> Edit: why disagree without any response? These are legitimate questions. Are we not curious hackers here? Because in the full paragraph, it's very clear what

> Edit: why disagree without any response? These are legitimate questions. Are we not curious hackers here? Because in the full paragraph, it's very clear what was intended: > The findings, based on surveys given to teenagers across the country, also showed high levels of violence, depression and suicidal thoughts among lesbian, gay and bisexual youth. More than one in five of these students reported attempting suicide in the year before the survey, the agency found. On the other hand: > > “We need to talk about what’s happening with teenage boys that might be leading them to perpetrate sexual violence.” > Are they all teen boys, or could it be that there older predators at play here? I actually think that's a valid question that's left unaddressed by the article, especially given that as I usually see the data presented, threats of this kind of thing, for kids and adolescents, overwhelmingly comes from relatives or trusted adults—if that's becoming less-true even as rates rise, that's a pretty big deal. Buuuuut I can see why readers would just DV your whole post, given the two things you chose to call out and that one of them is already answered by the article, such that it looks like you're trying to cherry-pick with a bit of an edgy slant.