The editors' perspective: how can you write for an LGBTQ+ audience?

Two editors from LGBTQ+ publications tell us how to be allies in our writing

Last week, we learned why being inclusive in your travel writing is a means to be a better ally — and also stop yourself from disappearing into insignificance as a journalist. This week, we’ve turned to the experts: two editors of leading LGBTQ+ publications who want the mainstream media to be a more representative place. Here is their advice for how you can make your writing inclusive for LGBTQ+ folk.

Uwern Jong, Found and Editor-in-Chief of OutThere magazine

Is it ok to say LGBTQ+ or should we all be using LGBTQIA?

There are many ways to refer to the community, but use is really about context and specificity. But first, I think it is important that all storytellers understand what it actually means (Google it, always a good start).

The full acronym is LGBTQQIAAP (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, questioning, intersex, allies, asexual, pansexual) and dependent on where you’re from and the audience you’re talking to, there are additional letters… for example in Canada you will often see 2S (two spirit), to be inclusive to the indigenous community there. In the US, we are seeing greater use of “transgender and non-binary people” as standalone when talking specifically about gender identity and not sexuality. 

If you want to get it right, then always know your audience. I am personally not someone who finds myself concerned about labels, both as a gay man and as an Editor. While I’m a proud gay, British-Malaysian man of Chinese descent, I’m not too fussed if you were to write about me as "LGBTQ+ Asian" in an article, for instance. But I know others who do care about the specifics, so it really depends who you are talking to and writing for.

Generalising people as just “LGBTQ+" or “Asian” is what I call cultural-fly-overing. Why be bland and generalist, when you can add so much more texture to your piece by really getting to know the person/community and how they wish to identify?  I also see many writers using “LGBTQ+ (or variation) person". No one person is LGBTQ+. They are part of an LGBTQ+ community, but they generally identify as one part of the acronym. So if referring to a person or group of people, it is always good practice to ask how they identify, so you can refer to them correctly. If you are unsure, make sure to ask. It’s lazy journalism if you don’t. 

My go-to is LGBT+ or LGBTQ+ because it is an abbreviation that is simple to use, but infers inclusivity of the entire community. It also reduces any sensitivity in scenarios where allies are not being referred to. For example, when writing about anti-LGBTQ+ laws... there is nowhere really (except perhaps in Russia and certain parts of Africa) where it is against the law to be an ally. So actually the “A” is an incorrect use/irrelevant in this context.

So in scenarios where you’re specifically referring to contexts of sexuality and gender identity, it’s best to use LGBT+ LGBTQ+ or LGBTQI. If you’re talking about subjects like Pride, diversity, inclusion, equity and belonging, where there is a possibility to include a wider community of friends and allies, then LGBTQIA or LGBTQIA+ can be used. 

I’m also seeing people commonly using the word “queer.” In contemporary writing, “queer" has become the catch-all for LGBTQ+. While accepted, I’d always be aware of its history as a derogatory term for those who are “not straight”. There are members of the LGBTQ+ community — particularly older generations — who despise the word. Also, by using it, you’re basically lumping everyone’s identity into one word, which is not how identity works.

Then there are people who are heterosexual but identify as queer. And then a transgender person may not identify as queer at all. So my point is, be sure that who are referring to truly identifies as queer before you use the word. If referring to queer art, culture, events … that’s a slightly different case, and generally more accepted… but again, be sure you’re not labelling something as queer when it isn’t. If the organisers of an art exhibition with an LGBTQ+ theme says it’s queer, then feel free to use it. But if they don’t, there may be a reason why they don’t. 

The other thing to note as time passes and the community develops... is that LGBTQ+ lumps subjects of sexuality and gender identity together, when they don’t always (more so today than ever before) sit naturally. Someone who is transgender, or non-binary may identify as heterosexual. Ditto if you’re writing about non-binary people. Because they don’t identify as either society-normalised gender, they don’t see their sexuality as clear-cut as others do.

My advice is to be very clear as to how someone, or group of people identifies before filing your copy.

Does mainstream travel media feel inclusive to LGBTQ+ travellers? If not, how could it be, or is it not the right place for content written for LGBTQ+ travellers?

