5 QUEERING THE TOURIST GAZE: Contributions by Mar Algueró-Boronat and Rosa María Rodriguez-Artola

Introduction

Since the 1990s, LGBTIQ+ tourism has gained scholarly attention alongside the increasing visibility of gender and sexual diversity. Initial research centred on affluent white gay men, reinforcing a reductive market-driven view of queer travellers (Pritchard et al., 1998; Hughes, 2002). Later critiques exposed the erasure of lesbian, trans, bisexual, and non-binary identities, and challenged the over-commercialisation of queer experiences (Monterrubio et al., 2020). This prompted a shift towards queer-informed approaches, which apply intersectional and critical lenses to examine exclusion, visibility, and heteronormativity in tourism (Waitt & Markwell, 2006; Vorobjovas-Pinta & Hardy, 2016). Tourism, long a space of both normative reproduction and resistance, holds transformative potential for LGBTIQ+ individuals as a site of identity affirmation, safety, and self-expression (Prayag et al., 2023).

Reframing LGBTIQ+ tourist motivation: From destination attributes to identity-affirming experiences

A key contribution of our study to tourism research lies in challenging the conventional understanding of tourist motivation within LGBTIQ+ travel studies, shifting the analytical focus away from destination-based attributes and towards intrinsic, identity-related drivers (Alguero-Boronat el al., 2024c). The findings indicate that internal motivations, such as the pursuit of belonging, emotional connection, and identity expression, exert greater influence over travel decision-making and experience formation than traditional pull factors, such as cultural attractions, amenities, or climate (Alguero-Boronat el al., 2024c).

This shift in emphasis calls into question the sufficiency of the established push–pull model (Dann, 1977; Crompton, 1979), which typically categorises motivations dichotomously: internal psychological needs (push) versus external destination attributes (pull). While useful as a heuristic, this framework fails to fully account for the identity-based motivations that shape queer mobilities. For LGBTIQ+ travellers, the act of travelling is not merely about escape or consumption, it is often a search for spaces of recognition, visibility, and emotional safety.

As evidenced in previous research (Lewis et al., 2021), queer travellers are particularly motivated by opportunities to connect with others who share similar identities and to inhabit spaces where they can express themselves freely. These motivations are not peripheral, they are central to how many LGBTIQ+ individuals experience tourism. In this context, travel becomes an affective and relational practice tied to identity affirmation, not simply a hedonistic or leisure-oriented activity.

Visibility and vulnerability: Gender identity and unequal access to tourism inclusion

Another significant contribution of our research lies in highlighting how gender identity functions as a more substantial barrier to inclusion within LGBTIQ+ tourism than sexual orientation. While sexual orientation often generates relatively homogeneous patterns in tourist motivations and preferences (Alguero-Boronat el al., 2024c), gender identity introduces critical divergences, particularly in how individuals engage with tourism activities (Alguero-Boronat el al., 2024b), what motivates them to travel, and how they navigate their experiences across different sectors.

A central explanation for this divergence is the relative (in)visibility of identity dimensions. Sexual orientation, in many cases, remains invisible in public contexts unless deliberately expressed. This allows some individuals within the LGBTIQ+ spectrum to selectively disclose or conceal aspects of their identity depending on the perceived safety of the environment. In contrast, gender identity, especially when it diverges from normative expectations, is frequently embodied, visible, and subject to external scrutiny. For many transgender and non-binary individuals, visibility becomes both an assertion of self and a site of risk.

This distinction has meaningful consequences in the tourism context. Gender-diverse individuals tend to exercise greater caution when selecting destinations and activities, prioritising environments where they can feel physically safe, socially accepted, and emotionally validated. Their travel decisions are often shaped by the need for belonging, social connection, and identity affirmation, not merely as personal desires, but as preconditions for participation in tourism without fear of discrimination, marginalisation or violence.

Unlike other members of the LGBTIQ+ community whose identities may be easier to conceal or adapt to normative expectations, travellers with visible non-normative gender expressions face the persistent challenge of negotiating safety and recognition across multiple tourism touchpoints. This aligns with previous research indicating that individuals with less socially privileged identities often experience tourism as a space of potential exclusion, surveillance or discomfort (Ram et al., 2019; Prayag et al., 2023).

The empirical findings presented in this research reinforce the notion that gender identity, more than sexual orientation, shapes tourism experience heterogeneity within queer communities. Cisgender individuals tend to encounter fewer structural or social barriers to participation, particularly in exclusive or high-end tourism segments. Conversely, transgender and non-binary individuals often find themselves underrepresented, underserved or actively excluded, either through overt discrimination or the absence of inclusive infrastructure, messaging, and recognition.

