Master Thesis
MSc in Sociology: Migration and Ethnicity track
To stay or sashay away: LGBTQ+ decisions to migrate A study case of Brazil
Vivianne Barbosa Soares (ID: 11978260)
Supervisor: Mw. Dr. Sonja Fransen Second reader: Prof. Dr. Jan Willem Duyvendak
1 Table of Contents Summary……… 2 Acknowledgments………. 3 Chapter 1: Introduction... 4 1.1 Research Question... 5
1.2 Case Study: LGBTQ+ migration from Brazil……….. 6
1.2 Societal and Scientific relevance ………. 7
Chapter 2: Theoretical Framework……… 7
2.1 Reflections on sexuality and sexual identity terminology……… 8
2.2 Aspirations and Capabilities: a revised examination……… 8
2.3 Collective Capabilities……….. 9
Chapter 3: Methodology……….. 11
3.1 Methodological Paradigm………. 11
3.2 Methods……… 11
3.3 Sampling………... 12
3.4 Study population and Data Collection……….. 12
3.4.1 LGBTQ+ Brazilians in The Netherlands……….. 12
3.4.2 LGBTQ+ Brazilians residing in Brazil………. 14
3.5 Data Analysis……… 16
3.6 Positionality and Reflexivity……… 16
3.7 Limitations……… 17
Chapter 4: Self-identified LGBTQ+ Brazilians in The Netherlands………... 17
4.1 Aspects related to sexuality……….. 18
4.2 Aspects not related to sexuality……… 25
4.3 Choice of host country: Why The Netherlands?... 27
4.4 Future migration aspirations………. 28
4.5 Holistic in-depth analysis……….. 28
Chapter 5: Self-identified LGBTQ+ Brazilians residing in Brazil………….. 31
5.1 Involuntary immobile………... 31
5.1.1 Aspiration to migrate……… 31
5.1.2 Lack of capabilities to migrate……… 33
5.1.3 Involuntary immobility?... 34
5.2 Voluntarily and Acquiescent Immobile……… 35
5.2.1 Aspiration to stay………... 36
5.2.2 Capabilities to migrate………. 39
Chapter 6: Conclusion……….. 39
2 Summary
Immobility is not a topic much addressed in the migration scholarship. The field suffers from a mobility bias meaning that there is an over-focus on migration drivers and migration decisions of those that have moved due to a belief that such focus will fully explain migration outcomes and patterns. However, how can we fully understand migration outcomes without looking at the persons that have stayed immobile? In the case of countries that present adverse environments to a community, such as Brazil in relation to LGBTQ+ individuals, how can we completely elucidate the social forces, capabilities, freedoms and other significant factors that influence people to leave if we do not know why some people are still staying? With that in mind, this thesis ventures into answering the question of why some self-identified LGBTQ+ individuals migrate, while others do not, when the environment presents itself as homophobic, unsafe and, in many senses, unfree. It begins with a brief reflection on why it is important to speak about immobility. Later, a critical examination of the Aspirations and Capabilities approach will be made, introducing the concept of collective capabilities. This thesis argues that such addition is imperative to improve the framework, presenting itself as a sharper tool to investigate migration outcomes and showing in more detail the social forces that contribute to migration decisions, especially among oppressed communities and social groups. Following that and drawing on the data collected by qualitative interviews, the aspirations and capabilities to migrate of those that have already left Brazil are examined, as well as the aspirations and capabilities to migrate or to stay of those still residing in Brazil. Finally, the findings are discussed highlighting key findings surrounding collective capabilities, individual adaptability, and the dichotomy of force versus voluntary.
3 Acknowledgments
The writing of this thesis was an immense but fulfilling challenge that provided me not only with better insights on migration as academic knowledge but with unmeasurable personal growth as well. From the difficulties of having to prospect the participants in a country that I had no personal networks, trying my best to convey what I meant in a different language and the daily struggles of being a migrant myself, I have developed resilience and learned to be proud of my own small victories. However, the credit for these attainments is not mine alone. During the course of doing this thesis, I have received a great deal of support and assistance.
I would first like to thank my supervisor, Mw. Dr. Sonja Fransen, whose expertise was invaluable in the formulation of the thesis proposal and the final research, offering important insights about the framework used and always pushing me to be more critical so I would contribute to the migration scholarship in the best of my abilities. More than that, I thank her for her kindness and comforting understanding of my limitations. Likewise, I am also grateful to all the participants that shared their stories, as painful as they were, assisting me in depicting how strong our LGBTQ+ community is and how our fight for equality is still so vital.
I would also like to express my profound gratitude to my parents for their support and wise counsel. It was their efforts that provided me with the opportunity to move abroad and study something I was passionate about. Without them, their encouragement and caring assurance, I would not be able to accomplish such intriguing research. Similarly, I desire to acknowledge my friends for their wonderful collaboration. They supported me greatly and were always willing to help, hearing my endless rambles over migration theory, reading my drafts, and being sympathetic and compassionate with my personal troubles. I would particularly like to single out my most patient and caring friends: Maria Eduarda Duarte, Marina Hamassaki, Lara Maia, Rebeca Rocha, Ísis Higino, Stella Sabino, Bruna Alves, Fernanda Prado e Fernanda Praisler. You are fearless women that even from miles away empowered me to be fearless as well. I am deeply grateful to have you in my life.
Finally, I would like to thank my partner that presented me with unfailing care, continuous encouragement, and softhearted understanding. Even without being familiar with social sciences and LGBTQ+ experiences, he was extremely helpful in assisting me to organize my thoughts and give a much needed fresh look into my writing skills. He was always glad to be of help in the most loving manner and be my happy distraction when I needed to rest my mind outside of my research. Helder, you were my joy, my motivation, and, at many times, my sanity. This thesis and this master are as much yours as it is mine.
4 Chapter 1: Introduction
From the newspapers’ headlines to politicians’ alarmist discourses that uses invasion, waves and floods metaphors to speak about migrants, we are told that moving is the deviant behavior. Implicitly, migration is put as the unnormal and something that needs to be fixed. In a way, more conventional migration theories also share such perspective in the sense that migration is the phenomena that need an explanation while staying immobile is the norm that requires no investigation. For instance, macro neo-classic economics perceives migration as a product of wage differentials between countries (Massey et al. 1993). Once that variance is extinct, so is migration. Therefore, migration is an aberrant event due to wage discrepancies. On the micro level, the neo-classics see migration decisions as an individual cost-benefit calculation that “stem from disequilibria or discontinuities between labor markets” (Ibid.: 435). Once again, it reinforces the idea that immobility is the natural state of the individuals, while migration is not. That, combined with many other strands of the social sciences that places immobility as the human standard norm, helps to consolidate a mobility bias within the migration scholarship (e.g., Arango 2000, Carling 2002, De Jong & Gardner 1981, Schewel 2019). A mobility bias gives little focus to those that do not migrate and, subsequently, loses essential elements that influence migration outcomes (e.g., Arango 2000, De Jong & Gardner 1981, Hammar et al. 1999). How can one fully explain the effects of migration drivers, the particulars of a migration flow including its size, the migration decisions, and possible trends without understanding why some people stay immobile while others choose to leave? In the words of Schewel (2019: 1), “the systematic neglect of the causes and consequences of immobility hinders attempts to explain why, when, and how people migrate.”
