Homophobic gang burn gay man in England

[sumskilz]

So what's your proposed explanation for the gay suicide rate being four times the average?

I don't assume that there is only one single factor, but here's something to consider. That long list psychiatric diagnoses which occur at much higher rates in homosexuals compared to heterosexuals are risk factors for suicide and all seem to be serotonin related. I don't think there are any on the list that aren't often treated with serotonin agonists. Serotonin is related to sexual orientation in mammals though exactly how it works in humans isn't clear. Now here is the interesting part, the brains of homosexual people react differently to the medications that are often used to treat these issues.

For example:

In accord with our hypothesis, differential effects were observed in the hypothalamus, with the homosexual group exhibiting a significantly (p ≤ .01) smaller reduction in hypothalamic glucose metabolism in response to fluoxetine as compared with the heterosexual group. Interestingly, areas not known to play a role in sexual behavior were activated differentially as well.

Fluoxetine is the SSRI more commonly known as Prozac.

EDIT: A bit more...

Low central nervous system serotonin (5-HT) turnover has been shown to be related to suicidal behaviour [13]. Consequently, serotonin-related genes have been the focus of much attention in candidate gene association studies [4]. Meta-analyses have confirmed the association of suicidal behaviour with variants in the serotonin transporter gene (5-HTT, or SLC6A4) [12]...

McGuffin et al. [20]... estimated that the heritability of completed suicide was 43% (95% confidence interval 27–60%) and that there was no effect of shared family environment.

The genetics of affective disorder and suicide

Rao and his team genetically engineered male mice to lack either serotonin-producing neurons or a protein that is crucial for making serotonin in the brain. Both types of altered mouse couldn't make serotonin.

Unlike typical males, mice deficient in the neurotransmitter showed no inclination to mount sexually receptive females more than males, nor did they prefer to smell females' genital odors or bedding. Instead, they climbed onto males and serenaded them with ultrasonic love songs more frequently than normal. Males emit these vocalizations when they encounter females to make them more receptive to mating.

While all of the males who possessed serotonin mounted females first, nearly half of the mice that lacked serotonin clambered onto males before females, and about 60 percent spent more time sniffing or hovering over the genital odors and bedding from males than from females.

Is Homosexuality Based on a Brain Chemical?

In case anyone is wondering, no you can't change someone's sexual orientation by modulating serotonin levels. The mechanism probably has something to do with serotonin levels at a particular stage of brain development.

[Enros]

Then how do you explain the large amount of variance in the LGBT suicide rate? The US rate is almost double the UK rate. Also this well-sourced Wikipedia article doesn't metion your hypothesis at all, while spending a lot of time promoting mine.

Regardless of what the tragedy is, it cannot mean the destruction of our freedoms. The only time when freedoms must cease to be is when they prevent someone else from practicing their freedoms

I argue that this sort of speech does prevent others from practicing their freedoms, because they're dead.

[Infidel144]

Then how do you explain the large amount of variance in the LGBT suicide rate? The US rate is almost double the UK rate.

What is the general suicide rate in US vs UK?

[Enros]

Apologies I messed up what I was saying. The US gay suicide rate is four times the US average. The UK gay suicide rate is a little over two times the UK average. That's ignoring the actual numbers, just the ratio of LGBT suicide rate to general population rate.

[jockmcplop]

Enros in some ways you are admitting that LGBT suicide rate varies according to culture etc. and in other ways you are arguing that it only has one cause. Just be less hyperbolic about it and you will get more agreement. Instead of assuming that the only reason more LGBT people commit suicide is homophobia you have to think about all possible causes. I know it seems redundant me explaining this again and again on the same thread when you have ignored my points repeatedly but its important if you want people to take you seriously.
The following are possible causes of LGBT suicide rates being much higher than heterosexual people:

1: Homophobia - There I said it
2: Perceived homophobia. Put 50,000 gay people in a room and get someone to make a non-homophobic political speech and you can guarantee that some of them will feel like the speech was homophobic. This is not only true of LGBT people but members of any traditionally discriminated against out-group.
3: Greater risk of mental illness like lack of self esteem. There is absolutely no proven link between this and homophobia. It could be linked to the fact that gays aren't yet FULLY integrated into every culture in our society, but that is nothing to do with homophobia - it is more the slow pace of culture in adapting to new expectations and circumstances.
4: 'Victim status'. Homosexuals often hang out in close groups, which are also often very left wing and politically motivated. This means they are hyper aware of the historical victim status of homosexuals, and its not a stretch to believe that they would attribute that to themselves in this day and age where homophobia is not particularly common (at least in the UK).

It would also be very helpful to find some statistics on demographics. Which LGBT groups are more likely to commit suicide. If you do this, you will find that by a huge margin the group at greatest risk are young people.
This is another reason for suicide that you have ignored. Going through the process of discovering your sexuality - A taboo and private matter anyway - and finding that you belong to a minority group is extremely stressful, regardless of homophobic attitudes.

tl;dr i'm not discounting homophobia and bullying here, its probably the main cause of higher suicide rates, but other causes exist.

