Weinstein Critical Review (Set 2, #1)

Weinstein's investigation of the origins, practices, and values of the metal subculture, while wonderfully thorough and detailed, is unfortunately painfully long to read, even for a fan of the genre. Her insight on the origins of the metal subculture being a coherent synthesis of biker and hippie culture was interesting, as was tracing back the four core values of metal: male, youth, whiteness, blue-collarness. One of the greatest strengths of this article is the fine distinctions it makes, for example between metal audience and metal subculture, women who emulate male style and women who take on "bitch-whore" music video roles, and memorizing lyrics versus understanding the meaning of lyrics. Another strength of the article is that it takes nothing for granted, backing up statements with hard evidence, and not drawing conclusions where there is not sufficient evidence (i.e. the correlation/causation of metal, stoner culture, and bad behavior in students). Overall she paints a very detailed portrait of the metal subculture as a strong, enduring, steadfast, (in some ways, but not in others) united force, and captures a lot of its nuances.

Question: Do you think the author is to harsh with her observation that most fans don't really understand heavy metal lyrics?  Is it a different scenario than other genres?