BEST EPISODE OF THE BEST SHOW ON TV
Girls Episode 7: Welcome to Bushwick, aka The Crackcident
Lena Dunham continues to hit it out of the park with her HBO hit Girls. The show is a heady mix of brilliant comedy and gritty emotional realism as experienced by coddled and helicoptered Millennials.
The best of the best:
K-I-S-S-I-N-G
Regular readers know I’ve been guilty of hoping for a happy ever after for Hannah and Adam. My wish came true this week, and it looks like they’re officially BF and GF, if only for a moment.
In Adam, Dunham has created a sympathetic villain. In prior episodes we’ve seen a narcissistic hedonist whose only feelings for Hannah appear to be sexual. The beauty of the writing is that Hannah is every bit as self-absorbed. She is more ruthless in her pursuit of a relationship with Adam than he is in his willingness to sex her up. More ruthless in fact – not only does Adam not text Hannah for sex, he is only intermittently responsive to her overtures.
While it’s been tempting, for me at least, to label Adam a douchebag who only wants one thing, this week Dunham exposed Hannah for her own lack of empathy and her objectification of Adam.
As the show opens, the Girls are arriving at a warehouse party in Bushwick. Though it’s packed with hundreds of young people, Jessa declares the crowd amateur, until she spies one particular guy dancing under a black light, surrounded by girls while throwing one over his shoulder.
Jessa: …although I do love a man who only hangs out with dykes. Look at them – they’re falling all over him like he owns a Home Depot.
Hannah: OK, that’s Adam.
Jessa: He does sort of look like the original man…
Hannah admits (once again) that Adam hasn’t replied to her texts in over two weeks, but sidles over to him in hopes of being seen. He does see her, immediately calling out to her and telling his friends, “You guys, that’s Hannah!”*
*This is our first clue that Hannah has some sort of significance in Adam’s life.
When Tako asks Hannah if she knows Adam through AA, she is surprised when Hannah is clueless, saying that she assumed anyone who knows Adam that well* would know about his alcoholism.
*Second clue.
Adam continues to tear up the dance floor, bopping around and being generally ridiculous, clearly having a great time. When Hannah finally does come over to say hi, he greets her warmly with a kiss and spends the rest of the party dancing with her.* (In keeping with his odd sensibilities, he shimmies behind her while shaking her cardigan up and down.)
*Third clue.
Though the party is still going strong, Adam invites Hannah to “come with” to the rail yard for scrap metal and they take off on his bike. When Hannah winds up getting thrown from the handlebars she becomes peevish with him.
Hannah: Tako told me that you’re an alcoholic.
Adam: I don’t drink, now.
Hannah: But you’re like in AA, that’s like a whole thing you never told me.
Adam: It’s been a part of my life since I was 17. It’s a big part of my life.
Hannah: …but you never told me!
Adam: You never asked!
Hannah: Was I supposed to fucking guess? Because you don’t really seem like you’re in recovery from much and I think you might be a sex addict.
Adam: You’re right, I may be.
Hannah: Again, that’s shit you should have shared!
Adam: You never asked! You never ask me anything besides “Does this feel OK?” or “Do you like my skirt?” or “How much is your rent?” I’m not gonna fucking talk your ear off about shit you don’t ask me about.
You don’t want to know me. You want to come over in the night and have me fuck the dogshit out of you then you want to leave and write about it in your diary. You don’t want to know me!
Hannah: Do you ever even think about me when I’m not there?
Adam: See?! …Look kid, I don’t know what you want from me. Do you want me to be your boyfriend? Is that it? Do you want me to be your fucking boyfriend?
Cut to cab ride with Hannah looking radiantly happy and satisfied.*
*Fourth and final clue.
Here’s what Dunham had to say about this development:
Although he hasn’t been very good to her, she hasn’t really made an effort to get to know him either. The relationship’s been very much about her and her own perception of herself. In a way, this is very cathartic for them. I loved that idea of, please for just one episode, seeing her overjoyed about what’s going on between them.
Although Hannah and Adam’s quirks are exaggerated for comic effect, the dynamic between them is quite typical. What’s more, many (if not most) of the relationships I’ve observed among people that age has followed a similar path.
Recently I was discussing this with a young woman who went to school with my kids. Nina hadn’t ever had sex casually in college, but recently she met Sam through her social circle. He let it be known that he was interested in her. She could feel him staring at her, could sense his nervousness and his attraction. She also knew that his two prior relationships had become established only after a period of hooking up without strings (as is typical).
She decided to go with it – to try hooking up and see where it would lead. From the start, her intention was to get into a relationship, though she didn’t voice this. They hooked up regularly for about a month, and came to be regarded as “together,” if not official. He told her that he really liked her and wanted to know if she felt the same. She said she did.
The following weekend Sam was friendly, but didn’t single Nina out for any particular attention. Things had obviously cooled off but she didn’t know why. He later told a mutual friend that he felt that things were heating up and he wanted to take a step back. Nina’s response to this was to call a halt – not by telling him, just by making it clear she was done, allowing their connection (and their history) to fade away. Within two weeks they were acting friendly again, as if nothing had ever happened between them.
In describing this, Nina voiced disappointment that her hookup experiment had been a failure. I pointed out that while it might have been doomed in any case, the truth is she pulled the plug after one month. He probably would have taken a break, come back to hook up again, and it wouldn’t have surprised me if at the two month mark they told each other, “I don’t want you f*cking anyone else” and Presto Change-o, official boyfriend and girlfriend!
It may be a back asswards way of connecting with someone, but it’s the norm. Lena Dunham is doing a great job, and a great service, in portraying the reality of relationships today.
ME-ME-ME
In this episode, Dunham strips away all pretense and shows Marnie for the entitled, selfish girl she is. Charlie’s band is playing at the party, and as Marnie arrives, she frets, “I just hope Charlie’s OK seeing me.” Wearing a dress that Dunham describes as being appropriate for a Bar Mitzvah rather than a hipster bash, Marnie watches Charlie’s band Questionable Goods as they’re finishing their set. She observes Charlie with an air of patronizing, wistful nostalgia before approaching him to say hi.
Charlie: It’s nice to see your face.
Marnie: Yeah, I thought it might be…All I ever wanted was for you to be able to find satisfaction outside of our relationship.
Moments later Marnie meets Charlie’s new girlfriend (Go Charlie!) and after pointing out that it’s only been two weeks, accuses him of being a sociopath. That cracked me up – after years of enduring being called “bitch” and “psycho” by exes, women finally have a rejoinder!
Marnie spends the rest of the party boring a bearded hipster to tears with her self-pity, and gets slapped in the face by Hannah’s gay ex after he calls her out on her selfishness and she tells him his singing voice sounds like a sack of crying babies.
Props to Dunham for giving Charlie a happy ending while letting Marnie stew in her narcissism. Scenes from next week show more of the same.
C-R-U-S-T-Y
Jessa’s embarrassingly horny employer shows up at the party with a bottle of wine and his Shogun hairdo only to embarrass himself terribly by dancing worse than Elaine from Seinfeld. If Jessa ever found him attractive, she doesn’t any more, so at least we’re spared the pain of seeing the old goat take his clothes off.
There’s a moment of growth for Jessa in this episode – after Jeff begs her to spend the night with him, she takes responsibility for her behavior and realizes how it would be not only pathetic but so very wrong to hook up with this man.
C-R-A-Z-Y
Shoshanna spends two hours alone at the party wearing an outfit that looks like she swiped it from a nursery school dress up box, complete with a two-finger rhinestone ring in the shape of a bow. She proceeds to inadvertently smoke crack (she thought it was pot) and goes completely loco. There’s a funny scene where Ray chases her all over Bushwick in an effort to keep her safe. When he catches her, her sequined skirt is gone and she’s wearing just Spanx. She attacks him in “self defense” and when she realizes her mistake, offers to make amends:
Last semester, I took a Sports Therapy class to meet jocks – it was mostly Indian girls – but I could massage you in a non-sexual way if you want…
Ray and Shosh have a moment, and I’m pretty sure it moved. Zosia Mamet is proving to be the most endearing character on the show, with her huge eyes darting nervously around every time she gets close to a guy.
Lena Dunham owns the topic of Millennial angst as part of the early 21st century zeitgeist. HBO executives were apparently surprised to learn that 60% of the show’s viewers are male. That in itself is a huge accomplishment; Girls may be written by a woman, but she’s got a great handle on what Boys are up against too.
{ 324 comments… read them below or add one }
1 2 3 »
Yay, I’ve never been first at HUS before.
@Cooper
I read it a bit differently (of course). I think that Adam feels resentful that Hannah has been using him for sex —-> relationship without trying to get to know him at all. I’d say on a scale of 1-10, Hannah’s interest in Adam as a person has gone from 1 to 6 this week. She’s still an immature, self-centered Girl, though.
