Again, you continue to ignore the primary point to argue about citation.

Even if Lokasenna does not say to you what it says to me (chiefly that it was considered valid to mock men for being in subservient sexual roles), I have provided plenty of other sources that point out the complex relationship Norse society had with homosexuality.

A complex relationship that Norskkk glosses over in favour of pushing a harmful worldview, which is the primary topic I sought to address.

A primary topic you have consistently ignored.

You claimed to have awarded it for being helpful, but there are no awards on it and your comments have been singularly focused on the issue of citation.

Is it a well-written academic paper? No, and it isn't meant to be, which you would know if you had read it.

It is meant to be a basic summary of the primary problem with Norskkk from which people can do their own research. Which I state in the post, if you had read it.