In it's time, a lot of this would have been groundbreaking. While we discuss concepts like familial homophobia with more nuance today, it was nice to see an earlier work about it. Seeing Schulman's own experience with this was impactful and definitely added to this. 

The biggest thing I got out of this is that *we* as a community can be the solution to a lot of things. As cheesy as it may sound, speaking out can do so much in interpersonal situations. And homophobia at large has justified abuses and lessened the likelihood that people will speak out. A lot of what she said makes me very excited to read Conflict is Not Abuse, which she published quite a while later. 

I do think it could have been more developed in some ways and it really would have benefited from research backing her points. The question of course would be, were there people out there doing psychology or sociology research on familial homophobia? It was probably slim, so I understand her decision to lean on her own experiences here. 

I also take issue with some of her proposed solutions. She mentions things like bringing in court-ordered therapy and relying on the state to diffuse certain situations. I don't think that is viable (and I'm not even sure whether or not the author would either at this point). There is also a lot that would have benefited a lot by an analysis of race in all of this as well. These, like the bit around gay marriage, I think says more about the state of discourse then (which is valuable to understand I think). 

Over all, it was a neat read. Not her best, but it meditates on important topics, many of which remain relevant, and definitely tells us something about its time.