We don’t know what Adam’s interest was before now, but based on the clues I noted I think there was some. He is clearly willing to give it a shot, and scenes from next week show him hanging in her apartment. Adam Sackler leaves his natural habitat!
My wish came true this week, and it looks like they’re officially BF and GF, if only for a moment.
I won’t get too excited if I were you, SW. I’ve bolded the keywords.
We don’t know what Adam’s interest was before now, but based on the clues I noted I think there was some.
Well, however interested he was, it was enough to drive him to discuss Hannah with the lesbians, perhaps seeking a woman’s opinion. The inadvertent result is that Tako flirts with Hannah, so he obviously made her sound hot.
Moments later Marnie meets Charlie’s new girlfriend (Go Charlie!) and after pointing out that it’s only been two weeks, accuses him of being a sociopath.
Interesting how art had mimicked real life in my real life this week.
A good friend of mine is in the process of divorcing her husband of 20 years. He is a locally famous surgeon and a huge narcissist. In the last few years, despite the fact that she really put family first, gave up a career, and supported him in every way possible, he has become very emotionally abusive of her–mostly I think as a result of some career setbacks he’s suffered.
This weekend he moved in with another woman and her kids. My friend is just crushed by how easy it was for him to get over her and move on.
It is truly shocking to women how easy it is for men to move on.
@Susan
You definitely will have me re-watching this episode.
I still think you’re all wrong about Adam. I suppose maybe I missed the clues that he actually cares about her involvement in his life.
To me, it just can’t work. With the way he talks to Hannah it’s like it all is a wash to him – he was quite willing to grab his backpack and bike off. Sure he asked if she wants him to be her boyfriend, but once again he seemed more concerned about simply defusing the tension than conveying emotional interest.
Susan, I hope you won’t get too upset when I say “I told ya so” when Hannah finds out he has never had long-term plans with her – he once said “I’m done growing, kid.” (I think his “kid” nickname very much embodies he entire outlook towards her)
Bottom-line, this relationship, as an example, CAN NOT work.
What would the messege be?
That there is a dad beneath every cad? It CAN’T be.
I know the hamsters like to think so, but that would be a horrible moral to the story. I don’t have a doubt in my mind that Adam will disappear soon without so as much as “breaking up” with Hannah.
On another note, what about last episode where Hannah tells Adam she slept with a pharmacist. His first response was “how was it?” And Hannah says, “does that bother you?” And Adam says “Why would it?”
Does that sound like someone who cares about the other intimately? No.
I think I may have been J, or maybe SayWhaat, that said yesterday that this show most definitely has a MO.
I don’t think it’s MO is to tell women whom have men in there live that show no desire for exclusivity – to keep looking for it in them.
Adam has always been quite honest when he has expressed himself – and a desire, OF HIS, for anything long-term or exclusive has not been conveyed.
I think the writers are attempting to show the weakness of the “Hope’s enternal” hamster. I think you still falling for it – in thinking they’re trying to feed it.
Only time will tell.
This show does sound great. It sounds like she wants get from Adam the things that she wants to get from Adam. That is realistic, in my experience.
Susan, the clips you embed are all I get to see of this show, so they’re all I comment on. (It is not yet available where I live.)
I was really surprised at the implication that Hannah doesn’t even know that Adam likes books! (Did I interpret it correctly?) She clearly never took the time to get to know him as a person. If he were my brother, I’d be telling him to get rid of her because he deserves better.
In the last thread, someone contrasted Girls to shows like Gossip Girl, and I had to agree. Marni types would never get this sort of ending on those other shows, if only because they are their heroines.
Really?
Creep
Gross
Dork
Pathetic
Boy (as in, he is just a boy, now I have found me a man!)
Asshole
etc.
In my experience, men either said, “bitch” or “crazy”. I have absolutely never heard a man call his (ex) girlfriend fat or ugly, which are the two biggest shotgun shells he could fire, if he wished.
Bellita, what if your brother said, “Well, we are not actually dating. We just have sex from time to time.”?
In observing this craze, I am left with the discomforting thought that Millenials are the Fish In A Barrel we’ve all heard so much about – and now, heard even more.
I’ve read that men get over heartbreak by immediately finding someone new, usually just to screw as a distraction. Very few women are capable of this. We go all in with the pain, analyse and baby it endlessly, seek comfort, etc.
However, being the rebound love interest for anyone sucks. I don’t think Audrey is going to last very long for Charlie if he has any balls at all. Unless, of course, he’s not really heartbroken. His monologue “I decided on you” sounded like his choice of Marnie was more logical or inertia than passion.
@Cooper
No, I don’t think that will be the moral to the story, haha.
One thing I’ve noticed is that we all assumed at the start that Adam is some kind of player. Now I’m not so sure. He hangs out all night with the lesbians. They know about Hannah, it’s not like he’s never mentioned her. She’s never seen any sign of another girl. He did send that pic of his penis then said it wasn’t meant for her…But she keeps showing up unannounced and he’s always alone.
I think he might be just really odd. And guarded.
In any case, I would not describe him as relationship material. But then again, I don’t think she’s relationship material either. I do think it’s clear from the episode that they both want a connection of some kind. When he yells at her that she doesn’t want to know him, he’s angry. He vents about how little interest she takes in him personally.
I’m happy that Hannah is happy – for now. The coming attraction showed Adam coming at her smiling with a bar of soap in the shower. However you feel about the relationship between them, there is absolutely no doubt that it advanced this week.
The one point I differ on is that the best show currently on TV is Game of Thrones, but Girls is still very good. I enjoy your blog as well, Susan.
@Cooper
You may be right, and I’m right on the front line spinning my wheel at 60 mph. If that is the case, then Lena Dunham has a remarkable insight into both male and female psychology.
@Susan
““I decided on you” sounded like his choice of Marnie was more logical or inertia than passion.”
Thats how most men choose their wife. Passion is based on being the logical best decision.
Not logical choice = no passion long term. May get some short term but thats because the hoe and or bitch hid what she was.
I decide to love my fiance every morning when I wake up. I could just as easily decide to drop her for a newer model.
I don’t because I said I wouldn’t. Therefore I wake up and decide to love her everyday. All she has to do is not fuck it up.
PS The hamster is strong in you young padawan.
@MattW
Thanks! I will agree that GOT is very good. My husband and I enjoy it immensely. In fact, I just bought the audiobook – that should keep us entertained for several long car rides!
PSS Female passion is also based on female logic. The reason it doesn’t look logical is because even Jedi Master level gamers can’t figure it out more than 50% of the time.
“It may be a back asswards way of connecting with someone, but it’s the norm. Lena Dunham is doing a great job, and a great service, in portraying the reality of relationships today. ”
I’d honestly venture to say that it’s the norm because it’s the most natural way for things to occur. It makes a lot more sense on a raw, biological level than a lot of the games we play in the name of courtship. We go full-tilt and connect on a sexual level, and then figure out what all of those feelings mean.
While that can get messy and obviously isn’t always beneficial, I can appreciate that on more of a romantic level than the cookie cutter practice of labels and not doing such and such until X date, and not calling her until this time and blah, blah, blah.
I love the raw purity of these situations when they work out for the best and appreciate writers who can be this honest about how things really go down. That’s why HBO is the best network on TV. … And I gotta agree with Matt, Game of Thrones currently wears the “best show” crown!
@Bellita
Yes, it’s clear that Hannah knows *nothing* about Adam. He knows at least that she is a writer who keeps a diary. The thing is, they’re both highly flawed individuals. The sibling or either one should be issuing warnings. So perhaps they’re well suited for one another? Hey, I just realized this fits nicely into my theory about the promiscuous getting with the promiscuous.
Though, to be fair, I still haven’t watched an entire episode of Girls. I DVR it along with Veep, but have yet to catch up on either.
@Ramble
I think the worst insults are ones that address the general mental health of the other person. After all, I my ex said, “You’re ugly!” I’d just say, “Ha you sure didn’t think so six months ago!”
I know that women *hate* it when guys imply they’re psycho when they ask for information, an explanation or call a guy out for being disrespectful or a douche. Although I think Charlie had every right to go get a gf as soon as he could, I liked it that “sociopath” was her go-to insult, implying that he lacks empathy and compassion if he can switch horses in only two weeks.
I have a certain fondness for calling others sociopaths myself
(But they really are.)
@Susan
“She’s never seen any sign of another girl.”
Never *seen*, yes. What about him talking about condom use? If I remember correctly he couldn’t even remember whether Hannah and him usually use one – and said that he usually doesn’t with other women.