This visibility significantly shapes how different subgroups within the LGBTIQ+ spectrum experience travel, perceive destinations, and select (or actively avoid) certain tourism activities. Importantly, visibility is not inherently negative; when acknowledged, respected, and institutionally protected by the destination, it can become a powerful enabler of transformative and meaningful travel experiences. In such contexts, visibility does not equate to exposure, but to affirmation, contributing to a deeper sense of self-recognition and belonging.

Symbolic visibility vs structural inclusion: Rethinking destination commitments

Another key contribution to tourism scholarship has been the articulation of a nuanced distinction between symbolic and structural inclusion in LGBTIQ+ destination marketing (Alguero-Boronat el al., 2024a). While previous literature has problematised the superficiality of certain inclusive strategies, commonly referred to as rainbow washingm, the study shows that even symbolic gestures (e.g., rainbow flags, inclusive slogans, representation in visuals) are often positively received by queer tourists. These signals, though limited in depth, contribute to a perceived sense of safety and welcome, which can be particularly meaningful in environments where sexual and gender diversity has historically been marginalized.

However, the analysis also demonstrates that authentic, deeply rooted actions, such as partnerships with local queer communities, inclusive tourism policies, and long-term commitments to social equity, are far more effective in generating emotional engagement and destination loyalty (Alguero-Boronat el al., 2024a). These forms of inclusion transcend aesthetics, fostering genuine relationships between LGBTIQ+ travellers and destinations that reflect shared values and mutual respect. This contribution reveals a critical tension: symbolic acceptance may open the door, but only structural inclusion builds trust.

This tension may also be explained by the temporal nature of tourism experiences. LGBTIQ+ travellers, due to the short-term and often superficial nature of their engagement with destinations, may not always seek deep-rooted inclusion but rather a baseline assurance of safety and non-discrimination. For many, knowing that a destination is visibly supportive, even through minimal symbolic cues, is sufficient to feel welcome, navigate the space with confidence, and avoid the psychological burden of hypervigilance (Ong et al., 2022).

However, comparative findings from other sectors suggest that when queer individuals engage more frequently or deeply with products, services or institutions, their expectations of authenticity increase. In non-touristic contexts, such as fashion advertising, sport, or corporate diversity initiatives, queer consumers increasingly demand alignment between inclusive branding and internal organisational practices (Oakenfull, 2013; Mumcu & Lough, 2017). These expectations include meaningful support for queer communities, transparent governance, and consistent ethical behaviour beyond seasonal or performative campaigns.

Thus, tourism inclusion operates on a spectrum: while symbolic gestures may suffice in short-term travel contexts, destinations aiming to build long-term loyalty and trust among LGBTIQ+ travellers must integrate inclusive values across the social, institutional, and economic dimensions of their tourism offering.

Beyond the “Gay Tourist”: Deconstructing homogeneity and embracing intersectionality

Another core contribution to LGBTIQ+ tourism studies has been the deconstruction of the so-called “gay tourist” as a homogeneous market category (Alguero-Boronat el al., 2024c). Early research often centred on affluent, cisgender gay men as the default queer traveller (Pritchard et al., 1998; Hughes, 2002), inadvertently marginalising the experiences, preferences and challenges of other identities within the LGBTIQ+ spectrum. Our work adds to this critical turn by exposing the diverse realities, barriers, and motivations that shape travel experiences for individuals with transgender, non-binary, and less visible identities.

By illuminating these overlooked perspectives, our research not only broadens the conceptual boundaries of queer tourism, but also challenges the assumption that orientation alone is a sufficient basis for segmentation. It reveals that gender identity, especially when it deviates from normative expectations, functions as a critical axis of differentiation in how individuals engage with tourism spaces and activities (Alguero-Boronat el al., 2024b).

In particular, transgender and non-binary travellers face unique constraints within the tourism system, ranging from the absence of inclusive infrastructure, to the fear of misgendering, discrimination or exclusion in high-end or traditional tourism environments (Algueró-Boronat et al., 2024b). These findings support the call for intersectional segmentation approaches that go beyond the lesbian/gay/binary, incorporating age, gender identity, race, socioeconomic status, and other relational dimensions of identity.
This perspective not only deepens our understanding of queer travel but also advances tourism marketing and policy development. It urges destinations and tourism operators to abandon reductive consumer logics and instead embrace a more nuanced, equity-driven view of diversity—one that amplifies the voices of marginalised subgroups and recognises the plurality of queer travel experiences.

