I agree that it's very important. That's what actual literary analysis is all about. But the thing is, although there are certain things you "can't get away with" now that you could then, that does not mean that there was no racism/sexism/what-have-you in the olden days. It was just really, really embedded. So why not engage it? Why not say "yeah, you have a point, but blah blah blah"? People get really knee-jerky when someone brings up this kind of thing - especially a young person reading with modern social norms, who picks something up and says, "holy shit, this is really offensive to me." But I think it's important that there is conversation about this sort of thing, that people who aren't offended for whatever reason doesn't just say "pah, your concerns are meaningless." I hate to get alarmist, but it's not good for the genre, or critical analysis given a world that is constantly evolving.

Some people made the point you're making in the article's comments, which I think is good, and y'know, probably the most interesting comment in the whole thing was some guy who rambled on about the more progressive aspects of Conan + the deeper philosophical meanings of the plots. I often find myself making those same kinds of points in defending Heart of Darkness, although I will admit it's a tricky line to walk (partly because HoD is something I would think only people who are old enough to handle the text would read - it's not "entertainment"). But a lot more people just shrugged and basically conceded her point, and said it didn't matter - sure, it's racist, who cares? That's what I think is a problem.