Back to last episode, is it not concerning that he said “why would I?” when asked if her sleeping with someone else mattered to him?
I’ve read that men get over heartbreak by immediately finding someone new, usually just to screw as a distraction. Very few women are capable of this.
I think this is true. My DH was actually excited for this guy (new poon!–which DH seems to think is the new gf’s actual name. He actually refers to her as the new poon.) until he realized that the new gf also had kids and an ex-husband. When he put himself in that guy’s place, it was less amusing.
However, being the rebound love interest for anyone sucks. I don’t think Audrey is going to last very long for Charlie if he has any balls at all.
I think you’re right, both about the show and real life.
@Lokland
That sounds about as strong a basis as I can imagine for marriage. Well put just three days before the wedding.
I know! I’m putting it out there because I think most guys here would describe me as fairly analytical and logical for a girl. So just imagine what other women are thinking!
By the way, in this last episode there was a shot of Adam’s face as he looked sideways at Hannah, and I felt such affection for that big, bumpy beaky nose.
I am truly going to have to eat my words here when this all blows up, I know it.
@Ramble
Bellita, what if your brother said, “Well, we are not actually dating. We just have sex from time to time.”?
Tell him to go to Confession! Hahahaha! But seriously . . .
“I’ve read that men get over heartbreak by immediately finding someone new, usually just to screw as a distraction. Very few women are capable of this. We go all in with the pain, analyse and baby it endlessly, seek comfort, etc.”
This is very true. Once that becomes empty (and it does) then we’re ready for relationships again.
I decide to love my fiance every morning when I wake up.
That’s sort of sweet, Lokland. On one level, women want to think it’s a sweeping passion that keeps men interested in us, but in reality, it’s really more like what you described. Love really is a daily decision to act a in certain way until someone screws it up and then you can’t anymore.
hey know about Hannah, it’s not like he’s never mentioned her.
I might be wrong and call me cynical, but I’m getting the feeling that he might had told the other women that he thinks she is a closeted lesbian, that he would love a threesome with her and another woman or something like it (why else would Taiko flirt with her if he was clear about her heterosexuality?) and she will find out next week, it seems that the show works a lot with the “he says/does something nice this week, next week it was all a lie/misreading”, YMMV.
This is very true. Once that becomes empty (and it does) then we’re ready for relationships again.
And that is why, ladies, you should never be rebound poon.
“And that is why, ladies, you should never be rebound poon.”
That would be wise. Unless you’re able to detach very easily, but most aren’t.
Otherwise, there’s going to be that awkward moment where he can’t answer his phone as much and becomes harder and harder to be reached because he’s becoming closer with the woman who is about to be his girlfriend.
That’s a cold reality.
@Lokland
+1
This is why I think it’s easier for a man to find love. Find decent girl you get along with and just decide she’s the one.
Woman can’t do that?
This is coming from a woman who has said that she had never lacked for male attention, apparently knows exactly how many calories she needs in a day and has a very pretty daughter.
Now, what if your “Adam” spent time grabbing at your fat and, after an argument about whether you are actually dating or not, he said, “Of course not, you are too fat and ugly to be my girlfriend”. (For the record, I am not recommending any of this.)
Or, think of it another way: does your average girl go on a hardcore kick to become more reasonable with a greater sense of justice after a breakup or does she go on a crash diet to lose weight?
Or, let’s come at this from one more angle: would you say that there is a taboo, in popular culture, in calling some girl crazy? What about calling some girl fat? (It’s easiest to to do this with popular sitcoms.)
Cads get with sluts. Right?
Which means that Hannah is a slut. Right?
I agree with what Lokland has said about consciously deciding to love his wife. I think deciding that your “unhappy” is just as a conscious decision.
To relate to the OP, I actually felt like I related to Charlie when he said “he decided on” Marnie. Love is complicated – but if you choose to you can find all sorts of reasons to NOT be in love with someone. I think being in love very much includes being content in not *looking* for such reasons.
Someone on HUS (I want to say Ted D – idk) recently said the reason women choose to admire alpha-traits because they much easier to find. And that it takes more work to find and adore beta-traits. (I believe the phasing “too lazy” was used in the original context)
In that sense, we all choose to adore particular traits in who we love. We all have traits – good or bad. So loving someone is sort of about choosing to find reasons to love that person over finding reasons to leave them.
I could be wrong but I see each of the characters in this show as being a classical relationship stereotype and as the series unfolds it is demonstrating far more realistic outcomes than we would normally see on television …
Adam is damaged goods and Hanna is a naive idealist and she is likely going to get hurt because she believes he can become what she wants him to be; he realistically can’t. Between sending bizzarre dick pictures to strange women, wacking off while Hanna was in the bathroom, and him agreeing with Hanna that he may be a sex addict in this latest episode all the ground-work has been laid for him to cheat on her while he is her boyfriend.
Marnie is the classic Type-A personality, and Charlie is the too-nice of a nice guy. While she is very attractive and will likely be able to find men who are interested in her, her controlling nature will scare away most decent men; and she is probably going to end up with that douchie artist who will use her, make her feel like crap and miss Charlie. At the same time, Charlie is probably going to continue to be successful with women because he brings a lot to the table, and his increased confidence will lead him to be less needy in relationships. These two may end up back together down the road …
I’m not exactly sure what is happening with Jenna, Shoshanna and Ray. I suspect that Jenna is going to continue to be very “liberated” and become progressively more miserable, Shoshanna will continue to be naive (if only for comedic effect), and Ray will be portrayed as being more of a jerk on the outside and an honourable guy inside.
@Cooper
You’re right. I need to find a way to beat this hamster into submission. There are red flags here everywhere we look. Believe me, if my daughter brought Adam home I think I’d have a heart attack.
@J
Wait, what? Audrey does? How did I miss that? She looks about 20!
@Ramble
Fair point – I’ll amend that to say that the worst thing you can call someone is what they secretly fear they really are.
OMG yes! This is a perfect example of how someone with a low number (2.5 in her case – what is that .5 btw? Is she a scrupulous reporter?) can be slutty based on their current behavior. I can’t imagine anything sluttier than the sex she and Adam have had. I wonder if it will change now that they are in a relationship. Or maybe we should not judge her because she is only *his* slut, which is what guys want?
@Cooper
I think part of what makes a successful marriage is choosing someone whose annoying habits you can stand. I’ve heard of women breaking up with men because of the way they folded Kleenex and “the sound of his breathing.” You’re definitely not in love if you can’t stand the sound of your partner’s breathing.
I wouldn’t say that annoying habits become appealing when you love someone, but they don’t matter much. For example, my husband sometimes uses his thumb to push the last bit of food onto his fork. Some small part of me always wants to say, “Use the knife!” but I forget it as soon as I think it.
The other night my husband came upstairs and said he’d known I was already home because several drawers were left open in the kitchen. I said, “Do I do that?” Honestly, I’ve never been aware of it. He laughed and said, “Constantly.”
well, just remember this the next time some paranoid male commenter here goes on and on about various girls getting with Alphas.
Even if the stats say that most people have relatively low numbers (and the most recent college cohort having very low numbers), that does not mean that some girl with a low number was not getting with at least one “alpha”.
Although, for the record, I am more in line with your thinking than theirs.
@Peppermint Panda
I agree. I think part of what people find so refreshing is that Dunham makes her characters accountable. The consequences are natural and real, and I’m sure sometimes people get lucky and don’t have to pay up, e.g. Jessa miscarrying just before her scheduled abortion.
Oh, that reminds me! In the scenes from next week, it looks like Marnie goes on a date with the guy who played the cop in Bridesmaids. I love that guy.
My husband said, “Charlie is in a band in Brooklyn. Now that he’s looking he’s going to meet girls all the time. That’s why most guys get into bands in the first place. It’s gold.”
I think Ray is intrigued by Shoshanna. I thought it was hilarious when Jessa asked Ray about his bug-eyed gf. In the first episode, I thought to myself, “She’s ugly, she has bug eyes!” So I loved that they riffed on that, but then I was a little worried that hurt the feelings of the actress who played her.
I’ve been a mom for so long I can’t view these characters through a lens that is not maternal.
@Ramble
I would not classify Adam as an alpha. For one thing, he doesn’t seem to have earned social dominance among men. Also, he’s just so odd – maybe a sigma? No offense to VD
Wait, what? Audrey does? How did I miss that? She looks about 20!
No, my friend’s husband’ new gf does. I had been comparing Charlie’s alacrity in moving on to a RL situation.
Again, I have never seen one second of this show, so take this with a grain of salt, but…
by everything you explained, he ain’t no beta-bitch. There is no supplication. And, it could be said that he has, so far, used her for sex.