On that basis, this study will build upon the research of immobility, helping to defy the mobility bias entrenched in the migration field. It will attempt to demonstrate that looking beyond movement provides sharper insights into the context of migration and the social forces shaping migration aspirations, decisions, and outcomes. Moreover, it will expose how migration is one of many forms of adaptation, namely depicting that “migration is only one possible response to changing life circumstances (Malmberg 1997 in Schewel 2019: 3).
That said, to tackle such topic, a theory that provided room for immobility was needed. The Aspiration and Capabilities framework suggested by Carling (2002) and later revised by De Haas (2014) and Schewel (2015) offered a two-step approach that granted the necessary tools to look at immobility with the same amount of details and scrutiny as mobility. As pointed out by Carling (2002: 23) the “model is intended to guide explanations of the size and direction of migration flows, and the characteristics of migrants compared to the characteristics of those who stay behind.” It does so by distinguishing two elements: aspiration to migrate (or to stay), and the ability to do so - later termed as capability by De Haas (2003, 2014). Besides, the framework also expanded the notion of agency into the subjective realm and recognized structure as a contextualized statement, offering leeway to acknowledge different levels of voluntariness and coercion in the aspiration to migrate or to stay, as well as the impacts of capabilities, social order and liberties on migration decisions.
5 Yet, while reflecting on what case study to focus on and the operationalization of the research, a weakness of the Aspiration and Capabilities model emerged. The revised theory by De Haas (2003, 2014) is grounded on Sen’s (1999) work on capabilities which de-emphasizes the collective realm. His work is inattentive towards the values and freedoms that are not a sum of individual capabilities or an element of the whole society, but rather a property of a group. In De Haas (2003, 2014) framework, the individual is still the ultimate unit of analysis (Robeyns 2016), which becomes problematic in the study of migration decisions. That is because, without the appreciation of the collective, the framework fails to capture the forces that affect social groupings and their differences in liberties against other individuals and society. That is, the factors that impact the aspiration to move or to stay are inaccurate without regarding at shared values, shared liberties, and shared benefits. This becomes particularly true in the case of oppressed social grouping such as black individuals, indigenous communities, LGBTQ+ persons, among others. In those cases, collective capabilities would underline debilitating effects of the oppressiveness and discrimination towards such groups and display how the insiders adapt to such adversities, either by aspiring to migrate or finding new ways to live and reconcile with the environment.
Given this, this study will venture into the topic of why LGBTQ+ migration is not a lot more expressive when in the case of countries that provide so many hazards and dangers to the community. In other words, in those circumstances, why do some LGBTQ+ individuals do not migrate, while some do? The choice for this particular social group was two-fold: first, in Academia, the inclusion of dissonant sexual identities as an important unit of analysis in research is often underexposed. Predominantly, researchers rely on heteronormative premises to contemplate various societal phenomena, forgetting underlying power-relations that comes from sexual differentials and therefore, getting a biased understanding of the social events they pledge to investigate. Migration scholarship is no exception. The field remains arranged around the assumption that migrants are heterosexuals (Luidhéid 2008), concealing how sexuality impacts migration, and limiting our understanding of the latter.
Even though there has been an effort to enlarge the body of literature that tackles the nexus between migration and sexuality in recent years (e.g., Cantú 1999, Carrillo 2004, Guzman 1997, Luidhéid 2008, Manalansan 2006), the topic is still underexamined. I plan to join the authors that have made an effort to put the spotlight in queer and sexual studies and bring light to how sexuality is a significant element in migration decisions. Secondly, LGBTQ+ narratives can be an exceptional instrument to explore how we conceptualize aspirations and capabilities, as well as the aspect of voluntariness of migration and immobility, in the context of oppression and intolerance. Venturing into these peoples’ aspirations and capabilities will highlight the immobility facet as an essential feature in understanding migration outcomes, as well as hopefully demonstrating how collective capabilities is an imperative concept in the inquiry of aspirations and capabilities to move or to stay.
1.1 Research Question
In this regard, this study will try to answer the question: Why do some individuals who
self-identify as LGBTQ+ migrate while others stay immobile, when in a context of intolerance and homophobia? To do so, the Aspirations and Capabilities approach will
6 be enriched by the conception of immobility presented by Carling (2002) and Schewel (2015). Moreover, the concept of ‘collective capabilities’ (e.g., Carter 1999, Evans 2002, Ibrahim 2006) will be introduced in the belief that it will act as a more nuanced instrument that will make more effective distinctions and for the examination of factors involved in the aspirations and capabilities to migrate of marginalized groups, instead of focusing solely on individuals. Put it briefly; collective capabilities will expectantly provide more detailed information regarding the social, political, and economic factors that contribute to the formation of the aspiration to move or stay and the capabilities to do so.
With that in mind, a qualitative investigation will be conducted of LGBTQ+ individuals that have migrated, as well as those that stayed immobile, either by voluntary immobility, involuntary immobility (Carling 2002) or acquiescent immobility (Schewel 2015). This will be accomplished by the collection of in-depth interviews where people will have the chance to elaborate on their thoughts, aspirations, and behaviors, providing detailed information that will be later analyzed to examine for patterns, emerging themes, and concerns. These in-depth interviews will venture into sub-questions, such as: How do LGBTQ+ individuals perceive their sexuality and the socio-political context to have influenced their aspirations to migrate? How do these people consider their sexuality and the environment in the country of origin to have impacted their capability to migrate? Does all or most LGBTQ+ individuals that have not migrated stayed immobile due to lack of capabilities? If not, what are these peoples’ aspirations to stay, and how does it relate to their sexual orientation and the adverse environment?
