I believe I understand your position and I believe you understand mine. I thought I understood your position. I've been repeating things from the article in post 14: How Might Homosexuality Develop? Putting the Pieces Together. After a cursory read of the article you said:
- Interesting...and it does seem to provide some answers
- I found the article in post #14 to be interesting and credible
- Again, the article in post 14 is a good one
Maybe I'm missing something here. I'm confused when you post the above comments and then turn around and state something completely different than what the article states. If it's credible then what in the article did you not find credible to make the comments you've made?
>>If it's credible then what in the article did you not find credible to make the comments you've made<<
Here's the part that immediately got my eye and I must confess, I still haven't read the article with the scrutiny it deserves.
Some of these traits might be inherited (genetic), while others might have been caused by the "intrauterine environment" (hormones). What this means is that a youngster without these traits will be somewhat less likely to become homosexual later than someone with them.