How much social dominance did all of those “alphas” (Mystery and the other PUAs) have when they all lived together in LA? I never read the book, but as far as I can tell, they were all a bunch of prima donnas.
I’d classify Adam as either a Sigma or a lesser Alpha.
Anyway, I just finished watching the latest episode, and I was freaked out by how much I tingled at the following line:
The way he said “fuck the dogshit out of you” stirred something in me.
My attraction cues are an odd bunch.
I think Jessa is my favorite character so far. I can’t really hate her, for some reason.
Marnie is the best depiction of an ice queen that I have seen in a long time. She’s so horribly uptight.
“I would not classify Adam as an alpha. For one thing, he doesn’t seem to have earned social dominance among men. Also, he’s just so odd – maybe a sigma? No offense to VD”
He is a simple-minded boy whose deviousness is in telling pathetic lies to Hannah, and only because she doesn’t call him out on it.
He suffers her too much for the sex to call him either of that. And he should have gone hee-haw when the lardass went sprawling to the ground from his bike.
On Hannah and Adam: Don’t do it Susan, don’t do it…
@ Susan
“OMG yes! This is a perfect example of how someone with a low number (2.5 in her case – what is that .5 btw? Is she a scrupulous reporter?) can be slutty based on their current behavior. I can’t imagine anything sluttier than the sex she and Adam have had. I wonder if it will change now that they are in a relationship. Or maybe we should not judge her because she is only *his* slut, which is what guys want?”
Anddddd this is why fiction is valuable. Use lies to tell the truth
I would absolutely judge her. Because she is not in a committed relationship with Adam and doesn’t even care about him, she is literally using him and just because she wants to be in a relationship. She’s vain and narcissistic. She will never be secure in this relationship. Even if she is, after a short period of time of pure bliss, she will grow bored and dump his ass.
Because…
She. Does. Not. Love. Him.
I doubt Hannah is even capable of love. Which, honestly? I think is something very true about Gen Y. A lot of us just have no idea what it means to truly love someone.
Undoubtedly, when she gets her head out of her ass, she will join the ranks of other girls who realize she doesn’t really like this kind of sex, and tell her next BF “no” a lot, and that he has to wait, and take her out on a nice dinner, because she will still be ignorant of how guys will view her.
BTW, their sex isn’t that slutty. They haven’t even done anal. It looks like there isn’t really any oral action, either, let alone blow load in mouth/swallow. What, doggy-style? Marnie and Charlie did that, too, and Marnie did the ridiculous “OMG degrading” nonsense….but Hannah’s parents, perfectly understanding that it isn’t in anyway degrading to a person’s dignity within a serious relationship.
Cause, you know, they aren’t using each other.
They just love each other and want each other to be happy.
Which is something these Girls know nothing about.
BTW, I called a girl a sociopath once, but she deserved it.
A further thing about being “my” slut. It’s probably a psychological weakness of mine, but to some extent I play into the Heartiste POV here on what makes an Alpha.
Banging a lot of low-quality girls isn’t Alpha. Higher quality makes up for lower quantity. Higher quality can me I invested less time and effort. Higher quality can mean hotter. Higher quality can mean better sex or more degrading sex acts.
Now, from a girl’s POV, this means you can boost a guy’s “score” beyond a mere number.
If you are boosting some other guy’s “score” more than you are boosting my “score,” then I am going to be pissed.
But this may also just be because I am a kinky guy and therefore a girl is probably going to tell me “No,” to something I’d rather want to do. If she said “Yes” to some other guy, who clearly matters less, ADBG be upset.
Susan, I think you and the readers might dig this (relevant to the website) song:
http://youtu.be/H-gfxjAaZg0
Ok-ive been hearing a goodly bit of buzz about dunham and her hbo show girls now for some time now; for whatever reason, the manosphere seems obsessed with it. And since ms walsh seems to have caught the bug, i suppose this is a great time for me to jump into the fray here.
First off-i simply do not get whats the big deal about girls-maybe thats because im not what christian lander referred to as swpl-and two, i dont do “angst”, which is something that swpl folk seem to be very much into, along w/”irony”, “snark” and the like. Being black and coming from a more working class background, i rather enjoy a more…shall we say, direct approach to things.
Moreover, i have to ask ms walsh in particular-how does girls measure up against say, the wire? Granted, the wire wasnt dealing with relationship themes per se-it was officially billed as a crime drama-but im curious to get ms walsh’s take on a kind of comparitive analysis of the two. For my money hbo has yet to top the wire in terms of its sheer and pure grittiness and bracing realism.
From my pov, the “hookup” aspect of girls is in no way anything new to me-black america has long been dealing with this reality and has the battle scars to prove it. Unlike the denizens of girls however, most blacks arent able to protect themselves from the pitfalls of hookup culture, all of which are well known by all of you, no matter how much we’re all not supposed to notice.
From my readng of things in the manospehere, there seems to be a good bit of consternation about the fact that dunham/hannah, can be a less than attractive woman yet still get sex, while more beta guys toil in obscurity. I could be wrong about that, but i think im onto something. A major component of the manosphere seems to revolve around this theme-recall my citing how and why roissy/heartiste continues to play to such a large audience.
Dunham is no looker-she cant hold christina hendricks’ corset-but i think she does make a point about satirizing the full of themselves stance of the nyc swpl scene. And i recall her realworld quip about the movie precious via twitter when questioned about the lack of black folk on the show-something that doesnt bother me one bit because, as someone who knows nyc quite well, i know for a fact that it is very possible to live segregated lives-there are entire sections of say, brooklyn where you wont see a black face for blocks and blocks. I dont see the big deal in that; dunhams just telling it like it is.
But i do see all the fawning over the show just a bit much. Weve always had spoiled brats among us; many of them have made utter messes of their lives; and yea, most women can and will get laid, while most men at the very least, hope to get lucky.
What else is new?
Holla back
O.
Check it out, Susan. Yohami is hating on you again and calling you a…narcissist. Why does he do this all the time? He takes a narcissism test, maxes it out, and then claims he’s not narcissistic. Then he accuses EVERYONE HE HAS A DISAGREEMENT WITH of being a narcissist. Just saying, I’m a long time reader of HUS and while I might not agree with you all the time, I support your freedom of speech, and I admire your strength and courage. Rock on, chica. Rock on.
Check it out, Susan. Yohami is hating on you again and calling you a…narcissist. Why does he do this all the time?
OK. I guess I take back what I said about men getting over things quickly.
@J
Oh, OK, I got confused there.
@Olivia
Thanks for the support. I don’t know anyone who agrees with me all of the time.
Yohami likes calling others narcissists because he gets off on thinking he’s creating others in his image.
At the sight of the title, you made me sing that children’s song I never thought I can still remember.
Regarding the series, I really love the way things are developing around Hannah and Adam.
J,
It is truly shocking to women how easy it is for men to move on.
And vice versa, of course.
Also, he’s just so odd – maybe a sigma? No offense to VD
None taken. My wife learned a long time ago not to ask what I was thinking. Also, I recently learned that when people at dinner parties are discussing comics, they usually prefer to leave the Japanese ones featuring necrophiliac morticians out of the mix.
I haven’t seen the show, but if Adam is a sigma, expect him to springboard to the pretty one soon. And he’s probably already involved with one or more of the “lesbians”. You’re correct, he doesn’t sound like a proper alpha, given his apparent lack of social dominance.
Yohami is hating on you again and calling you a…narcissist. Why does he do this all the time? He takes a narcissism test, maxes it out, and then claims he’s not narcissistic. Then he accuses EVERYONE HE HAS A DISAGREEMENT WITH of being a narcissist.
You’re looking for logic from a musician? They speak in emotional truths, not logical ones, that’s why women love them so much in the first place. Now, don’t get me wrong, I will hear no evil of the man. He is a genius and therefore his idiosyncracies must not merely be tolerated, but cherished. Even his hatred must be received with humble gratitude. “Let’s bring this dream home!”
Seriously, I can’t even think that phrase without it bringing tears to my eyes with silent laughter. I’m typing through the tears right now. It may be the greatest five words ever strung together in the history of the English language. Shakespeare himself would be jealous.
Really nice sentiments at comment #48, Beta Guy.
“He is a genius and therefore his idiosyncracies must not merely be tolerated, but cherished.”
Yeah, I wish Yohami would come back & post here too. He has a particular take on things you can’t find anywhere else. It’s like a colour of the rainbow is missing.
@VD
I hadn’t even thought of this, but that would be a great plot twist. For one thing, how many self-confessed sex addicts are monogamous?
