WARNING: The following passage contains content of a sexual nature. Reader discretion advised.
Anna Merlan’s verdict on a destined-for-infamy scene in Girls can best be understood as a verdict on Lena Dunham’s feminist ethos.
Dunham’s ethos, in turn, can best be understood as an expression of the decadent cultural values of 21st-century “progressives”:
They are the Nowhere People — rootless, without loyalty to family, community or religious tradition, and thus “free” to create for themselves imagined identities and idiosyncratic belief systems. Although they usually think of themselves as unique individuals, they are really sheep in a herd, predictable and therefore ultimately boring. Any politics, as long as it’s not conservative politics; any religion as long as it’s not Christian religion; any sexuality as long as it’s not normal sexuality.
So when HBO provides a dishonest pervert like Lena Dunham a platform from which to promote these values, our objections and criticisms are automatically rejected as illegitimate if expressed in terms of our own preferences — Christian, conservative, normal.
Dunham deliberately degrades the most attractive actress on the show — Allison Williams, daughter of NBC News anchor Brian Williams — by depicting her engaged in a shameful (to say nothing of unhealthy) kind of depraved sexual activity, and why? Because it is necessary, in the feminist mind, to believe that human beings are incapable of finding pleasure in sex that is healthy, wholesome and consistent with traditional morality. A husband and wife happily having normal intercourse together? This is impossible, according to feminist theory, which construes heterosexual love is inherently oppressive to women.
“Male sexual violence against women and ‘normal’ heterosexual intercourse are essential to patriarchy because they establish the dominance of the penis over the vagina, and thus the power relations between the sexes. . . . There are numerous examples of ways that heterosexual practice establishes male domination in women’s most private and personal spheres. . . . Men see women as objects for their sexual gratification.”
— Dee Graham, Loving to Survive: Sexual Terror, Men’s Violence, and Women’s Lives (1994)
Heterosexual intercourse — note how Professor Graham placed “normal” inside scare-quotes — is a horrific experience inflicted on women through “male domination,” you see. If a male obtains “sexual gratification” from a woman through “heterosexual practice,” this means she has been victimized by his “sexual violence.”
Feminism’s implacable hostility to marriage and motherhood — especially as these institutions are understood by Christians — inevitably produces a rhetoric that is anti-male and anti-heterosexual. Male sexuality must be demonized, and women’s universal victimhood asserted, in order to justify the feminist project of destroying the basic institutions our society. The feminist rhetoric of “gender,” aimed at subverting our normal understanding of masculinity and femininity, is an integral part of this project. Normal women prefer masculine men and normal men prefer feminine women. Therefore, if feminists can teach young people to reject their normal “gender roles” by teaching them that these roles are oppressive, this androgynous “equality” will make it more difficult for young people to form normal relationships as adults.
“Social constructions of gender, like power, stem from patriarchal ideologies . . .
“Environmentally speaking, gender is independent of sex . . . and signifies the social constructedness of what maleness and femaleness mean in a given culture. The hierarchy that implicitly positions men above women due to reproductive difference, is a harmful one.”
— Amy Austin, “Patriarchy and the Problem of Being Born Female,” Aug. 9, 2014
Parents who wish their children to be successful and happy adults, and who therefore encourage boys to be masculine and girls to feminine, are seen by feminists as part of a system that oppresses unhappy weirdos and miserable failures. In order to satisfy the resentments of unattractive women, the normal admiration of beauty must be prohibited — the “male gaze” reduces females to being “sex objects.” In order to compensate unhappy women for their personal failures, male achievement must be derogated as social injustice — men’s success is presumed to be unfairly obtained through discrimination against women.
These feminist beliefs serve the function of telling unhappy women that they are never responsible for their own unhappiness, and the propagation of this belief system provides career opportunities for women like Lena Dunham whose only claim to fame is her devotion to feminist ideology. No matter how wretched Girls may be — it’s supposed to be a “comedy” — critics feel obligated to praise it, because Dunham presents herself as a feminist and the show’s themes are therefore interpreted as feminist messages, even if this involves the celebration of Allison Williams getting a “desperately unfun” rimjob.
The editors of Huffington Post are required to heap unmerited praise on “the incisive, witty and hilarious dialogue that Dunham and the rest of her writing team come up with every week,” and cite as examples these lines from the first episode of the HBO show’s fourth season:
Hannah on preparing to move: “I don’t usually pack. I usually leave my crap in a pile and hope it makes it to where I’m going.”
Shosh on life after college: “I finished my degree. And now I’m just in the world, trying to get ‘er done.”
How incisive! How witty! How hilarious! Between this alleged brilliance and Allison Williams getting a rimjob, we can expect Lena Dunham to collect another pile of Emmy Awards for Girls.
No one can be permitted to criticize this phenomenon as what it actually is — a deliberately perverse insult to our sense of human decency — because telling the truth about feminism is a hate crime.
First published at TheOtherMcCain.com
The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Barb Wire.