I know you're trying to make a point here, but you're water-boarding it to death. Why don't you take a deep breath, crack your knuckles, and try to make your point without resorting to this meaningless inclusive/exclusive bravo sierra. Try plain English. It usually works best.
Your misrepresentation of it is where the fallacy of the false dichotomy occurs.
This is exhausting.
The quote from Genesis says "all" the men from Sodom, men and boys, young and old, from every part of Sodom, surrounded Lot's house, no? That's quite a gathering. And all of them there demanded that Lot fork over the strangers so that they, with they being the men, could have sex with them.
In other words, all the men of Sodom wanted to gang-rape these strangers. And because the strangers were men, and because all the men in Sodom demanding this gang-rape were men, that characterizes the form of gang-rape as homosexual gang rape, does it not?
Suppose we assume that all of this is true.
This means that there was once a town in which every single man was predisposed to gang-rape. Young and old. Every single man in town. In other words, no single man in Sodom decided that gang-rape was probably not a good idea. Not one man said you know what? I'm not in the mood for a good gang-rape today; I'll sit this one out. The Bible said all.
Now put down your Bible and put on your secular human history hat.
A human settlement of any kind requires cooperation. A human settlement before the age of mass technology requires a very intimate and interpersonal sort of cooperation. In order to cooperate with one another, among other characteristics, human beings need empathy, a respect for the possessions of others, a willingness to restrain their will where it conflicts with the will of others, and a willingness to shoulder a common burden for the good of all.
A gang-rapist has no empathy, no respect for the possessions of others, no willingness to restrain his or her will, and no willingness to shoulder a common burden for the good of all. That's just one gang-rapist.
Now imagine a community in which there were nothing but males who were gang-rapists. How long could that community have lasted?
Not long.
Maybe the author of Genesis was being hyperbolic?
Occam's Razor it.
I know you're trying to avoid a point here, but you're yanking it to death. Why don't you get a paper bag, take a few deep breaths and try to present coherent thoughts instead of hyperventilating over your inability to think of a meaningful response.
"This is exhausting."
No it's not. It's kid-stuff.
"The quote from Genesis says "all" the men from Sodom, men and boys, young and old, from every part of Sodom, surrounded Lot's house, no? That's quite a gathering. And all of them there demanded that Lot fork over the strangers so that they, with they being the men, could have sex with them."
Have I not posted that the quote from Genesis isn't the problem. Did you have trouble understanding that?
"In other words, all the men of Sodom wanted to gang-rape these strangers. And because the strangers were men, and because all the men in Sodom demanding this gang-rape were men, that characterizes the form of gang-rape as homosexual gang rape, does it not?"
IOW, you are determined to pretend to exhaust yourself in hopes that someone believes that you really aren't invoking the fallacy of the false dilemma.
" Suppose we assume that all of this is true. This means that there was once a town in which every single man was predisposed to gang-rape. Young and old. Every single man in town. In other words, no single man in Sodom decided that gang-rape was probably not a good idea. Not one man said you know what? I'm not in the mood for a good gang-rape today; I'll sit this one out. The Bible said all."
Suppose we assume that you recognize where you begin using the fallacy of the false dichotomy.
"A human settlement of any kind requires cooperation. A human settlement before the age of mass technology requires a very intimate and interpersonal sort of cooperation. In order to cooperate with one another, among other characteristics, human beings need empathy, a respect for the possessions of others, a willingness to restrain their will where it conflicts with the will of others, and a willingness to shoulder a common burden for the good of all."
Suppose we further assume that you recognize how you continue down the path of building your fallacy of the false dichotomy?
"A gang-rapist has no empathy, no respect for the possessions of others, no willingness to restrain his or her will, and no willingness to shoulder a common burden for the good of all. That's just one gang-rapist."
Suppose we assume that you are in full fallacy mode by now. What next?
" Now imagine a community in which there were nothing but males who were gang-rapists. How long could that community have lasted? Not long. Maybe the author of Genesis was being hyperbolic?"
At what point does the disingenuous nature of your appeal to the fallacy of the false dilemma become too embarrassing for even you to avoid? Apparently not yet.
"Occam's Razor it."
Had you done so, you wouldn't even be here.