What we both can agree is that this is a thought provoking book that may change the way that you look at life. What this book isn’t being given enough credit for is that it’s the first book to give an explanation for homosexuality that makes sense. Many people who are not opposed to gay rights still think that homosexuality must be a mistake because it in and of itself does not lead to reproduction. But if pomiscuous sex helped small communities of early man bond together and co-operate, it makes sense that homosexuality in some members might help the group bond closer together and co-operate better, thus helping the entire group survive. Thus, homosexuality became an asset even if gay people didn’t directly pass their genes to the next generation, and in many cases they probably did.

Anyway, thanks for clarifying and I’m sorry if my original remark sounded snarky.