"I Do"

I'm not sure where we were suppose to post, so I will post here too - 

In response to the "I do" of two women ~

According to Austin there should be no difference between a man and women saying, " I do" than a woman and woman saying, "I do" because what Austin focuses on is the speech act - what is being said and done - and not who is saying or doing it. In the case of two women saying, "I do" Austin would critique it as he would a heterosexual couple saying, "I do" in the sense that as long as the performative utterance is followed by appropriate and sincere feelings, thoughts, and intentions, he recognizes the speech act's legitimacy.

Contrastingly, if Austin's speech act of performative utterance were applied to the law and people who are against gay marriage than saying, "I do" would equate to what Austin calls abuse. People against gay marriage through the use of Austin's definition of abuse and performative utterance would say that two women cannot fulfill or complete what it entails to be a legally married couple; they, technically, cannot do everything a legally married heterosexual married couple can such as being legally married and recognized by the law as have benefits that married couples are given.

Everything depends on who uses Austin's speech act theory and in what context it is applied; two women saying, "I do" can be either a performative utterance or an abuse.