I thought the writer was sensitive to the plight of women and seemed to be encouraging other gay men to be more sympathetic. He noted that lesbian women inherently had different objectives from gay men, but he did not suggest that those differences were wrong or unreasonable.

The part about sex with animals as the beginning of interspecies communication and other sexual perversions was disgusting (p. 6). More and more I see why conservatives kept raising the slippery slope argument of legalizing homosexuality potentially leading to pedophilia and beastiality.

The section on children (p. 6) was sad. He acknowledged that straight men may molest young girls, but otherwise "kids can take care of themselves." Ugh. I gather that the author had sexual experiences as a kid that he considered positive and consensual, but I do not see how anyone can deny that boys can be groomed, molested, and taken advantage of just like girls. I think anyone who looks at the story of Vili Filau and Mary LeTourneau can see that he was taken advantage of by her, robbed of what remained of his childhood, and had his whole life irrevocably altered because of it. She tried to use the same argument as the author, that the kid came onto her, but if you watch interviews of them together, especially the more recent ones, you can tell that he harbors deep pain and regret about it. This idea that boys are just sex machines that cannot be molested needs to die.