@Obs
It’s apples and oranges. I still think The Wire is perhaps the best television I’ve ever seen. As we know, it’s now taught as a sociology course at several fine universities. It examines and exposes many complicated questions about America. One of the greatest things about The Wire, IMO, is that there is no clear distinction between heroes and villains. Omar is a hero. The police chief is a villain. So while it’s dealing with a macro set of issues, it’s also producing absolutely brilliant portrayals of all facets of human nature. The characters are incredibly well developed, and the acting is nothing short of miraculous.
Girls doesn’t come close, but it doesn’t aim to. It’s the small indie to The Wire’s mega studio production. Dunham is young and talented, but she’s just starting out. So I think we need to calibrate our expectations.
AFAIAC, she is the first person to accurately portray the modern SMP, and she includes many principles and observations from Game. Whether she studied it first hand, or Game has gone so mainstream it’s part of the zeitgeist – I’m not sure. She’s shared stories in interviews of guys spitting game – so my sense is that she’s just using her observations IRL and adding the comedic twist. For example, the artist who tells Marnie she needs to be f*cked by a man – he’s very small, not handsome, and has the ridiculous name of Booth Jonathan. Yet he sends her into a masturbation frenzy.
As I said in another comment, 60% of the show’s viewers are male. That is extremely significant – men trust and believe her to tell it like it is, something they see little of in American TV.
There is no question that Girls is SWPL, and it doesn’t pretend to be anything else. Dunham is sharing what she knows, the first, best lesson of good writing. It doesn’t matter who lives in Brooklyn – the truth is that many social circles are not particularly integrated. I reject the suggestion that Dunham should be creating relationships she’s never witnessed for the sake of political correctness.
First, she’s getting sex from a less than attractive man. Nothing about Adam says ladykiller. He’s running his own brand of asshole game and it works, at least with Hannah. Second, and more importantly, men need to drop the false equivalency of which gender has easier access to sex. Duh! We’ve got eggs, they are very expensive, you’ve got sperm, it is not very expensive. We get to choose. It’s biologically immutable.
The real equivalent is about commitment. Hannah has struggled to get any kind of relationship going. She has had sex with 2.5 men. Adam is one, and Elijah her gay ex is the other. In a very real way, Hannah is in the desert. We may argue about how deserving she is, what she really wants, etc., but from an emotional standpoint, Hannah toils in obscurity.
Actually, I think that there have been a lot of accurate portrayals of the modern SMP, but they were usually a small part of a larger picture.
Roger Dodger comes to mind. Actually, so does The Wire. But they never really delved all that deep into it or focused too much on it. It seems that Girls is the first to do just that. Focus on it.
Of course, there are not that many female creators in Hollywood, and, when we do see them, they tend to focus on relationships.
Is he?
Where would you place his body on a 1-10 scale?
Where would you place her body on a 1-10 scale?
And again, remember that it was not that long ago that very few girls were overweight. And, when thinking about Adam, remember that many guys are overweight.
“I can’t imagine anything sluttier than the sex she and Adam have had. I wonder if it will change now that they are in a relationship”
What was it until now that made it super slutty?
The fact that she was sleeping with him without knowing him? Or that she kept coming back? Or because of the way he treated her (and she kept coming back)?
And with ever made it the sluttiest before, what has changed? (because he is now her “boyfriend” – I can’t stress those quotations enough)
I’m still wondering what Adams’ definition of what he has agreed to, with Hannah, is. I get the feeling he doesn’t understand what the term means to her.
Ramble, I don’t mind male bodies that are a little overweight, especially if there are big muscles under the fat. Personally I much prefer that to the super skinny look. This might be an area where many guys project what they want in girls (small and skinny) to what many girls want in guys (big and bulky). Obviously there are exceptions with girls who love the skinny hipster look, but in general I think girls go for guys who are bigger than themselves.
My personal preference of male body types: well-built and proportioned muscular > extremely muscular > fat over muscle > lean > overweight flabby > ultra skinny > obese.
I don’t know where Adam falls on this spectrum, since I never saw the show, but categorically saying an overweight man is unattractive doesn’t work because a man can be considered “overweight” on the BMI but look very good.
Personally, I would say Hanna and Adam are roughly equal in terms of attractiveness to the opposite sex; and that is to say that neither is particularly attractive.
Hanna is not only overweight, dresses in a way which is unflattering and doesn’t (seem to) put much effort into hair and make-up. I wouldn’t say she is narcissistic (having personally known many narcissists), but she is certainly very self-absorbed and seemingly insensitive.
While Adam may be moderately fit and is confident, he does seem to be socially-retarded and has not direction or purpose in life. His sense of humor is abrasive, and many of his interactions seem very creepy.
This sounds like an odd way to judge how attractive someone’s personality is but when it comes to women imagine her as a mother and when it comes to men imagine them as a super-hero. In the case of Hanna, she is a child and thinking of her taking care of a child is an unappealing thought; and in the case of Adam, I don’t think Creepy-Man would sell many copies of a comic book.
@Ramble
I would give his body a 6-7 and hers a 4-5. However, I would give her face a solid 5, and his a 2.
A 2, wow.
Also, how much weight do you think she needs to lose?
@Susan
When women accepted the double standard on N men accepted a double standard on access.
If women, who control access and have all they want, demand not to be judged for using that access to excess expect men, whose trade-off for lack of access was acceptance when they used it to excess, to demand the same level of access.
It’s another yin-yang aspect of the old double standards. You cannot break half the double standards and expect those left holding the back on the remainder to be happy.
“Although I think, Charlie had every right to go get a gf as soon as he did
Could, I liked it that “sociopath” was her go-to insult, implying that
He lacks empathy and compassion if he can switch horses in only two
Weeks.”
———
She was partially right in referring to him as a sociopath. As I said, Charlie appears to be a gamma male. They just want a girlfriend or a wife and most times their choices in a woman often has very little to do with their emotions. I was not surprised that Charlie moved on so quickly and was dating someone new already. These guys do not have much of a criteria when it comes to seeking out a partner but what really gets their attention is a woman who is vulnerable and in need of rescuing. We saw that with Marnie when they first met; he was coming to her aid at a party. I just don’t see anything appealing about Charlie’s character. Marnie should have broken up with him long ago. In fact, she should not have entered into a relationship with him but she probably did because she really needed him at the time to be her white knight.
The thing about gammas is that they are often mistaken for beta males. They have been giving betas a bad name for a long time. Betas are much more balanced out, in my opinion. Nevertheless, these guys go all in from day one. They are usually the ones who want to make you their girlfriend on the first date and any girl will do in most cases.
It was slutty on both their parts. Using one another with zero regard for the other’s needs. Getting kinky with someone you barely know without communicating first. Trying to stick your penis in someone’s bum without even warning them (not to mention preparing them). Dirty talk that includes turning her into an 11 year old junkie with a Cabbage Patch lunchbox, without her agreement to participate. Bitching about using a condom. Very little kissing, no affection. No emotion, no strings.
20-25 lbs. She’s 145 now.
@Herb
Sorry, could you try rewording that? Why isn’t a woman who can get sex but no commitment any better off than a man who can get commitment but no sex? Both are an evo fail.
Really?
Look, I am not advocating the use of Cabbage Path dolls in talking dirty, but, think of how few references there are to “proper” dirty talk.
It wasn’t that long ago that I saw an article in Cosmo that said it was going to tell you how to talk dirty. Without exaggerating, it said, “don’t be annoying…don’t be yucky…don’t be weird…”
It never gave any concrete examples.
The next time I am with a new girl I am going to ask her if it is OK if I call her a dirty little whore.
“Are you sure that is OK? You know what, forget it, ‘whore’ is too far. How about slut? No, no, actually, now that I think about it, that is played out. I know…
You little harlot. You make me scarlet with anger. Take it. Take it all you bitch!
Oh, shoot, I called you a bitch. I’m sorry.”
So, she needs to lose 25 lbs and she is average looking (with concern to her body). Interesting.
” a man who can get commitment but no sex?”
When is that reality? What kinda of commitment is sexless?
Susan, if some girl gos to the local bar and says, “Please, someone fuck me”, she will get fucked.
If some guy goes to the college quad (where most of the girls are dying for a relationship) holding a dozen roses and says, “Please, someone be my girlfriend”, he will not get a girlfriend.
Personally, I don’t get the point of constantly banging the “girls can get laid whenever they want” drum, but, it does not have an analogous experience on the male side.
Girls can get sex (generally) whenever they want whereas guys cannot get relationships (generally) whenever they want.
And, for the record, it is not an evo failure with sex w/o commitment. If it were, Sub-Saharan Africa would be empty. It isn’t.
Ramble said what I couldnt putt into words.
Cooper, I am quite a good putter. I am even better with my long wood.
put*
Com’on, gimme a break. LOL
Just ask the guys at Married Man Sex Life.
