How “Baby It’s Cold Outside” May Be Out in the Cold

[felser]

39 minutes ago, Kevin Bresnahan said:

True, but we do need to be a way more understanding that others might not appreciate it, nor do we need to celebrate it. How do you think a lot of the "Me Too" women feel about that song? It seems like almost every Christmas CD today has a version of "Baby It's Cold Outside". As I said earlier, "Say, what's in this drink," with what just happened to Bill Cosby, is probably upsetting to any woman who has really been roofied.

Amen.  Two women in my close extended family, generation down from me, have been rape victims, and both still wear the psychic scars from it every day.  Something that was seen as cute and funny in 1944 can be seen as offensive in 2018. In this case, that represents growth in our culture  I don't have a problem with anyone who wants to perform or listen to the song, but I have no desire to do either.

1 minute ago, JSngry said:

An objective, historically aware reading of that lyric would allow for it just being an indication that the drink was stronger than expected, and she didn't put it down or throw it out, but instead kept sipping and flirting.

But you're right, in today's environment, there's another and quite different lens to see that through, and I say that should be respected.

But here's a radical notion - why don't we have a discussion about how flirting is disappearing as a valid method of initiating a relationship, and why is that? Maybe it's the decades of free porn making men feel entitled and women feel obligated, and oh yeah, what could possible go wrong with that as it imprints itself across several generations? What could possibly go wrong?

We'll not have that conversation anytime soon, will we? We're too far gone.

 

Yes, our actions and choices, as individuals and as a culture, have consequences.

[JSngry]

I think it's a really fatal consequence that flirting has, understandably so, become obsolete as a viable interaction. Men have collectively fucked it up by not having any respect for the dignity of themselves or of women. They don't get that "closing the deal" as the ultimate success is a poisonous attitude when it comes to interpersonal interactions. They've become killers, killers of possibilities, killers of nuance, killers of joy. Kill or be killed, my what a wonderful world this is.

So here we are!

[Dave James]

History is littered with things that wouldn't even get off the dime in today's environment.  Ever listened to Amos & Andy, watched Butterfly McQueen or Mantan Moreland, eaten at Little Black Sambo's or Coon Chicken?  Even a relatively recent film like Blazing Saddles couldn't get made today.  Point being, then was then and now is now.  Someone much wiser than I once said that the past is like a foreign country...things look different there.  There's plenty to worry about today.  Overlaying the past with the present shouldn't be one of them.

Edited December 18, 2018 by Dave James

[mjzee]

29 minutes ago, Dave James said:

Even a relatively recent film like Blazing Saddles couldn't get made today.

True, but you were still able to watch and enjoy Blazing Saddles.  By the logic being applied to "Baby It's Cold Outside," you soon won't be able to see Blazing Saddles on TV.  From there, it's a short step to Warner Bros. no longer making it available on DVD.  Down the memory hole.  Don't underestimate how destructive this movement is to your being able to speak and think freely.

1 hour ago, JSngry said:

Men have collectively fucked it up by not having any respect for the dignity of themselves or of women.

Your collective description of all men is dehumanizing and offensive.

1 hour ago, felser said:

Something that was seen as cute and funny in 1944 can be seen as offensive in 2018.

Who gets to determine what is and isn't offensive?  And should the few be allowed to tyrannize the many?

[JSngry]

9 minutes ago, mjzee said:

Your collective description of all men is dehumanizing and offensive.

Yes, I forget how endangered men are these days. These men's rights things are not happening in a vacuum. ATTENTION MUST BE PAID!!!

Therefore I apologize to all men. Every last one of them, past, present, and future, noble, despicable, or basically nondescript.

Sorry guys! Keep your penises safe!

56 minutes ago, Dave James said:

Mantan Moreland

Now there's a complicated character. I've seen him in a buttload of Charlie Chan movies, and if you can forget about racism in America and look at the comedic contracts in the mathematical/abstract, that's often some funny shit. But of course, there was racism, still is, most likely always will be, and then the question is fairly asked if these constructs in their specific execution would have existed at all if not for racism, and there you gotta say probably not.

But then you see Moreland paired with Ben Carter (and later Nipsey Russell) both in the Chan films, and that's some funny shit, period.

And then, years later, you get THIS (NSFW) and you gotta think it's one of the biggest Fuck You Final Acts in the history of the world!

If that band is live, add it to the list with Jimmy Lynch.

[Kevin Bresnahan]

1 hour ago, mjzee said:

True, but you were still able to watch and enjoy Blazing Saddles.  By the logic being applied to "Baby It's Cold Outside," you soon won't be able to see Blazing Saddles on TV.  From there, it's a short step to Warner Bros. no longer making it available on DVD.  Down the memory hole.  Don't underestimate how destructive this movement is to your being able to speak and think freely.

You mean like, soon you won't be able to hear "Money For Nothing" with the line, "That little faggot, he's a millionaire"? This is already true. It's not played on the radio any more.