1.2 Case study: LGBTQ+ migration from Brazil
Since the aim is to investigate LGBTQ+ persons that are originally from countries that present adverse environments for such community, the sample of interviewees will be comprised of Brazilians who self-identify as LGBTQ+. The reason for choosing this location is twofold. Firstly, Brazil is my country of origin and where I had the opportunity to live and grow up, which provides me with an insider insight on the context, as well as knowledge on the language that can facilitate rapport with interviewees. Secondly, Brazil has always provided an unfavorable milieu for queer individuals in terms of violence and intolerance. However, due to recent sociopolitical events, such discrimination and aggression had increased (Human Rights Watch, 2019). The issue is considerably visible in the social media, the press, as well as NGOs reports. The Brazilian Non-profit organization Grupo Gay da Bahia estimates that every 20 hours an LGBT person is murdered or commits suicide due to LGBTphobia (Grupo Gay da Bahia 2008). Transgender Europe, an organization that monitors the murders of trans and gender-diverse individuals, puts Brazil as the country with most killings out of the 72 countries examined between 2008 and September of 2018 (Transgender Europe 2018).
Regarding the recent political events, it is critical to allude that the country’s current president endorses “torture and other abusive practices, and made openly racist, homophobic and misogynist statements” (Human Rights Watch 2019). Human Rights Watch also points out that “Brazilian media reported about dozens of cases of threats and attacks against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people during the presidential campaign, many of them allegedly by Bolsonaro supporters” (Human Rights Watch 2019). That said, there is a lack of more comprehensive statistical investigations on homophobic violence in the country, mostly because the police do not collect data on hate crimes towards LGBTQ+ people since Brazil does not count with any legislation to criminalize homophobia or protective measures for this particular social group.
7 1.3 Societal and Scientific relevance
As before mentioned, the central relevance of this study is to contribute to research on immobility, emphasizing the importance to look beyond people on the move. By doing so, it is believed that the migration scholarship will benefit from sharper understandings of migration outcomes and migration decision-making (De Jong & Fawcett: 1981), as well as grasping with more detail the ways mobility and immobility are connected, how immobility preferences are associated with structural constraints and individual determinants, how capabilities differ in those that move and those that stay put, as well as how agency performs in the choice to stay versus the choice to migrate. That is, examining the causes and consequences of immobility will provide “an opportunity to understand migration processes in a new way” (Schewel 2019: 19) that looks at “the countervailing structural and personal forces that restrict or resist it” (Ibid.) in a manner that is inaccessible when solely regarding the mobility facet.
In sum, this study will contribute in a way to illustrate that looking at immobility gives a more robust analytical tool to understand migration. Confidently, this thesis will teach us that immobility patterns are much connected to how each person adapts or not to restrictions on their individual and collective capabilities, as well as other non-structural factors such as family, relationships, imaginary of abroad and life goals.
Alongside, a second scientific contribution is that this thesis aims to strengthen the Aspiration and Capabilities framework by adding the concept of collective capabilities. It is considered that such inclusion will enhance the effectiveness of the model in comprehending migration outcomes and patterns in different settings and with diverse individuals, especially apropos of marginalized groups. Therefore, it aims to contribute to the theoretical gap of such a framework that falls short of recognizing the collectiveness aspect of capabilities and its impacts on migration decisions.
Additionally, the research wishes to understand how sexual orientation molds migratory paths, displaying the importance to look at such factor and, hopefully, inspiring more investigation in the area. It also intends to take LGBTQ+ migration experiences out of the shadow, so their specific challenges do not remain to be overlooked by more extensive migration theories, policy-makers, and relief organizations.
Chapter 2: Theoretical Framework
As aforesaid, this study will try to understand why some self-identified LGBTQ+ individuals migrate, while others stay immobile, in locations that offer adverse and intolerant conditions to that community. In that sense, some key concepts must be operationalized, and the leading theory that will underline this study, the Aspirations and Capabilities framework, must be reviewed and enriched. Firstly, I will address the use of the term LGBTQ+, providing the reasons why this concept was chosen over the favored academic term ‘queer.’ Subsequently, the Aspirations and Capabilities approach (Carling 2002, De Haas 2004) will be detailed, touching upon the aspect of immobility provided by Carling (2002) and Schewel (2015).
Lastly, a contribution to the framework will be made by adding the concept of collective capabilities. It is believed that the approach would benefit from such insertion by providing tools to understand how structures affect not only individuals but social groups as a whole, as well as identifying how collective values and actions can influence migratory aspirations and capabilities.
8 2.1 Reflections on sexuality and sexual identity terminology
It is imperative that I address the use of LGBTQ+ and self-identification in the research question. The growing body of literature that addresses sexuality and sexual orientation has been opting more and more for the use of ‘queer’ instead of the ‘LGBTQ+’ label. This is because it is understood that sexual identities are not fixed categories and should not be approached in research through essentialist lenses, a claim that this study supports. In that sense, the sexuality scholarship promotes the use of ‘queer’ as a better fit to address the “the full spectrum of sexualities and sexual identities” (Mai & King 2009), allowing us to transcend the hetero-homo dualism and providing room for multiple ‘sexual deviant’ existences (Ibid.). Moreover, the term ‘queer’ is expected to highlight relations of power that are embedded within categories (Luibdhéid 2008). Various of the standard sexual labels were “historically formed through specific epistemologies and social relations that upheld colonialist, xenophobic, racist, and sexist regimes” (Luiddhéid & Cantú 2005: x-xi). Put differently, these categories do not account for intersectionality and often lack a critical consideration on “race, gender, class, and geopolitical location in experiences, (…) in a manner that does not always centralize — but that never leaves out — sexuality” (Luibhéid 2008: 171).
Nonetheless, in my view, the use of sexual categories such as LGBTQ+ is still needed here due to the choice of methods and the country of origin of the interviewees. LGBTQ+ as a multitude of sexual grouping is commonly used in Brazilian society, while ‘queer’ is a term often confined to academic spheres and does not have a translation into Portuguese. If during interviews I was to use the term ‘queer’ to describe sexuality and sexual orientation as a fluid matter, there could be a lack of understanding between the researcher and the interviewee, as well as potential harm to rapport. That would be most notably true regarding people without social sciences' academic backgrounds, making the research only relatable to a small socially privileged group of people. That is not to say that the use of categories will be done without reflection. The very choice of bringing the expression ‘self-identification’ is one of the measures introduced here to counterbalance the categorizations drawbacks and allow people to feel free to express their identity as they seem fit. Similarly, intersectionality will be addressed during the interviews by giving space for the participants to address other forms of social categorization that they feel affects their lives as oppressive systems. That said, the employment of ‘LGBTQ+’ will be done with caution and will continue to be contemplated and reflected upon throughout all the research process.
