Unfortunately, that sweet back story of the song’s origin
bears absolutely no relevance to the current discourse - or the representation
of the lyrics in the film clip. I dare say that, as a man “you don’t get it” and
are missing the point.
The scrutiny of this song can only be understood within the context of the
global culture of rape-a very real horror that overwhelmingly impacts women,
and which we are done staying silent about. Much like “a gun doesn’t kill people”
yet we agree we need gun control, so the song may seem innocent enough for the
time it was written, but in fact, it is insidious and should be retired…we’ve
grown beyond that sentiment.
If you are doubtful, tell me, would you accuse Jews of overreacting to the use
of swastikas as public decorations? After all, they are ancient Hindu symbol
for good luck and prosperity. Should we still allow the Confederate flag to
fly, knowing it represents a political platform that advocated for the
continued practice of enslaving blacks?
Further, to suggest that the existence of a female version of the song reflects
some sort of equity, when considered against the backdrop of a global culture
of rape, is at best ignorant. To overlook the inherent physical power dominance
of men over women is equally hard to fathom and at worst willfully selectively
ignorant. It is intimidating to a woman for a man to block her from leaving,
much as it would be for a man to be faced with a person with a weapon; that’s
how we experience it...as a physical threat to our safety - and yes, we have
learned how to play nice to get out unscathed.
Consider also the current subculture of the “involuntarily celibate” where
young men gather online to bemoan the injustice of not getting laid, and who
feel justified in killing people because those bitch women won’t fuck
them. https://www.economist.com/.../an-involuntary-celibate...
Also consider the very real context of a professed pussy grabber in the highest
office in the land, and that legislation has been introduced that would give a
woman’s rapists right to an unborn child. All this is very visceral and real
for women. Not empty threats at all. https://www.cnn.com/.../arkansas-abortion-law.../index.html
As I said to you personally earlier, there is a wisdom to listening. There is a
time for people who aren’t a part of a marginalized group to be silent and
listen rather than hoist their privileged opinions upon the oppressed group,
especially when their opinion is based on sentimentality, personal discomfort
or a disruption of the status quo
Talking over a woman’s verbal refusal, removing her coat as she puts it on,
alluding to something being put in the woman’s drink and her stating that she
cannot snap out of it (Think Crosby playbook). This is what you feel needs to
be defended? Is it more important to protect the nostalgic image of some silly
film then the insidious message it propagates?
Instead of suggesting this is “going too far”, it would be so appreciated if
men such as yourself would stand by our sides and validate the much needed
cultural message that when a woman says no, a man should respect that, not seek
to coerce or pressure her.
P.S. – If you find yourself thinking any of this is “overreacting”, I suggest
you listen more carefully. Take my word for it, as an intelligent, rational
woman; lyrics like this…presented in the manner these are presented, against
the context of the current culture, only serve to reinforce the notion that a
woman's “no” is negotiable. And that is dangerous to women everywhere, and
cannot be defended by anyone of good conscience. Good night baby. xoxo
Respectfully:
Baloney. As you yourself say before launching into your treatise, " that
sweet back story of the song’s origin bears absolutely no relevance to the
current discourse" -- and with that I agree. So, you want to nonetheless
take away the original context of the song and re-interpret it to fit your
narrative about how many ways women are victimized and oppressed. That's utter
nonsense.
I
agree with you that the issues you raise generally deserve to be addressed, but
to say that, "The scrutiny of this song can only be understood within the
context of the global culture of rape-a very real horror that overwhelmingly
impacts women, and which we are done staying silent about.", is just plain
utter bullshit.
The
appropriate, read historical, context that the song occupies is meant in a
light-hearted back and forth. The man does not drug her drink or force her to
stay. No doubt he's being assertive, but she is not deprived of her ability to
refuse his advances.
