Now, the only way such persons come to light is by study, either questionnaire or case. I gave you three reasons why a respondent may claim to be homosexual and claim his environment to be free from the criteria you mention in your question.
When I say that I don't know of any, you supposed to point out to me those you know of. You didn't. Your assumption was that I didn't put much credence in that particular scenario. Yes? So? Prove to me there are some, with case details.
The next paragraph was "..None of these would really be homosexual, of course. " which I didn't find responsive to the question.
Eh? My response was clearly that many that claim to be homosexual without abusive environments are not homosexual at all.
That may be a reason why "why would a young adult that hasn't been exposed to the bad behavior, that hasn't been abused, that's had the best environment, that hasn't had any of the behavioral reasons to be gay, be gay anyway."
You asked, Why? I responded.
So, while I don't refute what you said I also don't find that it is responsive to the question.
Eh, again? What kind of response are you looking for then? I said that the claimants may either be not homosexual, or lie about their environment from shame or other reasons. You ask, Why, and I answered why.
The response that "makes sense to me" appears to be limited to "there's no reason, so homosexuality must be genetically determined." You seem to ignore any response other than that.
So, again, show me some with their case histories. Since you ask the question, you must have some in mind, or your question is meaningless.