I’m not sure about this. There’s a floor for both. I think if one lowers one’s standards enough, all things are possible. There’s already a belief that boyfriends are not as cute as players, which just reflects market conditions. Conversely, sluts are not as cute as girlfriends, though saying so will get the men in the ‘sphere all riled up.
I don’t think there is any realistic argument that women have difficulty having sex or getting into a relationship, for them it is trivial; the problem is getting into a relationship with someone they want.
Go on any dating website and look at the taglines of women between the ages of 25 and 35. The vast majority of them are something along the lines of “Where did all the nice guys go?” … This is because the vast majority of these women were swarmed by men/boys who wanted to be in a relationship with them from the time the were young teenagers. They could have sex or get into a relationship if they wanted at any time but were too self-involved and drama seeking to accept any of these guys.
At (around) the age of 30 these women start noticing that the men they were interested in for all these years are actually losers, and the men they want to be with were the nice guys. Unfortunately for these women, these nice guys have gotten their act together and are dating women who are 5 to 10 years younger than them who aren’t self involved.
@Susan
I wasn’t talking about evo fail. I was talking about the false equivalence on the double standards front.
Women used to have expectations on how they would give up sex. Women control access to sex thus they were expected to behave responsibly with it. Men, not having access on demand, were not as closely judged (although they were judged) on how much sex they had.
Women now control access and demand they not be judged if they are reckless in exercising that control. They want an end to the double standard on how the sexes are judged on the amount of sex.
Men, as a response, are now expecting women to loosen up the access to all men. If they can’t be judged for how often and who they give sex how can they demand to judge men in deciding who to give sex.
I think this reaction is what Marcortte and company are talking about when they dump on “Nice guys” for feeling entitled to sex. They have half a clue but not all of it.
Guys harping on “women have easier access to sex” is another aspect of men trying to figure out how to get around the side of the double standard still in force. Women maintain control but are no longer to be judged in how they exercise it.
This is also why men get mad about sluts not putting out to them but adore virgins. If someone is, from the outside view, giving it up to just about anyone then how dare they reject me while picking loser X. Meanwhile, the virgin isn’t being irresponsible with her sexual control and thus it is wrong for a man to try and bed her.
Remember last thread when I explained the perception of the carousal as being “women like to fuck like us” and “women can fuck whenever they want” means “they’re fucking someone other than us”. This is another part of that idea.
Hmmm, that is only true if you assume an even distribution of looks on the 1-10 scale. I’ve always been told by men that 10s are as common as dodo birds.
@Susan
No, sluts aren’t as cute as girlfriends, but sluts are usually hotter. Then again, I think we overvalue hot.
As far as boyfriends aren’t as cute as players, I have the sense that for way too many women the issue is a “have your cake and eat it too” one. They want the hot alpha dominant guy on demand, but also want to be able to change the channel to beta boyfriend on demand as well.
@PeppermintPanda
So men can’t get commitment for free until 30 but then they can like women can get sex?
You’re looking for logic from a musician? They speak in emotional truths, not logical ones, that’s why women love them so much in the first place.
I’m married to one musician and the mother of two others, yet I will say that Yohami held no attraction for me and that I frequently skipped his posts here, finding many of them incomprehensible and incoherent. I do not read his blog
The ability to compose music relies on the ability to make logical and coherent patterns. Like many STEM abilities, it resides on the right side of the brain. Unlike most big talkers, who are generally left-brained, people who excel at music tend to be taciturn.
Yohami made absolutely no sense to me either.
Classical pianist and violinist here.
Right. No one is talking about ideal, or even nice, situations, here. We are talking about some lower market girl going to some bar and spreading her legs, metaphorically. She would get laid.
Her lower market brother, however, if he went to the college quad and opened his arms, he would not get hugged, again, metaphorically.
Again, I am not trying to add ammo to the bitter man’s gun. I am not saying that this is grand evidence that girls “have it easier”. I am only saying that these things, in this area, are not the same and they are not analogous.
It is truly shocking to women how easy it is for men to move on…
And vice versa, of course.
Not to dismiss the fact that man can be just as hurt by women as women can by men, IME men will move on faster after a divorce and women will be more cautious. Men seem to want to drown their sorrows in the arms of a new woman, while women are more fearful of getting burned again–at least in my age cohort. I do acknowledge though that the reverse happens as well.
@Susan
In one of the previous threads we both agreed that this made logical sense if everything else was equal. But then we also agreed that everything else wasn’t equal.
In my experience, the best looking girls are just as slutty as their less attractive counterparts.
Now I’ll give you that they’re generally better at being covert about it (booty calls/FWB with the athletes, frat stars, band members, BMOCs, etc.) than the more shameless sluts out there, who usually aren’t as attractive. But that doesn’t make them any less slutty.
Not really.
Personally, I think that the 1-10 stuff is not that helpful.
But, if I did invest much in it, I would instantly put most overweight girls in the below average category. And, oddly enough, I have gotten more critical of this as I have gotten older. When I was a teenager, I was much more sympathetic.
I’ve been a mom for so long I can’t view these characters through a lens that is not maternal.
LOL. Me too.
@Ramble #65
Their SMP is pretty equal from a woman’s POV. Yeah, Adam has a great bod, but he’s a butterface. Women prefer a nice face to a nice body, whereas men prefer the reverse. Hannah is also the more socially able. I find it odd that the first friends of his that we see are lesbians, not other guys or straight girls.
@Herb
They are able to be judged. By men. All the feminist ranting hasn’t changed that. I certainly hope guys are not going to accept promiscuity because they think they don’t have a choice. That really screws over the non-promiscuous women.
@Byron:
VD was being facetious and making fun of Yohami.
Men in the sphere aren’t big on subtle sarcasm, are they?
but categorically saying an overweight man is unattractive doesn’t work because a man can be considered “overweight” on the BMI but look very good.
I used to John Goodman attractive in his Roseanne days. He was big, but he was burly and had a nice face.
Oh, I don’t know about that (our superficiality tends to be equal opportunity), but I understand what you are saying.
Susan, men still judge but they have to do it covertly. It’s no longer acceptable to admit that we are skeeved out by promiscuity. In fact, admitting that is a sure path to a dressing down by virtually anyone who hears it. In addition to all the pseudo-moral BS, we will also be called “insecure” and “childish” etc.
The wiser men figure this out, make their judgements and act on them but don’t talk about them. The more confused ones tend to accept what the culture is screaming in their ears and either actually come to believe that promiscuity is OK, or else force themselves to accept it even when they don’t want to.
Obviously the men in category #1 are better off. But something is lost when they don’t tell the truth about why they rejected that otherwise “perfect” girl. Girls today, it seems to me, are really in a big mess of denial about how little most men respect sluts and about what their N has to be before he will consider her a slut. They don’t understand how men think on this point. On the rare occasions when they have to confront it openly, they get mad and blame the guy for being some freak outlier when in fact he is mainstream.
Tom post in 3 … 2 …. 1 ….
@Ramble
I do see the point you are making, but if men do have it tougher than women, that’s the product of evolution. Which means that it’s a judgment about the value of each sex to the reproduction process. My point is, it’s not about fairness, and bitching won’t change it.
He was also one of the few examples of a non-supplicating husband.
Roseanne, for all her weirdness, had middle class life pegged pretty well.
Granted, her producer, went on to create Dharma and Greg, Two and a Half Men, The Big Bang Theory and Mike and Molly, so, maybe it was not her and more him. I dunno.
Susan, for all of the woman hating that goes on in the ‘Sphere, there is actually an interesting story behind Chuck Lorre and Roseanne. Maybe I will tell it later.
Again, for the record, I was, and I am not, saying that.
@Jimmy
It’s not, but generally speaking the better looking a woman is the more options she has. It’s rare to see a good looking guy commit to a good looking slut. We’ve seen two young players here try recently and lose interest quickly. The girls just weren’t good enough. So, generally speaking, we might say “boyfriends are ugly” and “girlfriends are pretty.” That is, pretty girls have the advantage for commitment and hot guys have the advantage in avoiding it.
When I see couples, the woman is usually better looking than the guy. Because men acknowledge that they have much lower standards for beauty for a ONS (coyote ugly, anyone?) we can assume that in many ONSs, the man is better looking than the woman.
@Escoffier
Agreed, I’ve seen this first hand. In fact, I recently heard a girl bitching about the sexual double standard – not surprising, except that she has been part of my focus group for four years. She said she wanted to slap a guy’s face for judging her when his own number was much higher. Honey, we never said this was “fair!”