More so than ever before mainstream travel media is getting more inclusive. There is sometimes still a bad taste of tokenism in many cases, sadly… but at least we’re on the right track and I’m seeing more media generate more LGBTQ+ content.

But where it lacks is that it still doesn’t give LGBTQ+ travellers socio-cultural contexts and perspectives. There are still many countries in the world (a majority of them) where being LGBTQ+ is still against the law, punishable by corporal punishment, or worse death. And many mainstream publications and writers will openly tell stories about destinations without considering the nuances for LGBTQ+ readers and travellers. The world may feel like it’s open to everyone, but it isn’t always – and editors, writers, storytellers should be aware of that, think and talk about it more in their pieces. 

Mainstream media could also be better at informing mainstream audiences of how some of the world sees people who are deemed different. I am still shocked when I inform PRs and straight friends about how unwelcoming the destinations they represent, or love, are to LGBTQ+ people and they don’t have a clue of the laws or prejudices that happens there. LGBTQ+ people have to think twice about where and how they holiday.

Even the process of getting somewhere can be complicated, especially for transgender people. The mainstream could do a lot more to be mindful of that and educate the masses, so that they are/can be more inclusive of all people, because everyone deserves to be safe, celebrated and welcomed on holiday. 

It’s also about perspectives. For so long, travel writing has been about heteronormative and cisgendered perspectives. What a honeymoon or family travel is, for example… we as LGBTQ+ people only hear that one typical perspective, so you can imagine how isolating the world must feel to us.

And it’s not just LGBTQ+ people — the same applies for BIPOC/BAME people, differently abled, solo female travellers and travellers from other minorities. So much of travel media is privileged — and that has to change. 

What changes would you like to see in the way the mainstream travel media writes for an LGBTQ+ audience? 

Don’t edit out the nuances. If a writer identifies as male and talks about their husband in the piece, it’s ok. I’ve heard so many stories where writers' identities are watered down just to make their piece more amenable to the mainstream populace.

Also, editors need to make an effort to commission writers who have different perspectives. Let us talk about our same-gender honeymoons, or modern families. Let us talk about the reasons why we travel and the stories that celebrate our community. LGBTQ+ culture can be shared with others too and we are more than happy for non-LGBTQ+ people to participate!

How can freelancers ensure editorial written for non-LGBTQ+ dedicated media is representative of LGBTQ+ travellers’ experiences? 

Get more personal and put yourself in the shoes of others if you are not LGBTQ+ yourself. If you are an “A” (ally), then act like an ally.  If you’re not a member of the community and want to be more inclusive, then think about how you can be — understand your privilege.

Get involved. Be the “A” in LGBTQIA. Find out more about local laws and customs… get beneath the skin of a destination. Is it safe for and celebrating of LGBTQ+ people to go there, or will they feel and stick out like a sore thumb? Do you care? You should. Put yourselves in our shoes. If a place is not friendly, how does that make you feel? Do you still feel the same about the place you’re writing about?

I can tell you from experience that if a place doesn’t feel safe for LGBTQ+ people, then it won’t be right for many other groups of people — so think about that as you write your story. Ask questions of tourism authorities, hotel and resort management. Ask your LGBTQ+ friends and family how they feel about a place. What are their perspectives and opinions? 

Also don’t forget the difference between what is law and what is point of view. Many times, I’ve travelled to a destination with caution, only to be surprised — bowled-over even — by the warm welcomes I have received.

From an editorial perspective, a writing style that is in first person helps a lot. At OutThere we write and publish in first person, always. It’s important as that way you never erase the perspective and tone of voice of an LGBTQ+ person.

I’m also all about opinion, I see so much travel writing that are itinerarised accounts of a trip rather than actually voicing opinion on what it is like to visit. By getting opinion in your pieces, you are more likely to be able to include context for LGBTQ+ people.

Any further comments about the representation of LGBTQ+ travellers in the media? 

LGBTQ+ travellers for the most part want to travel like everyone else. We are mostly interested in the same things as everyone else, but perhaps more attuned to culture; and a true sense of community, as well as LGBTQ+ subjects. It’s just that the world has still a way to go before being inclusive and celebrating of who we are. 

