#MeToo and Time Travel

[pmv]

"Coquettish "

Very nice word usage. I don't think the quote was out of context, I think people look for demons so much they start to accuse angels. They're similar, but very different.

Coquetry is very irritating though. It may be the flipside of creepyness. It's a French word, and it took invasion by Nazis and subsquent liberation for French women to get the vote. Coincidence? (OK, maybe it is).

You find the lyric creepy in the context of the song, or just the single lyric?

The 'drink' line in particular but really the whole general tone of wheedling with an ulterior motive not being honestly stated. It's just downright irritating as much as anything. Everything about that song I find irritating. Who cares if its cold? Don't you own a coat? It's the 1940s, my parents remembered the 1940s, it was bloody cold _inside_ much of the time, there were fuel shortages and many people (including my grandparents) couldn't afford to have the heating on.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_of_1946–47_in_the_United_Kingdom

(OK, I might be losing sight of the point here, I just am not a fan of that song)

 

[realibrad]

The 'drink' line in particular but really the whole general tone of wheedling with an ulterior motive not being honestly stated. It's just downright irritating as much as anything. Everything about that song I find irritating. Who cares if its cold? Don't you own a coat? It's the 1940s, my parents remembered the 1940s, it was bloody cold _inside_ much of the time, there were fuel shortages and many people (including my grandparents) couldn't afford to have the heating on.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_of_1946–47_in_the_United_Kingdom

(OK, I might be losing sight of the point here, I just am not a fan of that song)

You are filtering the song through the perspective of reality, rather than fantasy. The image being painted is one of a romantic fantasy where a guy is trying to get a girl to give in to what she wants and ignore social norms. You can look at it through the perspective of modern issues, but, you have to make a big leap in saying the song was about something like rape.

You look to be filling in the gaps that a song has with something nefarious.

 

[pmv]

You are filtering the song through the perspective of reality, rather than fantasy. The image being painted is one of a romantic fantasy where a guy is trying to get a girl to give in to what she wants and ignore social norms. You can look at it through the perspective of modern issues, but, you have to make a big leap in saying the song was about something like rape.

You look to be filling in the gaps that a song has with something nefarious.

I don't share your assumption that there's a dramatic dichotomy between 'modern issues' and the era of the song. It's within the lifetime of people still living, it's not, as I said, the 18th century. Clearly 'the standards of the time' argument has some validity if talking about the very distant past, but if the past is another country the recent past is a country that many of us immigrated from.

 

[Starbuck1975]

I don't share your assumption that there's a dramatic dichotomy between 'modern issues' and the era of the song. It's within the lifetime of people still living, it's not, as I said, the 18th century. Clearly 'the standards of the time' argument has some validity if talking about the very distant past, but if the past is another country the recent past is a country that many of us immigrated from.

The song was written prior to the sexual revolution. My grandmother, who was in her 20s when this song came out, has in her silver years disclosed some fun anecdotes of the flirting around societal norms regarding premarital sex that occurred when their sweethearts returned from WW2.

I’ve always interpreted the song as two consensual adults flirting with having sex at a time when prematital sex was certainly happening but also still frowned upon.

Regardless, its not a very good song.

I fear the day when the SJWs turn their gaze to the spandex laden hair metal 80s, especially any of the David Lee Roth videos.

 

[interchange]

I don't share your assumption that there's a dramatic dichotomy between 'modern issues' and the era of the song. It's within the lifetime of people still living, it's not, as I said, the 18th century. Clearly 'the standards of the time' argument has some validity if talking about the very distant past, but if the past is another country the recent past is a country that many of us immigrated from.

Go ahead and talk to someone who was of dating age in the 1940s and let me know if you think social norms have changed. I find your argument preposterous.

What I think is relevant about what you say is that many people today are going to hear this song in the context of today, and regardless of whether that has bearing on the implications of the song in the 1940s, it certainly has bearing on its implications for today. The song is being played now.

 

[realibrad]

I don't share your assumption that there's a dramatic dichotomy between 'modern issues' and the era of the song. It's within the lifetime of people still living, it's not, as I said, the 18th century. Clearly 'the standards of the time' argument has some validity if talking about the very distant past, but if the past is another country the recent past is a country that many of us immigrated from.

