I have read this article a few times now and just can't see how it outlines any pitfalls of heteronormativity or monogamy.
The author writes eloquently, in my opinion, on the value of good, clear communication in relationships and on tolerance for those who are different. I find myself in wholehearted agreement with her frustration at the assumptions and irritations of finding yourself at a wedding as somebody who hasn't followed the traditional path in life.
I just can't see any description of pitfalls in it.
I had to smile at somebody talking about marriage in such negative terms while wholeheartedly, it seems to me, embracing a relationship that embodies one of the things that I see as making marriage a rather unethical pursuit.
One of my moral problems with marriage is the notion that generally speaking one man gives the woman to another man. Sometimes now the woman gives herself away - something that I find utterly bizarre. Bad enough to be given away by somebody else. Maybe then you could claim coercion but to give yourself to somebody like you are property seems utterly odd to me.
And yet - the author of this article firmly describes herself (or at least parts of herself) as being owned by a man. The idea of having to ask somebody else for permission to touch myself makes me feel fairly sick.
I kind of question also just how outside society a conventionally very pretty girl working in the porn industry actually is. It seems to me that it's a job that very firmly buttresses the main stream notion that women should be pretty, should wear make up, shouldn't talk much and should make sure they are skilled at sex. Oh yes - and that it is a woman's job to be sexually available and able to satisfy her man.
I see nothing in this article outlining pitfalls and nothing at all in it that suggests alternative ways of living. At heart - I think this is about finding ways to conform while claiming otherwise.