The research states that in the media, the portrayal of teenage boys is pathetic and is causing social disharmony. The most common phrases used to show us boys is “yobs” (591 times), followed by “thugs” (254 times), “sick” (119 times) and “feral” (96 times).

Ironically, the only time accounted in the last years media of teenage boys being shown in a positive light is when the boy has been killed by some tragic or violent event, e.g. teenagers killed by knifes, guns and so on.

Think about it guys, how many times do you read the sun just to laugh at its patheticness only to find out that not only is it a conservative piece of tabloid gossip but calls us all louts and scum-bags? Since when have we all worn hoodies, everyday all day?

On top of this however, the research also shows that boys are increasingly becoming wary of other boys just because they are in a group or they have their hoods up. Think about it, do you ever walk past a bunch of guys in Belfast thinking keep quiet, I don’t want to be beat up, just because they were wearing a tracksuit, caps or their hoods up and walked something like Clint Eastwood or doing that kind of “hard-man” Belfast walk where their arms flail at their sides like they are banging an imaginary lambeg drum?

As funny as this description sounds, even I have been scared of groups of teenagers. I’m only 18 and yet I walk warily past in the street trying not to make eye contact. Do you know why? Because we are told all day everyday that these people are scary, knife wielding ASBO owning hoodies. Who by? The Media!!!

What do you all think? Have you ever tried not to make eye contact with a group of other guys because you are scared that they might beat you up? Why do you think that? Is it because the media told you these normal other guys messing about like boys do, are thugs?

Challenge assumptions guys! Challenge everything!!!

A considerable amount of research has been conducted abroad that probes levels of drug taking and routes into drug use amongst the LGBT community. Yet there is a complete absence of comparable research here and we are left with a rather vague notion that there is a serious problem, rather than the type of sophisticated appreciation that emerges from systematic research that can be used to formulate policy and initiatives.

This study represents an initial step towards addressing this dearth of research. BeLonG To Youth Project, Ireland’s only designated LGBT youth service, secured funding through Pobal to commission research with young LGBT people between the ages of 18 and 26 to determine a) the extent and causes of drug use amongst this client group b) the impact of drugs on young people and c) the type of service response that is appropriate to meet the needs of those who are currently using drugs or who may potentially begin to do so in the future. As a general aspiration, the research strives to provide evidence that can support the development of BeLonG To services for young LGBT drug users.

A three phase research methodology was employed. In Phase 1 interviews were held with 12 young LGBT drug users to record their personal experiences of drug use. A small number of interviews were also conducted with the staff at BeLonG To and other stakeholders to get a service-provider perspective. Themes emerging from these interviews were then explored further in a focus group setting (Phase 2) with 32 participants (in five focus group sessions). Themes emerging in Phase 1 and 2, together with themes emerging from international literature, were then incorporated into an on-line questionnaire which was completed by 173 respondents between August and mid-October 2006.

Overview Of Findings

While recognising that alcohol is a drug, and that alcohol abuse is a growing problem within the LGBT community, for the purposes of this research it was excluded from our definition of ‘drugs’. Thus when used in this report, the term ‘drugs’ refers to ‘any psychoactive substance, excluding alcohol’.

Section C of this report provides detailed analyses of the on-line survey set in the context of testimonies recorded during focus groups and interviews. Headline findings from the survey include the following.

* 65 per cent of LGBT youth have had some experience of drug taking.
* 21 per cent have systematically used drugs (i.e. have done so on more than 60 occasions).
* 60 per cent had taken drugs over the 12 months preceding the survey.
* 40 per cent had used drugs in the preceding month and 29 per cent in the seven days leading up to the survey.
* 56 per cent of LGBT youth have some history of taking cannabis, 44 per cent poppers, 33 per cent ecstasy and 32 per cent cocaine.
* 89 per cent reported that they had been offered drugs at some point in the past.
* 65 per cent said that they had wanted to try drugs at some stage in their lives.
* 21 per cent of drug users either always or frequently mix their drugs on a night out (i.e. are polydrug users).
* 80 per cent of drug takers attributed their motivations for first trying drugs to curiosity. Eight per cent linked it to issues relating to their sexuality.
* 49 per cent of drug takers experienced blackouts resulting from drug taking. * 46 per cent of drug takers had engaged in unprotected sexual intercourse attributed to drug taking.
* 11 per cent of drug users had been sexually assaulted while ‘incapacitated due to drugs’.

