Lena Dunham wrote a book. And now things are getting a bit ugly.

[DSeid]

I believe the book is presented as a series of essays based on stories about her life, not as an autobiography. Very much like Sedaris’s stories. Liberties get taken.

“TruthRevolt” portrays those events as sexual experimentation and using her sister as “a sexual outlet.” Even given that she described her bribery techniques as the same as what a sexual predator would use, those snippets do not meet that standard. Really they don’t.

Suing over that is however silly other than as a means of getting more attention to her book. Marketing.

Again, I have no opinion about her talent and have no interest in any of her products. But I appreciate that celebrity is a job description now and that edgy humor requires a certain marketing approach.

She’s good at that part of the job if nothing else.

[singular1]

@Loach

She also came from a house where sexuality was very open. Her father makes a living painting pictures of giant hairy vaginas and and men with dicks for noses. Really awful stuff but what do I know.

Seriously? Am I the only one reporting this link? Please put NSFW before links like this! I really hope no one was looking at my monitor when I hit this!:mad:

[GrandWino]

@RickJay

2. That said, I am loathe to call someone a pervert because of something they did when they were SEVEN YEARS OLD. She was, you know, seven. Assuming it happened at all.

Some of it was when she was seven but other things she describes occurred between ages of 13-17 (the masturbating in bed w/ her sister next to her was at 17).

[Count_Blucher]

I’m going with:

“Look…we like your story, but it needs a small hook to get people talking. My Personal Assistant will give you a few ideas.”

“But that’s totally false… none of that happened…I mean REALLY… None of that happened…”

“Its a multi-book deal and you can recant in the second book which will boost sales for that book as well as bump some sales for your first book too. See how that works? Win-win…”

“…”

[DSeid]

@GrandWino

Some of it was when she was seven but other things she describes occurred between ages of 13-17 (the masturbating in bed w/ her sister next to her was at 17).

And do you call that behavior (covertly masturbating while co-sleeping) using her sister as a sexual outlet or sexually experimenting with her?

[Zebra]

@iiandyiiii

My point is that women are disparately criticized for things like this.

So does this mean we can’t criticize this woman? Should we have a moratorium on criticizing women at all? For how long? 20 years without ever criticizing any woman for anything? Will that bring balance to the force?

[TriPolar]

@DSeid

She’s good at that part of the job if nothing else.

So then she’s more like a high priced Attention Escort.

[Eyebrows_0f_Doom]

@singular1

Seriously? Am I the only one reporting this link? Please put NSFW before links like this! I really hope no one was looking at my monitor when I hit this!:mad:

So the sentence “pictures of giant hairy vaginas and and men with dicks for noses” didn’t clue you in that link just might contain pictures of giant hairy vaginas and and men with dicks for noses?

[Loach]

@Eyebrows_0f_Doom

So the sentence “pictures of giant hairy vaginas and and men with dicks for noses” didn’t clue you in that link just might contain pictures of giant hairy vaginas and and men with dicks for noses?

I do apologize but yeah, this. And it’s not like they are photographs. They are semi-abstract paintings. It’s art. Bad art for sure. But it’s not porn or even realistic paintings. If any mod feels the need to spoiler tag the link I apologize for the extra work. It never occurred to my that it might be needed.

[singular1]

Well, I figured it would be a link to a Wikipedia article about the guy, which would probably have a small picture of a painting in the corner. Instead I had a full 21" monitor with large pictures that are sure to set off HR complaints from anyone passing by. It didn’t offend me, but it isn’t an image I would voluntarily open at work. Thankfully no one was near when it opened, & now it’s been labeled, so carry on. My bad for even thinking clicking it was prudent, true. Sorry if I came across as a prude. I just work with some.

And Lena Dunham is definitely a narcissistic piece of work best ignored, her father’s lousy art notwithstanding.

[Drunky_Smurf]

@bobot

I know that she has/had a show on Showtime or HBO, and that she hosted SNL. That’s all I know of her, so if she’s an attention whore, she’s not that good at the attention part.

She got you to know she has a show and that she hosted SNL and that she has a book out with stuff in it that people are talking about on tv and IRL and making message board threads about.

I never heard of her until this thread and now I know all that stuff too.

I’d say that’s pretty good.

[scabpicker]

@Sampiro

That concludes any use of or appreciation for Lena Dunham that I may have. The episode or two of GIRLS I’ve watched seemed targeted at people who didn’t think the characters on SEINFELD were too funny but not self involved and whiney enough.

That’s much more articulate than my reaction to the one episode I watched, which was: “Wow, I hate all of these people. They aren’t interesting, and nor are their problems.”

[anu-la1979]

@Hello_Again

She is literally the most boring person alive. It’s also pathetic how desperate she is to be sensational. DNFTT.

She obviously learned from her father that if you don’t have any talent you can make yourself known by revolving your career around sex so incessantly and disgustingly it starts to seem edgy.

+1

I’ll also add that she represents the absolute worst of what I’ve come to peg as “NYC provincialism.” Which is when you believe you’re an interesting person simply because you live in and/or grew up in New York.

[Sampiro]

@Loach

She also came from a house where sexuality was very open. Her father NSFW link makes a living painting pictures of giant hairy vaginas and and men with dicks for noses. Really awful stuff but what do I know.

The kid who had my 8th grade English textbook before I did had a similar style, but I swear he was much better even though he only worked in pencil and ink.

[EllisDee]

@iiandyiiii

I don’t get this… are all famous women “attention whores”? Just the ones who aren’t conventionally Hollywood “hot”? The ones who talk about personal stuff? The ones who write books about themselves?

Pretty much every person – man or woman – who is intentionally famous is an attention whore. Extreme narcissism is the reason they wanted to become famous in the first place.

[Mr.Nylock]

@Saint_Cad

She’s an attention whore. Wouldn’t be surprised if it is all fake.

It’s a little depressing how well it all really works for her to me personally; but I’m not one to argue with success.

[April_R]

@Fotheringay-Phipps

I find it rather unlikely that a 1 year old could put 6 or 7 pebbles in their vagina (they would generally be wearing diapers almost all the time, and tend to be supervised), but I find it incredible that a kid that age could do it as a “prank” - even if a kid that age is capable of the concept of a prank, they wouldn’t appreciate the prank aspect of such an act. (I would also have to imagine that it would have caused a lot of irritation.)

So it’s likely that she either invented/distorted the story, or it happened at an older age.

This. I have a 1 year old and two 7 year old and at age 1 they aren’t capable of pranking. The story is suspect and the attention she is getting for it is laughable.

[Evil_Captor]

Ninja’d.

[VinylTurnip]

@Drunky_Smurf

I never heard of her until this thread and now I know all that stuff too.

You and the others who’d never heard of her before obviously don’t read Slate or Salon, both of which have published a long string of articles (seemingly one a week, at least) lionizing her or defending her from all the cruel haters of the world, or both.

[Evil_Captor]

I’ve run across Dunham before, an article about her book advance got me going and I posted about it to my blog way back in December of 2012, comparing Dunham to E.L. James and John Crowley. The article has illustrations that are totally NSFW (none involving giant hairy vaginas, though) so spoiler box ahoy:

Read it and weep.