[JSngry]

I think it's funny that some people think that evolution reaches a final conclusion and then STOPS and/or that there isn't collateral damage in the process.

[mjzee]

I think it's silly to assume that everyone reacts in the same way to situations.  I was reminded of that by last week's New Yorker, which reprinted an article by Nora Ephron from 2006, in which she writes about her life in the sixties and afterwards.  It's a time capsule, to be sure.  But read the third paragraph, and the tone of the article as a whole.  Do she or her friends seem damaged by their encounters?  Indeed, would that culture have been widespread if women were all getting damaged in the process?  And btw, should this article now be dropped into the memory hole for its inconvenient anecdotes?

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2006/02/13/serial-monogamy

[felser]

1 hour ago, mjzee said:

 

1 hour ago, mjzee said:

Who gets to determine what is and isn't offensive?  And should the few be allowed to tyrannize the many?

I would ask you the same question on who gets to determine what is and isn't offensive.  Just those who take no offense to something?  Don't I get to determine what is offensive to me?  Doesn't a woman get to determine what is offensive to them? Denying someone the right to express that offense becomes its own form of censorship.  Censorship comes from both the Left and the Right.   And I don't see any tyranny involved here.  No one on this thread is lobbying for the stupid "Baby, It's Cold Outside" song to be banned, just calling it out for what it appears to be in 2018.    And certainly "Blazing Saddles" could get met today.  Since when does perceived offensiveness stop Hollywood movies from getting made, if they are seen as something that will sell tickets?

18 minutes ago, JSngry said:

I think it's funny that some people think that evolution reaches a final conclusion and then STOPS and/or that there isn't collateral damage in the process.

24 minutes ago, Kevin Bresnahan said:

You mean like, soon you won't be able to hear "Money For Nothing" with the line, "That little faggot, he's a millionaire"? This is already true. It's not played on the radio any more.

"Eight Miles High", a record a million times better than "Money for Nothing", was banned because it was incorrectly accused of being a "drug" song.  Why no protest over that? Certainly, Mark Knopfler knew full well in 1984 he would be hitting a hot button with that line.  He chose to go there, and decisions have consequences.  I never did like the song, or the album musically, apart from the line.  It represented the dumbing down of his lyrics, which had been at times fairly profound up to that point, and of his music.  'Brothers in Arms' was the death of Dire Straits to me, who I really loved before that.  And yet, 'Brothers in Arms' is by far the top-selling Dire Straits /Mark Knopfler album.

Edited December 17, 2018 by felser

[lipi]

 

2 hours ago, mjzee said:

True, but you were still able to watch and enjoy Blazing Saddles.  By the logic being applied to "Baby It's Cold Outside," you soon won't be able to see Blazing Saddles on TV.  From there, it's a short step to Warner Bros. no longer making it available on DVD.  Down the memory hole.  Don't underestimate how destructive this movement is to your being able to speak and think freely.

14 hours ago, Big Beat Steve said:

“Do we get to a point where human worth, warmth and romance are illegal?” the conservative commentator Tucker Carlson argued on Fox News. (never mind whether Fox or "conservative" might discredit the statement with some)

Hey, oy, hold on there kiddos: that's textbook slippery slope fallacy, both of you. (Not that I would expect any better from Fox.)

15 hours ago, Big Beat Steve said:

[other stuff] Off the radar of the morally zealous because those niche musics are off THEIR radar? Or should we indeed imagine that for once they realized those lyrics need to be seen in the context of their times?

Or how abut screening rap lyrics for P.C.? Or do they get a free pass each time because it's rap? German-language forumists may remember the (quite understandable) outrage caused by the award-winning (!) lyrics of German-language rappers Kollegah & Farid Bang a couple of months ago. And this was TODAY!

OK, I honestly don't mean to just pick on you, Steve (this whole thread is just a bunch of old men whining about how the patriarchy really isn't what it used to be, so imagine my ranting at (nearly) all of you), but WTH is that first sentence? You're rhetorically asking, in other words stating, "they're not upset about this other music because they don't know this other music exists, the philistines!" It's a bit difficult to be upset about, or have any opinion on, something you have not encountered, so it appears like you think lack of musical knowledge makes someone ineligible of having their feelings hurt. I hope that's not the case.

And the second paragraph I'm quoting is another textbook example of a logical fallacy: this time it's a fallacy of relative privation, with a bit of false dichotomy implied. That there is rap music that is or is not offensive is irrelevant here. (As to your implied "but the same people love rap" statement: onus probandi.

As to the "it's about alcohol

Seriously, though, I'm embarrassed to be a male of the species after reading this thread.

Edited December 17, 2018 by lipi

[mjzee]

 

[Dan Gould]

23 minutes ago, lipi said:

 

(this whole thread is just a bunch of old men whining about how the patriarchy really isn't what it used to be, so imagine my ranting at (nearly) all of you),

You mean the future really is female? And intersectional? There aren't enough eye rolls available.