There are big differences though. There are connotations that people make today that were not made before. Its why art before seems funny now, because things change. Its why pussy means something different than what it used to. Gay was already brought up.

Not everyone hears that song and assumes rape. That song is very old, and I would bet that well over 90+% of people back then did not think rape when they heard that song.

 

[hal2kilo]

Extreme on either side is still extreme.

Speaking of misogyny, how bout these lyrics:

Under my thumb
The girl who once had me down
Under my thumb
The girl who once pushed me around
It's down to me
The difference in the clothes she wears
Down to me, the change has come
She's under my thumb
And ain't it the truth babe?
Under my thumb
It's a squirmin' dog who's just had her day
Under my thumb
A girl who has just changed her ways
It's down to me
Yes it is
The way she does just what she's told down to me
The change has come
She's under my thumb
Ah, ah, say it's alright
Under my thumb
It's a Siamese cat of a girl
Under my thumb
She's the sweetest, hmmm, pet in the world
It's down to me
The way she talks when she's spoken to
Down to me, the change has come
She's under my thumb
Ah, take it easy babe
Yeah
It's down to me, oh yeah
The way…

 

[realibrad]

Speaking of misogyny, how bout these lyrics:

Under my thumb
The girl who once had me down
Under my thumb
The girl who once pushed me around
It's down to me
The difference in the clothes she wears
Down to me, the change has come
She's under my thumb
And ain't it the truth babe?
Under my thumb
It's a squirmin' dog who's just had her day
Under my thumb
A girl who has just changed her ways
It's down to me
Yes it is
The way she does just what she's told down to me
The change has come
She's under my thumb
Ah, ah, say it's alright
Under my thumb
It's a Siamese cat of a girl
Under my thumb
She's the sweetest, hmmm, pet in the world
It's down to me
The way she talks when she's spoken to
Down to me, the change has come
She's under my thumb
Ah, take it easy babe
Yeah
It's down to me, oh yeah
The way…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Under_My_Thumb

The song's lyrics are an examination of a sexual power struggle, in which Jagger's lyrics celebrate the success of finally having controlled and gained leverage over a previously pushy, dominating woman. Jagger later reflected on the track in a 1995 interview: "It's a bit of a jokey number, really. It's not really an anti-feminist song any more than any of the others ... Yes, it's a caricature, and it's in reply to a girl who was a very pushy woman". For many years starting with the 1969 tour, Jagger changed the references of "girl" in the lyric to "woman".

Unhealthy relationship where originally the man was dominated in the very same way, is not dominating her. Its a story about the human condition and unhealthy relationships.

 

[Viper1j]

Speaking of misogyny, how bout these lyrics:

Under my thumb
The girl who once had me down
Under my thumb
The girl who once pushed me around
It's down to me
The difference in the clothes she wears
Down to me, the change has come
She's under my thumb
And ain't it the truth babe?
Under my thumb
It's a squirmin' dog who's just had her day
Under my thumb
A girl who has just changed her ways
It's down to me
Yes it is
The way she does just what she's told down to me
The change has come
She's under my thumb
Ah, ah, say it's alright
Under my thumb
It's a Siamese cat of a girl
Under my thumb
She's the sweetest, hmmm, pet in the world
It's down to me
The way she talks when she's spoken to
Down to me, the change has come
She's under my thumb
Ah, take it easy babe
Yeah
It's down to me, oh yeah
The way…

And listen to the girls scream..

Oppressed indeed.

 

[pmv]

Go ahead and talk to someone who was of dating age in the 1940s and let me know if you think social norms have changed. I find your argument preposterous.

What I think is relevant about what you say is that many people today are going to here this song in the context of today, and regardless of whether that has bearing on the implications of the song in the 1940s, it certainly has bearing on its implications for today. The song is being played now.