That said things have got so much better in the 12 years I’ve been at the helm of OutThere. You’ve got to think, when we started in 2010, equal gay marriage and LGBTQ+ positive laws were not realities here in the UK, or USA, or Australia and many other countries in the world for that matter. So we’ve come a long way as a community and the same can be said of our acceptance by governments and mainstream.  

And yet, even today as Editor of OutThere, the mere mention of "LGBTQ+ travellers" to PRs and the industry conjures up images of rainbows, unicorns and gay pride celebrations. Yes, we are celebrating of the unique culture that we have developed as a community, but we also want to experience the world like everyone else, but with an understanding of our needs, wants, hopes and fears.

Finally, do you accept pitches to your publication from non-LGBTQ+ writers?

Absolutely. We are truly inclusive — some of our very best writers are not LGBTQ+ but they are all fully aware and cognisant of what those who aren’t part of the mainstream feel and see when they travel. OutThere has evolved from being just an LGBTQ+ publication to one that is all about diversity, giving space to stories not often heard in the mainstream. 

Where pitches go wrong are that they have not thought about the nuance that our readers (and I am) looking for. I want to know why we should, as diverse travellers travel somewhere rather than just what is there to see and do. Some pitches I get are absolutely tone-deaf in the “you’ve got to be kidding me!” kind of way. Others just haven’t thought about who we are and who our readers are. They’re the ones that don’t get commissioned. It has nothing to do with the fact that you’re non-LGBTQ+. 

---

Joanna Whitehead, travel editor for DIVA magazine

Is it ok to say LGBTQ+ or should we all be using LGBTQIA?

Firstly, it’s important to say that as a member of the LGBTQIA+ community, no one person can speak on behalf of the entire community. It’s a diverse, constantly evolving group in which people disagree on fundamental issues, much like other communities. For this reason, I can only write about this from my perspective as a queer woman.

For those not familiar with this initialism [LGBTQIA], it’s one that has continued to grow over the years to incorporate those whose gender or sexual identity doesn’t align with the majority mainstream. The letters stand for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans, Queer, Intersex and Asexual. The plus-sign represents the additional identities falling under the rainbow umbrella that don’t fall under this initialism, such as pansexuality or non-binary identities.   

LGBTQIA+ is invariably more inclusive than LGBT and, on this basis, we should probably all be using this. In the past, I’ve faced pushback from editors who have been reluctant for me to even use the ‘Q’ and the plus-sign, with the directive that ‘LGBT’ is the house-style. This can be frustrating as it fails to account for the progress that has been made in this area. It’s a bit of a chicken and egg situation: the less people use the full, inclusive initialism, the more people will revert to the shortened version. Familiarity breeds acceptance and visibility and representation cannot be underestimated.  

I’m also conscious that editors are mindful of word-count and the fact that the full initialism is quite the mouthful. This is particularly pertinent when it comes to headlines and SEO-content. ‘Gay’ is the most popular word when it comes to Google search power, followed by ‘lesbian’, while LGBT doesn’t come close.   

Does mainstream travel media feel inclusive to LGBTQ+ travellers? If not, how could it be, or is it not the right place for content written for LGBTQ+ travellers?

The question of how inclusive mainstream travel media feels to LGBTQIA+ travellers is complicated. On the one hand, LGBTQIA+ people are much the same as their heterosexual counterparts. We like going on holidays and exploring new places and much of the content that exists serves to inspire and inform us in the same way as it does straight readers. 

On the other hand, I rarely (if ever) see travel media produced by or about the experiences of LGBTQIA+ people in mainstream publications. Mainstream travel media has historically catered to an exclusively white, wealthy and hetersexual audience, and to a certain degree, I still believe this to be the case. It’s something I feel extremely conflicted about as a journalist who writes about travel. While it’s not possible for every article to appeal to all people, I would like to see more diversity in this area.