@Ramble
Dharma and Greg is one of my favorite shows of all time. Something I found interesting and very telling is the alliances among the parents. The show was setup so you’d expect the hippies versus the rich, but much more often, especially in the later seasons, it was the men versus the women. The fact that the show did such a good job showing male bonding and male concerns with Edward and Larry. Edward, especially, is a good character to watch to get men.
Also, Kitty’s increased sex drive in the episode when she finds out Edward’s divorce was never final so he can Kitty aren’t legally married was interesting. When, after excellent sex, he says he’ll get his lawyer to fix it in the morning she tells him he’s never to call the lawyer about it.
Does her becoming “the other woman” making him “alpha” and thus exciting?
@Susan re: men judging
See Escoffier’s reply. Men aren’t culturally allowed to judge and blue-pill men getting ready to hit red-pill (and probably early red-pill men) are going to vocally demand free access to sex if they’re not to judge who women give access. Once you’ve swallowed the red-pill you start judging, hard. In fact, I suspect the social demand to keep the double standard on the side of access but not on judging actually makes the quiet judging harsher than it might be.
@ Liza207:
Eh, I disagree. I’m happy Charlie found someone new because Marnie didn’t treat him right. She didn’t love him, so he moved on. He’s not in love, but so what? It’s the early stages with someone new, which is always exciting.
I think Marnie outgrew her relationship with Charlie a long time ago and the mistake was holding on too long. Didn’t do either of them any favors.
I don’t begrudge Charlie for being with someone who actually wants to be with him. Do I think it’ll stand the test of time? Probably not. Is he a psychopath for dating someone new after a cruel break up (Marnie ended it while they were having sex! Come on!)? Hell nah.
Maybe it’s my own hamster, but I think the actor who plays Charlie is adorable. I’d be way more interested in him than any of the other guys on the show IRL…
+1!!!
This I totally agree with! I think what is Beta and Gamma is confused by many men. Beta is not an insult IMO. I prefer beta guys!
I can’t stand Gamma men — not for relationships! As friends, fine whatever. But in relationships they repel me! They have too much feminine energy for my tastes, which sets up a dynamic where the woman has to take charge of the relationship (i.e., “lead” and make most of the decisions).
I think it’s rooted in their desire to please, as most men who are people-pleasers are Gamma males. Anyone without a backbone — male or female — grates on my nerves. Can only take it in small doses…
I don’t know that I agree that “Once you’ve swallowed the red-pill you start judging, hard.” I mean, I felt this way as soon as I “came of age” which was decades before this conversation ever got started. It was just innate, in my bones. I didn’t get it from the culture (hell no) or my parents (never talked about it) or anywhere else. It was just in there. I believe it is a natural sentiment among men. Not universal, but far more common than its absense.
@Iggles
The young women I know think Charlie is really cute, and that Booth Jonathan was really sexy. YMMV, obvs.
I think this is just what Marcotte et al. are talking about when tnen put the word “nice guy” in quotes and say they hate “nice guys.” There really is a sort of pseudo-nice behavior that camflouges some real nastiness. To elaborate on Liza’s point:
“These guys do not have much of a criteria when it comes to seeking out a partner”–If I guy has no criteria, how is a woman to know if she genuine makes him happy and if he genuinely loves her? Is it, “Oh darling, I love you ; you’re so…so…so…there”? Most of us want to visible to aother and loved for our virtues and in spite of our faults. If someone loves you just becasue you’re there….? Most women wouldn’t call that love.
“but what really gets their attention is a woman who is vulnerable and in need of rescuing.”–Because a vulnerable woman is easy pickins’. Guys who lack confidence will go for women at their lowest points because they think those will be easy to get, not because they find those women the most attactive. If the self-esteem of either party improves, the relationship is over.
“I just don’t see anything appealing about Charlie’s character.”–I think he is cute and sweet, though not particulary interesting.
“The thing about gammas is that they are often mistaken for beta males.”–
Yes! The average faithful husband is probably a beta–just by definition. In the ‘sphere, there is an adherence to the binary system because no one wants to make men who can’t find relationships feel worse about themselves. That unfairly creates a huge pool of “betas” that ranges from highly successful guys who love their wives to 50 year olds who still live in mom’s basement.
“Nevertheless, these guys go all in from day one. They are usually the ones who want to make you their girlfriend on the first date and any girl will do in most cases.” –And that’s scary as hell to a normal woman. Yet these are the guys who complain the loudest that they are “nice guy”s and women “don’t like nice guys.”
“Not to dismiss the fact that man can be just as hurt by women as women can by men, IME men will move on faster after a divorce and women will be more cautious. Men seem to want to drown their sorrows in the arms of a new woman, while women are more fearful of getting burned again–at least in my age cohort. I do acknowledge though that the reverse happens as well.”
They might move on quicker, but according to this article on the CNN website, men are four times more likely to commit suicide after a divorce…
http://articles.cnn.com/2000-03-15/health/divorce.suicide.wmd_1_divorce-higher-suicide-rate-women-attempt-suicide/2?_s=PM:HEALTH
How, exactly, is it unfair?
What is it about this Different Standard that is unfair?
(It is not a Double Standard, it is a Different Standard. Double and Different standards are not the same thing and I will keep saying it until it sinks in.)
Well, at least they “manned up” and “grew a pair” before they were raped in court and killed themselves.
I don’t disagree with this at all.
But in my experience, both groups are quick to give up that advantage.
Most good looking beta guys are operating from a scarcity principle, and usually quickly commit to the first decent looking girl that will have them before putting her through any significant qualification process.
Likewise, most attractive girls in college still put out early and have had a few ONSs, booty calls, FWBs, etc with high status guys, even when their numbers are low.
So yeah, I do agree that the leverage could easily be used in both cases, but only a small percentage seem to actually exercise it. YMMV
@Susan
It has been my experience that you can tell when two partners met by looking at how the partners compare based on physical attractiveness. If the woman is less attractive than the man it is a good indicator that they met in their teens/early 20s, if they’re similar in attractiveness they met in their mid 20s, and if the man is significantly less attractive they met in his 30s.
It is becomming less common to see woman who are less attractive to their partners because women are being told to hold-off until later to find someone; and from a SMV perspective this is awful advice. At 18 to 24 a woman has the best opportunity to find a higher value partner, and after 30 she will be lucky to find anyone.
@Ramble #76
LMAO at your imagined convo!
@Ramble
Well, if they had lived too long they would have been a burden, taking money that could go to women.
It was more of a monologue, but “Thank you”.
@Ramble
if some girl goes to the local bar and says, “Please, someone fuck me”, she will get fucked.
Yeah, OK, but why would a woman want to do that?
As to Roseanne’s portrayal of LMC life, hell ya! My family of origin was a lot like that–tho somewhat crazier. I’d love to hear the Barr-Lorre story!
Granted, her producer, went on to create Dharma and Greg,
I loved that show I think it was full of nice people trying to do their best with a few crappy people once in a while the total opposite of crappy people getting away with everything (Seinfield which I hated) I also hated friends but I considered more about vapid people doing nothing of use of their lives, YMMV.
Susan, for all of the woman hating that goes on in the ‘Sphere, there is actually an interesting story behind Chuck Lorre and Roseanne. Maybe I will tell it later.
Dish! Dish! Dish!
Right, she wouldn’t.
I was simply trying to clarify my point about how our experiences are not that analogous.
They might move on quicker, but according to this article on the CNN website, men are four times more likely to commit suicide after a divorce…
That’s the nasty flip side! Men feel they have to act in some way; women will wait it out–whatever it happens to be.
Hi Iggles & J,
Yes, I find gammas to be a loathsome bunch. And yes! They possess way to much feminine energy. I don’t care about how cute or good-looking they are or how sweet they might appear to be (the sweetness is mostly them attempting to manipulate you).
I went out once with a gamma who resembled G. Clooney. He was pedestalizing and practically worshipping me and it was our first (and only) date. What woman in her right mind would be flattered by that kind of supplicating behavior all of the time?
It has been over a year since but I am still a little creeped out by him.
It has been my experience that you can tell when two partners met by looking at how the partners compare based on physical attractiveness.
Interesting. It has been my experience that you can tell the relative wealth of two partners by looking at how the partners compare based on physical attractiveness. When a woman is significantly younger and prettier, the guy is significantly wealthier. That would dovetail with male age in the fashion you describe, since net worth tends to increrase with age.
Anacaona,
Apparently Chuck Lorre (who would go onto to create the “misogynist” Two and Half Men) and Roseanne had a difficult relationship.
He became so fed up with her anger and tirades that he ultimately quit what was essentially the most successful show on TV.
Well, soon after, he (with another person) created Dharma and Greg. He specifically wanted to create a female character that was full of life, love and joy…she was also completely devoted to her husband and looked forward to having sex with him (a stodgy, conservative hard working businessman).
