Washingtonpost.com:
CHARLOTTESVILLE — A University of Virginia student’s harrowing description of a gang rape at a fraternity, detailed in a recent Rolling Stone article, began to unravel Friday as interviews revealed doubts about significant elements of the account. The fraternity issued a statement rebutting the story, and the magazine apologized for a lapse in judgment and backed away from the article.
Jackie, a U-Va. junior, said she was ambushed and raped by seven men at the Phi Kappa Psi house during a date party in 2012, allegations that tore through the campus and pushed the elite public school into the epicenter of a national discussion about how universities handle sex-assault claims. Shocking for its gruesome details, the account described Jackie enduring three hours of successive rapes, an ordeal that left her blood-spattered, scarred and emotionally devastated.
The U-Va. fraternity where the attack was alleged to have occurred has said it has been working with police and has concluded that the allegations are untrue. Among other things, the fraternity said there was no event at the house the night the attack was alleged to have happened.
A group of Jackie’s close friends, who are advocates at U-Va. for sex-assault awareness, said they believe that something traumatic happened to her, but they also have come to doubt her account. They said that details have changed over time and that they have not been able to verify key points in recent days. For example, an alleged attacker that Jackie identified to them for the first time this week — a junior in 2012 who worked with her as a university lifeguard — was actually the name of a student who belongs to a different fraternity, and no one by that name has been a member of Phi Kappa Psi.
Whether every detail of Jackie’s account is correct or not is really irrelevant. Sexual misconduct is a national problem and it needs to stop. Colleges and universities need to revamp how they handle these cases as well as how they report the cases to law enforcement.
Something happened to this young woman. She is obviously scarred and damaged from her ordeal. I have no doubt that the media used her and probably misreported what she told them. I sincerely hope that Rolling Stone’s recanting her story doesn’t keep colleges from handling sexual attacks swiftly and severely. I hope it doesn’t keep victims from reporting their injuries. Just because Rolling Stone has recanted its story doesn’t mean this young woman wasn’t raped and traumatized.
I suppose you are talking about this – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juanita_Broaddrick
This looks pretty he said/she said to me.
“Five people have stated that Broaddrick told them about a rape shortly after it allegedly occurred. Of these, two were Broaddrick’s co-worker Norma Kelsey and her sister; Slate Explainer proposes that they may have a grudge against Clinton for commuting the sentence of the man who killed their father, noting further that a third corroborator is Broaddrick’s current husband, who was involved in an extramarital affair with her at the time. Broaddrick did not tell her then-husband, Gary Hickey, of the alleged assault at the time”
Definitely a he said/she said.
Or it might have been a mutual consent situation that turned into a “he raped me” when it got daylight. We will never know. Rape doesn’t sound consistent with the individual in question. Remember, he is a charmer, not a forcer.
I even posted actual, documented victim testimony of this man and not just from one victim, from several of his victims over the years. Some of the victims describe some rather disgusting, physical assaults they suffered by this “sacred cow”. ALL of which were almost instantly deleted from the comments section accompanied by a warning that this subject and this man were not to be talked about.
Just wondering why not, other than he is a “sacred cow”. Do these victims deserve to be heard? To have their stories told? To even be looked at as victims and not just simply dismissed because of who assaulted/raped them?
Are you suggesting that the victims are not having their stories heard because of moderator choices on Moonhowlings?
I agree, nobody has explicitly condoned such behavior. However, why protect the sexual predator/rapist by deleting any mention of his assaults or victims? Is that not condoning by omission/censoring?
Jackson, its old “news.” Nothing ever came of any of it in 20 years. I am not going to give you the stage for old gossip. Period.
Yes, and that isn’t wrong I suppose, it’s not my blog. Just curious as to why…
Saying that I don’t understand sexual assault doesn’t answer the question… not trying to be a smart ass here just looking for clarification as to why victim testimony about being sexually assaulted/raped by “sacred cow” isn’t allowed. But we should take “Jackie” at her word? Just confused, that’s all.
I didn’t say you should take Jackie at her word. I said I felt like something had happened to her. That was my personal opinion.
Frankly, I don’t know what happened. I wasn’t there. I just believe Jackie had some sort of sexual trauma.