The
fact that this song had the impact on their social scene, that it did as
Garland put it, "We become instant parlor room stars. We got invited to
all the best parties for years on the basis of 'Baby.' It was our ticket to
caviar and truffles. Parties were built around our being the closing
act.", widely accepted in polite company concurrent with its time is proof
of this, but no, you've got an ax to grind, so you, being the self-righteous
standard bearer for your causes are going to take it upon yourself to
re-interpret it through your jaded prism and try to equate it with all manner
of men misbehaving. What utter rot!
If
you want your causes to gain traction and have credibility, you would do better
than to choose this song as your vehicle to preach your messages. #metoofar is
precisely what applies to your diatribe.
Happy
holidays!
You don’t know me, so for you to personally
accuse me of “having an ax to grind” and your perception of me as “self
righteous” or “jaded” exists only in your obviously bruised privileged white
male ego. In fact, I think they apply quite well to your tirade.
I am simply participating in a dialog and
sharing my perspective as a woman; perhaps this is something you are not used
to engaging in. But it says more about you than me. As you are a friend of
Eric, I will continue to attempt to speak to you respectfully. The only mud
will be that you put on your own face.
No where did I accuse all men. This is exactly
the kind of rancor that otherwise good man fall into when they take something
personally that is meant to be a discussion about a culture, and what ideas we
want to stand behind. You feel this strongly about a song, that you would
defend its lyrics rather than be seen as a sympathizer with women who have been
coerced into sexual acts when they clearly say “NO”.
You misunderstand the object of my statement
about context. I stand by the fact that the outrage surrounding this video and
song can only be understood within the current context of our times. The
BACKSTORY, has no relevance…the actual LYRICS and MOVIE CLIP are relevant to
the current culture, within which women are no longer being silent..can you see
that?
Again, the historical context is not relevant
to the current discussion. We are not living in the 1940’s. We are living now,
and the messages we promote should be sensitive to the experiences of
marginalized people. Again, do you feel we should allow people who use a
swastika as “decorations” giving their original meaning? Actually to a white supremacist…they
still symbolize prosperity and good luck.
“Plain and utter bullshit?” The song opens a
dialog about consent, within what we know to be a culture of coercion and rape.
Do you think that is bullshit? Do you know how many women are subjected to
intimate partner violence. Perhaps you don’t. And I won’t fault you for that,
but educate yourself. For you to call it “bullshit” is to actually deny me and
other women our experience, which is exactly the problem! I don’t know if you
have daughters, but would you want your daughter to have a boy take off her
coat as she tried to leave his dorm room? Would you be comfortable knowing she
thought something was slipped into her drink? This is REALITY for many, many
women. And if you cannot bear to support their right to not have it be
considered entertainment, than I recommend you do some soul searching.
Honestly, you found that constructive? How is
it constructive? So, is there no middle ground? Women either waive their rights
to consent or or waive any hope of a mutually agreeable union?
Maybe this feels constructive for well meaning
respectful men such as yourself, who have a never knowingly harassed a woman. To
me it’s just laziness. Much like it’s not enough to say - I personally am not a
racist, thereby feeling permitted to look away from the reality of
institutional racism - for you to shrug your shoulders and dismiss what is
being brought to the fore seems defensive and somewhat adolescent.
This is not about you or all men personally.
We’re talking about a culture of rape and attack on women’s rights as I’ve laid
out in prior post. Silence is complicity in these case and for men such as
yourself to simply say “sure baby there’s the door” is dismissive, and
arrogant. Too lazy to actually give a damn about it? Too messy? Would you
rather stick your head in the sand and ignore the reality that women are
regularly subjected to unwanted harassment?
Perhaps you and your friend feel cultural
mixed messages? Perhaps men aren’t clear how to walk the line between being
assertive and expressing interest in fear that will become accusations of
harassment. We can have that discussion.
Now if you tell me that you’ve had experiences
of women that want talk to me or hanging on you, or being provocative, then let’s
have that discussion as well- let’s discuss women’s sexuality and the portrayal
of women as sexual objects in the media. Let’s discuss woman’s right to be sexy
and attractive without inviting unwanted sexual contact. Just as a man who is
culturally sanctioned as desirable (What is it...muscular, money in the bank,
well-dressed, and a fast car?) shouldn’t be subjected to sexual harassment,
neither should a woman who appears in the culturally sanctioned manner to be
desirable. Which leads to an entire other topic of how we are programmed to
perceive each other and what is desire and social cues and the entire meeting
dance which is believe you’re not even too much for me to get into it this
point.
