Chris Chung Lun Wong & Denis Tolkach. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research. Volume 22, Issue 6. June 2017.
Introduction
Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) community was rather invisible and unrecognised among the broad public until recent decades. Currently, topics related to gay rights, anti-discrimination, same-sex marriage and child adoption by same-sex couples are prominent in the news media and political debates (Cheng, 2012; Drehle, 2013; Robertson, 2014). From the marketing perspective, there has been a growing recognition of the LGBT community as a separate lucrative market segment. Existing literature suggests that LGBT market segment possesses unique needs and purchase patterns, such as sophisticated tastes, need for gay space and high purchasing power (Hughes, 2005; Hughes, Monterrubio, & Miller, 2010; Pitts, 1999; Pritchard, Morgan, Sedgely, & Jenkins, 1998).
Admittedly, gay tourism research has been mostly undertaken in 1990s and early 2000s and in the Western countries. Vorobjovas-Pinta and Hardy (2015) suggest that while there has been a tremendous change in the attitudes towards gay men and women in the last decade, the research on gay tourism has not followed up on these social changes. Moreover, Vorobjovas-Pinta and Hardy (2015) urge for research into gay tourism from nonWestern perspectives, especially with focus on Asia and Africa. Only a limited number of studies have been conducted about gay tourism in Asia. Storer (1999) and Sanders (2002) approach the topic from sex tourism perspective with the specific focus on Thailand. Community Marketing (2014c) attempts to identify the travel pattern of Chinese gay travellers. Liu and Chen (2010) investigate travel motivations of Mainland Chinese lesbians born after 1980. Wong (2008) discusses the possibility of developing Hong Kong into a gay tourism destination.
The lack of research into Asian LGBT community and tourism forms an important research gap. LGBT has a unique and complex history in Asia. While there was some acceptance of same-sex relationships in various Asian cultures in early history (e.g. in China before tenth-century A.D.), Confucianism, high value of family and colonialism brought negative views of homosexuality (Huang, 2011; Kong, 2011). In recent years, the LGBT community in Asia has been changing and linking to the world LGBT movement (Jackson, 2001). LGBT communities in Asia are undergoing identity formation processes which reconcile Western LGBT rights movement with the specifics of Asian history, cultures and societies (Martin, Jackson, McLelland, & Yue, 2008). Simultaneously, high growth in both inbound and outbound tourism is occurring within Asia (UNWTO, 2016). Therefore, it is timely to investigate Asian gay travel from both sociological and marketing perspectives. The present study contributes to the extensive yet ever-evolving body of market segmentation and destination choice research. The present study is exploratory. It follows a qualitative and conceptual approach in market segmentation studies (Decrop & Snelders, 2005). In particular, travel preferences and factors impacting travel choices among Asian gay men are investigated. Travel preferences is a term that describes tourists’ motivation to travel, preferred destination attributes and preferred attractions and activities at a destination (Decrop & Snelders, 2005; Dolnicar, 2002). The present study discusses both destinations and attractions that Asian gay men choose to visit. The findings contribute to the body of knowledge of gay tourism and to understanding of the diversity of LGBT travel. As a result, the study provides the basis for comparison of Asian gay travellers with those from other parts of the world. The practical contribution of the study is the discussion of whether tourism products and promotion tools for Asian gay markets are necessary.
Literature Review
Gay Travellers
Information regarding LGBT travellers is rather scarce, since LGBT community still faces negative social stigma. Thus, existing studies may not be representative. The statistics and the dynamic of the LGBT tourism market growth is also unknown, although LGBT community is becoming more visible due to higher social acceptance (Hughes, 2006). The LGBT market in general has been described as a group of fashion forward, young, wealthy, well-educated and brand-conscious people (Hughes, 2002). A recent LGBT survey conducted by Community Marketing (2014a) mentions that LGBT community members are confident in their financial situation, particularly the older generations, and they travel more than the general public (Community Marketing, 2014a). Berezan, Raab, Krishen, and Love (2015) suggest that sustainability and corporate social responsibility are important for LGBT travellers.
To date, academic research has investigated gay travel from the following perspectives: travel motivations, demographic profiles and the role of gay space (Vorobjovas-Pinta & Hardy, 2015). Various studies suggest that LGBT travellers have their own unique needs and behaviour, sophisticated tastes, the need for gay space and high purchasing power (Hughes, 1997; Monterrubio, 2009; Pritchard, Morgan, Sedgley, Khan, & Jenkins, 2000). Some travel motivations of LGBT travellers are the same as those of heterosexual travellers, such as relaxation and escape (Hughes, 2006; Pritchard et al., 2000). Clift and Forrest (1999) and Monterrubio (2009) suggest that many gay men treat holidays as a prime opportunity to seek sexual activities with other men. Therefore, opportunities to socialise with other gay people serve as one of the travel motivations while choosing a destination. Nightclubs, bars and other gay venues serve as tourist attractions that help to satisfy these needs.