@Moon-howler
The psycho stuff mentioned above is coming from Charles C. Johnson. He’s quite a read – angry, misogynistic, and a bit of a blackmailer. I guess Twitter had to rap his knuckles and typing fingers.
There appears to be a desire to make this a conservative/liberal issue, male v. female issue but with little discussion of the violence too many women face.
You’re right – most women our age – I’d venture any age – have experienced plenty of unwanted attention from men whether it’s catcalls, bosses or professors hitting on us, unwanted physical grabbing, or rape. There needs to be a major discussion of what women put up with – regardless of what Clinton, “Jackie”, or any individual person in the news does. Except on this blog and through comments on the WaPo articles on UVa, I haven’t heard any men whining about false rape charges. That’s probably because there aren’t many. And I’d venture to say that most rapes don’t get reported either. Just how many men would report a rape – and why wouldn’t they?
Embarrassment. Supposedly about 1/3 of the sexual attacks in the military are male victims.
Where does one find this Charles C. Johnson?
“There appears to be a desire to make this a conservative/liberal issue, male v. female issue but with little discussion of the violence too many women face.”
I am speculating, that the reason has little to do with the issue of sexual assault, and more about the political leanings of RS, WaPo, feminists, and a perpetual game of political “gotcha”. Our society politicizes every news story, it seems. An officially-certified kook shoots a Congresswoman, and it gets politicized (ie, the shooter MUST be a conservative/teapartier). A puppy could be saved from a storm-drain, and someone, somewhere would politicize it. That is the world we live in, sadly. Everything is Man vs. Woman. Rich vs. Poor. Life vs. Choice. pro-2A vs. Pro-control. Christian vs. Secular. Young vs. Old. Black vs. White. Dog vs. Cat. North vs. South. Redsox vs. Yankees…..Division. Division. Division. We are sold a “zero-sum game” worldview by the media, and our political establishment: If you ain’t winning, you are losing. If someone else is winning, then you are losing.
“Just how many men would report a rape – and why wouldn’t they?” Men of a “certain age” might not, but it would appear that in general, more men are: http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2014/09/12/gq_on_male_victims_of_military_sexual_assault.html
@Steve Thomas
And that polarization is ruining this country. It’s a tactic used by political parties whose candidates profit and the rest of the public suffers.
Very good point, Censored.
Censored, it’s not just the political parties, or the candidates. It’s the “advocates” and the media (new and old), that profits from “FUD” (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt). Neither side of the X vs Y is blameless.
I also agree that the media is to blame as are the special interest groups.
A great analysis (IMHO/YMMV): http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2014/12/08/the_uva_story_unravels_feminist_agitprop_and_rape-hoax_denialism_124891.html
I detected bias there also.
I’m OK with sexual misconduct defined as: “unwanted or uninvited genital contact or breast groping” …provided you make it gender neutral. For example all the slapstick gags that have men doubled over because they have been hit in the genitals should be removed from family shows as inappropriate sexual misconduct. It really hurts to assaulted a man in the genitals and laughing about it is cruel. Teaching kids that it is all god fun because it makes women laugh and men cringe is sick.
I have no problem making it gender neutral. I taught my kids that kicking someone in the groin should only be done if your welfare is at state…as in life.
I don’t think it should ever be used as a joke. Men also need to not make jokes about it.
@Steve Thomas
Too much bias in that article – just look at the title. Just who are these feminists? What do they espouse? It sounds way too right wing. I’m a liberal independent. I’d like to see more discussion on addressing the real issue of rape. I’ve never known a man falsely accused of rape? Have you?
I do know women who have been raped – most while in college both back in the day and fairly recently.
I have never personally known a man who was falsely accused of rape but I have known of them.
Teaching kids that it is all god fun because it makes women laugh and men cringe is sick.”
I hate that as comedy also, but … it’s mostly men that propogate it, not women.
Agreed, Rick.
“I’ve never known a man falsely accused of rape? Have you?’
