Mays ends with, “ In the case of a gay male relationship, however, the key point is that neither of us is the girl of the relationship, no matter which side of the scale we fall on.” He concludes that regardless of preferences or qualities neither man in a gay relationship is the girl, and nothing can change that. It is possible that Mays' audience may not be clear, but one might infer from his article that his intended audience is those who impose gender roles on same-sex couples. Mays directly addresses the audience through this statement, “I'll spell it out for you: neither of them is the girl.” He is clearly addressing an audience he assumes to be implying that one male in a gay relationship is the “girl.” It is also most unlikely that he would even need to explain or criticize these forced roles to those who are in same-sex relationships. So if he is not addressing the ones being forced into the roles, then
Mays ends with, “ In the case of a gay male relationship, however, the key point is that neither of us is the girl of the relationship, no matter which side of the scale we fall on.” He concludes that regardless of preferences or qualities neither man in a gay relationship is the girl, and nothing can change that. It is possible that Mays' audience may not be clear, but one might infer from his article that his intended audience is those who impose gender roles on same-sex couples. Mays directly addresses the audience through this statement, “I'll spell it out for you: neither of them is the girl.” He is clearly addressing an audience he assumes to be implying that one male in a gay relationship is the “girl.” It is also most unlikely that he would even need to explain or criticize these forced roles to those who are in same-sex relationships. So if he is not addressing the ones being forced into the roles, then