Quote:Of course I didn't disagree ,I havn't argued once that more men equals more homosexuality? This is a strawman argument. I was merely using the the animals changing sex and sexual preference based on environment to disqualify that they are born one way or another,and you are the one who made the comparison to animals first remember. For instance the leader of clownfish groups is always female. If the leader dies and there is no more females and male turns himself into a female. So you admit that environment/society/biology can influence sexuality/gender?

I think you and I are really close on this. I get while environmentally to survive as a species, these birds would do this. It's weird to me to think about when applying the same survival scenario to humans, but I can get it.


My comparison to China may have some points of comparison, but in this same context admittedly it doesn't fit. These birds are doing it due to a shortage of males and the need to survive, not because a shortage of males means females will turn gay. Obviously there is not an environmental struggle for humans to survive. I don't know that bit about the clownfish or why they do that, but I wouldn't know how to apply that to humans. I don't recall if it was you, but someone was making the argument people could be environmentally influenced to be LGBT by hanging around with groups of people that are gay or people who are more publicly accepting of being gay. That is a bit less credible to me.

---