People always push at a problem or subject from their own initial emotional position on it. Just look at the political threads. :-) Those coming from different emotional positions are often amazed at what the other says or perceives.

The trick is in stretching your own perceptions until you can grasp where the other person is coming from and why. All people instinctively defend what they perceive to be good, right, and just.

I disagree with Doug R on politics, for example, but I do understand why he sees it all the way he does.

My impression is that the gay (male) lifestyle is inherently more stressful and risky than the heterosexual lifestyle or the gay female lifestyle...but...that doesn't necessarily mean that gay males cannot have a healthy, enduring relationship together. It just ups the odds of it not working out that way.

If I am right that it is more stressful and risky...it's partly because of existing social prejudice, partly because of the status quo, partly because of past customs, and quite possibly partly because of natural health reasons (anal intercourse is hard on the body in various ways, and is clearly not a very natural process for a body to undergo...the anus is there to eject waste matter, and that is its sole bodily purpose). There are also some interesting Taoist writings on the matter, strictly from a health point of view. They do not regard it as a moral issue. Just a health issue. They say that two aggressive sexual energies (male) tend to clash energetically when brought together, thus harming the body and emotions on a subtle level, whereas two female passive sexual energies do not clash harmfully when brought together. Therefore, Taoists did not warn against male-to-male sexuality on any moral basis whatsoever, but they did stress that it could have damaging health consequences. They did not ban it or attempt to ban it, they just cautioned people regarding the health issues. Under Taoism each person was entirely free to make his own decision about the matter, as he saw fit.