orichalcum

counterpoint the surrealism of the underlying metaphor! ;-D

I ran into a lot of writing like that in WMST. Stick with your style. It will be what wins out in the long run because people can stand to read it!

i'm scared that i understood that. i mean, what the author is saying is that despite the fact that the female agency just talked about might have been allowed because it was to a male's benefit, it is still a useful example for the author's argument (and I assume the next sentence will say why it is useful...)

based on personal experience, you will get published if you write clearly, or at least, write with fairly big words without actual technical jargon-babble, like my translation above.

In law, we run into this thinking all the time. "Must use jargon if people are to take us seriously." But judges and juries don't like the technobabble and the best thing is just to write clearly and concisely. I suspect it's the same thing with academia to some extent, but with much more artifice. When something is erudite and clear, people really appreciate it. Deliberately jargonized and obfuscated stuff like your quote is the refuge of the insecure who are afraid that that their ideas won't be taken seriously unless they jump on the jargon bandwagon. I'm sure it's very well received by equally insecure academics. But I would hope academia isn't so shallow as to discount something because it's well-written. I'm sure it's just a matter of finding the right people who appreciate it.