2.2 Aspirations and Capabilities: a revised examination
In 2002, Jorgen Carling introduced the concepts of aspirations and abilities as a two-step migration approach to guide his studies on ‘involuntary immobility’ in Cape Verde. The author aimed to explain the reality of those nationals that did not migrate, but still wished to do so (Carling 2002). Thus, the author theorized aspirations as a “conviction that migration is preferable to non-migration” (Carling & Schewel 2018: 946). The idea is considered to vary within a spectrum between choice and coercion (Carling 2002), according to macro- and micro-levels of analysis. Ability, on the other hand, is theorized as the feasibility of their desire to migrate, and it also counts with macro- and micro- dimensions. The former being the “immigration interface” and the latter expressing the “individual-level characteristics” (Ibid: 24). While the immigration interface relates to barriers and structural opportunities, the individual characteristics are mostly associated with peoples’ ability to overcome such barriers (Ibid.).
9 These two factors combined, aspirations and abilities, provide us with four categories of mobility: voluntary mobility, involuntary immobility, voluntary immobility, and acquiescence immobility (Carling 2002; Schewel 2015). Voluntary mobility is having both the aspiration and the ability to move. Involuntary immobility is having the aspiration to move, but not having the ability to do so. Voluntary immobility relates to those individuals that do not have the aspiration to migrate but have the ability to do so. Lastly, a concept proposed by Schewel (2015), acquiescent immobility “describes those who are both unable to migrate but neither do they desire to do so” (Schewel 2015: 6). From there, different scholars adopted this approach to account the contrasts between the wish to migrate and the actual enactment of such desire. Many of them opted to refine the concepts once proposed by Carling. That was the case of the employment of ‘capabilities’ proposed by De Haas (2010), a conceptual enhancement that will be used in this study. De Haas (2010) draws from development studies to expand the notion of ability, replacing it with the concept of human capabilities conceived by Sen (1999). The author advocated that such exchange “provides a richer understanding of migration as an intrinsic part of broader change” (De Haas 2014: 23), as well as to offer better insight of the role of capabilities in affecting migration aspirations (Ibid.). In other words, while the term ability was used as a synonym of resources used to overcome the costs of migration, the concept applied by De Haas contributed to the perception that the freedom to migrate is valuable within itself, making migration a part of broader processes of social transformations (De Haas 2014: 4). Put differently, “whereas the aspiration/ability model considers ‘ability’ to migrate only among people who aspire to migrate, the ‘capability’ to migrate is, by definition, equally relevant to all” (Carling & Schwel 2018: 956). 2.3 Collective capabilities
Considering the above, it seems that the concept of Sen (1999) imported by De Haas (2014) is restricted to the individual dimension, which motivated many critiques within development studies. The concept of capabilities was pointed out by several scholars (e.g., Carter 1999; Evans 2002; Ibrahim 2006; Rosignoli 2018) as being individualistic and, consequently flawed by neglecting the collective dimension of values and actions. Sen (1999) operationalizes capabilities as the freedom of individuals to be and do what they have reason to value. It relates to a person’s pursuit of their well-being by having free access and opportunity to perform any human functionings they judge as important (Ibid.). These functionings can range from a straightforward action such as having something to eat, as to more complex ones, such as “taking part in the life of the community and having self-respect” (Sen 1999: 75). However, scholars like Evans (2002), Carter (1999) and Ibrahim (2006) argue that some of the individual perceptions of what a valuable functioning is depends on the social structure and peoples’ interaction with one another. Not only that, but they support that the ability to achieve these functionings also relies on acting together with others that value similar things (Evans 2002; Ibrahim 1999; Rosignoli 2018).
On that note, Evans (2002) points out that
Gaining the freedom to do the things that we have reason to value is rarely something we can accomplish as individuals. For those already sufficiently privileged to enjoy a full range of capabilities, collective action may seem superfluous to capability, but for the less privileged attaining development as freedom requires collective action. Organized collectivities--unions, political parties, village councils, women's groups, etc.--are fundamental to ‘people's capabilities to choose the lives they have reason to value.’ They provide an arena
10 for formulating shared values and preferences, and instruments for pursuing them, even in the face of powerful opposition (Evans 2002: 56).
That said, it seems imperative to consider collective values and actions to fully understand human capabilities in different contexts, especially in those scenarios where the subjects examined are from marginalized groups in society. Being legally entitled to get married, for example, is a collective capability for non-heterosexual individuals, which most often is acquired by collective social action. Thus, it is appreciated that regarding collective capabilities as a distinct category, as proposed by Stewart (2005), is necessary to have a real account on capabilities, well-being, and social transformation. In this study, this distinct category will be understood as the capabilities implemented by a collective subject that cannot be reduced either to the individual realm nor to the broader category of ‘society’ (Rosignoli 2018: 826). Simply put, “collective capabilities are defined as opportunities that a group has to be and do what it values” (Hall 2014). Hence, it arises from values shared by a specific group, that can better be achieved by collective action and will move towards collective benefits. For example, Murphy (2014) has shown how political self-determination is a common value for people from indigenous groups. The possibility to determine boundaries of the political community, to establish mechanisms of deliberations, and make decisions as a group in the absence of interference or domination is a collective capability of this group (Murphy 2014: 323). However, this capability is most likely to be achieved by collective action, rather than by an individual (Ibid.).
With this being said, how can collective capabilities influence migratory processes? The study of Hall (2014) can show us how this concept can have an impact on individual migration aspirations, as well as in individual and other collective capabilities, shaping migration outcomes. The author applied a dual-level capability approach, where she attempted to discern individual capabilities from collective ones among an ereba-making community in Honduras (Hall 2014). While conducting an ethnographic examination, as well as interviews, she found that the know-how of ereba-making was linked to peoples’ identity and was considered a collective value of the community (Ibid.). Since protecting this knowledge and the survival of this economic activity would benefit the whole community, attending school and improving such know-how became a collective capability, rooted in collective values and resulting in distributed collective benefits. However, since the area did not have schools, parents would aspire to send their children to the city to have access to education. The ones that had individual capabilities would send their children that would later go back home to improve ereba-making processes. That shows how a collective capability (ereba-making and community survival) fed the desire of pursuing another capability (access to education) that could only be achieved by migration. Moreover, it illustrates the connections between collective capabilities and migration as a socially transformative process that widens not only individual capabilities but collective capabilities as well.
Therefore, it is believed that the addition of collective capabilities to the Aspirations and Capabilities approach proposed by De Haas (2014) would aid the author’s claim of migration as a “part of broader change”, as well as providing more detailed insights on peoples’ aspirations and capabilities to migrate, especially within people that face structural constraints to their capabilities due to their social group, such as LGBTQ+ individuals. For this reason, it is expected that, during the collection of data, collective capabilities that influence and alters LGBTQ+ migratory desires and experiences emerge, highlighting heteronormative structures that constrain queer individuals because of their sexuality and consequently alters their desire and capability to migrate. For instance, these
11 capabilities could comprise the capability of being protected by the police from LGBTphobia attacks, the capability of political self-determination, the capability of applying for a family reunion visa, and so forth.
