The Heterosexual Homosexuality Factor
Implicated: Homophobia, Gender Nonconformity
& The Possible ‘No Man’s Land’ Effect
Dimensions of Suicide Conference:Exploring Cause and Effect
Waterloo, Ontario: November 8, 2007
Richard Ramsay & Pierre Tremblay
University of Calgary
Please Consider Seriously & Maybe Encourage Related Research in Canada
The “Homosexuality Factor” Is Likely Associated with 30 to 70 percent
of Adolescents and Young Adults Who Attempt Suicide.
The Same Likely Applies For Aboriginal Youth:
Previous Related Conference Alerts Since 1995: Most professionals involved with North American adolescent and young adult suicidality should/must know... that gay, lesbian, and bisexual identified people have been at greater risk for suicidality, the risk generally increasing for the more serious forms of suicidality. See the tabulated resultsfor more than 110 studies (including transgender studies) available at
Generally "unknown" or "unsuspected":More adolescent/young adult suicide attempters (compared to gay, lesbian, bisexual – GLB - identified individuals) are likely in this category: heterosexual identified (especially if they report some same-sex attraction or sexual behavior), and their suicidality risks increases if "assumed" to be homo-sexual and targeted for anti-GLB harassment/abuse (See tabulated results for Seattle Adolescents and University students in this Alert.)... that may be an anti-gender violation sexism issue (1,2,3,4). Their higher suicidality risk may also be related to a "No Man's Land" status in a world of common gender and sexual orientation binary perceptions.
Gaydar & Gender Nonconformity (GNC): It is reported that GNC attributes are most often used to suspect/assume that a person is homosexually oriented, with a higher likelihood that GNC individuals will experience ongoing dislike, rejection/exclusion, harassment, bullying & violence (5-7)that often begins in early childhood when such abuses are NOT related to sexual orientation issues, but also/only to gender role violations (7-9). Hence, reports of anti-GLB harassment/violence by individuals are often a likely proxy for the higher probability that some GNC attributes exist.
Gender Nonconformity (GNC) & Suicidality Risk:Researchers have reported that it is gender non-conforming GLB identified youth who are at greater risk for experiencing reprimands, harassment, abuses, violence, with the likelihood of high risk for having attempted suicide (e.g.5, 10-12). However, more research of the exceptional kind is needed on heterosexualidentified (likely GNC) individuals targeted for anti-GLB harassment and related suicidality. Fitzpatrick et al (2005) concluded: “Cross-gendered [college students], regardless of sexual orientation, appear to have higher risk for suicidal symptoms. Researchers and clinicians should assess gender role in evaluations of youth samples.”(13) Gender role issues such as GNC continue to be ignored in mainstream youth suicidology.
Binary Belief Factor:In a world of believed (often enforced) binaries (e.g. sex: male/female, sexual orientation: heterosexual/homosexual), those not being as expected - meaning that they are in a "No Man's Land" - such as gender role violators - or bisexual people - have been reported to have the most mental health problems and higher rates of suicidality. This was the focus of a presentation by Tremblay & Ramsay (2003: 14). The same also applied for Bi/Multi-Racial adolescents in Oregon, compared to adolescents reporting only a one-'race' identity (Ramsay & Tremblay, 2004: 15). Such issues remain generally unrecognized and ignored in mainstream youth suicidology. Heterosexual identified people with GNC attributes or with some same-sex attraction - possibly acted on- would likely feel - or be made to feel - like they are in a “No Man’s Land.” Related Information: Tremblay & Ramsay (2004: 16).
