Although mentalities across Western Europe have been evolving for the past years on LGBTQI+ and sexual orientation questions, it remains an issue. Decades of social movements in favor of LGBTQI+ rights have shaped a more inclusive society.  For instance, after depanelizing homosexuality, numerous European countries have been legalizing same-sex marriage – it is now legal within 13 of them and going further in gay-friendly public policies. This is especially the case for Nordic countries and Benelux, that have been leading countries on the question over the past 20 years (Martel 2017, 184). Meanwhile, LGBTQI+ political and social movements have been increasing. But still, progress remains to be done, and stigmatization and homo, lesbian and bi-phobia persist in Western Europe, especially on the micro/family-level. This research project about sexual preferences and student migration will focus on the impact of studying abroad on sexuality and individual emancipation. The interest is in learning more about the quest for emancipation, fulfilment and sexual identity of people belonging to the LGBTQI+ community in a very particular context, that of leaving one’s country, one’s close environment to starting afresh in a foreign country while studying. 

The research topic for this work came out from a huge diversity of experiences within our research group, as well as quests for responses on a very contemporary and quite actual topic. This is after reading bunch of literature, such has Didier Eribond or Frédéric Martel’s literature, that we found out that some worked had already been done on the topic of sexual orientation and mobility, and that they were closely linked. What we wanted here was to operationalize it on an international level. Targeting current students or young adults (our panel is situated between 20- and 27-year-old), we first made public calls on our social medias, ending up with a group of 8 men and 8 women, lesbian, gay, bi, or pansexual. Based on a qualitative data collect and analysis methodology, we chose to focus interviews. We consciously expelled ethnography and questionnaires, due to organizational as well as “editorial” constraints. Moreover, considering the quite subjective character of this study, we preferred to focus on long semi-directed interviews, in order live some space and freedom of speech to our interviewees, although framing them in the topic of this study. All of us six conducted two to four interviews. We then gathered to discuss about major highlights in our discussions. This finally allowed us to draw four conclusions, based on an inductive approach. 

To the question « “How does studying abroad influences individual emancipation with regards to sexual identity?”, we first found that although sexual identity is a factor in the decision to study abroad, it plays only a minor role. Indeed, other factors play a more important role in the decision to leave. Sometimes the decision to go abroad was a result of the opportunity to study abroad provided by their course of study. However, the trip had an impact on their sexual orientation and their conception of their identity. This awareness may have occurred during but also after the experience abroad. Finally, consciously, or unconsciously, all the interviewees were eager to assert themselves and discover themselves during the trip. Secondly, sexual orientation plays a determining role in the choice of destination. Indeed, all respondents chose cities or countries that they felt were more ‘open’ and ‘tolerant’ of all LGBTQI+ issues. Thirdly, experience abroad plays a major role in personal and sometimes professional empowerment. First, leaving the sometimes homophobic, lesbophobic, or biphobic family environment is a first factor that allows for emancipation. Furthermore, living in a city that is considered more « open » allows one to assert a feeling of security that favors this emancipation. The reconstitution of a new social circle also plays a major role. Indeed, the respondents socialized with more queer people. However, even if for some this was by choice, for others it was by chance. Finally, even if the respondents say that they do not define their identity by their sexual orientation, they acknowledge that they live more freely and in a more assertive way. Our final conclusion focuses on the impact of the experience abroad on the transformation of a ‘private’ sexual identity into a political and activist claim. Since the institutionalization of gay and LGBTQI+ movements across the time, coming out and pride have been considered part of the appurtenance and revendication to the community.  However, what we find out is that two groups stand out. On the one hand, some claim their sexual identity through militant and political actions, and on the other hand, those who live their sexual identity without claiming it and who consider it as something private and strictly individual, without assimilating themselves to the community. International socialization and favourable experiences abroad may be drivers in this process. The possibility to live their sexual experience fully independently from a community and individually may be another driver to experience living abroad. 

            Finally, the choice of an inductive approach allowed us to engage the empirical work with as little prejudice as possible, which allowed for a comprehensive and open interview session. The proximity we already had with our actors brought spontaneous discussion which led to the emergence of strong points and concepts within their discourse. For a lot of cases, this enabled actors to produce some form of introspection. Furthermore, we can say the study influenced both the actors through this introspection and our group, which gained in rising interest and deeper understanding of our research subject as well as in research methodology.

            A critical point can nonetheless be made regarding our research sample, which we recognize not to be the most representative group compared to the population regarded by our topic. Most of them were cisgender white people from a wealthy social group, and only one lesbian woman was part of the actors. The number of participants and our communication method through personal and social media contacts can be an explanation. Another dimension than can arguably find a link with the previous one is the lack of quantitative data, making generalization more difficult. As a last note, we believe we should have emphasized more on the topics of discrimination as well as the question of the nationality of the actors’ contacts in their country of destination, which could have been linked to the acquisition of international capita.