Chapter 3: Methodology 3.1 Methodological Paradigm
This thesis seeks to understand the relationship between sexuality and experiences of mobility and immobility. When reflecting on the nature of each topic, this study perceives sexuality not as a fixed phenomenon, but rather as “a set of meanings attached to bodies and desires by individuals, groups, and societies” (Gagnon & Simon 1973 in Gamson 1994: 352). The act of migration, in the same way, is also perceived here as context-dependent and an intrinsic part of social transformation (De Haas 2014; Castles 2009), which implies that mobility takes different meanings depending on individual perceptions. Migration could be perceived as a cultural rite of passage, a family income strategy, among other meanings. Moreover, both elements are embedded in hegemonic discourses and social power relations. Simply put, “things aren’t just the way they are; they have been constructed and reconstructed within shifting power-laden context” (Hesse-Biber 2004: 27).
With that in mind, the choice of paradigm to guide this study needed to be suitable for the idea that reality is socially constructed and influenced by subjectivity. It also required to acknowledge power-relations that underlies social interactions and structures, providing tools and guidelines for a more holistic approach that could investigate not only the private realm but the broader structural context as well. For that reason, this study adopts a critical paradigm, where people’s own standpoints will be seen as knowledge and that an emic perspective will be prioritized over deductive reasoning.
3.2 Methods
The choice for qualitative methods is due to not only the suitability of such methods vis-à-vis the critical perspective but also to its efficacy in the pursuit of this thesis’ goals. This study aims to understand why some individuals migrate, while others do not, investigating people’s aspirations and capabilities to do so. Hence, qualitative methods, more specifically semi-structured in-depth interviews, seem to be the most effective way to gain insights on personal aspirations, experiences, and processes of decision, as well as understandings of the structural context and its consequences to one’s mobility. The choice of in-depth interviews was, therefore, due to its usefulness to “capture people’s individual voices and stories” (Hennick et. Al 2011: 110), along with their backgrounds and views on the socio-context (Ibid.), which is particularly interesting in the case of marginalized groups that have been systematically excluded from research processes (Hesser-Biber 2004).
For instance, aspirations were operationalized as a type of attitude (Carling 2014), defined as “a psychological tendency that is expressed by evaluating a particular entity with some degree of favor or disfavor” (Eagly & Chaiken 1993: 1 in Carling & Schewel 2018: 954). The essence of this entity can be three-fold: a comparison of places, a comparison of cultural projects or a matter of personhood (Ibid.). ‘Have you seriously considered moving abroad?’ Followed up by a ‘why’ question, is an example of an inquiry that helped highlight empirical facts, gave room for the preference to stay and its reasons or assisted in identifying the entity assessed by the people that have considered moving. Another type of question put into practice was ‘How likely do you see yourself moving
12 elsewhere in the future?’, to address both aspirations and capabilities (Ibid.). More specifically about the later, broad questions such as ‘How do you think migration would impact/have impacted your life?’ was used, as well as more theory-oriented questions such as ‘What do you imagine you will be freer to do if you were in another country?’, ‘What are the things you value to do that you perceive you can’t do it in Brazil?’, ‘Do you feel you are free to be yourself in Brazil?’. These inquiries attempted to capture constraints to peoples’ freedoms to do or be what they value and inspect how these capabilities influenced their migratory aspirations and/or mobility journeys. In annex, the complete interview guide can be found.
3.3 Sampling
For the process of interviewing, two samples of analysis were gathered. The first consisted of Brazilian nationals that self-identify as LGBTQ+ and have migrated to the Netherlands. The second comprised of Brazilians who self-identify as LGBTQ+ but still lived in their country of origin. Both samples were acquired by the snowball process. This method was chosen because, even though queer individuals are more visible today than a few decades ago, recruiting participants for research that revolves around delicate topics, especially those concentrating on experiences that are not entirely validated by society, such as ‘deviant’ sexual identities, can be problematic (Browne 2005). People from outside the heterosexual framework can be hard to reach due to the perceived risks of speaking openly about such theme, meaning the fear of discrimination, harassment, and even violence (Ibid.). Due to that, a method that facilitated the access to LGBTQ+ individuals was required, guiding the preference for a snowball sampling process. With this method, participants were found by following social networks of individuals selected as a point of entry. On that note, I assembled multiple points of entry to increase the probability of a heterogeneous group regarding class, race, and gender. For that, I utilized not only my personal networks but also worked with social media, LGBTQ+ associations, and events to acquire access to different people that fit the criteria needed for this research. However, the lack of access to lower socio-economic classes was still a limitation. The majority of the participants, both migrants, and non-migrants were from middle-class and high-middle class, which presents a restriction to the scope of the results.
In the specific case of Brazilians that still resided in Brazil, the interviews were conducted via Skype due to geographic and financial restrictions. Despite a considered amount of studies demystifying the belief that internet-based methods implicate in lack of rapport (Davis et al. 2004, East et al. 2010), and some even going further advocating that these methods make it easier for sensitive topics to be discussed (Davis et. Al. 2004, East et. Al 2010, Sturges & Hanrahan 2004), the potential limitations of Skype interviews were contemplated during the sampling and collection of data. For instance, I engaged in careful self-disclosure when felt appropriate to create a “less intimidating environment and enhance the reciprocal nature of interviewing” (Elmir et al. 2011: 13). Having said that, limitations due to the internet-based methods were minor and did not impact the quality of interviews.
3.4 Study population and Data Collection 3.4.1 LGBTQ+ Brazilians in The Netherlands
In total, thirteen Brazilian migrants that self-identified as LGBTQ+ were interviewed during March and April 2019 in The Netherlands. The interviews were semi-structured, conducted in Portuguese, and the quotations inserted in this thesis were translated into
13 English by the author. The purpose of the questions was to gain insights on why these people have left Brazil and on whether their sexual orientation had any influence on the aspiration and the decision to migrate.
Characteristic Percentage
Age (in years)
18-21 23 22-25 23 26-29 30.8 30-34 15.4 34-40 0 > 40 7.7 Gender Cis-Man 46 Cis-Woman 46 Trans-Man 0 Trans-Woman 0 Non-Binary 8 Ethnicity Black 23 Caucasian/White 77 Indigenous 0 Other 0 Socio-Economic class Upper Class 0
Upper Middle Class 23
Middle Class 77 Working Class 0 Lower Class 0 Sexual Orientation Gay 46 Lesbian 31 Bisexual 23 Queer 0 Other 0
As seen in the table above, the interviewees' age oscillated between 19 to 58 years old. The individual that has been living in The Netherlands for the largest amount of time moved 28 years ago, while the most recent migrant had arrived only two months ago. Most participants lived in Amsterdam, but a few were also residing in The Hague and one in Purmerend. All interviewees were here legally, either with dual-citizenship of a European country, a partner visa, study visa and one has already obtained Dutch citizenship. Out of the thirteen people, one did not have a higher-education degree, and two were in the process of obtaining their bachelor at the University of Amsterdam. Five people had recently finished their masters in a Dutch university, and another had obtained his master’s degree in the United States.
