A short criticism of Homosexuality

Hello, aryan here. Recently a couple of ubermenschen that I've dealt with have used their home-brewed garage kit morality systems to argue in favor of homosexuality.

They argue that the ability to enthrall (psycho-sexual slavery) any man (they are all objectively homosexual) as a gay lover holds promise for mankind, since men (inherently disposable) can be trained to perform any task, far easier than any woman can be thus trained.

Moreover, their arguments stipulate that by the nature of a homosexual connection, which they assume is based on 'emotions of eros', the loyalty from such bonds is completely and utterly unbreakable.

I must criticize this. As much as I agree with the desire to bring about a new golden age for humanity with gay ubermenschen, they consistently refuse to:

1. Prove that gay men are born with male brains, as opposed to gay brains

2. Properly apply wikipedia-supressed racial IQ and genomics data to homosexual relationships

3. Disprove the commonly accepted (among the secret societies I count myself in) fact that women are, in fact, the superior gender.

While I concede that total trannny internet control would not have been possible without psycho-erotic slave bonds, their arguments fail to exclude the possibility that s control the internet through their superior white genetics. Not to say the least that they have refused to discuss whether troooons have male or female brains.

We cannot yet jump to a hasty conclusion on the merits of homosexuality. If we fail to properly understand it before implementing, we just simply won't be able to compete.