There isn't just one single 'social norm' though. Who gets to say what are the 'social norms' of any given era? That's what I'm skeptical about on general principle, having been so many times told something was 'ok by the standards of the time' when I remember the time in question (or my parents did) and remember those standards being contested even then. The disagreements might not have been noisy or noticable, not least because those who disliked the dominant norms lacked the power to say so loudly, but most of the time disagreements or silent unhappiness were there nevertheless.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Yay! More manufactured outrage!

It's the best kind.

 

[Victorian Gray]

You are filtering the song through the perspective of reality, rather than fantasy. The image being painted is one of a romantic fantasy where a guy is trying to get a girl to give in to what she wants and ignore social norms. You can look at it through the perspective of modern issues, but, you have to make a big leap in saying the song was about something like rape.

You look to be filling in the gaps that a song has with something nefarious.

He's feeding her alcohol in order to lower her inhibitions as he works incessantly at 'persuading' her to fuck him. Some people once found that 'romantic'. Most, not so much anymore. <shrug>

You can now get back to your regularly scheduled quibbling.

 

[realibrad]

He's feeding her alcohol in order to lower her inhibitions as he works incessantly at 'persuading' her to fuck him. Some people once found that 'romantic'. Most, not so much anymore. <shrug>

You can now get back to your regularly scheduled quibbling.

Being nice to someone is also a way to lower an inhibition. In the context of the song, she clearly wants to stay. You can argue that the ultimate goal is for sex, but, you cannot include every nuance of romance and courtship in a single 3 min song. She gives excuses multiple times to stay.

Here is also another comment from wikipedia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baby,_It's_Cold_Outside

"Although some critical analyses of the song have highlighted parts of the lyrics such as "What's in this drink?" and the wolf's unrelenting pressure for the mouse to stay in spite of her repeated suggestions that she should go home, others have noted that cultural expectations of the time period were such that women were not socially permitted to spend the night with a boyfriend or fiancé, and that the mouse states that she wants to stay, while "What's in this drink?" was a common idiom of the period used to rebuke social expectations by blaming one's actions on the influence of alcohol."

Strawman it all you want by making it seem like the song is about rape when its not, and that any defense of the song is a defense of rape, but you are wrong.

 

[woolfe9998]

Being nice to someone is also a way to lower an inhibition. In the context of the song, she clearly wants to stay. You can argue that the ultimate goal is for sex, but, you cannot include every nuance of romance and courtship in a single 3 min song. She gives excuses multiple times to stay.

Here is also another comment from wikipedia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baby,_It's_Cold_Outside

"Although some critical analyses of the song have highlighted parts of the lyrics such as "What's in this drink?" and the wolf's unrelenting pressure for the mouse to stay in spite of her repeated suggestions that she should go home, others have noted that cultural expectations of the time period were such that women were not socially permitted to spend the night with a boyfriend or fiancé, and that the mouse states that she wants to stay, while "What's in this drink?" was a common idiom of the period used to rebuke social expectations by blaming one's actions on the influence of alcohol."

Strawman it all you want by making it seem like the song is about rape when its not, and that any defense of the song is a defense of rape, but you are wrong.

You're probably right that the song was not intended to be about rape. But the lyrics are easily read that way by modern audiences. Does it matter what the original intent was? No one is ever going to listen to it in 1947 again.

 

[realibrad]

You're probably right that the song was not intended to be about rape. But the lyrics are easily read that way by modern audiences. Does it matter what the original intent was? No one is ever going to listen to it in 1947 again.

Intent matters when its about a Christmas song yes.

To say the song was not intended to be about rape seems to imply that how some view it makes it so. To be clear, the song in not about rape.

If we are going to view things through a lense of the worst society has to offer, then what will be left? Ambiguity will be seen as tacit support of whatever a twisted mind can come up with. What a horrible world that would be.

 

[Lanyap]

The issue though, is actually more general. It's about looking at things that occurred, or happened, or in this case, were written before, long before this demographic was even born. And trying to make the past conform to the present or the future.

Where do you draw the line? Should Frosty the Snowman be banned for "temperature shaming"? Because he's not going to last very long on a beach in Miami.

Should Rudolph the red nose reindeer be banned? Because it's insensitive to people with large noses? Wouldn't that be nose shaming?