Actually, I do. Or did. A Marine. He was accused, by name. a “former boyfriend”. The accuser was a female Marine, and the attack happened “off-base”, which got the Onslow County Sheriff’s office involved. She picked him out of a photo line-up. Problem was, he was walking guard-duty around an armory at the time of alleged rape, and this was confirmed by both the Sergeant of the Guard, and the Officer of the Day, that he was at his assigned post, had been present for muster, and wasn’t relieved from his post until well after time she claimed. NCIS (known as NIS at the time) investigated as well. When the case began to crumble, she admitted that she did it to get revenge on him, for breaking up with her, after they had talked about marriage. Problem was, she didn’t know he had been assigned to 30 days of Guard Duty, when she made the claim. This was in 1990 or so.
She should have lost her rank and spent time n the brig. False accusations are a crime.
“Just who are these feminists? What do they espouse?”
That all intercourse, even consensual, is rape.
http://witchwind.wordpress.com/2013/12/15/piv-is-always-rape-ok/
That’s insane. Hopefully they don’t take themselves seriously.
@Steve Thomas
I’m glad that your fellow Marine had an alibi and I hope his accuser was punished. There are too many conniving ex-lovers and spouses out there who try to take advantage of law enforcement whether the tension between them springs from alimony payments, shared property, visitation rights, broken-off affairs. I think most judges and juries see through that crap. But there are still a lot of valid complaints that never are addressed because the victims feel the abuse of the assault was enough and they don’t want to have to undergo more. The UVa case is a good case in point. No one, as yet, really knows what transpired but something more than likely did – whether it’s as the RS article stated or Charles Johnson states – the victim is again under assault.
@Steve Thomas
I have to call hogwash on that definition. Far right conservative men have a tendency to pick the most outlandish definition or sect of feminism to define anything “feminist”. I’ve heard various definitions bandied about by people with varying agenda since before you were born. It’s defined by whatever suits the speaker’s agenda, it seems.
That certainly doesn’t sound like any feminists I know.
I am not even sure that there is one definition of feminism.
Censored, I consider both of us feminists. We don’t believe that. Probably combined we have been married 80 years to the same men. LOL
I can’t not put Al Franken’s joke here …
Limbaugh was railing about how feminists believe that all heterosexual sex is rape, which, I admit, is a belief that’s very hard to defend. The thing is, though, I know a lot of women, almost all of whom consider themselves feminists, and I know only one who actually holds this belief. And we’ve been married nearly twenty years.
I don’t know a single feminist woman who believes that all heterosexual sex is rape. Is this a joke? Most of my women friends are feminists of a sort, whatever a feminist is.
Nobody else is talking about Lena Dunham much here but me, but I have been. I’m going to get off her case. I read what she wrote. She writes about the ambiguity of her encounter and how it took HER a long time to think of it as rape. I’m not sure she could ever explain the incident to a higher degree than she has already. There’s nothing to clarify. Her story was about a drunk, stoned girl being “taken advantage of” in some sense, and her evolving conception of the incident.
Lena Dunham has such horrible social skills there is no telling what she came up with. I haven’t followed the story. Basically, she makes me sick.
@Rick Bentley
No need to get off of her case. She lied.
LENA DUNHAM’S PUBLISHER: Rapist “Barry” Is A Made-Up Character. “Random House, on our own behalf and on behalf of our author, regrets the confusion that has led attorney Aaron Minc to post on GoFundMe on behalf of his client, whose first name is Barry.”
Well I don’t know if it’s as simple as that. She didn’t say that this composite guy raped her really. The story’s not as simple as its being reduced to from a distance.
She seems to have taken liberties with the truth. But what it was in the service of isn’t quite clear. I know it looks like narcissism of some kind.
Did she know this guy Barry – and you can indeed figure out his real name in about 5 minutes if you choose to. Did she have sex with this guy Barry? I’d like to hear one or the other of them talk to that before I proclaim knowledge of quite what’s going on here.
In the end this story probably isn’t worth the effort it would take to disentangle it. Whether Barry ****** did or didn’t have rough sex with her when she was stoned, or if not him someone else, probably isn’t worth a whole lot of detective work.
She may well have pulled something of a “Million Little Pieces” maneuver here. But it’s not obvious why.
