Sorry, I was apparently unclear. I think lots of people might view my marrying a guy as a "betrayal" of sorts of lesbian feminism. I don't think that they would assume, conversely, that I got married in the first place because I wanted to defend the importance of marriage and biological children-in-wedlock, although they might think I was doing so subconsciously.
2. Sorry, I was being somewhat technical here. I mean that the idea of same-sex relationships has become part of the discourse - that we would not ridicule someone for assuming such a relationship between the handholders in the way, that, for instance, someone might have ridiculed the notion that Holmes and Watson were lovers in the 1890s.
3. Yes, I think Harris' stats are unreasonably narrow here and disagree with his assessment on a variety of counts, but don't have time to go into the stats.
4. I think that two men seeing a movie together would be generally read as platonic, yes, whereas man and woman at sports bar would be interpreted as flirting. Sorry for confusion.
5. Such things can change over time as well.
6. I was thinking of the "you're my third best friend" rhetoric of kindergartens...
Community is certainly strongly correlated here, but the fact that we use the term "friend" to define "people within our community" also complicates things.
Re: sorry if this is a bit incoherent, I'm really tired.
Sorry, I was apparently unclear. I think lots of people might view my marrying a guy as a "betrayal" of sorts of lesbian feminism. I don't think that they would assume, conversely, that I got married in the first place because I wanted to defend the importance of marriage and biological children-in-wedlock, although they might think I was doing so subconsciously.
2. Sorry, I was being somewhat technical here. I mean that the idea of same-sex relationships has become part of the discourse - that we would not ridicule someone for assuming such a relationship between the handholders in the way, that, for instance, someone might have ridiculed the notion that Holmes and Watson were lovers in the 1890s.
3. Yes, I think Harris' stats are unreasonably narrow here and disagree with his assessment on a variety of counts, but don't have time to go into the stats.
4. I think that two men seeing a movie together would be generally read as platonic, yes, whereas man and woman at sports bar would be interpreted as flirting. Sorry for confusion.
5. Such things can change over time as well.
6. I was thinking of the "you're my third best friend" rhetoric of kindergartens...
Community is certainly strongly correlated here, but the fact that we use the term "friend" to define "people within our community" also complicates things.