The Lena Dunham Thread - Printable Version
+- Roosh V Forum (https://rooshvforum.network)
+-- Forum: Main (https://rooshvforum.network/forum-1.html)
+--- Forum: Everything Else (https://rooshvforum.network/forum-7.html)
+--- Thread: The Lena Dunham Thread (/thread-22361.html)
+- Roosh V Forum (https://rooshvforum.network)
+-- Forum: Main (https://rooshvforum.network/forum-1.html)
+--- Forum: Everything Else (https://rooshvforum.network/forum-7.html)
+--- Thread: The Lena Dunham Thread (/thread-22361.html)
The Lena Dunham Thread - Slim Shady - 11-01-2014
If you have a social media account blast this news on there. Gawker has done a very pro Dunham piece in reaction to this news. Call them out on this hypocrisy. Gawker are child molestation apologists.
The Lena Dunham Thread - dholland662 - 11-01-2014
Quote: (11-01-2014 07:04 PM)Slim Shady Wrote:
If you have a social media account blast this news on there. Gawker has done a very pro Dunham piece in reaction to this news. Call them out on this hypocrisy. Gawker are child molestation apologists.
Especially with the hot water from GamerGate happening now
The Lena Dunham Thread - Roosh - 11-01-2014
Quote:Quote:
Gawker has done a very pro Dunham piece in reaction to this news. Call them out on this hypocrisy. Gawker are child molestation apologists.
You trolling? Gawker's piece just reported on the article and Lena's tweets. Where are you seeing a "very pro" piece? I hate Gawker as much as anyone, but stick to the facts.
The Lena Dunham Thread - Slim Shady - 11-01-2014
^Not trolling mate. While they may not have outright said "we support Lena's actions and stand behind her", the story is certainly a pro-Dunham spin.
If what she has done falls in the realm of child molestation, which I believe it does, then any piece not explicitly crying out against it is already in very poor taste and defends child molestation. Read that piece again and tell me that it doesn't spin the anti Dunham out cry as "right wing craziness". They have obviously just let Lena put most of the spin on it herself, but they are essentially giving a self admitted child molester her own platform to defend herself openly. Therefore they are "child molestation apologists".
This is not a person accused of something. That person certainly deserves and open forum to defend themselves. This is self admitted stuff. No argument here. The title itself is trying to put a partisan spin on the whole thing. That's basic rhetoric. Their rhetoric is trying to dictate the reader's thoughts to align with those of Dunham.
The Lena Dunham Thread - AnonymousBosch - 11-02-2014
^ As I suggested in the gamergate thread, use Archive Today to capture webpages when linking to Gawker et al so they don't profit from our outraged clicks and web traffic. Half of their bloody traffic probably comes from the manosphere.
Archived version of story here:
https://archive.today/Enif9
The Lena Dunham Thread - runsonmagic - 11-02-2014
We've reached a point where we're asking the question "how do we spin this child molestation story into a scandal so we can stop these people from making more money off it?"
Fuck me, is this real life?
The Lena Dunham Thread - Days of Broken Arrows - 11-02-2014
Quote: (11-01-2014 11:42 PM)Slim Shady Wrote:
^Not trolling mate. While they may not have outright said "we support Lena's actions and stand behind her", the story is certainly a pro-Dunham spin.
If what she has done falls in the realm of child molestation, which I believe it does, then any piece not explicitly crying out against it is already in very poor taste and defends child molestation. Read that piece again and tell me that it doesn't spin the anti Dunham out cry as "right wing craziness". They have obviously just let Lena put most of the spin on it herself, but they are essentially giving a self admitted child molester her own platform to defend herself openly. Therefore they are "child molestation apologists".
This is not a person accused of something. That person certainly deserves and open forum to defend themselves. This is self admitted stuff. No argument here. The title itself is trying to put a partisan spin on the whole thing. That's basic rhetoric. Their rhetoric is trying to dictate the reader's thoughts to align with those of Dunham.
I'd agree the Gawker piece is biased.
First it repeatedly mentions "conservatives" are calling out Dunham, as if it's their problem of bias. It focuses on that more than the incident itself.
But it also omits a bunch of facts about what Dunham wrote. It mentions her looking at her sister's vagina, but leaves out that Dunham would bribe her sister to make out with her and masturbate in bed next to her.
These are pretty serious things to leave out. We have a Canadian radio host taking heat for accusations about things he did with adults. Dunham admits to doing incestuous things with a child, and I don't see the nearly the same amount of scrutiny or criticism.
Finally, Dunham's Tweet about "who hasn't done that?" goes unquestioned by Gawker. They let her just speak her piece via Twitter.
It's left to Gawker's commenters say "Wait! I haven't done that!" That should have been the job of the writer -- to chime in with a reality check. That's what writers do, after all. When you have Gawker's commenters coming off like the voice of reason, you know you've got a problem.
This is really, really troubling. There are double standards of "media justice."
