portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article announcements portland metro

gender & sexuality | youth

Queer teen suicides

There are no queer teen suicides, only queer teen murders.
Anyone who espouses anti-gay rhetoric, anyone who says it's unnatural to love someone of the same sex, anyone who calls someone a faggot or a dyke maliciously, anyone who does not challenge heterosexuality as a cultural norm, is implicated in the deaths of queer teenagers who take their own lives. Those deaths are not suicides, they're murders. The young people are just doing to their bodies what others have already done to their souls. They don't kill themselves. Christians kill them. Television writers kill them. Big Red gum commercials kill them. Their parents kill them. Their schools kill them. I kill them and so do you. We need to move beyond confronting homophobia and challenging hetersexism. When we don't challenge exclusionary sex education lessons, when we don't cross dress, when we don't act on our sexual desires and curiosities, when we are ignorant about intersexuality and transgenderism, we are braiding the nooses upon which queer teens hang.

The web radio show, Not Gay Like Happy will be discussing queer teen suicides tonight on PDX Indymedia web radio.

perhaps a better image 21.Nov.2004 22:31



in many ways 22.Nov.2004 00:44


in many ways i agree - yet inside i still feel/think there is a line not to be crossed. we will see ethical entropy [to fast for some ,too slow for others, and the rest will just ride the wave]. and in such case, where ethics deconstruct what will we have? small scale socialism/anarchy where groups gel - based on convention? those who want to do X do X over in that territory, while those who like Y ,do Y over those hills? the problem is not everyone wants that [i.e. Y-folk doing Y-things over the hills]. what happens is war. then what? the same shit we battle today is our future after the revolution/collapse. [perhaps this was nietzche's reasoning for 'eternal reoccurrence'.] it would seem that history repeats itself , as has hitherto.

on what basis do we have to say what anyone does is wrong, even discrimination? i suppose over 90% of our [western citizens] ethics are tainted by the three monotheistic ideologies, including our ?ethics? of ?love.? many of us are passionate and have no answers or ideas, just criticisms [so?]. politics will not ?save? us, economics will not save us, anarchy will not save us [clans went to war]. some people are better [seemingly naturally] at ?things? than others ? this perhaps has lead to unintentional hierarchies ? either way we went from the ideal to this. and it would seem we will do so again.

You [meaning us] have no real answer [so it seems].

what the hell 22.Nov.2004 01:09

are you talking about

What line is that?

This line we must not cross?

You're being very vague.

Tragic 22.Nov.2004 08:21

Den Mark, Vancouver

Teen suicides are incredibly sad, especially while kids are still in school, where they should have powerful support. As a teacher, i know that schools could be FAR FAR better at making ALL teens welcome in the total school community & proud of themselves. But most rah-rahs are saved for certain athletes. Even academic achievement takes second billing to game-type sports. If the same resources spent on interscholastic sports were spent on inclusion, society at large would enjoy the positive results. The same disparity shows itself outside of schools, of course. Pick up an Oregonian or Columbian & see major column inches & multiple photos devoted day after day, year after year, to prep sports, & compare that to the occasional blip assigned to kids who are not necessarily into sports. Teen suicides are incredibly sad. Especially when it is so easy to say to every teen, "Hey mister, hey miss, you are important to me!"

bisexuals bridge polarization gap 22.Nov.2004 11:10


Polarization between hetero/homo communities does indeed seem like the democrat/republican or liberal/conservative or black/white divide that has American people in a constant state of opposition to the OTHER group..

Divide and conquer, it worked under the Roman Empire and works today under the US imperialists led by GW Bush. This self proclaimed Christian "pro-hetero" probably molests young boys in his Bohemian Grove/Skull & Bones rituals of power. The more self righteous, the more twisted inside. Remember Jimmy Swagart preaching "hellfire 4 sinners" and then cavorting with prostitutes on the side?

Last i heard, Jesus said something to the extent of "Love one another, don't judge one another", such a simple concept very few so-called Christians seem to be able to follow..

Another question, why are bisexuals marginalized from BOTH the hetro and homo communities?

interesting 22.Nov.2004 13:44

not to argue

on what do we collectivly have to stand on and say anything is right or wrong? even suicide, or murder? the emotions attached to terms seem to dictate values - i could be wrong. but is that ground enough to stand for or against something. im not trying to sound like an a**. but it seems like WE are saying i dont like what they are saying and doing they should stop its bad - and THEY are saying i dont like what they are saying and doing they should stop its bad.

where are we now?