Six people self-identified as cis-gendered women, six as cis-gendered men and one mentioned as non-binary. Regarding their sexual orientation, three people self-identified
14 as bisexual, six as gay and four as lesbian. Concerning race, three people self-identified as black, while the rest considered themselves white. It is essential to notice that all interviewees perceived themselves as middle-class or high-middle class before moving to The Netherlands. The province of origin of the participants can be seen in the map where Paraná state had three participants, Ceará state, Santa Catarina state, and Rio de Janeiro state had two participants each, while the states of São Paulo, Federal District, Bahia, and Mato Grosso had one participant each.
3.4.2 LGBTQ+ Brazilians residing in Brazil
Regarding the Brazilians who self-identify as LGBTQ+ and are still living in Brazil, fourteen semi-structured interviews were conducted. The interview guide can be found in the Appendix. The interviews were conducted in Portuguese, and the quotations comprised here were translated into English by the author. The questions were made in an attempt to uncover what makes people stay immobile while facing an adverse environment apropos of their sexuality. Is it a matter of lack of aspiration to move, lack of capabilities to move or both? Therefore, the purpose of the interviews was to examine 1) if people had the aspiration to move, 2) what motivated that aspiration or lack of thereof, and 3) if they held the required capabilities to migrate.
Characteristic Percentage
Age (in years)
18-21 7.1 22-25 35.8 26-29 42.8 30-34 0 34-40 14.2 > 40 0 Gender Cis-Man 28.6
15 Cis-Woman 71.4 Trans-Man 0 Trans-Woman 0 Non-Binary 0 Ethnicity Black 21.4 Caucasian/White 64.3 Indigenous 0 Asian decent 7.1 Other 7.1 Socio-Economic class Upper Class 14.3
Upper Middle Class 35.7
Middle Class 35.7 Working Class 0 Lower Class 14.3 Sexual Orientation Gay 14.2 Lesbian 42.8 Bisexual 35.8 Queer 0 Other 7.1
As illustrated in the table, the participants’ age ranged from 20 to 35 years old. There were 10 women and 4 men, and they all identified as cis-gendered. In terms of sexual orientation, five people identified themselves as bisexuals, two as gay, six as lesbians, and one described his sexuality as a “fluid spectrum between bisexuality and being gay.” All participants had or were currently obtaining a higher-education degree. In relation to race, three people self-identified as black, one as Japanese-decent, one self-identified as “multiracial of black, indigenous and white decent” and the remaining participants identified themselves as white. As for the geographic location of participants, one was from Alagoas state, one from Rio de Janeiro state, two from the Federal District, two from Mato Grosso do Sul state, one from Maranhão state and seven from São Paulo state.
16 A noteworthy limitation of the data is that, even though two people have stated that they come from poor lower-class backgrounds where they parents haven’t had any higher-education, all interviewees had a university degree which is not an accurate representation of the country. According to the IBGE (Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics), only 15,3% of the adult population (25 years old and older) have graduated from a higher education institution (IBGE, 2017). This indicated that a significant percentage of the lower-class population that still resides in Brazil wasn’t heard.
3.5 Data Analysis
To be consistent with an emic perspective, data was transcribed verbatim to give room to people’s voice and descriptions. Subsequently, an approach rested on the main principles of grounded theory was applied to the analysis of data. This implied that data was collected and coded cyclically. Simply put, “as one collects the data, one is analyzing the data” (Hesse-Biber 2017: 317). Both processes are interlinked. Coding was made holistically and largely inductively. However, as pointed out by Bryman (2012: 574), “social researchers are typically sensitive to the conceptual armory of their disciplines, and it seems unlikely that this awareness can be put aside.” Given that, in contrary to the main advocates of Grounded Theory, this study was aware that, since the research question is deeply rooted in theory, it was likely that coding strategies were deductively influenced by the Aspirations and Capabilities framework. That said, it is acknowledged here that “qualitative analysis involves the interplay between induction and deduction” (Hennick et al. 2011: 206).
3.6 Positionality and Reflexivity
Given my personal familiarity with the social group and country of origin studied, a section on positionality and reflexivity was deemed indispensable. Literature suggests different pros and cons concerning insider-research. Greene (2014) provides in her article a brief overview of aspects. For example, some of the benefits of such insider perspective would be the fact that the researchers have “pre-existing knowledge of the context of the research” (Ibid.: 3) and they understand the psychological and emotional precepts of the participants more effortlessly and efficiently (Ibid.). Moreover, the social interaction
17 develops more naturally, and “researchers are less likely to stereotype and pass judgment on the participants under study” (Ibid.: 3).
However, there are disadvantages. The most prominent would be that “greater familiarity can lead to a loss of ‘objectivity’ and there is thus the increased risk of the researcher making assumptions based on their prior knowledge and/or experience” (DeLyser 2001 in Greene 2014: 4), as well as letting personal beliefs and values influence the research (Ibid.). Another critical point is of power-struggle with participants. The insider-standpoint can blind the researcher of different types of power relations (age, gender, race) when interviewing someone from the same community (Ibid.).
In consideration of the preceding, I conducted a series of measures and techniques to mitigate the drawbacks from being an insider. First and foremost, I guided myself in the process of reflexivity, as proposed by Bourdieu (1990). More specifically, I examined my relationship with the object of scrutiny, identifying and analyzing how my social conditions (my age, gender, sexual identity, class, and academic background), and the environment I am embedded as a Masters student (the sociology field and the University of Amsterdam as an institution) affected my positionality and my objectivity. I made an “active engagement of the self in questioning perceptions and exposing their contextualized and power-driven nature” (Bourdieu & Wacquant 1992 in Greene 2014: 9).
For that, I implemented the use of different journals, as proposed in the article of Greene (2014). I adopted an interview journal for notes drafted during the collection of data, as well as a personal reflection log where I reflected upon my judgments and interpretations. Moreover, I set up a “peer debriefing” (Ibid.), where I shared my findings and thoughts with a colleague to gain an outsider perspective and fresh critical eyes on the data. 3.7 Limitations
As already mentioned, the main limitation was the lack of access to lower socio-economic classes. The majority of participants that served as entry-points for the snowball sampling were from higher socio-economic classes, leading to other participants from the same class. The few participants from lower classes didn’t lead to many participants, mainly because people felt that they couldn’t indicate another participant since they were afraid of exposing someone that might not want to talk. Time was also a restraint. Although it was possible to collect enough data for answering the research question in a comprehensive manner, more time would have permitted for more diverse recruitment of interviewees.
