When Turkey refused permission for Atlantis Events’ LGBTQ+ charter aboard Virgin Voyages’ Scarlet Lady to visit two of its ports, we didn’t hesitate to condemn the decision.

Turning away almost 2,000 passengers because of who many of them are is something we fundamentally disagree with.

But, why was an LGBTQ+ charter sailing to Turkey in the first place?

Now, just days later, Egypt has also refused the ship entry.

At some point, this stops being a story about governments making controversial decisions and starts becoming a story about questionable planning.

However Atlantis Events or Virgin Voyages choose to present this, we believe there are serious questions that need answering.

As two gay men ourselves, we’re utterly opposed to homophobia in all its forms. Nobody should ever be refused entry to a country, denied a service or treated differently because of their sexuality.

But equally, we also have choices. One of those choices is where we spend our money.

Dan and I have always deliberately avoided visiting countries where governments have made it abundantly clear they don’t support people like us. That isn’t because we’re frightened to travel. It’s because we’re principled, and don’t wish want to contribute to economies whose governments openly reject the very community we belong to. That is our choice.

Atlantis Events markets itself as one of the world’s leading LGBTQ+ travel companies. People don’t just book an Atlantis cruise because it’s a holiday. They book because they expect an environment where they can be themselves without worrying about how they’re perceived.

So why deliberately build an itinerary around countries with well-documented records on LGBTQ+ rights?

Turkey’s increasingly restrictive stance has been widely reported for years.

Egypt’s record is even more restrictive. And that’s why replacing Turkey with Egypt feels so baffling.

If one government has just rejected your cruise because of who your passengers are, why would your immediate solution be another country whose record on LGBTQ+ rights is even worse?

It feels reactive rather than considered.

There’s another uncomfortable reality here too.

Every community has individuals who attract attention. We’ve all seen it.

We’ve all witnessed passengers —gay and straight, whose behaviour pushes boundaries or seeks to become the centre of attention.

That’s human nature, not sexuality. Equally, many LGBTQ+ travellers simply want to explore the world, enjoy great food, visit historical sites and relax on holiday without anyone giving them a second glance.

They’re the overwhelming majority.

The point isn’t whether some passengers wear feather boas, extravagant outfits or express themselves differently. People should be free to be themselves.

The question is whether it’s sensible to organise an LGBTQ+ charter into countries where organisers already know that visibility alone could become controversial.

You cannot market a cruise around openness, self-expression and celebrating individuality while simultaneously choosing destinations where those very qualities may place your guests under greater scrutiny.

That isn’t about asking passengers to change who they are.

It’s about choosing destinations where they don’t have to.

Hopefully, many of the passengers aboard Scarlet Lady will still enjoy their holiday.

Crete and Montenegro will undoubtedly provide a warm welcome.

But after two governments have now turned the ship away in the space of a week, it’s difficult to dismiss this as simple bad luck.

The cruise industry spends enormous amounts of time assessing operational risk. Weather, security, health and political stability are all considered when planning cruise itineraries.

Surely, for a company specialising in LGBTQ+ travel, understanding how welcoming a destination is should be part of that assessment too.

We remain completely opposed to the decisions taken by Turkey and Egypt, and we as paying tourists refuse to give our money to countries that resent our way of like, and who we are as people.

But we’re equally puzzled by the decisions that put nearly 2,000 LGBTQ+ passengers in that position in the first place.

Perhaps that’s the question Atlantis and Virgin Voyages should now be answering.