Interesting point 22.Nov.2004 14:49


Yeah, there are no rules over what our morals should be written in the sky above for all to see. "God" never appeared to me personally in a dream to tell me "right" from "wrong". So why not do whatever I want to do? Why not just take what I want from whomever I want, whenever I want, and why not kill anyone who gets in my way? I think the reason is because we are inherently social creatures, and we all have a need for companionship. If we live our lives with no morals at all, then we will be completely repulsive to each other and we would die off pretty quickly. So, we form morals so that we can form groups that all agree on pretty much the same fundamental "rights" and "wrongs". So what if a taboo against eating squid on a Tuesday is ridiculous? As long as it connects us, it's fine.

A funny thing began to happen a million or so years ago; we created mythology. It was in us all the time, but now we began to ascribe names to deities that we placed up in the heavens or down in the earth to watch over us and be the thing that keeps us from violating the group morality. "If you break taboos, then Hagalimimikumsamfenat'we will eat you with her five rows of teeth, one tooth for every year of your life on every row for ever and ever amen." Or something like that. Then, our mythology began to grow in complexity as our societies grew in size. We developed this thing that some people now call "nationalism", where we feel like our culture and beliefs and morals, etc, are superior to those of other cultures to the extent that any violent actions we take against them (even if they violate our morals with regard to how we must treat each other) are sanctified because of their cultural difference (read: inferiority). They are inferior. We are superior. THEY live on land that WE want. It's Manifest Destiny, baby! WE were DESTINED to have that land, and all those savages can go piss up a rope! Or something like that.

Nowadays, there are growing numbers of humyns who are realizing more and more every day that the old ways--the ways of believing in myth as historical fact and seeking to annihilate everyone who doesn't adhere to the norms dictated by a particular myth--are untenable; we cannot survive as a species if we continue to live this way. There are two paths: One leads to destruction, or at the very least to a repressive society that values freedom about as much as a badger values a poke in the eye with a frozen banana; the other path leads to freedom. Which will you choose? If you value the freedom to wear a blue shirt during the month of August, or the freedom to pat your head and rub your tummy at the same time, then you had fucking better value the freedom of people like me to play with other guys' wing-dings (so long as that's what they want), or with other womyns' oversize (or undersized) clitorisisises. You had additionally better value my freedom to wear a skirt, even if it is a short skirt, or a pair of pants, depending on my mood. Oh yeah, and don't forget about my freedom to lick myself if I can reach it.

When you support anti-homosexuality, you support the tyranny of the majority, and the right of a large group of people to dictate how a small group of people have to live. Remember WWII Germany? Remember the Burning Times? Remember the civil rights era? You think you get overtime after 40 hours a week "just because"? No. If everyone subscribed to existentialism, then we would all be slaves first to the cunning, and then to their descendants. Oh, wait, we already are. That's the problem with gummints and laws: No matter how many laws you make, the mean existentialists are going to find ways around them, and ways to twist them to their advantage and to the disadvantage of us all. Get rid of gummint, force people to depend on each other in their own communities, and you level the playing field.

Good things that came of Measure 36 22.Nov.2004 19:55


Measure 36 exposed the idea of queer love to a wide range of people who may have never encountered it before, I am thinking particularly of queer youth isolated in christofascist communities. These kids might now suffer less knowing they do belong somewhere and that they can have loving relationships too.

Measure 36 exposed the christofascists as the liars and hypocrites they truly are ("If we don't pass
Measure 36 they will teach gay sex to kindergarteners"). How desperate they must be to disavow basic tenets of their religion to ban same sex marriage. They also don't have much faith in their god if they have to pass laws to enact "his will".

Measure 36 showed that queers will fight back. We didn't for so long while they isolated us, controlled us, humiliated us, raped us, murdered us. We are no longer passive recipients of the
cruelty of the ignorant. I have hope that this struggle have energized some of the new generation as well as those battle weary from the AIDS era and women's movements. It may have even woke some of the assimilated, uneasily placated by "just being left alone".

