Traditionally, metropolitan areas are thought to allow the institutionalization of homosexual identity. Indeed, the development of the modern homosexual archetype is possible in an urban setting, where the population density, and its anonymity, contribute to consolidate what we currently understand as a gay identity. However, is thismodel that relates the construction of identity and urban space applicable in every metropolis ? Considering Santiago’s case, we will show how in that city there is no exclusive nor preferential territory that may be associated to the gay identity. In this sense –differing from other western metropolitan areas that have visible gay neighborhoods within its limits- in Santiago there is spread of “discreet” places, used in different ways according to the social class observed. This fluidity of spaces, which is often larger for wealthier groups, is related to the value of discretion, which is a structuring element of local social practices. Therefore, there is no single and homogenous neighborhood but scattered spaces created by a differentiated class imaginary.