Originally Posted by Frownland

Way to miss my point.

Your analysis is dishonest because it's based on the assumption that sexism can only exist within an explicit denouncement along the lines of "women are inferior" as opposed to trends with clear implications. Your only "analysis" is simply the parroting one dictionary's definition.

Frankly (hehe) you'd have to be blinded by fanboyism or your own sexism not to see it in Zappa's music.

Originally Posted by jadis

Haha yeah I'm used to coming up against this wall - or others coming up against my wall - in philosophy circles. Let's say I've been the beneficiary of the "well, if we absolutely must have some random adjunct teach to our students the incomprehensible verbal diarrhea of those weird, nihilistic, godawful French homosexuals who have no interest in The Truth and Universal Logick, let us then get one of them clowns from lit studies, who had chunks on Foucault in his PhD on the likes of Blanchot and Klossowski and who reads all that garbage in the original. He regards all philosophy as no more than literature anyway, his view of language is derived from Benveniste and Barthes, not Frege and Quine, which will show our students how intellectually unserious he is, and they'll regret ever demanding courses on Foucault and come around to the sound ways" attitude...