See, we always find common ground. She makes me sick too, but for the fact that she is a lousy roll model fpr young people. As much as I can’t stand Kim Kardashian for the same reason, at least KimmieK has fashion sense…if you are an insane person. One thing these two have in common…they both seem to think they are more interesting when naked. They aren’t. Want to be interesting? Keep you clothes on, and save an abandoned dog or cat. Foster or adopt a child. Build a wing on a hospital. Put a library in an inner-city neighborhood. Then you’ll be interesting.
No argument here regarding either woman.
I don’t even think about KimmieK but Lena Dunham is more dangerous to young people. She plays a role where one bad life choice after the other is almost glorified without a clear path that illustrates the self destructive result.
Months ago, she gave an interview saying she talked to mutual friends about this, recently. That her college friends were aware of it. She’d have to be telling lies to people all around her, rather dumbly, to be manufacturing this out of thin air. http://time.com/3445018/lena-dunham-not-that-kind-of-girl-rape-essay/
My bad, wrong link. i saw some other interview where she said she had talkled to a mutual friend before the book was published.
Is Dunham a role model? Where do you get that idea? More like someone that walked on the wild side who is here to tell you what it feels like.
Her show on HBO makes her a role model for misfits. I agree with Steve about her. You know I can’t stand her or the character she plays.
@Censored bybvbl
Ah…you asked. I answered. Before I was born? Madam, I doubt that. I may not be ready for the scrap-heap, but I can assure you, I was alive when Goldwater founded modern conservatism, and I had the honor of voting for Ronald Reagan. You asked, “who are these feminists?”. I provided, (quickly) a clear example. Extreme? Maybe, but isn’t that your favored tactic? Take the extreme example, and use it as a representation of the group? Isn’t that what is at issue with the UVA case? Jackie wasn’t someone who had a bit much to drink, and was taken advantage of by her date (which would be an assault, in this father’s book). No. Jackie was.gang raped, on a broken glass table, by pledging frat boys, who referred to her as “it”…Madam, respectfully, check your dismissive, intellectually dishonest attitude. The UVA story is an indefensible hill. If you really wanted to empower women against the predatory male, you’d be advocating for lifting the bans on students being able to carry guns, and cracking down on underaged drinking. A sober, trained, armed woman is more than a match for any assailant,.and the facts are on my side: woman are the fastest growing group of armed citizens, are some of the most responsible of gun owners. You want feminist equality? Let them arm themselves if they want to. I am 100% in favor of that…paternalistic, conservative me. Make them equal in defensive capabilities. That’s the ultimate in feminism.
I cannot tell you how opposed I am to students carrying guns on campus in downtown Charlottesville. Ask John Mosby why.
All you need is one liquored up jackass to stir up mayhem. Arm girls with mace–fine. We aren’t talking about inner city college life here.
I am all in favor of the entire state cracking down on underage student drinking. I think most social ills in a campus setting probably stem from student drinking, especially binge drinking. Students don’t drink like you or I drink. They guzzle huge amounts of alcohol in a short period of time. Some of them die from doing this each year. Others flunk out, run into social problems, some become early alcoholics, some become promiscuous, the list goes on.
I have no problem with girls being armed when they are home over the weekend and during the summer. I do have a problem with students being armed for obvious reasons.
Rick, are you kidding? Maybe Dunham isn’t a role model to a middle-aged guy, but to a millennial woman, yes, shes a role model. Do you think the DNC/Obama campaign hired her to make a video comparing voting for obama to be as important as losing one’s virginity, because she was just some girl? She’s “someone” in that demographic,.and holds herself out as some feminist icon…and is to a whole bunch of young women.
@Steve Thomas
If you have time to pull a rape whistle, you have time to pull a gun. Nothing says, “Stop! Don’t rape me!” like two to the chest.
And if not a gun….a knife.
@Steve Thomas
Okay, so you were a toddler when I had my first organized experience with feminism. But I can assure you that unorganized efforts started much earlier.
Your hands aren’t exactly clean when it comes to partisan attacks. Although you didn’t mention Charles Johnson’s name, you were the first to giddlly bring the info to this blog. I just thought that everyone should know who the scumbag was who was making the allegations.
