While painting my daughter’s room, I spent an hour listening to Lena Dunham on Bill Simmons and I want to share my thoughts on it.
This was my first longer-form exposure to Dunham and I’m not trying to be provocative when I say she comes off in this interview as a fairly narrow-minded individual who is highly prone to generalizing and stereotyping. In other words, she seems to be the rare case of being everything she’s cracked up to be by her critics.
She seems to fall into a fairly common trap for many of my politically-charged friends and acquaintances on both sides; that being—
She clearly seems as if she feels she has been wronged or felt pain on a personal level by the doings of the opposite “political group” at some point in her life (which is probably true), but her reaction to it is to vastly overcompensate in her retaliation by lashing out and generalizing against any/all of that opposite group; effectively turning herself into the same sort of monster(s) that likely perpetrated the act (or acts) against her.
And, predictably, she has a fascinating self-serving view on why some people are turned off by her. In my view, people dislike her primarily because she finds ways to generalize vast groups of people as racists or misogynistic when many in such groups are not. That turns people off and always will. I am generally very pro-Planned Parenthood (not for Federal funding of it, but otherwise an enthusiastic supporter, etc.), and have no doubt after listening to Dunham due to my age, race, and personality that I would be swept up in her generalizations as a bad guy who is general y anti-women. Well, I’m not anti-women in any way. And the perception she generates that sweeps me into that misogynistic group is **precisely and solely** what turns me off about her; not her political views on issues or gender necessarily.
Dunham, on the other hand, makes it clear in the podcast that she thinks those that are turned off by her do so *because* they’re misogynistic and it further proves that she and women generally are oppressed by these evil men. This view is an effectively double-downing on making someone like me feel falsely accused of being called misogynist; which of course turns me off to her even more.
It’s unfortunate that Dunham is on this bigoted rampage of generalizations. Though I see it all the time on both sides of the spectrum. In my everyday world I see it mostly as it pertains to views on Christians. My Christian friends get a dose of intolerance (legitimately) and lash out 10-fold on the world because of it and my non-practicing-Christian friends get a dose of intolerance from Christians (legitimately) and lash out 10-fold on Christians. Both sides want to get back at the other so much that they all seem be a vastly more effective perpetrator than victim. I’d say the same is true for Dunham and that’s unfortunate.
This was my first longer-form exposure to Dunham and I’m not trying to be provocative when I say she comes off in this interview as a fairly narrow-minded individual who is highly prone to generalizing and stereotyping. In other words, she seems to be the rare case of being everything she’s cracked up to be by her critics.
She seems to fall into a fairly common trap for many of my politically-charged friends and acquaintances on both sides; that being—
She clearly seems as if she feels she has been wronged or felt pain on a personal level by the doings of the opposite “political group” at some point in her life (which is probably true), but her reaction to it is to vastly overcompensate in her retaliation by lashing out and generalizing against any/all of that opposite group; effectively turning herself into the same sort of monster(s) that likely perpetrated the act (or acts) against her.
And, predictably, she has a fascinating self-serving view on why some people are turned off by her. In my view, people dislike her primarily because she finds ways to generalize vast groups of people as racists or misogynistic when many in such groups are not. That turns people off and always will. I am generally very pro-Planned Parenthood (not for Federal funding of it, but otherwise an enthusiastic supporter, etc.), and have no doubt after listening to Dunham due to my age, race, and personality that I would be swept up in her generalizations as a bad guy who is general y anti-women. Well, I’m not anti-women in any way. And the perception she generates that sweeps me into that misogynistic group is **precisely and solely** what turns me off about her; not her political views on issues or gender necessarily.
Dunham, on the other hand, makes it clear in the podcast that she thinks those that are turned off by her do so *because* they’re misogynistic and it further proves that she and women generally are oppressed by these evil men. This view is an effectively double-downing on making someone like me feel falsely accused of being called misogynist; which of course turns me off to her even more.
It’s unfortunate that Dunham is on this bigoted rampage of generalizations. Though I see it all the time on both sides of the spectrum. In my everyday world I see it mostly as it pertains to views on Christians. My Christian friends get a dose of intolerance (legitimately) and lash out 10-fold on the world because of it and my non-practicing-Christian friends get a dose of intolerance from Christians (legitimately) and lash out 10-fold on Christians. Both sides want to get back at the other so much that they all seem be a vastly more effective perpetrator than victim. I’d say the same is true for Dunham and that’s unfortunate.
that's where much of the humor is.
) is the son of a higher-up at NPR and a Democrat. So why call him a Republican, then?
