film / tv / lists / guides / news / love / celeb / video / think pieces / staff / podcasts / web / politics / netflix / advertise / cbr

Lena Dunham Thinks Men Are "Simple," And She's Probably Right Because She Is the Voice of a Generation

By Dustin Rowles | Think Pieces | April 2, 2013 | Comments ()


But look closely enough, and you'll also realize this: Dunham is terrible at writing men. Yes, she does create compelling male characters, but they're not genuine. They are slackers without ambition only capable of being driven by their love of a woman; they are closet date rapists; misogynists meatheads; or they are pu**ies.

Why does Lena Dunham reduce men to walking hard-ons? Because dudes are "simple," as she tells Refinery29 in an interview published this week.

"I think these girls are more tortured by their relationships with each other, specifically Marnie and Hannah, then they are with their relationships to men," she said. "Men are, in some ways, simple, while their ability to get on the same page with each other, at the same time, is more of a challenge."

Exactly! We are simple, aren't we? Give us a beer, a cheesesteak, and throw us a f*ck every once in a while, and we're totally content. Our motivations are driven by women: Our natural state is vegetative, and only for the love of woman and sex are we driven toward success. Our relationships with each other are also very simple: We speak in a bro code; we never have falling outs, conflicts, or tension in our relationships with other men; and all over our communication is done via one-word text message grunts. This is true even of our hipster brethren, whose sensitivity and apathy are but disguises for our laziness. But take away our lady, and we'll CREATE AN APP. We don't have feelings, we only have different sizes of erections.

What I love about "Girls" is that it presents women of a certain age -- warts and all -- in interesting and dynamic ways that few shows have done before. Too often, women are presented as nags, shrews, or sex objects, but "Girls" presents unlikable female characters created by women, which gives us license to dislike them for the right reasons: Because they are unlikable, not because they are Heigl-ian one-dimensional stereotypes.

I'm sure, too, that someone as insightful and sophisticated as Dunham would afford men the same treatment, if we were worthy of it. But we are not complicated. We are simple, primitive people, really. We just walk around sticking our dicks in things, easy in our relationships with both men and women, just waiting for a woman to ask of us a romantic gesture that we will happily oblige -- even if it means running breathlessly through the streets of New York City -- no matter how fucked up and damaged the woman of our affections is. We are simple. We don't understand damage. We only understand that, if we do what a woman wants of us, we will be provided a place to house our c*cks.

And really, why should we bother being anything else when even trendy, intelligent television shows about spoiled but complicated women reduce us to penises with different flavors of one-dimensional dysfunction? Why should we aspire to be anything more than the depictions of men from the voice of a generation. If someone as important and influential as Lena Dunham thinks that we are "simple," then it must be so.



Confessions of a Hater: Top Nine Things Worth Hating This Week | 5 Shows After Dark 4/2/13



Bigots, Trolls & MRAs Are Not Welcome in the Comments

Recent News











Recent Reviews








Privacy Policy