The SOGIE (sexual orientation, gender identity and expression) rights movement has, at least in the West, been considered successful. In Southeast Asia, there appears to be a vibrant SOGIE rights movement, which leads some to speculate about a SOGIE rights revolution in the region. However, instead of a revolution, there seems to be a dilemma in Southeast Asia. Advocates of SOGIE rights in this region find themselves facing political institutions with ambiguous positions regarding SOGIE rights in particular and human rights in general. In fact, it can be argued that on issues concerning SOGIE, Southeast Asia is as varied as it is politically and culturally diverse. The study explores the developments of SOGIE rights in Southeast Asia, particularly the persistent lack of institutionalization of SOGIE rights in three states in the region, despite the growing visibility and activism of SOGIE rights movements therein. To address this, the study looks at particular states in Southeast Asia where SOGIE rights activism has seen some significant recent developments, i.e., in the Philippines, in Singapore, and in Viet Nam. Interestingly, each of these countries has distinct differences relative to the other politically, socially, economically and to a considerable extent, culturally. Adopting the norm localization framework developed by Amitav Acharya, the argument forwarded in this thesis is that this persistent lack of institutionalization of SOGIE rights at the state level is a result of strong and well-entrenched local norms and beliefs that resist or oppose SOGIE rights, even when there are credible local actors who managed to find congruence between SOGIE rights and existing norms. Using historiographical research and case studies, I explore the dynamics of norm localization in terms of SOGIE rights by non-state actors, i.e., SOGIE rights movements in Southeast Asia.