Conclusion

This set of academic contributions forms part of the doctoral research project of Dr Mar Algueró Boronat, conducted at the Universitat Jaume I in Castelló de la Plana, under the supervision of Dr Rosa María Rodríguez Artola, who has provided both academic and personal support throughout this journey. Together, we have examined LGBTIQ+ tourism from a range of empirical and theoretical perspectives, with the aim of expanding the field beyond the traditionally dominant economic and market-driven frameworks.

These contributions stem from a deep commitment to giving voice to groups that have been historically marginalised in tourism studies, and to promoting research that centres justice, emotional safety, and identity recognition as core components of the tourism experience. As Pritchard and Morgan (2017, p. 34) aptly state, “critique alone cannot lead to transformation.” Through academic inquiry, we hope to contribute to the development of a tourism field that not only embraces diversity, but affirms it, protects it, and learns from it.

Written by Mar Algueró Boronat and Rosa María Rodríguez Artola, Universitat Jaume I, Spain
Read Mar and Rosa María‘s letters to future generations of tourism researchers

References

Algueró Boronat, M., Rodríguez Artola, R. M., & Moliner Tena, M. A. (2024a). Queer-friendly tourist destinations: how are they perceived by the LGBTIQ+ communities?. Current Issues in Tourism, 1-19.

Algueró Boronat, M., Rodríguez Artola, R. M., & Moliner Tena, M. A. (2024b). The taste of diversity: Spanish LGBTIQ+ travellers and the role of gastronomy tourism. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 14673584241299924.

Alguero-Boronat, M., Moliner-Tena, M. A., & Rodríguez-Artola, R. M. (2024c). LGBTIQ+ tourist motivations and memorable destination experience: The moderating effect of gender identity and sexual orientation. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 0(0).

Clift, S., & Forrest, S. (1999). Gay men and tourism destinations and holiday motivations. Tourism Management, 20(5), 615-625.

Crompton, J. (1979). Motivations for pleasure vacation. Annals of Tourism Research, 6(4), 408–424.

Dann, G. M. (1977). Anomie, ego-enhancement and tourism. Annals of tourism research, 4(4), 184-194.

Hughes, H. (2002). Gay men’s holiday destination choice: a case of risk and avoidance. International Journal of Tourism Research, 4(4), 299-312.

Lewis, C., Prayag, G., & Pour, S. (2021). Linking travel motives to identity and travel behavior of the Australian LGBT market during COVID-19. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 38(7), 725-741.

Monterrubio, C., Madera, S. L. R., & Pérez, J. (2020). Trans women in tourism: Motivations, constraints and experiences. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 43, 169-178.

Mumcu, C., & Lough, N. (2017). Are fans proud of the WNBA’s’ pride’ campaign? Sport Marketing Quarterly, 26(1), 42–54.

Oakenfull, G. W. (2013). What matters: Factors influencing gay consumers’ evaluations of “gay-friendly” corporate activities. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 32(1_suppl), 79-89.

Ong, F., Vorobjovas-Pinta, O., & Lewis, C. (2022). LGBTIQ+ identities in tourism and leisure research: A systematic qualitative literature review. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 30(7), 1476-1499.

Prayag, G., Lewis, C., & Pour, S. (2023). Travel in my life: queer identity, travel motivation, resilience, life-satisfaction and wellbeing. Current Issues in Tourism, 1-18.

Pritchard, A., & Morgan, N. (2017). Tourism’s lost leaders: Analysing gender and performance. Annals of Tourism Research, 63, 34-47.

Pritchard, A., Morgan, N. J., Sedgely, D., & Jenkins, A. (1998). Reaching out to the gay tourist: opportunities and threats in an emerging market segment. Tourism management, 19(3), 273-282.

Ram, Y., Kama, A., Mizrachi, I. & Hall, C.M. (2019), “The benefits of an LGBT-inclusive tourist destination”, Journal of Destination Marketing and Management, Vol. 14, pp. 1-8.

Vorobjovas‐Pinta, O., & Hardy, A. (2016). The evolution of gay travel research. International Journal of Tourism Research, 18(4), 409-416.

Vorobjovas-Pinta, O., & Pearce, J. (2024). Scoping The Role of LGBTQI+ Festivals in Regional Australia: A Local Community Perspective. Event Management, Fast Track.

Waitt, G., & Markwell, K. (2006). Gay tourism. Culture and context. New York: The Haworth Hospitality Press.