Table 1 - 1995 Seattle Youth Risk Behavior Survey: Grade 9 - 12Adolescent Male “Attempted Suicide” Results Based on Sexual Identity
Being / Not-Being Targeted For Anti-Gay/Bisexual Harassment*
Group
Suicidality
Categories / Heterosexual
Not Targeted
N = 3219, 87.6% ofMales / Heterosexual
Targeted
N = 125, 3.4% ofMales / "Not Sure"
Not Targeted
N = 191, 5.2% ofMales / "Not Sure"
Targeted
N = 24, 0.65% ofMales / GB Males
Not Targeted
N = 90, 2.4% ofMales / GB Males
Targeted
N = 36, 0.98%
ofMales
AttemptedSuicide*
Risk Ratios (RR)1 / 140/3219: 4.3% / 20/125: 16.0%
2.4<3.7<5.7 / 21/191: 11.0%
1.6<2.5<3.9 / 7 / 24: 29.2%
3.5<6.7<12.7 / 18 / 90: 20.0%
3.0<4.6<7.1 / 7 / 36: 19.4%
2.2<4.5<8.9
Percentage of
Suicide Attempters / 140/213: 65.7% / 20/213: 9.4% / 21 / 213: 9.8% / 7 / 213: 3.3% / 18 / 213: 8.4% / 7 / 213: 3.3%
* Attempt(s) with
Med. Attention, RR / 45 / 3197: 1.4% / 8 / 122: 6.6%
2.2<4.7<9.7 / 5 / 192: 2.6%
.7<1.8<4.6 ns / 1/24: 4.2%
.4<3.0<20ns / 10 / 91: 11.0%
4.1<7.8<15.0 / 4 / 35: 11.4%
3.1<8.1<21
Percentage of
Med. S.Attempters / 45 / 73: 61.6% / 8 / 73: 11.0% / 5 / 73: 13.7% / 1 / 73: 1.4% / 10 / 73: 13.7% / 4 / 73: 5.5%
Percent of Group Targeted / 3.7% (125 / 3344) / 11.2% (24 / 215) 2
RR = 2.0<3.0<4.5 / 28.6% (36 / 126) 2
RR 5.5<7.6<10.6
Table 2 - 1995 Seattle Youth Risk Behavior Survey: Grade 9 - 12
Adolescent Female “Attempted Suicide” Results Based on Sexual Identity
Being / Not-Being Targeted For Anti-Lesbian Harassment*
Group
Suicidality
Categories / Heterosexual
Not Targeted
N = 3193, 82% ofFemales / Heterosexual
Targeted
N = 292, 7.5% ofFemales / "Not Sure"
Not Targeted
N = 207, 5.3% ofFemales / "Not Sure"
Targeted
N = 30, 0.77% ofFemales / LB Females
Not Targeted
N = 107, 2.7% ofFemales / LBFemales
Targeted
N = 66, 1.7% ofFemales
AttemptedSuicide*
Risk Ratios (RR) 1 / 232 / 3193: 7.3% / 66 / 292: 22.6%
2.4<3.1<4.0 / 21 / 207: 10.1%
0.9<1.4<2.1 ns / 10 / 30: 33.3%
2.7<4.6<7.7 / 21 / 107: 19.6%
1.8<2.7<4.0 / 16 / 66: 24.2%
2.1<3.3<5.2
Percentage of
Suicide Attempters / 232 / 366: 63.4% / 66 / 366: 18.0% / 21 / 366: 5.7% / 10 / 366: 2.7% / 21 / 366: 5.7% / 16 / 366: 4.4%
* Attempt(s) with
Med. Attention, RR / 62 / 3196: 1.9% / 27 / 293: 9.2%
3.1<4.8<7.3 / 6 / 206: 2.9%
0.7<1.5<3.4 ns / 4 / 30: 13.3%
2.7<6.9<18 / 5 / 106: 4.7%
1.0<2.4<5.9 / 6 / 67: 9.0%
2.1<4.6<12
Percentage of
Med. S.Attempters / 62 / 110: 56.4% / 27 / 110: 24.5% / 6 / 110: 5.5% / 4 / 110: 3.6% / 5 / 110: 4.5% / 6 / 110: 5.5%
Percent of Group Targeted / 8.4% (292 / 3485) 3193 / 12.7% (30 / 237) 2
RR = 1.1<1.5<2.1 / 38.2% (66 / 173) 2
RR = 3.7<4.6<5.7
*Attempted suicide incidence in the past 12 months by heterosexual, gay (G), and bisexual (B) adolescent males (Table 1) - or heterosexual, lesbian (L), and bisexual (B) females (Table 2) -who were or were not the "target of offensive comments or attacks" related to their presumed homosexual orientation at school or on the way to school. "Attempt(s) with Med. Attention" means one or more suicide attempts associated with having received medical attention. Saewyc (2002: 17) made the data on males and females available to the authors. About 89% of students answered both the questions related to sexual orientation and anti-GLB harassment.
Ethic Composition of Study Sample: 34% European-American, 26% Asian American, 18% African-American, 1% American Indian, 14% multi-ethnic, and 3% other. Respondents were evenly distributed from Grades 9 to 12. Almost equal numbers of males and females (Saewyc, 2000: 18).
1. Risk Ratios are calculated with a 95% Confidence Interval by the authors of the Alert. They represent comparisons with "not targeted" heterosexual male values or heterosexual female values for the Row Variable. "ns" = not significant.
