Something I've noticed cropping up consistently over the past few years...
Picture it: Two lovers have spent some time together at the Male Lover's house, just as a blizzard picks up. Fraught with concerns over her sense of responsibility to others, the Female Lover suggests that she must leave. The Male Lover, thinking only of spending time with his love, doesn't relent in his attempts to convince her to spend the night with him.
OR!
Picture it: A man and a woman are alone in a house as a blizzard begins. The woman is reluctant to stay through the storm, but the man continually pressures her into staying with him, attempting to distract her with music and alcohol. Though he knows she has others who will want her home, he continues to insist that she stay. She continues to resist his advances, but he does not let up.
These are two interpretations of the song "Baby, It's Cold Outside."
Same story, different readings. This song is one that comes up a lot during the holiday season as a perpetuation of rape culture. This is a suggestion that I think comes from the second reading I've provided here - the idea of a predatory male stalking his sexual prey. But I do have to ask - does the nature of the song change if you make these two characters lovers? Is there some implicit consent in this observation of "status?" Certainly the first reading seems less creepy, doesn't it? The Male Lover doesn't seem to have such aggressive or negative intentions - even after I revisited the paragraph and changed the last line from "...can spend the night together" to "...can spend the night with him." If they're two lovers, is this really a coercive event? As far as I've seen, there are two kinds of people - those that think it's not coercive, and those that think it is.
The criticisms of this song represents to me part of the problem with many attempts at dismantling rape culture - improper angles of attack on things that most people *relate* to. The rape-nature of this song only revealed itself to me a few years ago when, upon googling the lyrics, I discovered the two roles in the duet were listed as "Wolf" and "Mouse," which immediately sent up some red flags. "This is predatory?!" I said, sort of bewildered. Looking at it now, intellectually, it's almost silly that I could have missed it. However, I think my initial confusion over this song points to an important element about how we sometimes approach long-standing traditions, cherished artifacts, or deep-seated beliefs when it comes to rape culture.
Like many of you, I've heard this song on repeat since I was a child. The narrative was a simple one to understand, as though somehow internally I knew that the message was not a negative one - these people are in love, I said, and the woman is worrying about her priorities for the evening, just like I'd done when I had homework but wanted to play Sega a little bit longer. It'd be better for me to focus on the homework, but my friends wouldn't have to make too many arguments before I caved and ended up staying at the console for another few hours. Now, I don't think I'm an everyman, here, but I do know that part of the controversy over this song comes from the meeting of people who feel as I've just described with people who have internalized the second reading. The latter group might read what I've just said about growing up with this song and say, "But that's part of the problem! You're being raised to believe that this sort of sexual predation isn't negative!" I'll agree with you - that certainly IS a problem. This group might go further and suggest that this song idealizes consentless/mixed-message encounters, making romance of situations that are potentially dangerous. Again, I'll agree.
But I sit here thinking about Feminism and gender equality and rape culture. My father, though constantly reminded on which side of the line his children stand, doesn't think like I do. Some of my friends, good people, don't find this song evocative of rape - they find it to be about love and playfulness and the chase. If you come out and tell them, "That song is rapey!" (or some derivation thereof), you're going to get a bewildered stare, and, more importantly, readily dismissed.
The song sets a terrible example, sure, but it's not the song's fault - I'd even go a step further and suggest there's nothing wrong with the song at all. Though this may seem like a terrible situation to you, for many more people it's a song that represents love during the holiday season, and attempting to convince those people otherwise will only earn you ire. Though you may not be saying it directly (and some people DO say it directly), when you diligently inform a lover of this song that their cherished melody is actually a link in the chain of patriarchy that helps to bond them to rape culture, you're not going to get anywhere. This hypothetical demographic loves Christmas and loves love, and you, you will appear to be an arrogant Feminist grinch. Are you trying to win hearts and minds, or let everyone know just how terrible the things they love are?
If you're really bothered by this song, my suggestion is not to rally against it, but instead to continue to rally around the information that makes this song seem so rapey. Plans of attack that involve assaulting beloved traditions or communal treasures will devolve into personal attacks from the defending party - you're just not going to get through to them. If you really want to make a difference, if you really want people to understand the terrible parts of this song, then you're going to need to figure out why they love it first.
Don't get me wrong - we should always be on guard against contributors to rape culture where we see them. However, if we're serious about making change, we're really going to need to understand the opposition. I think that this "opposition" is made up mostly of average, middle-of-the-road people who believe their traditional structures, unwittingly formed in patriarchy, are linked more readily to positive emotions and scenarios than the negative ones we can identify in places such as this song.
There's a whole subset of people out there that love this song, and there's no doubt they find that these claims (regardless of validity) of rape-culture-association to be getting old. They're busy getting in the holiday spirit or enjoying pumpkin pie with loved ones, even if only in their heads. If you can't understand why some people love a song that (to you) is ostensibly about sexual predation, then you will have a very hard time convincing them to view the song as such.
'Tis the season, right? For those that find themselves struggling with this song, I suggest that you try to have a Merry Christmas anyway - maybe you'll find some ground with which you can relate to this group of people who think there's no harm in this game of Wolf and Mouse.
No comments:
Post a Comment