Moreover, previous studies suggest that gay men are looking for a safe place to travel. A safe place is considered important for gay travellers to satisfy sexual desires, to enlarge social network, to relieve stress and to be able to express their identity (Hughes, 1997; Pritchard et al., 2000). The level of gay-friendliness, the presence of homophobia and the degree of safety may be the considerations of leisure travel planning among gay men (Hughes, 1997; Monterrubio, 2009). This is because homosexuality is still illegitimate or illegal in some countries (Pritchard et al., 2000). The combination of such motivations as relaxation, escape, socialisation and safety has led to popularity of such destinations as Florida’s Key West, California’s Palm Springs and San Francisco, New York, Sydney, Cape Town and Thailand among gay travellers (Hughes, 2006).
Hughes (1997) warns against stereotyping the LGBT community based on the aforementioned characteristics, since the community is highly diverse. Indeed, all aforementioned attributes of gay tourists have been challenged, since those descriptions represent gay tourists as a homogenous group (Vorobjovas-Pinta & Hardy, 2015). Nevertheless, there have been only few attempts to further explore segments that constitute gay tourism market. For example, Pitts (1999) suggests that gay men have distinctive enthusiasm for sports tourism, and the economic value of their passion to sports activities is valued at US$180 million. Furthermore, Hughes and Deutsch (2010) analyse senior gay travellers. They conclude that senior gay men prefer being with friends’, renew old companionships and make new friends, rather than focus on sexual activity. They can also afford more luxurious services on holidays than the younger gay travellers. Among the major concerns of senior gay travellers are assurance of access to gay space, for example, bars, saunas, and clubs and avoidance of homophobic places.
While demand-oriented studies focus on who gay tourists are, the supply-side studies discuss incorporation of gay community or gay space into tourism destinations (Vorobjovas-Pinta & Hardy, 2015). Gay space is usually thought of as a physical location which may have a significant proportion of gay-residents, be it a place of significance for gay rights movement or a place where gay-oriented businesses operate. Hughes (1997) considers gay space to be the consequence of social disapproval. Gay space provides gay men with a sense of security, acts as a shelter and provides a support network (Pritchard et al., 1998). In terms of tourism, gay space may be thought of as a tourist attraction. If one is to apply existing tourist attraction classifications (Cook, Yale, & Marqua, 2010; Swarbrooke & Page, 2012), then gay parades are live event attractions, bars and saunas are commercial attractions and places important for LGBT rights movement are heritage attractions. Ivy (2001) suggests that the term “gay community” can have a variety of meanings from a group of people who share common concerns, such as discrimination or combating AIDS to a physical space with concentration of gay businesses and residences. Furthermore, Ivy (2001) suggests that gay-friendly establishments are more important for gay men while travelling than in the place of usual residence.
Overall, the growth of interest among marketers in developing and promoting gay tourism may signal the high visibility and acceptance of homosexuality in contemporary society. However, one of the main selling points of gay tourism is a safe space, which is an alarming sign of ongoing discrimination faced by the members of LGBT community (Coon, 2012). Furthermore, Waitt, Markwell, and Gorman-Murray (2008) critique the approach that gay tourism studies take, setting the premise of interest towards LGBT community based on their purchasing power. This is a testimony to ongoing heteronormativity of tourism studies, where LGBT community is compared to heterosexual society on various parameters, most importantly the commercial viability of a market segment.
Asian Gay Men
There is no consensus on the number of LGBT people in the world. Even in relatively liberal countries with well-established statistics, such as the UK and the US, the estimates vary between 1% and 10% (Hughes, 2006). For example, 2.3% of the U.S. National Health Interview Survey respondents identified themselves as lesbian, gay or bisexual (Ward, Dahlhamer, Galinsky, & Joestl, 2014). Due to lack of acceptance of homosexuality, respondents of surveys may not disclose their sexual orientation; therefore, the extent to which respondent samples in research studies of LGBT community are representative is questionable (Guadalupe-Diaz, 2013). Community Marketing (2014b) states that there are approximately 65 million LGBT people in Mainland China. A 2002 survey has found that 7% of tertiary students in Hong Kong are homosexual and 2% are bisexual (Hong Kong Tertiary Institutions Health Care Working Group, 2002; cited in Kwok, Wu, & Shardlow, 2013). Shahani (2008), citing several studies, suggests that between 8.7% and 36.8% of Indian male population had sexual intercourse with another male, although having a same-sex intercourse does not equal to acknowledging homosexual identity. Dentsu Souken (2012) survey in Japan reports that 5.2% of respondents identified themselves as LGBT. Dentsu Souken (2012) estimates LGBT spending in Japan to be 5.7 trillion yen (US$73 billion).
Drummond (2005) suggests that Western gay men are different from their Asian counterparts. One aspect that Drummond’s (2005) study is the importance of body shape as a determinant of a person’s masculinity. Asian interviewees of Drummond’s (2005) study express that they are less masculine in comparison with Western gay men because they are less muscular. According to Wu (2003), feminised male appearance was popular in the Ming and Qing dynasties of China. While Western masculinity emphasises building an athletic body shape, traditional Chinese culture did not pay attention to male body development and extolled feminised male appearance.
