Shit, sorry... I missed that one. It's actually important because you confuse these two things (structure and metphor; universal and particular) all the way through your argument.
The structure in this incidence is (a) binary (male:female - seaside:island-side) and (b) reflexive (as in, it can observe itself at work - in the guise of the anthropologist - some argue this is polluting). This is the Universal at work.
The metaphor is the singular case (male is to seaside as female is to island-side).
^^^^^^^ CB: The binary opposition is the binary opposition. The metaphor is the identifying of the relationship between males and females in general with the relationship of the island and seasides of the island in general. The structure _is_ the metaphorical identification.
The metaphor male is to female as seaside is to island side.
I'm not in the least confused :>)
^^^^^^^^
This is the confusion you're stumbling on times and again.
What Levi-Strauss and the Structuralists argue that metaphor and structure are inhernetly linked - but structure (binary, tertiary etc) comes first. Computer scientists would argue the same thing. Binary first - then code.
^^^^^^ CB: Once you get to two binary oppositions related, you have a structure and a metaphor.
^^^^^^^^
NB: my main response was posted prior to this and is awaiting moderation because its too long - sorry if this comes up first.