Somebody needs to place a call to common sense, and tell it that it's vacation time is over.

Too late for poor Rudolph.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/arts...ed-reindeer-heres-why/?utm_term=.4237af511ce6

 

[Victorian Gray]

Being nice to someone is also a way to lower an inhibition. In the context of the song, she clearly wants to stay. You can argue that the ultimate goal is for sex, but, you cannot include every nuance of romance and courtship in a single 3 min song. She gives excuses multiple times to stay.

Here is also another comment from wikipedia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baby,_It's_Cold_Outside

"Although some critical analyses of the song have highlighted parts of the lyrics such as "What's in this drink?" and the wolf's unrelenting pressure for the mouse to stay in spite of her repeated suggestions that she should go home, others have noted that cultural expectations of the time period were such that women were not socially permitted to spend the night with a boyfriend or fiancé, and that the mouse states that she wants to stay, while "What's in this drink?" was a common idiom of the period used to rebuke social expectations by blaming one's actions on the influence of alcohol."

Strawman it all you want by making it seem like the song is about rape when its not, and that any defense of the song is a defense of rape, but you are wrong.

Dude, I don't give shit what Wiki has to say about the song. I've been hearing it since I was a kid in the 50's. By the time I was about 10 I'd figured out what the song was all about because I saw the living examples of the behavior all around me, in real life, tv, movies, books....

It's as I originally stated, he wants to get fucked and that's the way society said you got to fuck women. Get 'em drunk and wear down their scruples and it was called "seduction".

 

[Zorba]

You find the lyric creepy in the context of the song, or just the single lyric?

As I said in my first two posts. It is easy to see the whole song as either creepy or a testimate to how women's sexuality was viewed in the 1940s that it would be better for her to risk her life in a blizzard than stay at a man's house.

The one line that makes it slant more to the creep side for me is "Say, what's in this drink" and no response. Maybe it is because she likes it, maybe because she thinks it was roofied.

 

[woolfe9998]

Intent matters when its about a Christmas song yes.

To say the song was not intended to be about rape seems to imply that how some view it makes it so. To be clear, the song in not about rape.

If we are going to view things through a lense of the worst society has to offer, then what will be left? Ambiguity will be seen as tacit support of whatever a twisted mind can come up with. What a horrible world that would be.

No one knows what the original intent was. Most people will never read that wiki you keep citing. And young people may not even know the vintage of the song, particularly since it keeps getting covered by modern artists.

Look, I'm not for any kind of censorship. But I do get why some people think the song is creepy.

 

[Zaap]

it's the same thing with Money For Nothing. It wasn't offensive enough to censor it back in the 80's but it is now. In fact it was banned here in Canada a few years ago.

That's just stupid. The whole point of that song is it's from the perspective of some loudmouth watching videos and blathering clueless nonsense about them. It was from an actual experience Mark Knopfler had. Amazing anyone would have a stick so far up their ass to ban that because oh noes he didn't sensor what the bad man said. That kind of thing truly is the fucking death of art.

As for Baby It's Cold Outside...

Meh.

Personally I think it's kind of a stupid song that doesn't really deserve the fame it's enjoyed even this long. It could fade off into obscurity and I wouldn't shed a tear.

Does it even qualify as a Christmas Song? It actually has shit-all to do with Christmas or any other holiday- it's just the story of a hard up dude trying to get a chick to stay over. I guess "Cold Outside" automatically means Christmas or something? Who added that crap to the Christmas song must-play playlist in the first place? Promote an ACTUAL Christmas/Holiday song to replace it.

 

[Perknose]

The one line that makes it slant more to the creep side for me is "Say, what's in this drink" and no response. Maybe it is because she likes it, maybe because she thinks it was roofied.

Anachronistic term for the song. In the 40s, the term would be "slipped a mickey."

 

[Jaskalas]

Commendation to @realibrad for showing us an interpretation of the song, and likely the correct original intent from the 1940s.

This subject can wander, but a good chunk of it comes down to a defining question:
How should this song be viewed, from the lens of which time period?

