A lot can be said -- and long time listeners know we've said a lot -- on the changing of mores and morals and works being "products of their time." Mostly we here at Lost in Criterion come down on the fact that some things are nakedly and objectively immoral -- rape, slavery -- and anyone of any age defending them (or failing to attack them) is wrong, especially since there have always been voices in each age that are not "products of their time" but exceptions to what we, in the current day, believe "their time" to have been like. What I mean is, the "products of their time" excuse says more about us and how we view history than about the people living in that period.
Anyway, Bad Timing spends it's entire run time suggesting that the defining act of the film is not an act of rape despite the impossibility of consent. That the movie even suggests, let alone spends 2 hours maintaining, that Art Garfunkel's character has not committed rape is wrong. We are supposed to sympathize with him.