It finally happened. Took a lot longer than I expected, but it finally happened. Society has risen up against a marginally suggestive, and therefore offensive, Christmas song. Baby, It's Cold Outside has become the season's punching bag, much to the relief of Starbucks.
Yeah, yeah - debates are ongoing as to the true meaning. An English-teacher, tumblr user teachingwithcoffeetumblr, breaks things down in a very plausible and meaningful way. The song itself was first used in pop culture for the movie Neptune's Daughter (1949), and at that time, romantic relationships were vastly different. As teachingwithcoffee points out, women at the time lacked sexual and reproductive agency, so admitting that they wanted to be intimate with someone to whom they were not married was something no one had yet figured out how to discuss.
But here we are, 69 years on, and now having that discussion about whether that song is appropriate or not. I agree that the superficial value of the lyrics runs afoul of growing social conscience. Perhaps ten years ago, I would have still chuckled at the idea that a guy was seemingly trying to coerce a single woman into bed. It was normal, and I would also have not regarded that song as the rape-anthem that it seems to be receiving now. Now is very different.
But why?
Social context... I am of a generation that warns girls to look out for dangerous and predatory boys. There's a good reason for that. The reported instances of rape are heartrendingly common, while unreported incidences seem to outweigh those by a healthy margin.
If our recognition of rape culture tells us anything, it's that consent no longer has the luxury of ambiguity. We can't jokingly say that there's something "in this drink" to excuse sexual interest while preserving innocence. It is a vestige of a deeply inequitable time when women were still victims, even when they weren't, because they couldn't be allowed to make the choice for themselves. Frankly, I feel that the radio stations who are banning the song are doing the right thing, but maybe for the wrong reason.
Stepping outside of rape culture for a minute, let's go back and focus on the social stigma of women who own their sexuality. We have historically called them hussies, sluts, tramps... anything that would demean their self-actualization. We have treated this like a disease for decades, generations - hell, millenia! So why are we continuing?
If teachingwithcoffee is right, then the female voice in the song doesn't have the right or ability to say she's interested, and that's just wrong. If the public outcry is right, the male voice is intent on subjugating a woman who is vocally protesting the situation, and this is equally wrong. Why should we be propagating either of these ideas? Because it's tradition? Well, that's bullshit.
We are faced with a reality where people are violated by repeat offenders that spark #MeToo movements. We watch frat boys walk away from the judiciary with a stinging wrist. We watch entire films that revolve around that haze of confusion that follows a roofied drink. How is it then okay to hold a holiday tune unaccountable for its expired relevance and confusing message?
Neither side of this coin is okay, but nobody really wants to address that. It's entirely possible for both sides to be wrong for very different reasons. Apologists who want it to continue playing are ignoring the public epidemic that has 1-in-6 women being victimized, 80% of whom will experience a completed rape. Alarmists who want this song pulled are also ignoring the oblique agency displayed in the song.
Rape culture AND sexual autonomy both need to be publicly discussed. This song is suitable as a springboard for both, and which one you discuss is determined by what you think it's saying. Both messages are bad. There's nothing wrong with taking this little ditty out of the playlist while we parse the differences between non-protest and consent. No one is hurt by its silence. You'll have plenty of non-Christian folklore and tradition to revel in this holidays season, courtesy of Bing Crosby and Burl Ives.
No comments:
Post a Comment