If I hadn’t perceived that part of his article felt that it was mostly appealing to straight masculinity (mostly the marriage section) then I wouldn’t have said what I perceived.
Again, how and in what way is it mostly appealing to straight masculinity? I’m aware there is a certain school of thought which says that the word Marriage can only mean the sacred union of one man and one woman — but in my experience, people in that camp don’t tend to fling “heteronormative” around like a cuss-word. You gave me the impression of being someone who upholds the validity of same-sex marriage between two men or two women. So why would you call it “heteronormative” to recommend that a man ought to find someone of unspecified gender, with whom to tie the knot and jump the broom, forsaking all others till death do us part?
You are free to disagree and say you didn’t find it heteronormative, however. That’s your right, but you don’t have to ridicule me for perceiving it differently to you.
I know I don’t have to ridicule you — but don’t worry, it’s on the house. Free to each customer while supplies last, на халяву, это не за что, esto es gratis, de nada, no thanks necessary, I do it out of philanthropy.
I mean, how are you ever going to SMARTEN UP if no one ever makes fun of you, kiddo?
And just to be clear, I’m not ridiculing you for “perceiving it differently”; I’m ridiculing you for using a fancy-sounding and pretentious word without the slightest justification.
