Mamet's Buffalo is a dud

I read American Buffalo today. I didn't really enjoy it. I didn't hate it either. It left me unmoved.

I am starting to become aware of a masculine bias to theatrical history in a way that is almost becoming a physical recoil. I could tell from the very first page that this play was not going to communicate anything of relevance to me.  

At a very basic level, you could say it is blokey, but I like Glengarry Glen Ross and The Cryptogram so it is not Mamet I don't like per se. This play, however, almost seems to go out of its way to alienate female reception.

All of the information I have looked at on the web talk about the relationships between the men, loyalty, and belief systems.  There are characters in this play, though, which are never seen or heard, but are absolutely crucial to the the story. Fletcher (although he is more of a object than a real person), and Ruthie and Grace.

Ruthie and Grace are mentioned constantly throughout the play and appear to be pivotal, but they are despised and derided although it is never made clear why. They are lesbians apparently, but that doesn't seem especially relevant to the ideas under discussion. For me this is the great weakness of the play despite it's brilliance in technical play writing. (It also seem to me to be the greatest weakness of all the writings and analysis associated with the play).

As with his other works, this play was touted and lauded but I can't help wondering how much of that was true because the world - especially the arts world - was an inviolable patriarchy. It intrigues me to ponder whether this play would have seen the light of day in the slightly less gender biased scene of the modern era.