Kirk Mack wrote:I don't have a problem with "erection" in the song- it is referred to in a number of songs in today's age, though in other words...
...I'm more put off by "rape" than "erection"......
Initially, I felt the same way, but I think Neil quite cleverly uses the rape fantasy to show how utterly sad and pitiful Casanova has become; I have to say though that I have only listened to the song a couple of times, so I may be wrong.
I see your point, it just caught me off guard. I haven't listened to it all that much, so it may become benign eventually....
if he didnt like the use of the word a couple times in a song how does he feel about his thread that is 5 pages long of erections flying before his eyes I wonder.
glennjridge wrote:if he didnt like the use of the word a couple times in a song how does he feel about his thread that is 5 pages long of erections flying before his eyes I wonder.
Eldritch wrote:No, you don't. It's because you're not bright enough to manage without them. I bet you can't have a conversation without pulling grotesque faces.
Funny how something so natural as an erection
makes everyone so ruffled. Erections occur BILLIONS
OF TIMES EVERY DAY... but it cannot be mentioned in
a song.
paninaro28 wrote:was more concerned abt the word "rape" too, seems out of place in a good song. Made all the worse by the context of it bein a dream of rape????
I actually think it very much in place. Blaming one or all women for own impotence, or for that matter other shortages is not an uncommon "reason" for rape. In a lot of rapecases where the rapist cannot hold erection he continues using objects instead.
I were impressed by the insight.