1. Yes, kah-shar in 1Sam 18:1 is in the perfect tense and feminine... so what? Are these people and you? saying that because the word is feminine in that text, then it de facto signifies a homosexual 'binding' between Jonathan and David? scratchchin

2. Consulting some of the most respected and reliable sources re: Hebrew and O.T. as to this word as it appears in 1Sam 18:1; BDB (Brown, Driver, Briggs) A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament and Englishman's Hebrew and Chaldee Concordance and Keil-Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament vol. 2, NONE even hint of anything untoward in the relationship between Jonathan and David.

BDB-Genesius: "the life of Jonathan was bound up with the life of David"
Keil-Delitzsch: (summary) with ongoing strained relationship between Saul and David who committed himself to remain under the authority of Saul despite the strong animosity of Saul toward David. And thus, Jonathan committed himself to follow David for the remaining days (for life), i.e., Jonathan made a covenant of friendship with David. And, as a pledge of his loyalty to the covenant made, he (Jonathan) gave David his clothes and his armor.

Thus, I maintain that the problem has to do with using the right text, using proper Grammatical-Historical hermeneutic and one's presupposition that respects the LGBTxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx agenda. One or more applies to all who try to suggest that there was a homosexual relationship between David and Jonathan.

If the above is not sufficient to answer your query, then I apologize for not supplying what you are desiring. grin