being a lesbian, she probably would have situations in her life in which she must pass as a heterosexual. In other words, she must pretend to be straight. In a society, the many differences of class, race, and sexuality sometimes cause individuals have

(25)

to adopt an identity other than their own, passing as others (Ahmed 1999: 93). For instance, a lesbian sometimes has to pass as heterosexual in her family, workplace, religion, and social meetings. This “passing” depends on the environment that surrounds this woman. If the environment is ultra-conservative, this woman has to pass as a straight. Otherwise, her life could be threatened, such as in the case of lesbian refugees.

In all the reported stories from the interviews of this study, lesbians had to hide their sexual orientation in their home countries because they were seen as “deviant” by their societies. Heteronormativity may have forced lesbians to become refugees in other countries. And heteronormativity is reinforced by the disciplinary power of different institutions in a society. Therefore, it is essential to analyze the stories of lesbians refugees / asylum seekers to understand the horrible role of heteronormativity in their lives in their countries of origin, in their own lives, and in the Netherlands having to prove their sexual orientation.

2.6 Breaking Down Common Sense About Refugees and Lesbians

To understand the intersectional complexity behind the concept of a lesbian and a refugee, we analyzed the definition and historical background of the concept “refugee,” the process to acquire refugee status in Dutch society, the definition of a “lesbian” in the social sciences, and theories about heteronormativity.

This chapter addresses common perceptions about refugees and lesbians. We saw that refugees are not only the “poor” fleeing war but also anyone who had to flee their country of origin due to persecution (because of religion, political opinion, ethnicity, nationality, or sexual orientation). To migrate, a person must have sufficient resources, such as money, information, and social connections (De Haas 2014: 27). We also saw that sexual orientation and gender identity are commonly confused, when a more “masculinized” woman is perceived as a lesbian or when a more “feminine” woman is seen as straight. Instead, a butch woman can be straight and a femme woman can be a lesbian.

In the end, through theoretical framework research, it is clear that heteronormativity plays a role in the lives of lesbian refugees / asylum seekers in many ways: in their country of origin, where they were persecuted for being lesbians; in the way they negotiate their sexuality; in the Netherlands, when they have to prove to be “real” lesbians to the Immigration and Naturalization Service. The next chapter addresses the participants’ experiences of persecution while having to hide their sexual orientation in their countries of origin.

Everything we should know about lesbians who became refugees in the Netherlands