And I don't think it's about date-rape either.

..do.

Apparently I should have made that more clear.

It’s really sad people have put on this song. It’s not about rape

• Click here for link at https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna94

I think the date-rape focus on that song these days is hilarious.

There is no reason to believe the story being told is not date rapey.

Individuals draw their own lines when it comes to date rape but if this story was told in court by both parties 6 months later theres reason to believe you could convict in several states.

and bangs the guy, because she wants to, and who cares what her neighbors of parents or siblings say.

It’s quite a powerful moment of realization of self power.

Social progress

And the fact that you can't think about it any other way is a product of the warping of the mind wrought by societal decay.

Both from the context of the person who wrote it in 1944 and of the person who listens to it after having sexual encounters they were unable to prevent due to alcohol, a lack of escape routes, and persistence of the aggressor.

If you can’t think of it both ways then you should work on that. Understanding perspectives of people who have unwholesome experiences is not the decay...it’s the existence of the experiences that are the decay. Can you at least agree to that?

You can only think of the song as about sex, and about power. And if you view the song as one of the singers trying to manipulate the other into adultery, sure, the song is rather shocking.

But---and here is where the societal decline comes into play---not everyone everywhere is talking about copulation, much less coercion with respect to it. Viewed from the perspective of a more restrained society, the song's import is both much clearer and much less nefarious.

Dean Martin is clearly fond of Marilyn Maxwell. But as Marilyn accurately points out, the situation is not apt for vigorous canoodling, for all sorts of reasons. Dean isn't a fool. He knows this. And because he knows it, he doesn't really want Marilyn to stay, at least not altogether.

Marilyn, of course, is clearly fond of Dean. And so she doesn't really want to go home, at least not altogether.

What they both want, and what the song cleverly puts on display, is the enjoyment of their mutual repartee. In a world where people do things other than force each other to have sex---or even other than have sex after obtaining informed consent on all the appropriate ironclad forms---they can explore other enjoyable exercises, and a bit of teasing between people who like each other is a good example.

So after the singing and the drinks are done, Dean is going to help Marilyn into a cab to get her safely home, or at least let her lock herself in his room while he sleeps on the couch if it really is too cold to make it to the sidewalk.* Because in a world other than the one we have right this second, people might do things other than have sex.


* I've never seen Neptune's Daughter, the movie for which the piece was originally written, although Red Skelton and Ricardo Montalban in a madcap romantic comedy sounds fantastic. But if the synopsis on the internet is accurate, my version sounds a lot closer to the original use of the song than the one that stalks the twenty-first century's imagination.

But I’ll stick to this

1. Your first sentence is false - I can’t “only” think of it in any one context and I’ve already made that point
2. Your second sentence is false - who said anything about adultery?
3. The rest of your description appears to be false as was pointed out in this thread...the song was not written for a movie or to fit a plot of a movie - the songwriter wrote it for parties. It doesn’t really matter to me because intent is not the debate here...no one thinks the songwriter intended for this to be a loveable song about how he tries to have sex with his wife without her consent. But it certainly should matter for you since it appears to be the majority of your argument. And according to the evidence in this thread...it’s wrong.

Though I think you are correct that it was written in advance and the borrowed for Neptune's Daughter. But that was tangential.

The rest of your response is just an obtuse refusal to engage with my actusl point, which is disappointing.

And if your argument and evidence is reliant on you telling me how I think....I’m allowed to tell you you’re wrong and be done with it.

So as your “substance” is an incorrect assumption about me and a (tangential) description of the plot of a movie you didn’t see...how much more do you expect anyone to engage?

Be done with it - keep your opinions, no one ever said you couldn’t have them.

The support you provide for that view is even more so.