Yes there are many ways it can be taken. A little thing like CONTEXT drives one to a certain interpretation. She was found to be with child BEFORE THEY CAME TOGETHER makes no sense unless the coming together was sexual intercourse. Before they lived together? That doesn't prohibit one from being a father of a child. Context says that Joseph and Mary had a normal relationship.
That's not what the Gospel says. It says that +Jospeh "took" Mary for a wife. The Greek term (parelamben) in the original has a rainbow of meanings, all of which are applicable, and not all even suggest what you are suggesting.
It has already been explained that in the CONTEXT of times caretaker marriages were not uncommon, and also in the CONTEXT of the earliest patristic teachings no one taught what the Protestants teach today, and it has been explained that in the CONTEXT of the Judaic culture the terms brothers did not necessarily mean full-blood siblings and no one from the earliest days of the Church taught otherwise.
In the CONTEXT of things, there is not a single critique of the Protoevangelium of James, calling it heresy, fraud or something out of context of the times, culture and beliefs. Yet it was not deemed to be inspired by the Church, even though the church would have had every reason to wish it inspired. But certainly it did not proclaim anything that was contrary to the times, as understood in the CONTEXT of the times when it was written.
If anyone is taking things out of context it is the heterodox Protestant community, quite unlike even the very founders of Protestant heresy, Luther, Calvin Zwigili, etc. who held on to more traditional and correct teachings regarding Mary and the Lord's half-brothers and half-sisters.