The Asian culture still lacks an identity system for LGBT community comparable to the Western culture, where such system has been evolving for the past two centuries (Chan, 1997). Indeed, across various Asian cultures, the act of same-sex intercourse does not necessarily impact one’s identity. For example, Kole (2007) indicates that while there is a tradition of same-sex relationships in India, Indian languages do not have terms to express homosexuality. For example, Indian men who are having a sexual relationship with another man are only defined as “having fun with men” instead of being gay. Similarly, in Japan, the terms related to homosexuality describe acts rather than personal identities. For instance, “danshoku” meant adult men who have boy lovers and “wakashu” meant young men or boys who are loved by adult men (Hideki, 2006). Furthermore, the notion of gender in Asian culture is not necessarily binary (male/female). For example, in Thailand, the terminology used to describe genders and sexuality put male and female gender on a continuum. Such attitude towards the question of gender also impacts views of homosexuality (Jackson, 2001).
Huang (2011) argues that Chinese society is traditionally tolerant of homosexuality due to strife for social harmony and conflict avoidance. Homosexuality had some acceptance prior to Song Dynasty (960-1279 A.D.) (Kwok et al., 2013). Since then, there have been various laws against homosexuality in China. Due to the prevalence of Confucian thought within Chinese society, which places high value on family, respecting parents and procreation, homosexuality is viewed negatively, contributing to the sense of shame among homosexual Chinese (Huang, 2011; Kong, 2011). Huang (2011) and Kimmel and Yi (2004) suggest that some of the negative perceptions of homophobia in Asia are a result of colonialism and globalisation. Arguably, awareness of LGBT rights in Eastern Asia is also a Western influence (Lee, 2016; Martin et al., 2008). Indeed, it is difficult to assess the exact impacts of factors that have shaped and are continuously shaping LGBT communities in Asia, such as traditional cultures, geopolitical changes, foreign influences and national agendas (Huang, 2011; Kong, 2011). These processes complicate identity building of Asian LGBT persons (Kong, 2011).
Since 1990s, the rise of “tongzhi” (literally, comrade) movement, which in essence represents LGBT activism in Mainland China, Taiwan and Hong Kong, many progressive policies have been adopted, although same-sex marriages are not allowed. In Hong Kong, Taiwan and Mainland China, homosexuality is also decriminalised and appears more publicly accepted or at least tolerated. Similar, situation is found in Thailand and Japan (Jackson, 2001; Martin et al., 2008). Nevertheless, in all of the above countries and territories, same-sex couples may face discrimination and the state does not provide the same protection and rights for same-sex couples as for opposite-sex couples (Martin et al., 2008; UNDP, 2016; UNDP, USAID, 2014). Singapore maintains laws against homosexuality, although they are not enforced (Martin et al., 2008). Lack of acceptance of homosexuality is still present among the aforementioned countries. For example, UNDP (2016) reports that only 5% of sexual and gender minorities in China disclose themselves at school or in the workplace. The majority of respondents to UNDP (2016) survey reported the experience of discrimination with the highest rate of discrimination being from other family members.
Based on the aforementioned studies, it is evident that there is need for further exploration of LGBT in Asian countries, as Western categories may not be applicable. The LGBT identities and communities around the world do not share the same history (although, all cultures have LGBT history) nor are destined to appear and behave the same (Jackson, 2001).
Asian Gay Travellers
Only a few studies related to gay travel have been undertaken in Asia to date. Most notably, Storer (1999) and Sanders et al. (2002) suggest that in Thailand, which is often considered the most gay-friendly country in Asia, LGBT is tolerated due to economic benefits rather than due to acceptance of homosexuality. In addition, Community Marketing (2014c) demonstrates that Mainland Chinese gay and bisexual men travel less than lesbian and bisexual women both domestically and internationally. Liu and Chen (2010) identify stress-release from the working environment and family as the dominant motivations for travel among Mainland Chinese lesbians born after 1980. Liu and Chen (2010) identify the desire to experience lesbian-exclusive products and services among this cohort. In Hong Kong, Wong (2008) suggests that the general public and the government do not show positive response to ideas of Hong Kong becoming Asia’s gay city or gay tourism destination. A survey of Hong Kong residents concludes that the Hong Kong public considers the development of gay tourism as an economically feasible, but not a socially welcomed idea (Wong, 2008).
Considering that Asia gay travel is an underresearched area, the present study aims to contribute to understanding of Asian gay men travel preferences. Prior literature identified differences between gay and lesbian travellers (e.g. Community Marketing, 2014c), which in part is related to the gender differences, similar to heterosexual males and females (Hughes, 2006). Hughes (2006) suggests that lesbian travellers may be more conscious of the cost of a trip, may prefer a relaxing holiday and be less concerned with safety. Furthermore, there are lesbian-specific destinations, such as Greek Island of Lesvos and Isla Mujeres in Mexico as well as lesbian-specific accommodation, for example, Naari guesthouse in New Delhi (Puar, 2002). Themes related to lesbian travel are stronger related to femininity and feminism (Johnston, 2007). Within LGBT rights movements, there are precedents of schism between gay and lesbian activists (Kong, 2011). Due to all of the above and in order to reduce complexity, the focus in the present study is solely on gay men. The next section provides the theoretical framework that underpins the present study.
