Jack Road wrote:Perhaps foible is too relaxed. I'll change it "So far, Dunham has decided to write in a book that she committed sex crimes against her younger sister, while both of them were juveniles. If her sister is not pressing charges, why exactly do we care?"
I'm prepared to allow almost anything, as long as we settle on the discussion on why we care. This seems like a publicity stunt, perhaps because it was introduced as a stunt and then highly publicized?
This is not like Senator Whatsist accidentally confessing that he likes little kid butts on a radio show. Confessing something in a self-published biography is about as well rehearsed as BP confessing to an oil spill. There is absolutely zero chance that she did not see this response coming, and therefore I must assume she intended for this response to happen. At which point, the only position I can take is that I don't care and any judgement should come from her sister pressing charges and not involving me at all.
If Dunham was found out as a rapist, I could talk about her in relation to all sex crimes. When she tells the story herself in a book, she is either aiming for preventative damage control or aiming to become the center of a heated discussion. Neither of which interest me.
I care because people are defending her. It's a sign of how spineless our media can be and how afraid we are to offend popular feminists. I understand that it's likely this was done intentionally to stir up controversy, but if so, I feel like it's pointless to rebel by ignoring it. Also, I'm not so sure it was intentional. Her lawyers are suing over it, and Dunham herself is responding in such a stupid manner that it's hard to give her intelligence the benefit of the doubt.