Measure 36 reinforced that there are many queer parents and their kids are growing up just fine. Only the most radical christofascists are still trying to take our kids away from us. And how could they? They can't even take care of their own.

Measure 36 showed us where our friends are and also those not so neighborly and friendly. We know where not to vacation, where not to hold gatherings, where not to spend a single queer dime. Nationwide, communities with the largest gay populations voted against same sex marriage bans. The straight people living alongside queers know they are no threat, they deserve to be rewarded as much as those against us do not deserve our financial support. Vote with your dollars, it'll do a lot more to create a better community than using a ballot.

Finally, Measure 36 exposed once again the bitter reality of heterosexual marriage. From adultery to domestic violence to disposable relationships, the dysfunction of marriage dwells in irrational fantasy (happily ever after) and abject consumerism, a place far from love. Sometimes the grapes you can't reach truly are sour.

we see what we want ,despite 'reason' 22.Nov.2004 20:35


<If you value the freedom to wear a blue shirt . . .you had fucking better value the freedom of people like me . . .>

part of our evolution has seemingly given us the ability to make free choices - with nothing writ in the heavens prescribing ethic, nothing is right nor wrong. so fuck your binary oppositions and my replacment of your priviledged meaning with my own. we have no room really to complain against anyone for their actions - what the fuck are personal rights. for that matter what the fuck are social rights.

we complain about existentialism? and yet we replace it with a new spin on old mother modernity - which is the same shit we fight. so, back to with nothing writ in the heavens prescribing ethic, nothing is right nor wrong. it could be argued that apeals to ones emotional side to subscribe to any convention is coercion. we dont make sense and we should probably deal with that - or as it would seem, we end up as that which we combat.

ok ok: my bad, but still; 22.Nov.2004 21:10


If you support institutionalized suppression of any peoples' freedoms, then you give credence and thus power to those forces which will eventually get around to supressing the freedoms that you value (assuming that they haven't already). My point (if I can ever get around to making it amidst all the rambling) is that the humyns created the writing in the sky when they created government and law. But it's artificial, like astroturf. It's not real. But then, nothing is. So if we create it, and agree that it is so, then it is.

The first thing you do is, you figure out what you want. Then, you look and see if that's possible. If it's not, you find out why not. You seek out all the things that are standing in your way. In my case, it's our modern industrialized world. Everything about it is at odds with what I want out of life, and I see no way to change it (reform) to make it acceptable. So, I call myself an anarchist because I have yet to learn of any gummint that ends up facilitating the kind of place in which I want to live. In my opinion, the system cannot be reformed; it must be smashed. Fortunately, I see the system as being inherently self-destructive. This means that eventually, it is going to fall, and those of us with at least a few vertebrae to our name will create the world we want from the rubble. The meek shall inherit the earth and all that shit. This is my myth. What's yours?

I know this is all one long ramble, but hopefully I got something meaningful across.

I'm sorry, but FUCK you! 22.Nov.2004 23:51


I'm a very open person, who believes in civil liberties. But when you say you want to challenge heterosexualism, you sound like a frothing mad idiot. Heterosexuality is the basis for life on the planet. Procreation does NOT occur when homosexuals have sex. Ever. Humans are an animal organism and biologically life would not exist without straight sex. Heterosexualism is nature's way! I believe that everyone has the inherent right to be straight or gay (or bi), but please don't attack non-gays. You aren't doing any gay folks a favor by doing so! Please don't misunderstand me. I don't have any problem with gays, but it certainly (from a biological point of view) is not the norm. In fact, I think of gays as folks who have removed themselves from the competition for existence! This is a good thing (IMHO) in light of population issues.

Haaahaaaa...hhaaaa...ha 23.Nov.2004 00:54


Het reproduction destroys = Homoz RULES!
LAB HOMEWORK: 1.Put a few rats of both sexes in a cage for a while. See how they eat each other alive and overpopulate and die. Hets suck. 2.Take a few same sex rats and put them in a cage for awhile. Homoz win! We can sustain life on this planet longer. We can control our population growth with a turkey baster (happy thanxgiving). We are the smurfs and we are here for your children. Recruit homos... RECRUIT!

Did that first poster really use the word "hitherto".

Keep bumpin those tacos ladies.