These findings would tend to suggest that drug use is widespread amongst LGBT young people and is more prevalent than recorded in comparable studies probing drug taking within the youth population generally.

By Regina Nuzzo, Special to The Times
June 16, 2008

Last month, Sen. John McCain dropped by “Saturday Night Live,” drawing laughs from his promise, if elected president, to fight expensive federal projects — such as, he spoofed, a Department of Defense device to “jam gaydar.”

That was a joke. But some scientists are, in a way, working on gaydar, the supposed ability to discern whether a person is homosexual by reading subtle cues from their appearance. Just don’t refer to it that way. The preferred term is “sexual orientation correlates.”

These scientists are searching for innate traits that might not appear to be related to sexual orientation or even to standard clichés. So measuring a subject’s shoe size is permissible; asking about ownership of Barbra Streisand albums would be cheating. Some inborn traits might be expected if homosexuality is — as most scientists believe — rooted in biology, and they might provide clues about the biological origins of sexual orientation.

Finding and solidifying these links isn’t easy. Studies contradict each other, and some promising paths don’t pan out. (A link between male homosexuality and finger lengths isn’t holding up, and a claim that gays have distinctive fingerprint ridge patterns is largely discredited.) Scientists don’t always agree on how to interpret the results, and more progress has been made with regard to men than to women.

* Big brothers. Study after study — including one of 87,000 British men published last year — has found that gay men have more older brothers than straight men do. Only big brothers count. Lesbians don’t show such patterns.

The numbers: Each older brother will increase a man’s chances of being gay by 33%, says Ray Blanchard of the University of Toronto, an expert on the “big-brother effect.” That’s not as dramatic as it might sound. A man’s chance of being gay is pretty low to begin with — perhaps as low as 2% (lowered from 10% by researchers in the early 1990s). So having one older brother ups the chance to only about 2.6%.

What it might mean: Psychological influences are probably not at work, because the pattern holds even for gay men who weren’t raised with their older brothers. Instead, the mother’s womb might be key. After giving birth to a boy, her immune system might create antibodies to foreign, male proteins in her bloodstream. Subsequent sons in the womb could be exposed to these “anti-boy” antibodies, which might affect sexual development in the brain.

Accordingly, you’d expect the percentage of gay men in a society to vary depending on demographic differences in family size: One study calculated that a one-child-per-family law would reduce male homosexuality by about 29% from current levels.

* Left hand vs. right hand. The hand you use to sign your name might have something to do with what gender you are drawn to.

The numbers: More lefties — or at least more somewhat-ambidextrous folks — crop up in the gay population than among straight people, several studies have shown. An analysis of more than 23,000 men and women from North America and Europe in 2000 found that being non-right-handed seems to increase a man’s chances of being gay by about 34%, and a woman’s by about 90%.

What it might mean: One guess is that different-than-normal levels of testosterone in the womb — widely theorized to play a role in determining eventual sexual orientation — could nudge a fetus toward brain organization that favors left-handedness as well as same-sex attraction.

Another theory is that development of a fetus might be disturbed by factors such as a mother’s illness, steering the fetus into being less than strictly right-handed — and, in some cases, less than strictly heterosexual.

It’s a politically sticky idea, says Qazi Rahman of Queen Mary-University of London. “It’s essentially saying that homosexual preference . . . is some kind of biological error,” he says. (It might tick off the left-handed folks too.)

* Hair whorl. How does your hair grow? This might reflect your sexual orientation.

The numbers: A 2004 study of nearly 500 men — 272 on Delaware’s Rehoboth Beach, popular with gay men, 200 on a beach without that reputation — found that hair on the heads of men on the gay beach was 3.5 times more likely to grow in a counterclockwise direction. (Scalp hair typically resembles a clockwise-rotating typhoon.)

What it might mean: One theory is that a single gene might influence hair-whorl direction, left-right brain organization and, somehow, sexual orientation. Exactly how it would do all this, however, is anyone’s guess.