Rest assured dear man, this will be my last
offering of a glimpse of why women are feeling the way they are, and why this
song triggered outrage. That would require a true curiosity on your part. If
you and your friend prefer to remain with crossed arms, ignorant in your
comfortable sense of a more innocence time…that would be unfortunate, but not
surprising. Complacency and homeostatis are strong pulls. xoxo
an "axe to grind" is assumption and a speculative
characterization of motivation - for the sake of the lightest of moderation - i
kindly ask all participants to have comments more centric to the issue of song,
culture, varying points of view.. let's step back from the boundaries of
personal
Much appreciated. So much is lost when one resorts to personal attacks in order to defend their position. Its central to the intimidation playbook and very disrespectful to what is, obviously, my strongly felt and carefully articulated argument.
Eric Davis RA Pascale woa.. an eloquent and articulate summation of all facets of the issue on this thread... one a side note regarding swastika am reminded how americans use to pledge allegiance to the flag for 50 years with the Bellamy salute before an act of congress changed that in 1942 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bellamy_salute
I'm happy to "stand down", but I would note simultaneously that it's not speculative when it is supported by a series of statements demonstrating the view that leads to my conclusion.
nothing personal, but if
you don't find the lyrics to suggest a male attitude of entitlement and
coercion, then we really have some work to do on what is and isn't consent. The
lyrics state "I simply must go, The answer is no", "Hey whats in
this drink" "I wish I knew how to break this spell" Ah, you're
very pushy you know?" To which he replies "I like to think of it as
opportunistic" So now we have a woman feeling a man is pushy, which he
sees as opportunism. Do you see the problem with that? If these were a
transcript of an actual rape, do you think you'd see it as innocent? Of course,
I recognize the light heartedness of the time and the film..i am not suggesting
the writer or film maker purposefully were pushing an agenda of rape or lack of
consent. I am pointing to our increased awareness, that this type of coersion
is no longer considered "innocent, flirtatious and light hearted".
Honestly, what is most offensive to me, besides that you never address the
actual culture of rape, is that you continue to try to intimidate and silence
me, by suggesting I have an ax to grind, no sense of humor, etc. Could you for
a moment put down your defensiveness and consider that perhaps I am a woman who
has lived experience to speak from? Could you for a moment be willing to look
through the lens I see through? You want to make it light hearted, and so seek
to paint me as some "overwrought, silly"woman with an ax to grind .
This is exactly how marginalization occurs, at the hands of otherwise well
meaning people. Minimize the concerns, say they are over reacting...but never
really stopping and putting oneself in their shoes and seeing through their eyes,
so never really understanding.
BTW, it might interest you to know, that I am arguing so that this is not
quickly dismissed, and that I in fact have my concerns about the overuse of
the #metoo hashtag, and concerns
about ruining lives of people based solely on accusations. I felt this type of
reactivity to people saying I enjoyed "white privilege". My family is
from immigrant background, so I thought...no way, not me. It took time,
listening, working with a marginalized community, and really considering the many
ways my whiteness protected me to realize my privilege. So no, I have no ax to
grind, but I do have a hope that someone like you might open their heart and
mind and be willing to try to HEAR what is being said by women. I'm sure if men
had been abused in this way for millennium, you would see and hear what we see
and hear in these lyrics and film clip. Which for the last time is...suggests
that a woman's No is negotiable. And that is a dangerous ideology to support,
innocently expressed, wrapped in sparkly paper or delivered by Santa
notwithstanding. BTW...the historical origins of Swaztikas while perhaps not lighthearted,
were used as a symbol of divinity and spirituality; quite the antithesis of
what they came to represent. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika
No comments:
Post a Comment