You don't believe me? Try an experiment:
Let's have one of us get on Twitter or Return of Kings and admit to molesting a sibling -- in detail. Would you all be secure that you'd get the hands-off treatment Dunham received?
Or would accounts be frozen and Web sites seized by the government? Would arrests be forthcoming? Would a media firestorm ensue?
What man here is willing to take this risk under his real name?
The Lena Dunham Thread - Roosh - 11-02-2014
This is a much better piece to go after Gawker with:
https://archive.today/qTJb2
Jezebel reviewer condones Lena's molestation by calling it "welcome" and "old fashioned"
![[Image: SVMdQ36.png]](http://i.imgur.com/SVMdQ36.png)
The Lena Dunham Thread - kbell - 11-02-2014
Next episode of Girls, the episode will all be about child molestation. How each character has molested their siblings, and its okay, they aren't going to prison because they are women. Than some white dude will go to prison for the same thing.
A coordinated review system will praise how brave Lena is to tell her story.
The Lena Dunham Thread - Days of Broken Arrows - 11-02-2014
Quote: (11-02-2014 09:52 AM)kbell Wrote:
Next episode of Girls, the episode will all be about child molestation. How each character has molested their siblings, and its okay, they aren't going to prison because they are women. Than some white dude will go to prison for the same thing.
A coordinated review system will praise how brave Lena is to tell her story.
"Than some white dude will go to prison for the same thing."
No, he'll go to prison for "catcalling," while they get off scot-free for child molestation and incest. This is a good place to repeat my favorite Heartiste/Roissy quote which applies. And to mention that anyone on Twitter should make sure to Tweet news of this to him since he has a huge and influential following.
"The goal of feminism is to remove all constraints on female sexuality while maximally restricting male sexuality" -- Heartiste
The Lena Dunham Thread - iamdegaussed - 11-02-2014
The perfectly natural adult male sex impulses are shamed and derided.
This mentally imbalanced child molester is celebrated.
Tagging out of society now. I'm done. I can't do this anymore.
The Lena Dunham Thread - MattW - 11-02-2014
I dislike Lena Dunham as much as the next guy here but she was 7 when she did all that. I doubt you'll score any points by pointing to bad stuff someone did when they were that young.
The Lena Dunham Thread - Days of Broken Arrows - 11-02-2014
Look at this article I found.
In Oklahoma on Sept. 24 of this year, an ex-preacher was charged with a felony because police say a fictional story about three minors engaging in sexual acts was found in his home.
Got that? He was arrested for a fictional story about child porn. I don't think people are getting how heinous a crime the US sees this as.
"Prosecutors charged 65-year-old Larry Jones on Tuesday with possessing obscene or indecent writings.
Jones is the former pastor at McAlester Missionary Baptist Church. His wife, who has since left him, told police she found a story inside their home about a sexual encounter with three children who attended the church."
Sorry for all the bold, but this guy was busted for writing kiddie porn fiction!! Meanwhile Dunham not only wrote about child molestation but copped to it (and again, I'll repeat there was more besides her looking in her sister's vagina). Does anyone else see the insanity and double standards here?
I really think it's time for Return of Kings to put together an article looking at these laws and asking why Dunham is walking the streets and this guy got busted. Law Dogger would be a good pick to write it -- and feel free to use my above research.
The Lena Dunham Thread - Ryre - 11-02-2014
Quote: (11-02-2014 11:07 AM)MattW Wrote:
I dislike Lena Dunham as much as the next guy here but she was 7 when she did all that. I doubt you'll score any points by pointing to bad stuff someone did when they were that young.
I agree; I'd love to jump aboard this bandwagon, but this falls more in the category of kids playing doctor. Something adults would stop if they caught you at it, but not a crime.
However, some of the anecdotes from her book, from what I've seen in the press, may have happened when she was older. She talks about bribing her sister with candy for kisses. You can't really bribe a one-year-old. Does anyone know, did these behaviors go on when she was older? A twelve-year-old doing stuff to a 6-year-old is a lot different than 7 and 1.
The Lena Dunham Thread - Downtown - 11-02-2014
seven year olds know what they are doing. they know the difference between right and wrong and certainly that you dont mess with anyone's "private parts"
frankly i'm astonished her editor allowed it.
The Lena Dunham Thread - Slim Shady - 11-02-2014
You can't just say "this shit happens when you are seven".
I'm not even saying this from a legal standpoint. Obviously you should be given leeway at 7. The point is that it is a sign of a mentally sick person. You don't just abuse someone at that age unless it is imprinted on you somehow. Possibly from abuse by a parent/relative/neighbor towards you or someone you know. Even before this you could take one look into Dunham's eyes and tell she was vacant and sick inside. Now you know there is some deep scarring down there.
So what does this do? 2 things:
1) More evidence that feminists are broken and sick people.
2) The main problem is not what she did at 7. It is that she denies that it was wrong TODAY. That is the hypocrisy. Deep hypocrisy. Mark Wahlberg was a crazy goon in his teens. He was psychopathic. He lives every day today trying to atone for those "sins".