Market Segmentation
The present study is placed within the market segmentation and destination choice research. As demonstrated by Moscardo, Morrison, Pearce, Lang, and O’leary (1996), these two areas are interconnected and are related to travel motivations, travel activities and travel patterns. The practice of segmenting markets in order to address the needs of different groups of people has been established in the 1950s. Market segmentation can be data-driven or conceptual (Dolnicar, 2002). Due to the current lack of knowledge regarding Asian gay travellers, a conceptual and exploratory study enables identification of variables that may assist in effective segmentation as well as deeper understanding of Asian gay travellers.
Travel motivations have been previously used to identify tourism market segments (Moscardo et al., 1996). Two broad groups of travel motivations are commonly identified within the academic literature: push factors are the needs that motivate people to travel, while pull factors are the destination attributes that attract tourists (Prayag & Ryan, 2011). While a large number of various tourist motivations have been studied, escape, relaxation, relationship enhancement and self-development comprise the core push factors (Pearce & Lee, 2005).
Studying tourist motivations may not be sufficient to understand the travel pattern, that is, why and how tourist make decisions regarding travel (Pearce, 2014). A number of other dimensions that can be structural, intrapersonal or interpersonal, including logistical issues and previous travel experience, affect travel decisions (Huang & Hsu, 2009; Pearce, 2014). Decrop and Snelders (2005) focus on sociopsychological processes and decision-making. Tourist fears or perceived risks form another dimension that is growing in prominence within the tourism marketing literature (Dolnicar, 2005). Perceived risks may be of special importance for the gay travellers due to the ongoing discrimination of LGBT community. The present study focuses on understanding the travel preferences among Asia gay men. It asks about factors affecting destination, attraction and activity choices and compares them to existing Westernbased studies. The next section provides the methods applied in the present study.
Methodology
LGBT is a sensitive issue in Asia and the related academic literature in Asian hospitality and tourism sector is limited. An exploratory qualitative approach is considered appropriate to gain an in-depth understanding into a scarcely researched topic (Priest, 2010). Prayag and Ryan (2011) found qualitative semi-structured interviews useful for an in-depth exploration of travel motivations and travel experiences. The approach to data collection is influenced by grounded theory, which aims to develop a theory based on the empirical data (Decrop & Snelders, 2005). The approach to interviews taken by Decrop and Snelders (2005) and Prayag and Ryan (2011) is adopted in the present study. Respondents are asked about their general travel preferences based on the aforementioned studies. More specifically, the respondents are asked about major considerations while planning leisure travel, what motivates them to travel and what attractions and activities they look for in a destination. In addition, questions specific to LGBT community are asked. These questions are generated based on gay tourism literature (e.g. Hughes, 2006; Pritchard et al., 2000; Vorobjovas-Pinta & Hardy, 2015). Among them, the importance of safety, acceptance of homosexuality at the destination, existence of gay space and LGBT attractions and events when choosing a leisure travel destination. These questions led respondents to discussions of destinations and attractions they visited. Demographic information related to the age, nationality, occupation and income was also collected. Content analysis of semi-structured interviews is undertaken to understand factors affecting Asian gay men travel preferences.
Sample and Analysis
Two considerations are applied in selection of interviewees’ place of residence, namely the existence of a relatively large outbound tourism market and the existence of a known and sizable LGBT community. These criteria are applied in order to increase the possibility of recruiting respondents who are gay and have travelled before. Only a limited number of cities could be studied because of resource constraints.
Bangkok, Hong Kong, Shanghai, Singapore, Taipei and Tokyo are the selected locations. These cities represent some diversity within Asia, although it is impossible to represent the whole of Asia. The interview sample size of each location is five people except for Tokyo. Unfortunately, due to language barrier and unwillingness of potential respondents to discuss their sexuality, it was not possible to recruit more interviewees from Tokyo. Purposive sampling was applied since interviewees should be gay men and possess outbound travel experience.
A total of 27 gay men who have travelled internationally are interviewed, at which point the data collection process reached theoretical saturation with no new themes arising from the interviews. Due to the sensitive nature of the topic, it was challenging to recruit respondents. Purposive sampling using online forums was used to recruit respondents. The sample may represent one of the limitations of the present study. However, it also highlights the difficulty of undertaking LGBT research in Asia. The average length of each interview is approximately 30 minutes. The majority, 15 out of 27 of the respondents, are from the 20-29 age group. Eleven respondents (60%) have undergraduate qualification and 6 respondents (30%) have reached the postgraduate level. Ten respondents are current students (either at undergraduate or at postgraduate level). Other respondents are working as skilled professionals in such industries as education, banking, information technologies, medical services and TV production. The income level of the interviewees ranges from US$0 to US $6000 with the average highest income being among the interviewees from Hong Kong (US$2500) and the lowest – from Shanghai (US$1100).