On a separate question, I disagree with Felser, Blazing Saddles never gets made today. No way no how.  In fact I was watching Beverly Hills Cop just yesterday and my wife and I were agreeing that the scene in the private club ("and that Mr. Maitland should see his own physician before things start fallin' off on the man") would never ever get made today. Yet it is in my opinion a Top Five Eddie Murphy screen moment.

[lipi]

5 minutes ago, Dan Gould said:

You mean the future really is female? And intersectional? There aren't enough eye rolls available.

No, I mean the future should not be the shameless patriarchy that the 20th century was. And if you fail to see that, I cry for you, but smile in the knowledge that conservatism has never stood on the correct side of history.

[JSngry]

2 hours ago, mjzee said:

  Indeed, would that culture have been widespread if women were all getting damaged in the process?

Well, there is that. But there's also the next microtone from that, which is "if women have been getting damaged, why haven't they been speaking out" which runs smack into well, here they are, they aRE speaking out, and then you do what, tell them to SDASTFUB?

Let the voices speak and be heard, let those with ears to hear hear, and let's let this shit get right, or at least more right, because humans will NEVER get anything compeltly right, that's just not how shit is wired.

But personally, I kinda miss being able to flirt in an appropriate manner, not because I want to fuck every woman, but because if I find a woman do be a delightfully attractive individual (and so many of them are, ya' know, just delightful, not for sex, but just wonderfully attractive, period), I like that nice level of friendship where people can be comfortable with acknowledging the delightfulness of each other.

but why don't you want to do that with another man?, you might say. Easy - men are disgusting pigs. If I wanted more of that, I'd live alone and regale myself with myself. Or live a life of modern porn. Same thing.

And having said all that (and meaning it) I will also say that you can have my Ray Charles/Betty Carter record (and my god, what does it say that NOBODY uses that record as an example of creepiness - or plays it at Christmas time? WTF? White and/or Young People, WTF???) when you pry it from my cold dead turntable and CD player.

And I mean that too. Useless is the brush that paints with only one stroke.

[Dave James]

4 hours ago, Dan Gould said:

You mean the future really is female? And intersectional? There aren't enough eye rolls available.

 

Does anyone really believe that we wouldn't be better off with women running the government?  Men have had well over a hundred years to get things right and haven't come close.  

[Scott Dolan]

I can't imagine how a specific gender running government would be a difference maker. How about simply better people running government? 

 

[Dan Gould]

10 hours ago, lipi said:

No, I mean the future should not be the shameless patriarchy that the 20th century was. And if you fail to see that, I cry for you, but smile in the knowledge that conservatism has never stood on the correct side of history.

There you have it folks.  As Charles Krauthammer put it,

The right thinks the opposition is deluded.

The left thinks the opposition is evil.

[Brad]

Sorry I unleashed this discussion as it's now become a little heated and political. 

[Teasing the Korean]

2 hours ago, Brad said:

Sorry I unleashed this discussion as it's now become a little heated and political. 

No apology necessary, but how else could the conversation have progressed?  Banning art for political reasons is inherently a political topic. 

[Kevin Bresnahan]

3 hours ago, Teasing the Korean said:

No apology necessary, but how else could the conversation have progressed?  Banning art for political reasons is inherently a political topic. 

Interesting... I've never heard of a discussion of date rape being political before.

[Teasing the Korean]

7 minutes ago, Kevin Bresnahan said:

Interesting... I've never heard of a discussion of date rape being political before.

Please read my post.  Banning the song is political.  

[Scott Dolan]

Is it truly political, or is it cultural/societal?

Honest question. I feel it’s more the latter. A cultural awakening or maturing? I mean, cultural/societal evolution isn’t necessarily political, is it?

[Kevin Bresnahan]

Just now, Teasing the Korean said:

Please read my post.  Banning the song is political.  

Banning this particular song, if it were to happen, is not political. It's moral. At least it should be. I don't care if you're a (D), (R) or (I), you should be aware that some women are offended by it.

People don't talk about murder or theft and talk about how the left or the right supports it. It's apolitical. Ditto date rape.

[Teasing the Korean]

10 minutes ago, Kevin Bresnahan said:

Banning this particular song, if it were to happen, is not political. It's moral. At least it should be. I don't care if you're a (D), (R) or (I), you should be aware that some women are offended by it.

People don't talk about murder or theft and talk about how the left or the right supports it. It's apolitical. Ditto date rape.

Let's agree to disagree.  I consider it to be a political act to ban (or to try to ban) art.  And I don't believe that awareness of a topic retroactively changes the meaning of a lyric written to convey something else.

My wife, who a very much a feminist, is opening her annual Holiday radio show with this song.  She thinks the entire controversy is as absurd as I do. 

[Big Beat Steve]

13 minutes ago, Kevin Bresnahan said:

 Ditto date rape.

If the only possibility of interpreting the lyrics of this song WAS "date rape". Which IMHO it isn't.

(For the record, I find the recordings of this song that I am aware of to be just boring).