thanks believe it or not in the real world i think that we think mostly alike on this i'm for the societal normalizaion of homosexuality i'm not for the nasty tactics used by some folks who feel that way including branding anybody who feels otherwise as having a phobia and such work against themselves but in a wikipedia sense such opinions are not relevant two definitions of the word exist and one of them is sky is blue obviously controversial the problem with the article is that as a part of a pov quest it pretends that the more controversial all opposition is phobia definition is the only definition that would be just a difference of opinion but the more severe problem there is the nasty tactics used by a certain cadre there against people who do not agree with their quest i think that they have set the record for the amount of bogus tactics and bogus accusations used against a fellow editor and when i see people using such tactics against people in wikipedia to further their purposes i really see red and no i do not think that you are misguided i think that the real world you and your thoughts and efforts are right on track and admirable and in wikipedia you are a kind and thoughtful editor about the worst complaint i could muster is taking real life advocacy a bit too much into wikipedia and having a bit of a hard time understanding my someone abstract analysis of the structure of the article which is necessary to present the issues in wiki terms but the first in very minor and the second is somewhere between normal and being a failure of mine to explain better your friend north