In terms of the internet method, the main limitation was not lack of rapport, but organizing and scheduling interviews in two different time zones, making it harder to interview a higher number of participants in the time provided for the research. That said, with organization methods, it was still possible to reach a good sample size that provided valuable data.
Chapter 4: Self-identified LGBTQ+ Brazilians in The Netherlands
This section will focus on the interviews conducted with self-identified LGBTQ+ Brazilians that have already migrated and are currently living in The Netherlands. To collect the necessary data for answering the proposed research question, these interviews were semi-structured in a way to focus in two main sub-questions: what were the aspirations and capabilities that shaped these participants’ decision to migrate and how
18 do these migrants perceived these two elements to be connected with their sexuality and the environment they lived in?
With this in view, the following two segments will expose the different motives of migration described by the interviewees, providing an overview of the data. These will be divided into two groups: those motives attached to sexuality and those that were related to non-sexual factors. In both groups, the motives will be analyzed and associated with the concepts of aspirations, individual and collective capabilities exposed in earlier sections. Later, two additional sub-sections will be devoted to display why participants have chosen The Netherlands, connecting this choice to the theoretical approach, as well as a brief account of future migration aspirations. To conclude, a comprehensive analysis will be provided, rendering a more holistic eagle-eye view of the findings and touching on topics such as forced migration versus voluntary migration and the nexus between violence and aspirations.
4.1 Aspects related to sexuality
In this subsection, the factors related to sexuality mentioned by the interviewees will be analyzed. These were elements described as issues that influenced their desire to migrate and, in some cases, were even described as the reasons that “pushed” some individuals to act upon this desire. That said, it is essential to be aware that different people placed different weights to such factors in their decision to migrate, meaning that some factors described in this segment were to some people critical, while to others were less relevant or not relevant at all.
Physical aggression due to sexual orientation
Physical aggression and persecution were reoccurring topics during the interviews. Mostly, it was brought up as something people feared. Except for three participants, the rest of the respondents had never personally experienced physical aggression or persecution. However, they all knew friends and colleges that had suffered from those types of violence due to their sexuality and had constant contact with news and any other media that reported cases of homophobic attacks. These narratives exacerbated their feelings of unsafety, which inhibited the interviewees from doing what they valued as significant. That is, the fear of being a victim of homophobic aggression diminished their individual and collective capabilities. In other words, being in an environment where aggressions are typical striped the participants’ confidence and ease to do things they value as important, such as the capability to display affection in public that will be later discussed. Consequently, that boosted migration aspirations in the sense of a “conviction that migration is preferable to non-migration” (Carling & Schewel 2018: 946).
I have never personally suffered any physical violence, but I was scared. I saw the news of gays being beaten up to death because they were holding hands in public, so I avoided doing it. The moments I had the courage to do it, I was always looking to the sides, being afraid, checking if there was anyone suspicious, it was stressful (…) I knew that it would be different here. I knew that people here would be more friendly, more open-minded and I wouldn’t have to be as afraid as I was in Brazil.
19 In the case of those who had personally experienced physical aggression and some sort of persecution, it was clear from their narratives that these severe homophobic incidents considerably marked and altered their lives in Brazil, influencing their desire to migrate or, at least a desire not to stay. They explicitly cited that their sexuality was the main and only reason why they moved. They expressed the belief that they would not feel the aspiration to migrate in that point in life if they were straight, a lot due to the aggressions suffered. In other words, when put into a spectrum, those people had a higher degree of coercion in their aspiration to migrate when compared to other participants that did not have violence due to sexuality as the dominant player in the aspiration to move. By way of illustration, a 58-old respondent recounted that he was always a target of verbal abuse and harassment for not conforming with the expectations of masculinity, but that things got worse when he was outed to his family by neighbors.
My brothers started regularly gathering his friends, surrounding me, and beating me until I could not move anymore. My parents would also abuse me psychologically. During that time [around 1990], being gay in a small city meant being travesti at the public square doing prostitution. They thought I would start to dress as a woman and become a prostitute myself, especially because I was already perceived as effeminate for doing ballet and dance classes. It was traumatizing times. I could not bear it anymore, so I decided to leave. I saw that The Netherlands were providing visas for low-skilled workers, and I knew they were known for being LGBT-friendly, I applied for the visa and came here.
Another respondent described that after the election of Bolsonaro in Brazil, the family of his partner started to feel freer to openly discriminate against LGBTQ+ people, emotionally abusing his partner, constantly humiliating and making homophobic jokes. When he decided to take a stance, he was beaten. After that, he started receiving death threats. The persecution got to a point where he would not feel safe to leave his home.
“One day, I bumped into one of them, and I had to run for my life. It was terrifying! I was afraid to walk around the city. What if they saw me? I could not leave there anymore.”
Safety and collective capability of police protection
Many of the respondents felt that they could not be fully protected in Brazil by the local authorities. To them, the issue went beyond the fact that homophobia was not criminalized in Brazil. They sensed that if they contacted the police, they would be discriminated and not be taken seriously, even in cases where the law would support them, such as matters of physical harm, threats, and damages to assets. A respondent from Rio de Janeiro said he would not report stolen goods because he was afraid that the police might refer to him with homophobic slurs and even harm him for being “effeminate.” Another respondent said she called the police during a scary episode and they never appeared. She described that she and her girlfriend were walking home at night after work when a man started following them by car. The man yelled homophobic insults and threats. At one point, he threatened to rape her so “she would learn how to be a woman” and said that he would get his gun to kill them. He then disappeared for a while, and they entered a bar to hide.
He came back, and that is when I called the police. He would wander around the block, waiting for the bar to close. Sometimes he would still yell something to us. He had his hands in the pocket, and we were afraid
20 it was a gun. The police said on the phone they would come, but they never did. I had to call my mother to pick me up, and we ran inside her car. It was frightening.
Similarly, a participant from the Federal District described that she went to the police station to file a report against a man that followed her and her partner in the streets, homophobic name-calling them and eventually spitting on her.
I went to the station to file a complaint, and the deputy was extremely rude to us. He said, “why do you hold hands with your girlfriend in public if you know that society is like this?” He was blaming me for what happened and discouraging us from making a report. He said that we should not expose our sexuality that much. He said that the only way that guy knew we were LGBT was because we were showing off. He was more concern in trying to justify what that guy did than being worried about doing something about it. He even said, “you cannot do this; you cannot put yourself at risk by showing off your sexuality.” In the end, he did not let us file the complaint.