“Giddy”….I don’t think I’ve ever been “giddy” in my life. I am not a “giddy” kind of guy. But this story isn’t about me. It isn’t about the blogger who outed Jackie. It’s about a left-leaning publication that was relevant about the same time you were having your first experiences with feminism, publishing a shoddy journalistic hit piece, using a possibly delusional girl as their main source, then disowned her, and the story, when an equally left-leaning publication began to poke holes in the whole thing. It was only a matter of time before someone outed her, as “Drew” may have grounds to sue. And just because this blogger outed her, as classless as it may be, at least he’s just running true to course for what passes for journalism these days. If I were to be “giddy” about anything, it’d be all about watching the hard-left in this country devour itself.
I am not sure how “Drew” has legal standing in this case. Perhaps I missed something, since it is now all blending together.
Steve, I don’t know why you are classifying “hard left” and whatever else. I don’t see this as being on the political spectrum. I am sure that conservatives don’t want their daughters sexually accosted any more than liberals do.
Is it not possible to talk about anything without hanging a political tag on it?
I don’t think UVA is any worse than any other main university as far as sexual misconduct. I just know it better. I have talked to my brother who is a UVA graduate and has worked most of his adult life at a major Midwest university. He would agree with me on that score. However, I saw what I would later describe as a tone of sexual entitlement at UVA that I seriously doubt you would see at JMU. The behavior might be the same but the tone would probably be different. It’s that Wahoo entitlement.
I am also seeing it from many decades away, partially as a townie and from a female point of view. I also have strong roots in the University: parents, aunt, uncles, brother and grandfather. It needs to clean up its act. The story of Jackie was very real in some respects. I also doubted the validity of some of it when I read it. You know, it might have been something as simple as what was posted on Beta Bridge. I just can’t remember now.
President Sullivan is not going to reinstate the fraternities and sororities before the holidays. Good for her. they need to clean up their act. Whether Jackie is true or false is immaterial. Much of what was revealed WAS true, perhaps not the specifics but the general tone of party life, drinking, and treatment of others cannot be denied. That is what needs to be changed.
There’s a hard left in this country?
I wonder where the UVa story would go if “Jackie” had given the wrong fraternity name – either in an attempt to further hide her identity or because she had mixed the frats up. It’s still a crappy idea to name the wrong one purposely.
Its also easy to confuse the various houses if you are drunk or you aren’t into the Greek society. I am not positive I ever knew them ALL. I agree, it was wrong to single out Phi Psi if they had nothing to do with it.
@Censored bybvbl
Censored…please take a gander at my first comment in this thread. I seemed to have had a pretty good handle on how this thing would play out, thus far, and I think it will continue to unfold as I predicted. Doesn’t matter how it would have gone, had she changed the names. People knew her. She, like most kids her age, had a pretty sizable social-media presence, and her association with the “anti-rape-culture” campus groups well known.
Oh…and it appears that she “had given the wrong fraternity name”, because every single verifiable detail has been checked, and found to be false. No party at the named frat on the night claimed. No pledges at that frat during the semester she claimed the incident took place, so no possible “initiation”. “Drew”, her supposed date, someone she worked with at the pool, wasn’t a member of the frat named…he’d already been accepted to a completely different one. She reported (in detail) being raped for 3 hours on top of a shattered glass coffee table, yet her friends who saw her immediately after the supposed party, said she had no visible injuries. No blood. No bruises. She claimed her friends (anti-rape advocates) convinced her not to go to the police, yet when the WaPo spoke to them, they reported that they did in fact tell her to file a report, and it was Jackie who refused.
I wonder where the UVA story would have gone, had Jackie not appeared to have made it up? Let us not forget, by RS editors own admission, they wanted to do a story on campus rape-culture. In the reporters own words:
” “First I looked around at a number of different campuses,” said Erdely. “It took me a while to figure out where I wanted to focus on. But when I finally decided on the University of Virginia — one of the compelling reasons that made me focus on the University of Virginia was when I found Jackie. I made contact with a student activist at the school who told me a lot about the culture of the school — that was one of the important things, sort of criteria that I wanted when I was looking for the right school to focus on.”