[sumskilz]

Then how do you explain the large amount of variance in the LGBT suicide rate? The US rate is almost double the UK rate.

Even if it's primarily serotonin related, there could be any number of factors. For example, different approaches to, or regularity of, treatment of the various risk factors.

Also this well-sourced Wikipedia article doesn't metion your hypothesis at all, while spending a lot of time promoting mine.

Argumentum ad populum fallacy. Wikipedia editing tends to be agenda driven of course. Sometimes it becomes balanced just out of agenda competition, but there is no career incentive to waste time editing it if you have some expertise in a relevant field. I might want to edit some pages as a public service, but I don't like seeing my effort destroyed a few days later by someone who doesn't even comprehend the points being made.

I see from the talk page that someone edited in this:

Developmental psychologist [[Ritch Savin-Williams]] argues that the It Gets Better Project "promotes a false 'suffering suicidal script'" and that the rates of serious suicide attempts are in proportion to that of non-LGBT counterparts, (when the non-lifethreatining attempts are left out).<ref>[http://www.apa.org/monitor/feb02/newdata.aspx New data on lesbian, gay and bisexual mental health</ref><ref name="The Gay Kids Are All Right">

I don't know the quality of the cited evidence. I haven't really looked yet, but the link is to the American Psychological Association. It was removed because other editors consider it hate speech.

[Infidel144]

Apologies I messed up what I was saying. The US gay suicide rate is four times the US average. The UK gay suicide rate is a little over two times the UK average. That's ignoring the actual numbers, just the ratio of LGBT suicide rate to general population rate.

Odd. The "well-sourced Wikipedia article" you mention above, says: "there are no national data (for the U.S.) regarding suicidal ideation or suicide rates among the LGBT population as a whole or in part, for LGBT youth or LGBT seniors", "It is impossible to know the exact suicide rate of LGBT youth because sexuality and gender minorities are often hidden and even unknown, particularly in this age group".

It does note a 1989 study "found that LGBT youth are four times more likely to attempt suicide than other young people".

Suicide attempts, not actual suicides, and probably fairly out of date by now.

[Boyar Son]

deport/exile them

murderous homophobes like these backwards white men are reminiscent of the barbaric and tribal nature that existed before the two world wars which seemed to have corrected a lot of the barbarism that existed back then by whites

now these far-right ethno-nationalists are trying to bring it back and we have to stop them

Never gonna happen. Either way you lose. I am personally running propaganda for more open borders and non-EU migrants to Britain while simultaneously supporting Brexiter right-wingers to increase their support. You'll see a lot more muslim and right winger gangs.

Oh, and second amendment rights in the USA, to all people. Not only for the crazy Christians but even the Muslims.

I'll stop all this ... for 1 million dollars. So please don't go out at 3AM while considering this offer!

[BatGoat]

If you'd ever tried debating in college you'd know the slippery slope argument is seldom a good one:

• "We start off with not increasing the minimum wage, and then very quickly we'll have slavery and lynching."

Hmm. For starters, your counter argument is not a very good one.

And let's see... Communist anywhere does not like people speaking their own opinions and forcefully silence those with dissident points of view. Do you think the Benevolent and Free Republic of China would allow us to even discuss something like this over there? I think not.

The hate speech law I am proposing has nothing to do with offence. I don't care if people if are offended. I only care if the scientific evidence shows that certain slurs cause the suicide rate in a group to increase. If they do, those slurs should be restricted. I'm not in favour of harsh criminal penalties for this though. If they don't increase the suicide rate, use the slurs all you like.

Can you find a study that clearly demonstrates that slurs increase the suicide rate? No? And even if you could, how would you implement a restriction on them?

[Enros]

Argumentum ad populum fallacy. Wikipedia editing tends to be agenda driven of course. Sometimes it becomes balanced just out of agenda competition, but there is no career incentive to waste time editing it if you have some expertise in a relevant field. I might want to edit some pages as a public service, but I don't like seeing my effort destroyed a few days later by someone who doesn't even comprehend the points being made.

Wikipedia is very good at outlining the scientific consensus on a topic. That your hypothesis is at odds with the consensus does not mean it's wrong, but does mean politicians should ignore it until you are can win the scientists around. If you think Wikipedia is bad, why don't you use Conservapedia instead?

Odd. The "well-sourced Wikipedia article" you mention above, says: "there are no national data (for the U.S.) regarding suicidal ideation or suicide rates among the LGBT population as a whole or in part, for LGBT youth or LGBT seniors", "It is impossible to know the exact suicide rate of LGBT youth because sexuality and gender minorities are often hidden and even unknown, particularly in this age group".

It does note a 1989 study "found that LGBT youth are four times more likely to attempt suicide than other young people".

Suicide attempts, not actual suicides, and probably fairly out of date by now.

Here is a recent CDC estimate.

And let's see... Communist anywhere does not like people speaking their own opinions and forcefully silence those with dissident points of view. Do you think the Benevolent and Free Republic of China would allow us to even discuss something like this over there? I think not.

Where have I ever argued for implementing a communist government, or the system of China?

Can you find a study that clearly demonstrates that slurs increase the suicide rate? No? And even if you could, how would you implement a restriction on them?