There are still 70 countries around the world that criminalise LGBT people. This includes about half of Africa, and much of the Middle East and the Caribbean. Six of these countries implement the death penalty for private, consensual same-sex activity — and capital punishment is a legal possibility in five more, including the UAE. Brazil is one of the deadliest places in the world for trans people, with the most recent figures (2021) showing that 125 trans people were murdered because of their gender identity in a single year, the worst figures on record. Despite this, I have yet to see any mention of the reality of life or risks facing LGBTQIA+ people even given a cursory mention in a mainstream travel article.   

For this reason, I think many LGBTQIA+ people turn to specialist media, such as DIVA magazine, or to LGBTQIA+ travel bloggers and influencers for a more comprehensive overview of a specific destination. That said, just because a country isn’t hospitable to LGBTQIA+ people, it doesn’t prevent many people from the community visiting or even living in such places. 

It’s also worth noting that different rules often (but not always) apply for tourists compared with local people, but these are arbitrary and frequently come down to good (or bad) luck, or money which — as with almost all areas of life — can be a protective factor. In many countries, criminalisation only applies to men, rather than women. So much of homophobia tends to be the policing of gender, so a woman who may not conform to traditional ideas of ‘femininity’ may also experience harassment, for example. Other additional intersecting factors, such as a person’s race or whether someone has a disability, may also present as more of a priority in terms of assessing how welcoming a country is likely to be for a potential visitor. 

There are occasional exceptions. I really enjoyed this piece for Condé Nast Traveler by Melissa Kravitz Hoeffner about her experience of going to a Sandals resort with her same-sex partner, a holiday firm that explicitly banned same-sex couples going on their holidays until 2004. My partner and I are currently trying to find somewhere suitable to stay on our honeymoon where we might feel comfortable simply holding hands around the pool without it causing a scandal and it’s a challenge.

And we’re not alone; a 2017 survey by Virgin Holidays found that only five percent of LGBT couples polled felt comfortable showing affection towards each other when on holiday. This epic story by Shannon Keating about what happened when she went on a lesbian cruise absolutely blew up when it was published in 2019 — and for good reason (it’s definitely worth checking out her socials for an update on this!). 

What changes would you like to see in the way the mainstream travel media writes for an LGBTQ+ audience? 

I’d like to see more mainstream publications publishing content by and about readers from diverse groups — across all different identities, such as race, sexuality, etc. We may be a minority, but we also go on holidays! It’s also an opportunity for readers to learn about an alternative experience from the mainstream, which can only be a good thing. Rather than expecting heterosexual writers to write authoritatively on LGBTQIA+ issues, good editors should be actively commissioning diverse voices to write about travel — and all other aspects of life. True allyship requires you to pass the mic.   

I do think that many publications — some more than others — are reluctant to do so, however, for fear of upsetting a fraction of their readers who seem to react to any expression of diversity with accusations of ‘wokeness’ or outright prejudice, which is a real shame. I think it’s down to editors to take the lead here, be allies and fight for more diverse representation.   

How can freelancers ensure editorial written for non-LGBTQ+ dedicated media is representative of LGBTQ+ travellers’ experiences? 

The best way for everyone, not just writers, to stay informed about LGBTQIA+ issues is to actively seek out and listen to those voices. Educate yourself. The mainstream media is actively hostile to trans people — even supposedly “left-wing” publications. When all we read about trans lives come from the mouths of cis people (those whose gender identity at birth is the same as their current gender identity), our media is failing us all.

The disability rights manifesto of “nothing about us without us” rings true when it comes to any minority voices; I’d like to see more LGBTQIA+ writers being commissioned to speak on those experiences from a first-hand perspective, resulting in content that is invariably richer and more authentic.

Finally, do you accept pitches to your publication from non-LGBTQ+ writers?

While LGBTQIA+ voices are still underrepresented in the mainstream, it falls to publications such as DIVA magazine to fill this gap. Like many print magazines, DIVA operates on a small budget. Pitches are open to people who identify as LGBTQIA+, but the magazine doesn’t always pay for contributions, unfortunately.

---

This was the third newsletter in our series about how to be a better ally to LGBTQ+ folk in your travel writing. Next week we’ll be discussing practical steps for practising allyship in your work.

Want more practical tips, exclusive interviews with editors and calls for pitches to help you find greater success in the industry? Become a paid subscriber and receive four indispensable newsletters each and every month.