See the rat eat its babies, still doesn't have anything to do w/ sexuality 23.Nov.2004 03:45

nother viewpoint

The argument for homosexuality as a response to overpopulation is poor since overpopulation does not seem to be the threat it once was  http://www.worldpress.org/Asia/1979.cfm .

I am heterosexual and actually I don't have a sexual preferance. I am with a man because the religion I chose to belong to teaches that sex is between a wife and husband. But the key thing here is that it is a religion I chose to belong to and my religion does not condemn anyone who does not chose to belong to it.

A government, or even a society, cannot and must not dictate morality. Morals must be chosen or they have no meaning. If someone believes, with all of their heart, that love must be expressed through a bodily function in order for it to be fulfilled then society (especially as dictated through a government) can not forbid it. There is no legal way for a government to forbid any kind of marriage between adults who have the legal ability to enter into a contract.

Why is the word "marriage" such an emotionally charged word? If it is a religious word then it should be removed from our government language. Previous "marriages" could still be "domestic partnerships" but all new contracts would not use the word marriage.

I don't believe that homosexuality is "normal" or "natural". I think that children need to be taught two things: 1) One's own opinion does not need to be shared at all times, nor does having an opinion automatically make it the "right" one
2) It's okay if you chose not to be normal or natural

I don't understand why being homosexual is not "chosen" since I know I chose to be heterosexual. But I don't have to understand that in order to fight for someone else's right to engage in a bodily function.

Society kills their children by not listening to them, hearing them when they say they are hurting. We murder them by isolating them to be alone and experience life with a whole bunch of people at their same state of emotional immaturity. At no other time in their lives will they be forced to interact with a large group of people at their (basically) exact same age and same (relatively) life experiences. The school system is corrupted and has lost its purpose and communities have lost their sense of purpose as well. Until we remember, as a society, what our job is we will continue to lose our children to the horrors of self-inflicted wounds and death.

I agree that as a society we are killing our children but not in the same manner that "some poster" sees it.

hey "anonymous" 23.Nov.2004 10:10


You know, that's a typically homosupremacist reaction to having your sexuality challenged as being the norm. The article wasn't attacking you for being a hetero, it was attacking the idea that heterosexuality is "normal" behavior while homesexuality/bisexuality is somehow deviant. And your idea that humyn heterosexual reproduction is some sort of justification for heterosupremacist attitudes is typical of the sort of frothing maniacal norm-crazed bullshit I hear regurgitated almost every time I get into a discussion about sexuality with someone who thinks that they're in "the norm".<p>

<blockquote>I think of gays as folks who have removed themselves from the competition for existence!</blockquote>

You need to meet more "gays" and actually talk to them. We are a very diverse croud. Some of us still want to reproduce while others don't. For you to stereotype us like that is not cool (to me).

cyclical self defeat/victory 23.Nov.2004 10:58


clamydia - what do you see as a valid response to humyn history? @narcho - syndcalism - agrarian socialism - fuedalism - capitalism - back to @narcho and so on - it looks like we'll just cycle through. awesome!? without some transcending point, even our smaller points and purposes have nothin to attach themselves too - and it is absurd [existentialism]. ok then, why not do what we want esp if theres no point to any of this. and i guess if some want to say <i dont like you/what you do/that> they they will as will the rest of us. goody goody gum drops. what do we do with the absurdity? ignore it? [after all theres no point in dealing with the absurdity - ok then. this is stupid

well, 23.Nov.2004 13:06


That's part of the problem. So many people are trying to "respond" to their environment/past/future in a "valid" way, they forget that their actions ultimately only will have meaning to them. Sure, you create your own future, and your own present reality to some extent, but if you're not creating something that you are enjoying, if you are not enjoying the creation of it, and if you are not going to enjoy the end result, then what's the point? The whole "do whatever you want" philosophy still leaves you with the responsibility to make yourself happy, and I don't see that as being a possibility if one takes a "fuck over everyone but me" attitude. There is no "valid" response to history, and in fact "history" itself has no meaning other than as anecdotal evidence that this caused that and so on and so forth. "History" is/was written by people you don't know and probably wouldn't be able to identify with, and it was written with THEIR agendas and biases in mind, not yours. So there's no point in responding to it. And if you are going to live a "do whatever you want" life, then it must at some point occur to you that it is equally legitimate for others to do the same in different ways, i.e. playing with people of varying sexual identities while you may choose to refrain.