2. Risk Ratios (95% Confidence Intervals) for being targeted for anti-GLB harassment, compared to Heterosexual males or Heterosexual females. For GB Males compared to "Unsure" Males: RR = 1.6<2.6<4.1. For LB Females compared to "Unsure" Females: RR = 2.1<3.0<4.4
Table 3: Suicidality Results: University of Washington Students, SeattleMurphy (2007: 20): PhD Dissertation Study
Sexual
Identity /
Suicidal
Behavior * / Heterosexual:
No Same-Sex Attraction or Behavior: n= 404 / Heterosexual:
Some Same-Sex
Attraction or
Behavior: n = 79 / Gay, Lesbian,
Bisexual, Queer
n = 38 ** / Not
Sure
n = 7 / χ2 = - - . - -
df = ( )
ρ = 0. - - -
(From Study)
Gender
Identity: n’s / M: 153 / F: 251 / M: 16 / F: 63 / M: 21 / F: 15 / M: 4 / F: 3
Suicide
Seriously
Considered / 15: 9.8% / 15: 6.0% / 4: 25.0% / 13: 20.6% / 1: 4.8% / 5: 33.3% / 2: 50.0% / 0: 0.0% / 14.60 (6), < 0.05
M/F: 30: 7.4% / M/F: 17: 21.5% / M/F: 7: 18.4% / M/F: 2: 28.6% / 19.06 (3), < 0.001
Suicide
Planned / 13: 8.5% / 9: 3.5% / 4: 25.0% / 10: 15.9% / 2: 9.5% / 2: 13.3% / 1: 25.0% / 0: 0.0% / 11.96 (6), 0.06
M/F: 22: 5.4% / M/F: 14: 17.7% / M/F: 5: 13.2% / M/F: 1: 14.3% / 15.56 (3), < 0.01
Attempted Suicide / 0: 0.0% / 5: 2.0% / 1: 6.3% / 5: 7.9% / 1: 4.8% / 0: 0.0% / 0: 0.0% / 0: 0.0% / 6.00 (2), 0.05
M/F: 5: 1.2% / M/F: 6: 7.6% / M/F: 1: 2.6% / 0: 0.0% / 12.21 (3), < 0.01
Attempted
Medical
Attention / 0: 0.0% / 0: 0.0% / 0: 0.0% / 2: 3.2% / 0: 0.0% / 0: 0.0% / 0: 0.0% / 0: 0.0% / --
M/F: 0: 0.0% / M/F: 2: 2.5% / M/F: 0: 0.0% / M/F: 0: 0.0% / 1.67 (1), 0.20
Sample: Mostly From First Year Psychology Classes, Some From the Q Center: GLBTQ Services
M = Male, F = Female -- * In the Past Year.-- **Gender Identity: Transgender = 1, Other = 1
Information related to victimization in the past year was solicited: victimization types & number, on and off campus, including on the basis of the assumption that one is non-heterosexual (GLB). Generally, non 100% heterosexual were most at risk for suicidality, with some exceptions, noting also a low count problem (subgroup sizes and suicidality counts). Result from regression analyses revealed that victimization on the basis of the assumption that one is GLB was implicated in suicidality for both sexual minority and heterosexual identified students.
It is doubted that heterosexual identified individuals reporting same-sex attractions or same-sex sexual activities would be “out” about this aspect of their lives, but some were nonetheless targeted for anti-gay comments/harassment. This likely happened because they were manifesting some gender nonconformable attributes, as such individuals were reported to have in the Dunne et al. (2000) study of Twins in Australia: “A continuous measure of childhood gender nonconformity(CGN) was sensitive to slight variations in homosexual attraction andbehavior. In particular, among both men and women who identified as heterosexual,there were significant differences between “complete” heterosexuals andthose who admitted to only one or a few same-sex behaviors but no homosexualattraction. Among men, CGN scores distinguished between heterosexuals who admittedto same-sex behavior only and those who admitted to some homosexualattraction. The sexual subgroups also differed on a measure of gender atypicality in adulthood.” (21)
Note: Only 12 of the 528 students had attempted suicide in the past year: 2 males and 10 females. “The Homosexuality Factor” is associated with the 2 male suicide attempters (100%) and 5 out of the 10 female suicide attempters (50%), for a total of 7 out of 12 suicide attempters (58.2%). Suicide attempts requiring medical attention were reported by 2 females, both also acknowledging some same-sex attraction or behavior. A similar result was reported by Bagley & Tremblay (1997) from a random sample of 750 young adult males in Calgary: Five out of the 8 serious suicide attempters (62.5%) were either homosexual or bisexual identified (n = 3) or they were heterosexual identified and reported same-sex sex in the past 6 months (n = 2) (22).
Bibliography
1. Jenness V, Kendal B (1994). Antiviolence Activism and the (In)Visibility of Gender in the Gay /Lesbian and Women's Movements.Gender and Society 8(3):402-423.
