Frank Zappa Appreciation Thread

[The Batlord]

Hey ain't nuthin nerdy bout this prime cut of ... Oh.

[Terrapin_Station]

Originally Posted by Frownland

Irony alert.



Do you think I care about your leading questions?

I don't think you care about asking questions that require you to think critically, no. Doesn't hurt to ask though, in the off-chance that you'd actually answer.

Originally Posted by Guybrush

No (though Gail didn't approve), but the lyrics coupled with the stories make it seem like he didn't really respect women.

From his secretary:

Butcher moved to the US and became his full-time secretary, despite the lack of convention with which the role was first suggested to her: "Do you think if we ****ed, you could still work for me as my secretary?" Zappa asked.

...

But gradually she began to experience moments of clarity. When Butcher heard one of the "Mothers" – the members of Zappa's backing band, the Mothers of Invention – say he felt sorry for one groupie because she had been with three different musicians on consecutive nights, she became irritated, since the men who behaved that way were congratulated for "scoring". Or as she says, with understatement: "I began to notice the double-standard."

Butcher was upset when Zappa did not see her point of view. Something clicked in her mind when she saw feminist campaigners in the news. "I saw a banner that said: 'Love me less, respect me more.' And I just thought: 'Yes. That's it.'" Butcher read Kate Millett's Sexual Politics, which came as a revelation to her, as it did to many women at that time. Excitedly, she told Zappa what she had realised. "I thought he'd be sympathetic, but he wasn't, completely the opposite."

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/music/20...nk-zappa-women

I'm sure I've read he for a while used to give trophies to groupies for ****ing him, which also seems a little narcissistic and condescending.

So, on your view, you respect women by not wanting to have sex with them, presumably because in your view, women don't really want to have sex as much as guys do.

[Frownland]

Originally Posted by Terrapin_Station

I don't think you care about asking questions that prop up the hang up I'm introducing into this conversation, no. Doesn't hurt to ask though, in the off-chance that you'd actually help me out and pull on my ding dong.

You got that right.

Answer your own question with the stance you're clearly attempting to introduce instead of trying to lead me into some dumb gotcha. I know the game dude.

[Guybrush]

Originally Posted by Terrapin_Station

So, on your view, you respect women by not wanting to have sex with them, presumably because in your view, women don't really want to have sex as much as guys do.

No. Are you even making an effort to understand my point of view? Treat the discussion with some respect, please.

[Terrapin_Station]

Originally Posted by Guybrush

No. Are you even making an effort to understand my point of view? Treat the discussion with some respect, please.

So what's not "respectful" about saying something like ""Do you think if we ****ed, you could still work for me as my secretary?"

Originally Posted by Frownland

You got that right.

Answer your own question with the stance you're clearly attempting to introduce instead of trying to lead me into some dumb gotcha. I know the game dude.

I'm inquiring about your semantics (philosophy of meaning). I can't answer for myself what your semantics is.

[Frownland]

...I clarified it for you already. Read the sentence you're contesting again. It's on you if that's outside of your comprehension tbh.

[Guybrush]

Originally Posted by Terrapin_Station

So what's not "respectful" about saying something like ""Do you think if we ****ed, you could still work for me as my secretary?"

He is her boss, right? Is it okay for a boss in this situation to pressure an employee into sex? Because I think any sane person would start to wonder what it would mean for her future employment and relationship with her boss if she were to turn him down.

As an employer, this is obviously gross to me and is a big part of what stirred the #metoo movement to begin with. Where have you been?

[Terrapin_Station]

Originally Posted by Frownland

...I clarified it for you already. Read the sentence you're contesting again. It's on you if that's outside of your comprehension tbh.

You believe that something you wrote already presents a philosophy of meaning/an account of just how meaning works ontologically?

[Frownland]

Originally Posted by Terrapin_Station

You believe that something you wrote already presents a philosophy of meaning/an account of just how meaning works ontologically?

I believe that you're either too dishonest or dumb to understand the clarifications of sexism I've laid out here.

[Terrapin_Station]

Originally Posted by Guybrush

He is her boss, right? Is it okay for a boss in this situation to pressure an employee into sex? Because I think any sane person would start to wonder what it would mean for her future employment and relationship with her boss if she were to turn him down.

As an employer, this is obviously gross to me and is a big part of what stirred the #metoo movement to begin with. Where have you been?

First, isn't this a different question than whether someone is being "respected"?

Secondly, is anything a boss asks an employee about socially something that is or that should be read as social pressuring, and as something that would be tied to the job? Or are just some things that? Which things and why?