gendered reading (also book #36)

#36 is Alternatives to Sex by Stephen McCauley.

The discussion of gender and reading that's been going on at Phantom's and Laura's (far more articulate and insightful than anything I'm about to write) made me think about this book, and the rest of Stephen McCauley's work, in that context. I'm surprisingly fond of his writing, given that I'd describe it as chick lit for gay men. Or, at least, about gay men. I'd be interested to know what kind of demographics his readers cover, actually. (Are straight men as reluctant to read about gay men as they seem to be to read about women? Are gay men more willing to read books that are domestic in content?) There are some spoilers below, but nothing you couldn't predict from a working knowledge of the narrative conventions of chick lit.

This book, like most of those by Stephen McCauley, contains many of the conventions of a chick lit novel, yet somehow it manages to appear more literary. The protagonist likes his clothes and frequently name drops the designers, he's rather less than assertive and is self-conscious about his appearance. More damningly, the ending of the book becomes obvious the instant the (supposedly platonic) male best friend is introduced. Along the way, he has to sleep with a string of unsuitable men (although he has far more casual sex than a heroine is likely to get away with), finally gain the upper hand with his long-time crush, realise he's not interested after all, discover the best friend's "boyfriend" was just a ploy to make him jealous, realise he's in love with the best friend, mistakenly give the best friend the impression that he's in love with the crush, disabuse the best friend of said impression and go to some great length to prove his love.
With all that, how does it not seem like a Bridget Jones clone? (He even takes notes in a decidedly Bridget-ish manner: "dinner w/ happy couple at Indian restaurant - Charlotte radiant"). Is it merely the fact that he throws in some social commentary regarding 9/11 and stops the book just shy of the inevitable happy ending (but not before making it clear that it is in fact inevitable)? Does it seem less cliched just because the couple isn't divided into stereotypical masculine and feminine halves? If it were written by a woman with a female protagonist, would they slap a pastel cartoon of a woman shopping on the cover?
I've been trying to think of a book by a woman that treads a similarly fine line and I'm not sure I can think of one (perhaps The Girls' Guide to Hunting and Fishing?). Am I just being influenced by the pink covers they're all cursed with? The fact that this author/character is a man and therefore his musings on love are more serious? I can think of examples of more literary love stories by women, but they seem further removed from the chick lit stereotype than this. Do women have to more studiously avoid the chick lit conventions in order to be taken seriously?
Am I just trying to justify my enjoyment of the book by claiming it's literary? Maybe, but I'm not ashamed to admit that I enjoy Marian Keyes without pretending her books are literature (okay, maybe a little ashamed, but they are better than most of the genre, I think...). When I first read a Stephen McCauley book, though, I was just looking for some lightweight, romantic fluff to read and was surprised to find something more substantial (The Object of My Affection had just been made into a Jennifer Aniston romantic comedy - how could it be literature?).
Anyone else read any Stephen McCauley? Also, since my post seems to be entirely questions, anyone have any thoughts or answers?