More here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2014/12/05/rolling-stones-disastrous-u-va-story-a-case-of-real-media-bias/
The WaPo also points out that the RS reporter spoke to many schools:
“Erdely interviewed students from across the country. She talked to people at Harvard, Yale, Princeton and her alma mater, the University of Pennsylvania. None of those schools felt quite right. But one did: the University of Virginia, a public school, Southern and genteel, brimming with what Erdely calls “super-smart kids” and steeped in the legacy of its founder, Thomas Jefferson”.”
She couldn’t find the “rape-culture” she was seeking. Not at any of the other schools….then she met Jackie. Jackie had a story to tell, and by the reporters own admission, she’d found what she was looking for:
“Erdely discussed some details of her reporting that didn’t surface in the story. Erdely alleges Jackie had told her some chilling things about the run-up to the alleged gang rape. As lifeguards at the U-Va. pool. Jackie couldn’t figure out why “Drew” was paying attention to her when the other female lifeguards were “model-gorgeous blondes,” said Erdely in the interview. “‘He was paying so much attention to me, showing so much interest in everything I had to say,’” Erdely said, paraphrasing Jackie. “And all she could think is that [Drew] was probably grooming her for something like this, and testing her for something like this.””
And I found THIS passage particularly compelling:
“”Observe how Erdely responded to a question about the accused parties in Jackie’s alleged gang rape. In that Slate podcast, when asked who these people were, she responded, “I don’t want to say much about them as individuals but I’ll just say that this particular fraternity, Phi Kappa Psi — it’s really emblematic in a lot of ways of sort of like elitist fraternity culture. It’s considered to be a kind of top-tier fraternity at University of Virginia…It’s considered to be a really high-ranking fraternity, in part because they’re just so incredibly wealthy. Their alumni are very influential, you know, they’re on Wall Street, they’re in politics.””
I gotta say, I am impressed by WaPo’s approach to this story. Surprised even. So, Yes Virginia…er, I mean Censored…there IS a Hard-Left in this country. It’s populated by the reporters and editors of Rolling Stone, the Jezebel blog, those who manufacture fake “cultures” “wars” and “climate change”. They protest at occupy events, and smash windows at IMF and World Bank meetings. They permeate academia. They inject race, gender, class, and orientation into every discussion…and they pander….Oh do they pander.
But I don’t think left/right has much to do with this story. Yea, the people who protest the world trade meetings are extreme. Not sure they are even part of a political movement. I always thought they were just protest groupies. Do you see them at the Democratic National Convention? Not on the inside. Maybe on the streets.
I do believe we have various cultures in this country. Some of them are propagated by people like Bill O’Reilly. Doesn’t he even have a book about culture warriors? Climate change? That science, not a culture. How about the earth as the center of the universe? That was probably a big one back in the day.
@Moon-howler
“I have no problem with girls being armed when they are home over the weekend and during the summer. I do have a problem with students being armed for obvious reasons.”
Ok, so you are fine with a 21 year-old (the minimum age to get a CHP in VA) being armed off-campus, but not on, because college kids drink…a lot. So why not ban driving while at school? After all, far more incidents result from drinking and driving, than do from drinking while carrying. So, let’s ban driving on campus. Also, since Mace or Pepper Spray is permitted for on-campus carry, it is obviously ineffective at preventing sexual assaults, since there is an obvious rape-culture at UVA… It says so right there, in the Rolling Stone….
Snark aside, I do agree that the root of much of the problem lies with underage drinking, and the overall “party culture” a particular school. Also, for the record, I am no fan of “Greek” organizations…really. I thought them silly, and am glad that no such organizations existed at my school…but cadets had their companies, battalions, and there were groups formed around a branch-of-service. During my entire college career, I drank exactly two beers. No parties. Year-round student. Double load. Major/minor…and was accountable to the Professor of Naval Science, a Marine Colonel, applicable regulations, and the UCMJ, so my college experience was “different”…and I’d say, “better”. I don’t feel like I missed out on anything.