Online communication platforms, that is, online gay forums, are used to recruit research participants (except for Shanghai where local gay organisation helped to recruit respondents). Interviews are undertaken via Skype. This allows communicating with respondents located in different countries across Asia. Interviews are conducted in English, Mandarin and Cantonese. Interviews with Thai and Japanese respondents are undertaken in English, rather than respondents’ native language, which constitutes one of the limitations of the study, although no language barrier was evident during the interviews. Welch and Piekkari (2006) suggest that interviewing in researcher’s or respondent’s second language is not necessarily a barrier for a qualitative research. Consequently, the data are transcribed and translated into English. NVivo 10 is used for the content analysis of transcripts. Open coding and axial coding are utilised to analyse the data and generate themes for discussion (Patton, 2005). The analysis has resulted in 92 codes in 20 categories, which have been integrated into seven themes presented in the results section. The two co-authors independently analysed the results to increase validity (Pritchard et al., 2000).
Results
The following section discusses the findings of primary data collection. The findings are presented by emerging themes. Quotes from interviews are integrated without altering the grammar. Where a quote is translated from Mandarin or Cantonese, the translation aims to be as close as possible to the original statement.
General Travel Considerations
General travel considerations such as budget, accessibility, visa policy, climate and activities available at the destination were dominant in the interviews. Budget is recognised by the respondents as one of the most important considerations. The budget is mentioned by 19 out of 27 respondents (70% of respondents). The majority of interviewees indicate that budget is the basic consideration for the trip. Respondent 15 (Singapore, student, 20-29) expressed the following:
Let’s say Gordon Ramsay restaurant. It may cost about 200 pounds. You know you want to go there but you are unable to … . (Respondent 15)
The results demonstrate that some interviewees are price-conscious.
Travel Companions
Travel companions are discussed by 19 respondents (70% of respondents). Three interviewees (11% of respondents) would have different plans when traveling with family, friends or gay friends. Travel companions impact the choice of attractions at the destination. Respondent 12 (Singapore, creative assistant, 20-29) provides the following comment:
… it is really depending on who I am going with. Who is my company? I need to make sure if my company is a straight people, I will go to the straight bars. (Respondent 12)
Additionally, the relationship status can be one of the considerations when interviewees are planning their trips. Respondents 8 (Hong Kong, auditor, 20-29) expresses the following:
Because I have a boyfriend now, I think you know, (laughing) and I’m not interested in partying that much now. (Respondent 8)
The issue of travel companions raises questions regarding the need for gay-only businesses. In case of travel in a larger group of friends or family where some travellers are gay and others are straight, gayonly places are not suitable. However, for single travellers or couples, gay-only places might be preferred to allow travellers feel more comfortable and secure.
Cultural Attractions and Activities
Cultural attractions and activities of the destination are considered by 15 respondents (56% of respondents) when planning their trips. Most responses discuss interest in local traditions, lifestyle and art, not specifically related to LGBT culture. Respondent 1 (Bangkok, copywriter, 30-39) states the following:
My favourite activities are usually not LGBT related ones. I prefer like many people gay or straight, cultural activities, traditional culture or art.
The above quote is representative of other discussions related to cultural attractions. Respondents are not specific regarding the type of cultural attractions or activities they prefer and often refer to “experiencing culture” as a general term. Six respondents state that they are more interested in LGBT-related culture and activities as a way to learn more about the LGBT community. Respondent 22 (Shanghai, student, 20- 29) provides the following comment on this theme:
I think I prefer something which is related to culture and arts. … I think I want to know more about this community and about myself. We know a lot of Chinese LGBT stuff. You want to know more about the foreign countries culture … (Respondent 22)
The discussion of LGBT-specific travel motivations and attractions is provided further below.
Conservativeness and Safety
Seven (47%) of 20-29 age group respondents, five (62.5%) of 30-39 age group respondents, and three (75%) of the 40-49 age group respondents stated that the level of conservativeness of both the place of origin and the travel destination affects their preferences and final decisions regarding leisure travel. The senior gay men pay more attention to the issue of conservativeness.
Four respondents claim that Bangkok is an openminded city, thus it is a more favourable destination. Two out of five Singaporean respondents suggest that Singapore is discriminatory towards homosexuality. Therefore, they would like to travel to other comparatively open-minded countries to satisfy social needs. Respondents 15 (Singapore, student, 20-29) and 18 (Singapore, bank officer, 40-49) provide the following comments:
If you are travelling overseas, you want to enjoy yourself and clubbing is the way for you to release the stress you have … Yeah definitely. Like in Singapore, we are the minority. And it doesn’t allow homosexuality. Definitely I look for a place for me to release stress and to meet friends or meet more people. (Respondent 15)
For example, Bangkok is known for its openness. So I feel more comfortable. On the contrary, say, Malaysia, it’s predominantly Muslim and religious. I feel a bit uncomfortable … I’m very interested in visiting LGBT related places. Again, because home country [Singapore] is very restrictive. (Respondent 18)
The level of conservativeness of the destination is closely related to the issue of safety for gay people. A question related to the openness of a destination to different sexualities generated a variety of responses. Respondent 5 (Bangkok, banking/finance, 30-39) provided the following comment:
It doesn’t affect me so much since I don’t explicitly express or show the world that I’m gay. I mean if I go with my gay friends … no one knows we are gay.
Respondent 22 (Shanghai, student, 20-29) has an opposite opinion:
Absolutely, I will never go to Russia. If the local government of the destination is anti-LGBT, I will never go to the place … I don’t think that I should hide my thoughts or ideas. So if the local government is anti-gay, I cannot be myself or express myself. My whole travel experience will not be that comfortable and good for me.