The Lena Dunham Thread - Ryre - 11-02-2014
You know, the irony here is that Dunham is mad about being as she sees it falsely accused of a sex offense based on events she described in a book...a book in which she also accuses a man of a sex offense. I wonder if she will still subscribe to the general feminist belief that false accusations are no big deal?
The Lena Dunham Thread - Sonsowey - 11-02-2014
^ Yes she will
The Lena Dunham Thread - iamdegaussed - 11-03-2014
During the whole Fappening thing apparently Dunham tweeted that the people responsible were sex offenders.
So according to her, distributing some nude pictures is worse than actually molesting a child. Jesus wept for the culture that made this person relevant.
The Lena Dunham Thread - 2Wycked - 11-03-2014
Even when condemned, left-wing outlets try to cover her up:
Quote:Quote:
How was Lena allowed to print that? Where were the gatekeepers? The friends? The editors? How did no one in the process of book proposal to book writing to book editing to book publishing not say “hey. We should probably leave this part out?” Was discernment busy? In the grand life of Lena Dunham, was finding pebbles in her sister’s Love Pocket so important that it just had to be in her memoir?
You mean in the life of Lena Dunham as told by Lena Dunham, raping her sister isn't as important as telling the grand narrative of Ms. Dunham as told by Ms. Dunham?
Rape and sexual assault are always relevant to any story.
To complain about their exclusion from a non-fiction book speaks to nothing but the desire to ignore allegations of rape and sexual assault.
The Lena Dunham Thread - Days of Broken Arrows - 11-03-2014
Public sentiment seems to be turning against her. Buzzfeed did a story and the comments (esp. the top ones) are overwhelmingly negative. Even the positive ones are negative: Women are even saying things like "OK, so she played doctor, but who would brag about that in their memoir?!"
Since it's a fairly balanced story where they reprint some really anti-Dunham Tweets, I'll include the link:
http://www.buzzfeed.com/ryanhatesthis/le...s?bffbnews
The Lena Dunham Thread - bojangles - 11-03-2014
There's some fucked up apologists on that buzzfeed article, notably not a single one is a man.
The Lena Dunham Thread - Days of Broken Arrows - 11-03-2014
She canceled a book signing in Belgium yesterday and it's being reported as possibly being related to this controversy:
"It comes after Lena hit out at US blog, Truth Revolt, after it published an article claiming that the Girls start had described “sexually abusing” her younger sister Grace during an exert from her memoir. In one revelation, Lena recalls an incident when she found her sister had inserted pebbles into her own vagina, writing: "One day, as I sat in our driveway in Long Island playing with blocks and buckets, my curiosity got the best of me. Grace was sitting up, babbling and smiling, and I leaned down between her legs and carefully spread open her vagina. She didn't resist and when I saw what was inside I shrieked. My mother didn't bother asking why I had opened Grace's vagina… It quickly became apparent that Grace had stuffed six or seven pebbles in there.
"Another extract from the book, Lena also recounted several occasions when she tried to kiss Grace, explaining: “Basically, anything a sexual predator might do to woo a small suburban girl I was trying. Maybe, I thought, she would be more willing to accept kisses if I wore the face mask my grandmother had for when she did her dialysis… What I really wanted, beyond affection, was to feel that she needed me, that she was helpless without her big sister leading her through the world.”
The Lena Dunham Thread - Nemausus - 11-03-2014
A few thoughts.
First off, the fact that there is a demand for an unremarkable 28 year old's memoir points to how broken the current culture has become. No wonder she had to dig way back into her childhood to find enough content to put together a book. She's only been an adult 10 years.
What I’m also wondering is how did it take six weeks for this excerpt to emerge? Dunham’s book came out in September, but this story is only making the news in November. Where were all the media people who got advance copies to review? How did the cultural guardians who have built this woman up all breeze past this story and think nothing of it?
Regarding her canceled appearance in Belgium, I have no doubt that the local people on-site shut it down once this story broke. People outside of the anglicized West just won't put up with this crap. Even though Belgium is pretty Westernized, I believe that it's only in the US/Canada/UK type of countries where this girl's "quirkiness" is lauded. Girls outside of the English speaking world take pride in their appearance and don't colour their hair green. They can't relate to this monstrosity.
The Lena Dunham Thread - ddjembe mutombo - 11-03-2014
Quote: (11-02-2014 10:46 PM)Ryre Wrote:
You know, the irony here is that Dunham is mad about being as she sees it falsely accused of a sex offense based on events she described in a book...a book in which she also accuses a man of a sex offense. I wonder if she will still subscribe to the general feminist belief that false accusations are no big deal?
This is exactly what I was going to comment. A feminist icon now has the taste of being accused of assault.
This story is a good resource to gauge people by their reactions. Any normal person should be disgusted by this. Any person (man or woman) that starts rationalizing this is obviously a lost cause.