To advance her argument, the author cites political scientist and sociologist, while she herself is a linguist. what exactly is the nature of these three professions? what do professionals in the first two fields do? why does tannen use their observations in developing her argument?

There is nothing inherently wrong with being gay. speaking generally, opposition to gays are usually judged on people's moral basis whether it be religion, experience or other factors. to conclude, there is no objective answer to this question only subjective ones that rely on people's idea of what is right and wrong.

The answer is holding on to the past