Response 23.Nov.2004 19:16

some poster

Wow, great dialog.
Nother viewpoint: So, if you had to chose to like men, then you supressed your desire for women, making you bisexual, correct? Bi-sexual people often choose either a male or a female as their predominant partner, dictating their sexuality to the majority of society.
I have never been sexually aroused by a female. Love them and all but they don't do anything for me below the belt. Therefore, I would say that I didn't chose to be gay. I was just lucky enough to be born this way. Sorry, I don't mean pick on you but this choice issue is a hot topic with me.

Anonymous: Procreation is a weak argument for heterosexuality vs. homosexuality. Some of the best parents I know are queers. Up yours! Besides, I wasn't arguing that heterosexuality was wrong. I was stating that heteros and their system have isolated queers and made us feel like outsiders. I don't hate heterosexuality. I hate heterosexism.

Suppression is okay 23.Nov.2004 21:59

nother viewpoint

Of course. Haven't we all suppressed a desire for something that we couldn't/shouldn't have? Not every desire needs to be acted upon, not every itch needs to be scratched.

Homosexuality *IS* natural! 24.Nov.2004 09:39


Homosexuality is natural. Any claim to the contrary is pure rubbish.

Homosexual behavior in humans has been recorded since the dawn of history. There is thus every reason to suspect it existed in prehistoric times. Moreover, homosexual behavior has been shown to occur in many non-human animal species as well.

The only logical conclusion to these facts is that it's completely natural for at least some human individuals to be hard-wired with either the ability or predisposition to experience same-sex sexual attraction.

The fact that queer sex doesn't facilitate reproduction is irrelevant. Pretty much any population of any species (plant or animal) contains individuals that for one reason or another don't reproduce. Homosexuality obviously doesn't threaten the existence of humans or any other animal exhibiting such behavior, else these species would have all gone extinct long ago.

From the standpoint of continuing a species, it is not necessary for all individuals to reproduce; it's only necessary for enough of them to do so such that populations can maintain themselves.

Finally, the fact that homosexual behavior has persisted in humans and other species for countless millennia strongly suggests there is some sort of evolutionary advantage to having a certain percentage of people being queer. If there wasn't, the trait would have been selected against as populations without queer individuals would have tended to out-compete those with them.


A Queer Teens View 03.Dec.2004 05:16

Kitten rebalvamp2006@yahoo.com

I just want to say that I stumbled across this site doing resurch for my school resurch paper.I dont know about the other people who have posted.To be honest with you high school is hell on Earth for everyone...then theres GLBTQ memebers who have it even worse.They have been many days Ive gotten to the point I just wanted to screw it and give up.But I..ME...I took the steps to get myself the help I needed. I really do understand what its like for a gay teen to try and make it....So stop fighting and start helping us if you feel so much conviction to write about it in this site.



i think some people need to chill out 15.May.2005 11:55

straight but caring teenage girl im_special_because_of_god@yahoo.com

i think that people are scared of people who are different.the only difference is how we think about stuff. we are all special and god made us this way.he accepts us why can't we accept each other? people say well that's weird or that's unusual. those words just mean different and i think they were meant to hurt people. well in my books weird or unusual is another way of saying unique or your very smart just in another way. why don't we all try to get each others side of the story and see what they are going through? i think that gay,bisexual,lesbian,cross-dressers,and others are also having that meaning.what is so wrong with being special or unique? i know that god doesn't want us to like the same sex but i think deep down he still loves us all. i also love everyone no matter how they act or think. it's just sometimes i can't get along with people and that's my problem not theirs. kind of like it's your problem that you don't accept these special people not theirs.in my school we have a rule book and in it it says that cross-dressing is prohibited,anyone who choses to disobey these rules shall be punished and that is wrong too. just because they are special they are being punished? i am in the process of trying to persuade the principal to change that rule. it's not fair how the world treats these unique people.quit trying to change people and change yourself. you are the one with the problem why should they change? it is all about acceptance and beliefs.please incourage these people that it is okay to be special and you don't have to change you are a beautiful person and everyone loves you because of it.