2. Wilets J (1997). Conceptualizing Private Violence against Sexual Minorities as Gendered Violence: An International and Comparative Law Perspective. Albany Law Review, 60(3): 989-1050.
Bibliography (Con’t)
3. Tomsen S, Mason G (2001). Engendering Homophobia: Violence, Sexuality and Gender Conformity, Journal of Sociology, 37(3): 265-287.
4. Namaste K (1996). Genderbashing: sexuality, gender, and the regulation of public space. Environment and Planning D: Society & Space, 14: 221-240.
5. California Safe Schools Coalition & 4-H Center for Youth Development (2004). Safe Place to Learn: Consequences of Harassment Based on Actual or Perceived Sexual Orientation and Gender Non-Conformity and Steps for Making Schools Safer.
6. Smith TE, Campbell L (2005). Self-perceived Gender Typicality and the peer Context during adolescence. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 16(1): 91-103.
7. Horn SS (2007). Adolescents’ Acceptance of Same-Sex Peers Based on SexualOrientation and Gender Expression. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 36(3): 363-371.
8.Smetana JG (1986). Preschool children's conceptions of sex-role transgressions. Child Development, 57(4): 862-871.
9. Blakemore JEO (2003). Children’s beliefs about violating gender norms: Boys shouldn’t look like girls, and girls shouldn’t act like boys. Sex Roles, 48(9): 411–19.
10. BontempoDE, D'Augelli AR (2002). Effects of at-school victimization and sexual orientation on lesbian, gay, or bisexual youths' health risk behavior. Journal of Adolescent Health, 30(5): 364-74.
11.D'Augelli AR, Grossman AH, Salter NP, Vasey JJ, Starks MT, Sinclair KO (2005). Predicting the suicide attempts of lesbian, gay, and bisexual youth. Suicide & Life Threatening Behavior, 35(6): 646-60.
12. Remafedi G, Farrow J, Deisher R (1991). Risk factors for attempted suicide in gay and bisexual youth. Pediatrics, 87(6): 869-75.
13. Fitzpatrick KK, Euton SJ, Jones JN, Schmidt NB (2005). Gender role, sexual orientation and suicide risk. Journal of Affective Disorders, 87(1): 35-42.
14. Tremblay P, Ramsay R (2003). Socially Constructed Binaries & Youth Suicidality. Presentation Segment from "Bi/Multi-Racial Adolescent Males at Risk for Suicidality." CPS (Centre for Suicide Prevention) Research Symposium, April, Calgary, Alberta.
15. Ramsay R, Tremblay P (2004). Bi/Multi-Racial & Aboriginal Adolescents At High Risk For Suicidality: Oregon 1999 Youth Risk Behavior Survey. PowerPoint Presentation: International Congress: Innovative Practices For Suicide Prevention. May, Montreal, Quebec.
16. Tremblay P, Ramsay R (2004). The Changing Social Construction of Western Male Homosexuality: Associations With Worsening Youth Suicide problems. Poster Presentation, Diversity & Health Conference, November, Calgary, Alberta.
17. Saewyc E (2002). The 1995 Seattle Youth Risk Behavior suicidality results – separated for males & females - and based on sexual identification / self-labeling measures were made available via email, January 2001. Some results for males and females analyzed together have been available in publications and online since 1996. See: Link to "Eighty-Three Thousand Youth" in PDF format by Reis B, Saewyc E (1999) at:
19. Saewyc EM, Singh N, Reis E, Flynn T (2000). The Intersections of Racial, Gender and Orientation Harassment in School and Health Risk Behaviors Among Adolescents. Poster presentation at The Annual Meeting of the Society of Adolescent Medicine, March, Alexandria, Va. Presentation PDF sent to authors.
20. Murphy HE(2007).Suicide Risk Among Gay, Lesbian and BisexualCollege Youth. PhD Dissertation. College of Education, University of Washington. Dissertation at UMI:
21. Dunne MP, Bailey JM, Kirk KM, Martin NG (2000). The subtlety of sex-atypicality. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 29(6): 549-65.
22. Bagley C, Tremblay P (1997). Suicidality problems of gay and bisexual males: Evidence from a random community survey of 750 men aged 18 to 27. In: Chris Bagley and Richard Ramsay (Eds). Suicidal Behavior in Adolescents and Adults, 177-193. Aldershot, England: Ashgate. Internet: or A slightly different version is published in 1977 Crisis, 18(1): 24-34.
NOTE: A link to this “Alert” will soon be AvailableBoth as a Word Document and as a Webpage at: .
An Associated Webpage will also be Constructed to
Expand on the Information Given in this “Alert.”