Six interviewees state that they would not travel to countries that are known to be discriminatory towards LGBT community. The countries and regions named include Malaysia, Russia, the Middle East, Muslim countries and Africa. As evident, the respondents interconnect the issue of safety with the importance of being themselves and being able to freely express their sexuality.
The Role of Sexuality in Travel Planning
It is observed that the majority of respondents are not comfortable discussing topics related to sexuality. Only three respondents mention sexuality before being asked sexuality-related questions. In all cases, this is related to travel companion discussions. On the one hand, this may imply that Asian gay men are unwilling to explicitly express their sexuality. For example, Respondent 3 (Tokyo, software engineer, 30-39) provides the following comment: “I don’t talk about my sexuality that much.” On the other hand, not all interviewees appear influenced by their sexual orientation when making travel decisions. Comment from Respondent 1 (Bangkok, copywriter, 30-39) illustrates this point as follows:
It could be that my travel preference has nothing to do with my sexual orientation and that I don’t relate myself entirely to the mainstream gay culture like going out and pubbing.
It remains a challenge to determine whether a person may exhibit unwillingness to talk about his/her sexuality due to the external environment and fear of judgement or whether this is due to the genuine lack of interest in the issue.
LGBT Attractions
LGBT tourist precincts and attractions can be described as the locations with presence of LGBT businesses and places related to the history of gay rights. Such LGBT spaces do not appear to affect destination selection of the respondents. Existence of an LGBT precinct is not important for travel destination choice for 19 (70%) respondents. However, 14 respondents indicated that if they had an opportunity (e.g. time and easy access) to visit LGBT precincts and attractions, they would do it and treat it as a complimentary activity.
Interestingly, 13 respondents associate LGBT-related tourist areas or attractions with bars and nightclubs. Gay bars play an important role for the LGBT community as places where members of the community could confirm their identity and connect with other community members in a safe environment. The second most common type of LGBT attractions, mentioned by five respondents, are unspecified cultural, historical or art attractions. Gay pride parades are mentioned by three respondents. Two respondents mention gay cruises. Massage parlours, saunas and sex toy shops have one mentioning each. No respondents mention gay-only resorts. It is evident that gay-only products are not in demand among the respondents.
The respondents displayed little awareness of or interest in places that represent a cluster of LGBT residences (e.g. Gay Village in Montreal), places important for gay rights movement (e.g. Castro district of San Francisco) or gay events (e.g. Gay Pride Parade in Amsterdam). The LGBT precincts and historical areas mentioned by interviewees are limited to Red House Theatre (Taipei), Stonewall Bar (New York), West Hollywood (California) and Oxford Street (Sydney). Interest in LGBT movement and gay rights at the destinations is expressed by seven respondents (26%). This may demonstrate a genuine lack of interest in the gay rights movement, the irrelevance of Western gay history for Asian countries or be the result of conservative policies of respondents’ countries of residence. For example, at the World Human Rights Conference in 1993 in Vienna, Singaporean Foreign Minister stated that “Homosexual rights are a Western issue, and are not relevant to this conference” (Berry, 1994, p. 73). Such political views and related policies may affect perceptions of Asian LGBT members. Nevertheless, Respondent 24 (Shanghai, student, 20-29) suggests that LGBT-related tourist attractions with historic value are more appealing than purely commercial venues:
I will consider the Stonewall Bar which is in New York because of the historical value of the place. For example, the gay bars or clubs which are in Beijing or Shanghai must not be attractive to me. I think those places are much commercialised and not that meaningful to me.
The lack of interest in and awareness of certain LGBT-related attractions is an interesting aspect that merits further investigation. Various dimensions related to LGBT attractions are further elaborated within the discussion section of the paper.
Meeting Other Gay Men
Nine respondents express interest in meeting and socialising with gay men during travel. Five of them suggested that they may look for sex. Respondent 25 (Hong Kong, nurse, 40-49) provides the following comment regarding socialising during travel:
I think LGBT is an identity from my perspective. Everyone will have their own desire to know more about their own community. Of course, we have some social needs. Of course, when we are there, we would like to know or meet more friends. Of course, culture can be everything like their habits, their preference etc. To be honest, lastly, we may prefer some sexual activities, for example, some saunas or bars.
Appearance of gay men at the travel destination forms part of the social needs theme. Respondent 16 (Taipei, teacher, 30-39) and Respondent 17 (Taipei, teacher, 30-39) express interest in meeting attractive gay men as follows:
I choose those places because of seeing those handsome men. (Respondent 16)
Those guys who are on the cruise ships should be quite attractive. They are very sexy, and attractive. We may meet some guys on the cruise ship. (Respondent 17)
Therefore, interviewees suggest that travel is an opportunity for romance.
Discussion
Most previous studies related to gay tourism focus on the Western world (Vorobjovas-Pinta & Hardy, 2015). The themes that are covered in these studies are often related to the commercial viability of developing and promoting tourist destinations to the LGBT community (Hughes, 2005). Gay travellers are presented as having higher disposable income to spend on travel due to absence of children (Community Marketing, 2014a). Another recurring theme is safe environment and the necessity for gay space at destinations (Pritchard et al., 2000). Moreover, previous studies emphasise socialising and romance as part of the travel experience sought by gay travellers (Hughes & Deutsch, 2010).