It doesn’t sounds like we are in that much disagreement. Not everyone carries Mace or pepper spray so we cant really assume much of anything. I just don’t think guns are a good idea at colleges and universities. Now, those who live off campus can probably keep an arsenal if they want–just keep the guns off campus. Not sure how that applies at various schools. I know that Hampden Sydney encourages guns. I believe there is an on-campus arsenal.
From their website:
http://www.hsc.edu/Student-Life/The-Key-Student-Handbook/IV-Rules-Governing-Student-Life/Student-Justice-System/Appendices-of-Justice-System/Firearms.html
I really do not think that she’s a role model. “Representative”, one could argue. I think that people enjoy her show because of the smart writing and the feeling that we’re being immersed in something we wouldn’t normally be involved in.
I don’t think that young women are looking to Dunham to take a cue about being themselves unapologetically. They’re generally doing that. Traditional concepts of female manners broke down independently of anything that Dunham ever did or wrote.
If I’m wrong, expect a plethora of young women who squat down and urinate in public, and shove pencils in their ears under stress.
God I hope not.
She still represents a type of independence to those who are misfits and lack social skills.
I really do not think that she’s a role model. “Representative”, one could argue. I think that people enjoy her show because of the smart writing and the feeling that we’re being immersed in something we wouldn’t normally be involved in.
I don’t think that young women are looking to Dunham to take a cue about being themselves unapologetically. They’re generally doing that. Traditional concepts of female manners broke down independently of anything that Dunham ever did or wrote.
If I’m wrong, expect a plethora of young women who squat down and urinate in public, and shove pencils in their ears under stress.
“holds herself out as some feminist icon”
I don’t think she sees it that way. Or that most people younger than us would.
sorry about the double post
I don’t think that most young women are going to feel any urge, if they watch “Girls”, to urinate in public, or to begin a bizarre sexual relationship with an insular nerd who wants to pretend he’s raping a schoolgirl. Any more than viewers of Breaking Bad, who immersed themselves in that world, are going to want to cook meth. Or that viewers of “Mad men” want to become alchoholics.
Ah…mad men. Another show that makes me want to take a baseball bat to my own TV. Girls embarrasses me. I am embarrassed for the characters. Man Men enrages me. That is far too close to the way things were. That Pan Am show that mercifully went off the air also enraged me.
“Girls” doesn’t bother to put signposts saying “this is bad” all over the place, but I think that it is not attempting to glamoirize. The initial concept was to do a more “realistic” Sex and the City. I.e. instead of showing cosmopolitan life as a series of glitzy romances, show young women going through STDs and abortions and drug problems.
Perhaps. I will say that theory is plausible.
@Rick Bentley
“I really do not think that she’s a role model. “Representative”, one could argue.”
A distinction without a difference, but you and I can respectfully disagree here.
“I think that people enjoy her show because of the smart writing and the feeling that we’re being immersed in something we wouldn’t normally be involved in.”
I like the Walking Dead, House of Cards, Vikings, Lilyhammer, Longmire, and Justified. Smart writing and immersion in something I hope to never be involved in.
“Traditional concepts of female manners broke down independently of anything that Dunham ever did or wrote.”
Chicken v. Egg, perhaps? Is she a product of the “new feminism” or does she perpetuate it? If all she did was live her life, I’d say the former. But considering she writes and stars in a show, and has published an auto-bio, I’d argue the latter. Are “Gangsta Rappers” products of their urban sub-culture, or do they perpetuate it? Same-y-same.
I sometimes watch her show I don’t enjoy it. It makes me horribly uncomfortable and I am embarrassed for the characters because they have such ho level. rrible social skills. They are losers on every level. I don’t find that they have anything to do with feminism, at least the feminism I can relate to.
Real feminists have pride in their own accomplishments and take responsibility for their own behavior.
@Moon-howler
“Real feminists have pride in their own accomplishments and take responsibility for their own behavior.”
Welcome to the “New Feminism”, as represented by Lena Dunham. Academics are calling this “Third Wave Feminism”. Whereas the first-wave issues were political (voting), and civil (property, inheritance), and the second wave regarding career, opportunity, birth-control, the “third wave” is much more cultural, and “in your face”. Music. Manner of dress. Body modification, lesbian (as opposed to general gay rights) issues, Google “Slutwalk” and “Riot Girrrl”, and you’ll get some idea. No, this isn’t your Gloria Steinem Helen Reddy feminism.