The study, although intriguing, suffers from a lack of scientific rigor. The author walked around while on vacation, collecting hair-whorl observations on men from a discreet distance. He didn’t know anyone’s sexual orientation for sure, and didn’t objectively examine any scalps up close. Rahman’s group is attempting to replicate the results in the lab.

* Penis size. If exposure to testosterone in the womb influences sexual orientation, scientists reckon that straight and gay people would differ in body parts strongly affected by testosterone, such as the penis.

The numbers: Anthony Bogaert of Brock University in Ontario and his colleagues re-analyzed data on 5,000 gay and straight men from sexologist Alfred Kinsey’s famous files, collected from the 1930s to the 1960s. The results, published in 1999, showed that gay men had longer, thicker penises than did straight men: on average, about 6.5 inches long and 4.95 inches around when erect, versus 6.1 inches long and 4.8 inches around for straight men.

What it might mean: Scientists don’t really know. One guess is that gay men could have been exposed to an odd mix of hormones in the womb. Testosterone levels might peak early, causing enhanced penis growth, then drop off later in pregnancy — leading to some feminine characteristics.

There’s one catch: Kinsey asked his subjects to measure themselves at home and mail a postcard recording their dimensions. It is within the realm of imagination that not every man reported the perfect truth. If everyone lied, the essence of the results wouldn’t change. It’s a problem only if gay men were more factually creative than straight men.

Bogaert says that all the measures — length and circumference, erect and flaccid — seem to plausibly line up, which probably wouldn’t be the case if the men had tacked on a vanity half-inch or so. Also, a smaller, 1960s study (in which a physician did the measuring) backs up the findings. As to whether gay or straight men are more likely to exaggerate about penis size, “It would be an interesting master’s thesis project,” Bogaert muses.

However, the next frontier in this kind of research seems to lie elsewhere — with subtle differences in how gay and straight brains navigate new cities, respond to erotic movies and react to the scent of sweat and urine.

They hope to speak confidentially to men aged between 16 and 34 who have thought seriously about or acted with the intention of suicide, in order to develop care and support programmes for those at risk.

During the interview the men will be asked to talk about issues in their lives that have influenced their thoughts about suicide and the types of help and support that they have used when feeling suicidal.

Around 50 of the 242 people registered in 2007 in Northern Ireland as taking their own lives were men in this age group according to statistics released this month by NISRA.

The research is being conducted in association with QUB.

Heading the Ulster researchers on the project is Professor Hugh McKenna (pictured), Dean of the Faculty of Life and Health Sciences, who said: “Talking directly to young men about their experiences means that we will be able to hear about ways of developing care and support that make sense to them. We want to hear from young men who have sought help from services as well as those who have not. It’s important that we learn from their experiences so that the recommendations we develop for policy and practice are realistic and relevant.”

Dr Joanne Jordan, from the School of Nursing and Midwifery at QUB, is leading the study, which is entitled Providing Meaningful Care: Learning from the Experiences of Suicidal Men.

Those who take part will be able to access counselling free of charge with a counsellor accredited by the British and Irish Association of Counselling and Psychotherapy and will receive information about support services in their area.

Dr Jordan said: “The rise in suicide in Northern Ireland over the recent past is now a matter of record. In large part this increase has been prompted by a rise in male suicide, particularly among young men. Although the latest statistics suggest that suicide among this group may be beginning to level off from the previous few years, this does not mean that we can afford to be complacent.

“Suicide continues to claim far too many young men’s lives, making it imperative that we learn about the circumstances in which they are led to consider it.”

The Ulster researchers on the project are: Professor Hugh McKenna, Dean of the Faculty of Life and Health Sciences, Dr Sinead Keeney, Senior Lecturer in the Institute of Nursing Research, and Mr Iain McGowan, Lecturer in the School of Nursing.

Over the next few months the research will be extended to include the Banbridge and Craigavon areas

Any young men living in the north and west Belfast area who are interested in taking part in the study should contact Iain McGowan on 07894 646690 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting              07894 646690      end_of_the_skype_highlighting or email menssuicidestudy@ulster.ac.uk for more information.

For further information, please contact:

Press Office, Department of Communication and Development
Tel: 028 9036 6178
Email: pressoffice@ulster.ac.uk