The findings of the present study are rather different from the existing literature. It is apparent that many interviewees have careful considerations of the budget in their travel, are not interested in the gay space of the destination and would consider to travel to less gay-friendly destinations. This is different from the claims often appearing in the Western literature, which tend to describe gay travellers as affluent, focus on the importance of gay space and opportunities for romance (Hughes, 2006; Vorobjovas-Pinta & Hardy, 2015). Contrary to previous studies (Vorobjovas-Pinta & Hardy, 2015), the present study also demonstrates that some Asian gay men would prefer to conceal their sexuality and travel to destinations which have negative views of homosexuality, rather than to avoid traveling to those destinations.
Therefore, it is important to avoid assumed homogeneity of gay travellers and focus on understanding the diversity of gay travellers and their travel preferences and patterns. Segmenting tourist markets and tourist behaviour based on one or two variables has been proven erroneous in other settings. For example, Prayag, Disegna, Cohen, and Yan (2015) demonstrated heterogeneity within the young Chinese outbound travellers market, while Ring, Tkaczynski, and Dolnicar (2016) segmented use of word of mouth by tourists. The results of interviews provide basis for two further discussions: characteristics of gay travellers and attributes of LGBT attractions. The rest of this section will aim to delve into these two themes.
Understanding Gay Travellers
Table 1 provides factors that have emerged from the interviews and are related to gay travellers’ identity. Gay travellers’ identity is related to the highly discussed issue of sexual identity (Huang, 2011; Martin et al., 2008) in terms of how one’s homosexuality is manifest in his/her travel choices and how much the sexual orientation influences those choices. The impact of various factors on travel planning and travel preferences is provided. Each factor has a number of alternatives. Some factors are best described through a continuum of options, while others provide multiple options. References are made to relevant literature for each factor. The references are not necessarily related to the topic of gay tourism, but are rather representative of the application of the outlined factors in other studies.
Table 1. Factors affecting travel preferences of gay men.
| Factor | Alternatives | Impacts on travel pattern | Literature |
| Centrality of being gay to self-identity | From “being gay does not define me” to “being gay is very important part of my identity” | Impacts the level of importance of gay space and LGBT-specific attractions and products | Griffith and Hebl (2002) |
| Degree of disclosure of personal sexuality to others | From being “closeted” to expressively gay | ||
| Disposable income | From low income to high income | From budget travel to luxury travel | Hughes (2005) |
| Travel motivation | Escape, novelty seeking, self-development, relaxation, relationships (including existing friends and family, meeting new friends and romance), sexual activities | Impacts the choice of destinations and attractions Impacts the level of importance of gay space and LGBT-specific attractions and products | Clift and Forrest (1999) Pearce (2011) |
| Travel companion | Family, heterosexual friends, homosexual friends, partner | Impacts the level of importance of gay space, gay-only products, venues related to sexual activities | Huang and Hsu (2009) |
| Safety | From unsafe to very safe | Impacts the choice of a destination Impacts the behaviour within the destination related to expression of gay identity May cause psychological stress | Hughes (1997) Pritchard et al. (2000) |
| Conservativeness | From homosexuality is illegal to legal gay marriage and adoption |
Two dimensions directly related to sexuality emerge from the interviews: the centrality of being gay to self-identity and the degree of disclosure of the sexual orientation. The same two dimensions have been previously identified in research of gay and lesbian work environment (Griffith & Hebl, 2002). Griffith and Hebl (2002) conclude that gay and lesbian workers who were comfortable with being gay and disclosing it have less work anxiety and higher work satisfaction. The present findings indicate that those respondents who are openly gay and consider their sexuality central to their identity are more likely to be interested in attractions related to LGBT and are less likely to travel to destinations where LGBT community is discriminated against. However, further quantitative confirmatory research is required to support this thesis.
Another important factor is the income level. While previous literature has argued that gay men have higher disposable income (e.g. Hughes, 2005; Waitt et al., 2008), the respondents of the present research had a great variance of income from US$0 (as fulltime students) to US$6000 per month. Most respondents placed high concerns on the budget of their travel. The economic concerns may be higher for Asian gay men, as many Asian countries have developing economies with lower incomes than the Western countries in which most of the previous gay tourism studies have taken place.
Travel motivations that emerge from the interviews generally fit within the travel push factors described by Pearce (2011). These motivations are likely to affect the importance of gay space within the destinations for travellers. For example, those travellers who are looking for new relationships may be more interested in the presence of gay space as opportunity to socialise. Furthermore, “Escape” motive may be interpreted as a motive to escape the repressive environment of the place of residence. Although, “escape” motivation can mean escaping the daily routine or work (Pritchard et al., 2000).
Huang and Hsu (2009) have identified travel companions (friends or family) as one of the constraining factors affecting travel decisions. In terms of gay research, one of the most important characteristic of travel companions is whether they are gay or not. This affects the importance of destination’s gay space and relevance of gay-only products. This factor warrants further examination as it appears to be rarely mentioned within the existing literature.
