>the comradery and care two adults can have for each other can be reflected into children no matter the gender of the adults who serve as examples.

The love between a man and a woman is unique and no other arrangement replicates it.

How so? Would you describe this uniqueness so that I may understand it?

How is AB different from AA or BB? Is this a trick question?

It's definitely not a trick question.

I'm more than confident you don't mean to imply that a child gains benefit specifically because a biological man has an outie and a biological woman has an innie and because innie and outie go together and that that's the "love" that only a man and a woman can have together in that particular "arrangement" and that, again, a child benefits from that.

So, since a child's life isn't impacted by the specific configuration that a penis and vagina can happen to join in, what do you mean?

It sure seems like a trick question, because it seems like you want me to define man and woman in a way that you can say "ha gotcha." Instead, I'm leaving the definition of man and woman to you, and only requiring that you know there is a difference. "AB" doesn't refer to the genital configuration, but it is a required component of the arrangement. Whatever a man is to you, in addition to having a penis, that's "A". Whatever a woman is to you, in addition to having a vagina, that's "B". If you don't see how that's a unique arrangement, then I'm afraid I can't continue to explain it while also assuming your interactions are in good faith.

Alright, so it's not genitals, cool, cool and it's somehow "gender"-based that makes love across genders to be interesting.

Which philosophy of thought do you follow where gender would have an impact? Is this an argument about dominant / submissive? breadwinner / caretaker? Something else?

>Alright, so it's not genitals

I said genitals is "a required component of the arrangement." It's just not the whole thing.

Ah, sorry, I misread that part, then.

Why do genitals matter?

Because it is the only combination that produces life.

Sure; but what does the ability to produce life have to do with love?

Because the production of life in a loving relationship between a man and a woman is the best way to produce life.

"Life" ?

Quantitatively false:

    According to the team, there are almost 20 quadrillion ants on Earth right now. That’s a 20 followed by 15 zeroes, which is a number that’s hard to really get your head around.

https://newatlas.com/science/how-many-ants-total-earth

In terms of tonnage and sheer numbers there are many many more ants than humans - clearly their method of producing life "wins".

As a quick heads up, they don't have loving two parent families.

Human life, I thought it was pretty obvious that we were talking about humans, since men and women can't produce ants.

Is evolution surprising?

What does the physical act of having the form of sex that can produce a child have to do, at all, with what happens after that child is conceived?

Evolution only operates on "ability to live long enough and put oneself in a circumstance that enables making a baby."

They are strongly linked in a social organism sense to maximize gene transfer to the future.