Why Steve!! [hands on hips!] Were you painting me in a corner with Gloria Steinem and Helen Reddy?
sigh..you are closer than you think other than I was sort of born to thinking I could do whatever I wanted. I think my father instilled it in me, only to be horrified at the monster he created as I grew up.
I wasn’t part of a movement, I just tried to live it.
I don’t think those people get to define feminism. they haven’t done their homework and they are misfits.
The idea that you should be able to walk down the street wearing whatever without someone taking it as a “yes” might be very true. Should isn’t how the real world works.
Elena and I have already quarreled over this topic. The point is, there are pervs in the world and pervs view almost anything as a yes. If you are at my end of town, it is probably a good idea, especially if you are a young woman, not to dress provocatively. You can live in the real world and carry mace or you can live in the world you think we should have and put yourself at more risk.
Or, you can read the incident reports from the PWC police.
I also have this discussion with my granddaughter. It is why people in our house really inconvenience themselves to make sure she gets to work safely. (talking 4:30 am) Its called dealing with reality.
Yes, it is the same argument as with gangster rap. And the young people see this differently – probably more clearly – than us old people.
Nothing happens without a reason. No one is going to choose to behave like Lena Dunham, or Tupac, unless they want to and it fulfills some psychological need in them.
One of the benefits we get from art, probably the main reason it evolved and that it exists, is our ability to immerse ourselves in situations that we aren’t in and may never choose to be in, but to experience them.
I have half an idea what it would be like to become an amoral drug dealer (Breaking Bad). Or a closeted uptight gay guy coming to terms with himself (Six Feet Under). Or to make the life-altering choice to become sexually involved with a young teenager (Lolita). None of those are on my bucket list. But they’re interesting to see, feel, and reflect on.
I have half a clue what it is like to be a sexually adventurous and socially awkward clever 20-something scraping by in New York and groping towards identity. So thanks Lena.
If you let this kind of thing upset you, for God’s sake don’t watch 10 year old kids playing Grand Theft Auto 5. Video games take this immersion thing to a new level. Most young parents understand this, and aren’t particularly upset by game content.
And whether it’s good or bad to take things to that level – to let young kids immerse themselves in combat games and crime dramas – it’s the world we live in. Big time. Arguing against that is like arguing against the use of electricity at this point. The debate’s over.
So, I personally have loosened up a lot with what sense of right and wrong I had about mass entertainment. At this point, it generally offends me if it is stupid or pointlessly graphic. If it’s well-done – the Sopranos, Breaking Bad, Girls – it’s okay with me. IMO you can let young girls watch “Girls”, and nothing bad is likely to come of it.
I wouldn’t allow my daughter to watch if she was a teenager. the ewwww factor is just too strong.
I have no problem with the Sopranos, Breaking Bad, House of Cards, Homeland, etc. The Affair is pretty good once they aren’t hopping into bed every second. Showtime always has such loud sex. The Tudors was the worst. Geez.
You have to admit, Steve, that we’ve loosened up too. We apparently both enjoy “The Walking Dead”. It’s way beyond any other show in terms of violence. Video game levels. And it takes it further each season.
@Rick Bentley
To your point, if the sex, violence, etc isn’t gratuitous, actually contributes to the story, and leaves more to the imagination, I am pretty much ok with it. I do tend to fast forward through the sex scenes, as they kinda bore me. I’m more about the action, or dialogue. Haven’t watched GoT, and don’t plan to.
My initial impression of “Girls” was that it was full of gratuitous sex, and exhibitionism and narcissism, and that I found it grotesque.
Then, because of critical consensus, I watched it from the start. And realized it wasn’t trying to be exploitative. It was aiming for a certain story, told in a certain way. And I came to enjoy it.
And if anyone can watch the episode where she has the affair with the older Patrick Wilson character (Season 2, Episode 5), and not be impressed, or at least understand that this is a worthwhile show … I’d be surprised.
I think I remember that one.
And she writes funny stuff, too – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dYF33a_BkS8