DYNAMICS OF REPRESENTATION AND DISCOURSE ON SEXUAL AND GENDER DIVERSITY IN THAI CINEMA DURING THE MARRIAGE EQUALITY ERA (2017–2025)

Abstract

       This article examines the dynamics of representation and discourses on sexual and gender diversity in Thai cinema between 2017 and 2025, a period conceptualized in this study as a pivotal transition under the emergence of marriage equality. It pursues two objectives: 1) to analyze strategies of representing sexually and gender diverse characters in Thai feature films, and 2) to investigate the discourses and ideological structures articulated in mainstream and independent films. The study employs qualitative methods, drawing on textual analysis and critical discourse analysis within an integrated theoretical framework of representation, queer theory, semiotics, and narrative structure. The sample consists of sixteen Thai feature films released between 2017 and 2025, purposively selected to cover independent and art-house cinema, commercial mainstream productions, law-engaged films, and critical case studies. Data were collected through a structured film-analysis sheet focusing on narrative structure, visual style, and character construction, and were analyzed through close reading and critical interpretation of discourses. The findings show, first, that strategies of representation differ markedly across film sectors. Independent and art-house films tend to shift queer characters from the margins to the narrative center, construct identities at the intersections of multiple power structures, and mobilize visual poetry and non-formulaic storytelling to foreground lived experiences, vulnerability, and agency. By contrast, mainstream commercial films continue to rely on affirmative visual tones and optimistic moods toward queerness, while simultaneously commodifying queer characters within the pink economy and BL capitalism. Second, at the level of discourse and ideology, the study reveals a persistent tension between attempts to contest heteronormativity and the reproduction of familiar myths. Some independent films position queer characters as focal points for questioning the state, religion, class, and the law, thereby using cinema as a site of socio-political critique. Meanwhile, several mainstream and critical case-study films still deploy the bury-your-gays trope, comedic ridicule, and commercial gimmicks that reinforce stereotypes or reduce sexual and gender diversity to decorative background without substantive narrative weight. Overall, the study suggests that, despite the legal recognition of marriage equality, Thai cinema in this period operates as a contested terrain where increased visibility does not necessarily translate into nuanced or empowering representation. The coexistence of a peak of visibility and a crisis of representation points to unresolved tensions between legal change, cultural production, and market logics, and offers an empirical basis and conceptual lens for filmmakers, critics, scholars, and policymakers interested in developing storytelling practices and media guidelines that affirm sexual and gender diversity while respecting human dignity.