I already linked to this on the very first page. And as for implementation, simply copy the hate speech laws of countries that already have them.

[sumskilz]

Wikipedia is very good at outlining the scientific consensus on a topic.

Is that something you learned reading Wikipedia?

I think you missed the irony in the editors having removed a link to a mainstream scientific association because they considered it hate speech.

If you think Wikipedia is bad, why don't you use Conservapedia instead?

I've never read it, but I assume mob rule by a different set of scientific illiterates doesn't make it better. Certainly RationalWiki is no improvement despite its branding. The problem is with entries on controversial issues which tend to be heavily biased toward trendy ideologically driven soft science perspectives and advocacy research (not that there is much difference between the two).

[BatGoat]

Where have I ever argued for implementing a communist government, or the system of China?

My hair-triggered friend, that was but an example of how one's freedom of speech is denied and how speaking out against the establishment is severely frowned upon. It's called censorship, which is effectively what most "anti-hate speech" laws tend towards.

I already linked to this on the very first page.

But that is suicide amongst immigrants. You're talking about the LGBT community. Do you have a study that backs up your claims for those people?

And as for implementation, simply copy the hate speech laws of countries that already have them.

It's that easy, huh? Just say because it is illegal then it is illegal? How do you actually get down to the meat and potatoes of actually bringing charges of hate speech towards someone? Unless it is as plainly obvious as a sore thumb, the whole scenario comes down to semantics. In the context of this thread, it would be a very slippery slope as to what constitutes hate speech and what doesn't.

[sumskilz]

Wow, that Mullen and Smyth study looks like a horrendous piece of cargo cult science.

[BatGoat]

Wow, that Mullen and Smyth study looks like a horrendous piece of cargo cult science.

That is putting it bluntly.

[Himster]

No, when a terrible crisis occurs, such as thousands of people dying, the burden falls on all of the different political movements to offer solutions to voters. I've outlined the liberal solution. What's the conservative solution to the mass suicide of gay people?

The liberal solution? No you ing haven't. You've outlined an authoritarian solution. The exact opposite of a liberal solution. "Liberal solution", what utter horse .

Given you already conceded that homophobia causes gay people to kill themselves, I'm guessing you think there's more evidence for my position than there is for god.

Homophobia probably causes lots of things. I believe that based on my own anecdotal experiences, my gut feeling and as an axiomatic component of my personal philosophy. Not so different from how a Theist believes in a God or Gods, the same level of evidence, which I freely admit. You can cite as many correlative statistics you want, just like a theistic fanatic: it doesn't prove anything when they do it and it doesn't prove anything when you do it.

The only difference is the cause of death.

The difference is the choices involved, free will and volition.
Some people choose to kill themselves. It's unfortunate, but what are you going to do? Force them to not have free will? Decide for them like some kind of "benevolent" dictator God? Or are you going to decide why they killed themselves and reshape society utterly like a malevolent God to give special protection to one group but not to others?
Any option you choose is profoundly anti-liberal, if not utterly evil.

There are other forces at work in gay culture that are relevant to their suicide rates, such as substance abuse, the average length of relationships, wealth distribution, race, gender.
Most gay people are male, already that doubles their suicide rates, the level of substance abuse in gay social circles is unparalleled: suicide rate doubled again. Most openly gay people in America are white, so: tripled suicide rates. Relationship lengths are shorter in gay relationships and broken relationships are the number one cause for suicides in the modern world, gay people have a higher net income than average, which also carries a correlation of higher suicides and so on and on and on.
To just pick one correlative statistic (out of many) as a weak justification for your perverse obsession with silencing individuals who disagree with you is simply: embarrassing.

Also stop trying to misappropriate the label "liberal" onto your ideas, everything you say/propose is so utterly anti-liberal, you insult liberalism and everything it stands for.
The correct label you're looking for is authoritarian.

[Infidel144]

Here is a recent CDC estimate.

"A nationally representative study of adolescents in grades 7–12 found that lesbian, gay, and bisexual youth were more than twice as likely to have attempted suicide as their heterosexual peers.3"
This says 2+x rather than 4x, and is still talking about attempts.
Your claim was: "The US gay suicide rate is four times the US average". Neither this, nor the wiki cite support your claim.

[fkizz]

What's sensationalist about the murder of gay people?

Omar Mateen?

[StarDreamer]

Wikipedia is very good at outlining the scientific consensus on a topic. That your hypothesis is at odds with the consensus does not mean it's wrong, but does mean politicians should ignore it until you are can win the scientists around. If you think Wikipedia is bad, why don't you use Conservapedia instead?

Dear god, this is the worst BS I've seen. You never ever go to wikipedia for anything scientific, at best you can look in the references for a scientific study that you can use as a source.

[fkizz]

Dear god, this is the worst BS I've seen. You never ever go to wikipedia for anything scientific, at best you can look in the references for a scientific study that you can use as a source.

This. Wikipedia value lies in seeing basic parts of a topic and see if worth researching further somewhere else.

[Heinz Guderian]

It's the equivalent of one and a half 9/11s every year.

thats 1.22727 per year. can someone check my working out.