On that matter, informants expressed that, if being LGBTQ+ was visible in any way or if it was part of the complaint, the police deliberately would not assist them. In some interviews, tv news and stories about transgender acquaintances being brutally beaten by the police also arose. It was evident that the interviewees valued safety and the fact that they did not have a protective system to safeguard them influenced their aspiration to move and the decision to do so. Here, a link to collective capabilities is indispensable. These people lacked the capability for being protected by the police force, not because of individual traits, financial power, or any other personal factors; they lacked this capability because they were considered sexual deviants. Not everyone in Brazil perceives that the police are not willing to protect them, making this not a general aspect of society. Neither is an individual matter since it discriminates against everyone that falls outside the heteronormative frame. If capabilities are associated with having free access and opportunity to perform any human functionings the individual judge as important (Sen 1999), in this case, even though the importance of feeling protected might be personal, the absence of free access is not. It is collective. The social structure of the police is embedded in heteronormative norms that neglects and discriminates towards LGBTQ+. This is visible in an interview with a Ceará respondent that said
I was reporting an armed robbery. A guy with a knife asked for my purse in the city center. I was really shaken up and nervous. They [the police officers] were being really proactive and helping me to calm down. They were asking me details so they would track my things. Everything was going well. The minute my wife entered the station to meet me, everything changed. They started to make homophobic jokes that I needed a man to protect me. Or that my wife should be a man and tell me to control my emotions. Then they started questioning my story, doubting that the guy was armed. I felt super uncomfortable, and I knew they would not even make any effort to help me track down my documents.
When asked if they thought that a law criminalizing homophobia would help these oppressive situations, most of the participants said that a law by itself would not improve
21 the lack of police protection towards LGBTQ+ since there was a need for a collective education. Sex education programs at schools that would tackle the topics of sexual diversity, public campaigns of awareness and other joint social actions were the main elements cited by the interviewees as a possible way to mitigate this lack of capability to be protected, indicating again the collectiveness nature of the capability discussed here. “Looking Gay”
Informants expressed that “looking gay” or not made a massive difference in their feelings of unsafety. Seventy percent of participants used the expression “dar pinta,” which means to portrait or behave like a homosexual. To “look gay” is often associated in Brazil, as in many countries, with stereotypes. For men, it means being more effeminate, speaking on a higher pitch, dressing in a way that is considered too feminine, having a limp wrist, listening to pop music, etc. while for women is often being more masculine, having short hair, wearing baggier clothes, among other things. That said, even though the stereotypes exist for both sexes, this topic was more vivid in the recounts of male participants.
While some women that perform gender in a more masculine way did say that they felt they experienced more homophobia and discrimination because their sexuality was more visible, the argument of unsafety due to that visibility was more prominent and made with more alarm by the male interviewees. Men that would be read by society as more effeminate said they are a constant target of discrimination, homophobic jokes, harassment, and aggression. Those who did not have “feminine traits” also shared the perception that discrimination would be worse if they were more effeminate.
One participant expressed:
The problem of being gay in Brazil is not about being with another man, that is not the problem. The problem is for you to become closer to what it is perceived to be a woman. That is the problem. When you are associated with being a woman, you are reduced. Women are perceived here as weak and fragile. If you get close to that, you get more exposed to violence because they will see you as fragile too and they think you won’t fight back.
Another account described a sort of persecution in the sense that participant felt consistently vulnerable to robberies due to “looking gay.” “In Brazil, when you are
straight, you suffer from violence, but if you are gay is worse. However, if you are effeminate, then things will only get worse for you.” He recounted that the robberies
started to occur more regularly and more violently. The interviewee feared that it would escalate to physical aggression. After being robbed three times in the same week, he decided to move to The Netherlands. “I had plans in Brazil; I wanted to go to University
there. I wanted to be a professor. However, I did not feel safe. I knew that if I stayed, something worse would happen to me”.
Another respondent said that his parents would always ask him to “tone the gayness down,” to not wear pink shirts or to talk too loudly because they were afraid of violence. He described: “I was angry at them for asking me that, but at the same time I knew they had
22
he got stabbed going home.” On the same note, a participant from the Federal District
pronounced: “I am very privileged. People that were homophobic there [at his work
environment] did not get bothered with my presence because I do not look gay. I'm not a loud gay, I’m quiet, so they thought it is okay”.
Inferable from this is that homophobic oppression was perceived by the interviewees as 1) attached to gender roles and gender stereotypes, connecting it to sexism in the cases of effeminate men, and 2) attached to the idea that the deviant sexualities should be kept in the private realm and will be more harshly “punished” by Brazilian society if they come into contact with the public sphere. Consequently, an individual that is free to be himself fully in public is someone that is within societal expectations of behavior and appearance, making effeminate men and masculine “butch” women incapable of being authentically themselves. “Looking gay” is, therefore, an individual capability that molds the amount of prejudice and violence one experiences and, consequently, influences the aspiration to migrate.
Public display of affection
Attached to the same idea of public versus private dichotomy is LGBTQ+ display of affection in communal spaces. In Brazil, it is widespread to hear phrases such as “it is ok to be gay, but there is no need to kiss in public” or “how will I explain to my children if they see two men kissing each other?”. Research by Rede Nossa, an NGO from São Paulo, reported that four out of ten São Paulo residents are against the display of affections, such as kisses and hugs, between homosexuals in public spaces (VEJA 2018). The current president Bolsonaro, at the time a congressman, has said in an interview in 2003, that he feels that gay men kissing or holding hands in public is not ok and that it offends him and the traditional families in Brazil (SUPERPOP 2003). When asked if it was okay for straight couples to do the same in public, the answer was yes because “it was normal” (Ibid.).
Giving that context, it is not surprising that every respondent narrated at least once during their interview that they did not feel free to show affection towards their partners in public while in Brazil and that such restriction affected their aspiration to migrate. “It was the
little things in Brazil that made me feel completely imprisoned. I knew that here I could demonstrate affection, hold hands, give a kiss on the cheek? These are things that I would absolutely never do that there” a participant from São Paulo state said. When asked to
elaborate on why they did not feel free to show affection publicly, the answer was mainly due to fear of violence, but also due to feeling uncomfortable with the stares and possible judgment of others. “I never felt comfortable holding hands and the times that I did
someone slurred something homophobic at me” recounted a participant from Rio de
Janeiro. A respondent from Ceará said, “I did not feel free to do that there [hold hands].
Here I do not feel this way, I can go out with a woman, a man, both, and no one will stare at me, and judge me, no one will beat me for it in the street, people see me here as normal, and that matters a lot to me”. Another respondent from the same state expressed, “I used never to hold hands [in Brazil], I was afraid someone was going to do something to me. Maybe say something or even do something more aggressive. That made me angry. If straight people could do it, why couldn’t I?”