Time changes social norms, and this isn't some cult classic on which society would stand their ground. Is there cause for us to defend an honest and innocent creation? Or is there some greater ill derived from reinterpreting and shunning age old things by using today's standards? Should we instead honor today's women whose experiences of being pressured prior to being forced are all to common and familiar?

 

[pmv]

Speaking of misogyny, how bout these lyrics:

Under my thumb
The girl who once had me down
Under my thumb
The girl who once pushed me around
It's down to me
The difference in the clothes she wears
Down to me, the change has come
She's under my thumb
And ain't it the truth babe?
Under my thumb
It's a squirmin' dog who's just had her day
Under my thumb
A girl who has just changed her ways
It's down to me
Yes it is
The way she does just what she's told down to me
The change has come
She's under my thumb
Ah, ah, say it's alright
Under my thumb
It's a Siamese cat of a girl
Under my thumb
She's the sweetest, hmmm, pet in the world
It's down to me
The way she talks when she's spoken to
Down to me, the change has come
She's under my thumb
Ah, take it easy babe
Yeah
It's down to me, oh yeah
The way…

Surely "Brown Sugar" is worse?

There are loads of them, though (songs whose lyrics are actually kind-of dodgy). It's more of a problem when, as with the Rolling Stones, they are arguably decent bits of music (unlike the annoying ditty the thread is about). Though the questionable nature of lyrics like Brown Sugar is one reason why it was a long time before I grudgingly admitted the Rolling Stones aren't bad. Hated them back in the post-punk era and people pointing out the sexist or racist lyircs was just grist to that mill. But then subsequent generations turned out every bit as problematic so that bit of puritanical punk ideology went down the toilet.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Intent matters when its about a Christmas song yes.

To say the song was not intended to be about rape seems to imply that how some view it makes it so. To be clear, the song in not about rape.

If we are going to view things through a lense of the worst society has to offer, then what will be left? Ambiguity will be seen as tacit support of whatever a twisted mind can come up with. What a horrible world that would be.

I find the Van Halen song “Jump” triggering as it promotes suicide...might as well jump...go ahead and jump.

The citizenry of “Paradise City” need to check their privilege and ease up on their water use. Do you know how much chemical runoff there must be the maintain that green grass?

 

[pmv]

Being nice to someone is also a way to lower an inhibition. In the context of the song, she clearly wants to stay. You can argue that the ultimate goal is for sex, but, you cannot include every nuance of romance and courtship in a single 3 min song. She gives excuses multiple times to stay.

Here is also another comment from wikipedia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baby,_It's_Cold_Outside

"Although some critical analyses of the song have highlighted parts of the lyrics such as "What's in this drink?" and the wolf's unrelenting pressure for the mouse to stay in spite of her repeated suggestions that she should go home, others have noted that cultural expectations of the time period were such that women were not socially permitted to spend the night with a boyfriend or fiancé, and that the mouse states that she wants to stay, while "What's in this drink?" was a common idiom of the period used to rebuke social expectations by blaming one's actions on the influence of alcohol."

Strawman it all you want by making it seem like the song is about rape when its not, and that any defense of the song is a defense of rape, but you are wrong.

But the fact that the prevailing ideology then said 'good girls don't have sex and/or don't drink alcohol' so a woman might have to collude with the fiction that she didn't really want to be doing those things and was being tricked into doing so (which is an obvious interpretation of the song), is one of the things that makes the song horribly dated. That was a dodgy ideology, not least because it was awkwardly compatible with rapey attitudes from the menfolk and could provide a cover for them. The two went together, though it's hard to say how much of one and how much of the other is present in something like this song.

That's why people decided to move on from that ideology. The thing is, there was always, even then, some awareness among some people, that something wasn't right about it.

I just think in general the idea that one can just declare 'different times, different values' and leave it at that ignores how complex the question is - what determines how and why 'values change' anyway? Do the new values just magically appear from nowhere?

(Then there's a separate, also tricky, question of what you do with cultural artifacts that embody attitudes that are no longer the dominant ones...I absolutely don't think they should all be thrown out entirely, incidentally, but the problem should at least be acknowledged).