Safety and conservativeness of destinations are arguably the two dimensions that have been extensively covered in gay travel research (Hughes, 1997; Monterrubio, 2009; Pritchard et al., 2000). Generally, gay travellers prefer to go to gay-friendly destinations where they do not feel threatened or discriminated against. Nevertheless, some respondents mention that they do not have conservativeness of a destination as a major concern and would be interested in travelling to countries known for discrimination against LGBT community. Therefore, instead of not going to a certain destination, some gay travellers may avoid disclosing their sexual orientation and adjust their behaviour. This decision differs from Western countries, as suggested in previous studies (Vorobjovas-Pinta & Hardy, 2015), possibly because many Asian gay men are used to hiding their sexual identity (UNDP, 2016). The objectivity of assessment of destination’s gay-friendliness remains questionable. While interviewees suggested Thailand as a gay-friendly destination, Sanders et al. (2002) and Storer (1999) maintain that Thai society is only tolerant of homosexuality for economic reasons rather than being genuinely inclusive.
LGBT Tourist Attractions
Another theme that the interviews covered is the LGBT-related tourist attractions. Table 2 provides a classification of LGBT tourist attractions with examples for each category.
Several categories described in Table 2 follow wellestablished classifications of tourist attractions. For example, Swarbrooke and Page (2012) divide attractions into sites and events. Cook et al. (2010) identify a category of commercial attractions, which aim to gain profit from the operation. The benefits provided by the attractions also fit within Cook et al. (2010) classification of attractions. Nevertheless, additional important dimension is the extent to which these attractions are exclusive to gay travellers. Considering the long history of political advocacy for LGBT rights, the relevance of attraction to political activism is another category to consider.
Table 2. Classification of LGBT-related tourist attractions.
| Category | Alternatives | Examples |
| Site/event | Site Event | Gay sauna Gay Pride Parade |
| Level of exclusivity | General Gay-friendly Gay-only | Gay club Gay-only resort |
| Popularity | From not famous to world-renowned | Stonewall Bar Castro District Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras |
| Level of commercialisation | Non-profit For-profit | Gay rights demonstration Gay bar |
| Type of benefit provided | Educational (history/culture) Entertainment Romance | GLBT Historical Society, San Francisco Gay club Gay sauna |
| Level of political activism | From non-political to highly political | Gay cruise Same-sex marriage demonstration |
Interestingly, most respondents associate LGBT attractions with nightclubs and bars, that is, commercial sites with the benefits of relaxation and socialising. Historical, cultural or political attractions do not feature as prominent. This differs from previous Western-based literature which highlights both types of attractions (Hughes, 2006). This may be attributed to Asian LGBT community still developing its unique identity which would reconcile the history of homosexuality in Asia with the modern culture. Such process takes a long time. As Chan (1997) states, the Western LGBT community spent more than 200 years on developing its own identity system.
Conclusion
The present research explores the theme of travel by Asian gay men. It focuses on the travel preferences and travel planning by Asian men from six different cities of Asia. The findings establish several categories that affect travel planning and travel preferences of Asian gay men (see Table 1). These categories affect destination choice, the importance of gay-friendliness of the destination, existence of gay space within the destination, attractions to be visited and activities to participate in within a destination. LGBT attractions are also classified based on the research findings (see Table 2). The categories provided in Tables 1 and 2 may serve as the basis for further evaluation of LGBT market segments.
The study contributes to the understanding of the diversity of gay travellers. While often marketers have focused on high-income gay men from the West, the present study demonstrates the diversity of opinions of gay travellers from Asia. Contrary to previous studies that focused predominantly on wealthy gays and identified romance and presence of gay space as important, the present study has demonstrated that Asian gay travellers do not necessarily need gay space and are not necessarily wealthy. A segment of Asian gay travellers exhibits travel preferences, motivations and behaviours similar to those of general public. Thus, the idea of a single gay market segment is not realistic. It is important to avoid stereotyping gay travellers, the phenomenon that persists despite the warnings made by Hughes (1997).
Travel is a powerful social tool which may further contribute to the development of Asian LGBT communities and LGBT rights within the continent. While the present study has attempted to investigate Asian gay tourism, the sample is limited to six cities, thus a broader sample would be required for further studies. Future research may focus on intricacies of current change in attitudes to LGBT and its impact on tourism in one of Asian countries. The present study focused on Asian gay men; therefore, future studies should investigate travel by lesbian, bisexual and transgender Asians. Further research should approach the topic from a sociological rather than business perspective. Further investigation of LGBT travel is required. Quantitative methods may be employed to further test gay travel preferences. However, this is challenging due to the sensitivity of the topic. Another inherent issue within LGBT research is the low participation from LGBT members who do not disclose their sexuality. The present study has also been limited by the difficulty of recruiting research participants, due to sexuality being a sensitive topic in Asia.
It is important to encourage community members to participate in academic research and express their ideas directly in order to provide more accurate and precise data. These steps will allow researchers, policy-makers and hospitality and tourism sectors to better understand LGBT travellers and cater for their needs.