The interesting part (for me) was that his reaction to dealing with Roseanne was not to create a hateful woman that he could piss on (which, to a degree, he would do later with Two and Half Men…the mother), but to create a lovely female character.
@Liza
I was creeped out by gamma behavior when I was young and single; now it just makes me feel sorry the guy.
@J
You mean I could be banging cute, red-headed coeds if I was irresponsible with my money?
@Ramble:
If you could create a woman would you create Audrey Hepburn or Amanda Marcotte?
@Ramble
Google doesn’t know what a “Different Standard” is. Here’s the def of a Double Standard:
: a set of principles that applies differently and usually more rigorously to one group of people or circumstances than to another; especially : a code of morals that applies more severe standards of sexual behavior to women than to men
Until your preferred term makes it into the dictionary, I’ll continue to stick with Double.
@Peppermint Panda
That makes sense based on the patterns of the sexes’ market value over time.
Would much prefer a bit of chub to an ugly face. I’ve never been all that into the lean “hardbody” look. Something short of a Reubens gal, but more filled out than Kiera Knightly, works rather well. Jennifer Connelly, IMO, looks worse now that she is super thin. Jennifer in Rocketeer is pretty damn close to perfect.
Well, if you are really angry at Amanda Marcotte, you might create a character that represents her so that you can shit on her.
He did not do that with Dharma and Greg.
The interesting part (for me) was that his reaction to dealing with Roseanne was not to create a hateful woman that he could piss on (which, to a degree, he would do later with Two and Half Men…the mother), but to create a lovely female character.
Yeah I adored crazy lovely nice Dharma I think she was Manic Pixie Girl/Yamato nadeshiko I do wonder if women liked her though. It seems that the most devoted to her man and nice the woman the most hated by the women’s audience I guess is the sexual competition instinct kicking in hating on a woman that could snap your hubby/boyfriend/crush away. Oh well I adored her.
Funny enough Dharma was also really promiscuous in college were her hubby was really serious and commitment minded I wonder why Chuck did it that way.
I think the mother is a bit of a jab at how mother’s screw their male kids. Charlie was a shameless womanizer and sweet Allan was screwed by Judith and he was shown to be attracted to women that treated him like crap. The mother was a slut and a ballbuster, I think the message was quite clear on that aspect, YMMV.
Yes, Herb, I do. Or more accurately, less responsible with money around the redheads.
I friend of mine used to own a car dealership. For a number of years, he had an elderly male customer who would come in on a frequent basis, each time with a new young lady, and a buy her a car. One of the junior salesmen once remarked, to the hilarity of the older salesman, that it was lovely that the old gent had so many granddaughters and bough each a car for her 18th b’day. My buddy, who mourns the passing of his loyal customer, practically pisses himself whenever he tell the story.
Google has 1.5 million hits for “Different Standard”.
We do not need Webster for this. We know what Double, Different and Standard mean, and we can use them appropriately (much like we can probably see in those 1.5 million references).
Different Standard: Suzy and Tom both work at Widgits, Inc. She is the head Database Administrator (DBA) with over 10 years experience. Tom, just hired, is fresh out of school and will be working on the database team. Suzy and Tom are held to different standards.
Double Standard: Suzy and Tom are of equal experience, seniority and pay-grade. If Tom comes in dressed like a slob, no one gives a shit. If Suzy has one strand of hair out of place, she is fired immediately. This is a Double Standard.
Susan, this is not hard.
Guys and Girls, in the SMP, are held to Different Standards. We always have been (on some level) and we always will be.
It’s a shame, isn’t it.
Well Chuck, in real life, married a former Playboy model well after her sell-by date, that may have played into it.
No argument here.
@Escoffier
+1
The list of attractive actresses who got ugly by embracing the heroin shiek that passes for beauty in Hollywood is very long and very sad.
@Ms. Walsh:
“It’s apples and oranges. I still think The Wire is perhaps the best television I’ve ever seen. As we know, it’s now taught as a sociology course at several fine universities. It examines and exposes many complicated questions about America. One of the greatest things about The Wire, IMO, is that there is no clear distinction between heroes and villains. Omar is a hero. The police chief is a villain. So while it’s dealing with a macro set of issues, it’s also producing absolutely brilliant portrayals of all facets of human nature. The characters are incredibly well developed, and the acting is nothing short of miraculous.”
O: You thought B’More’s police chief Burrell in The Wire was a villain? I thought he was a rather operationally incompetent but politically saavy careerist – as was the case with the majority of the police department’s “bosses”, as McNulty referred to them, was (and that includes Cedric Daniels, though to a much lesser degree). Still though, I would agree with you – The Wire’s characters were very layered and textured, and I think that’s why the guys in Alt-Right end of the Manosphere flatout refused to even mention The Wire by name when they go to bemoaning TV and how it’s doing the Poor Widdle White Man in – because it was just to gray for them to simply do the “good guy/bad guy” thing to/on. And yup, the Ivies, like Harvard, now teach The Wire, which I think is a beautiful thing, because, as you rightly note, it raises some very powerful questions of what, exactly, America is, what it was supposed to be, and where we are headed in the very near future.
Anyway, thanks for your take; now let’s get back to Girls…
“Girls doesn’t come close, but it doesn’t aim to. It’s the small indie to The Wire’s mega studio production. Dunham is young and talented, but she’s just starting out. So I think we need to calibrate our expectations.”
O: Fair enough.
“AFAIAC, she is the first person to accurately portray the modern SMP, and she includes many principles and observations from Game. Whether she studied it first hand, or Game has gone so mainstream it’s part of the zeitgeist – I’m not sure. She’s shared stories in interviews of guys spitting game – so my sense is that she’s just using her observations IRL and adding the comedic twist. For example, the artist who tells Marnie she needs to be f*cked by a man – he’s very small, not handsome, and has the ridiculous name of Booth Jonathan. Yet he sends her into a masturbation frenzy.”
O: Hmm – very good point. Perhaps the Manosphere reaction, to which you allude to below, speaks to this recognition on her part, be it from primary Game sources, or just relaying what she’s seen gone done firsthand, or both, is what accounts for the buzz? Hmm…
“As I said in another comment, 60% of the show’s viewers are male. That is extremely significant – men trust and believe her to tell it like it is, something they see little of in American TV.”
O: Again, very good point. Smart ladies rock.
“There is no question that Girls is SWPL, and it doesn’t pretend to be anything else. Dunham is sharing what she knows, the first, best lesson of good writing. It doesn’t matter who lives in Brooklyn – the truth is that many social circles are not particularly integrated. I reject the suggestion that Dunham should be creating relationships she’s never witnessed for the sake of political correctness.”
O: Here, here – and this is what I loved about The Wire. Sure, Blacks and Whites were in the show, but make no mistake, they, for the most part, lived in very different worlds, even though they all inhabitied a city of less than a half a million people. And the same can be said of “Girls” even though its set in the much larger NYC.
What bothered me about some Black and White people who attempted to give Dunham a workout about the supposed lack of diversity on her show, was the fact that these people are delusional – NYC is no different from anywhere else along segregated lines, no matter how much it tries to bill itself as so progressive and the like. Indeed, I would much rather live where such demarcations are clearly known, than in a place like NYC that fakes the funk.
“From my readng of things in the manospehere, there seems to be a good bit of consternation about the fact that dunham/hannah, can be a less than attractive woman yet still get sex, while more beta guys toil in obscurity.
“First, she’s getting sex from a less than attractive man. Nothing about Adam says ladykiller. He’s running his own brand of asshole game and it works, at least with Hannah.”
O: That’s not how the fellas in the Manosphere see it; here’s what the fellas over at Chuck Ross’ blog, GLPiggy, are calling it:
Why does anyone care about an unattractive woman’s tits on TV?
http://glpiggy.net/2012/05/27/why-does-anyone-care-about-an-unattractive-womans-tits-on-tv/
Note the comments – quite a few guys there are miffed at the prospect of a relatively fat, unattractive woman gettin’ some from a guy who, even if he’s all the things you say, is still in good shape physically. Please note that Chuck has addressed Ferd’s In Mala Fide and Half Sigma as well. So this is clearly a concern that gets at least a bit of play in sectors of the Manosphere.
“Second, and more importantly, men need to drop the false equivalency of which gender has easier access to sex. Duh! We’ve got eggs, they are very expensive, you’ve got sperm, it is not very expensive. We get to choose. It’s biologically immutable.”
O: True – but so long as women will be able to mate at a rate of two to one to men, men will be pissed about it. *Kanye shrug*
“The real equivalent is about commitment. Hannah has struggled to get any kind of relationship going. She has had sex with 2.5 men. Adam is one, and Elijah her gay ex is the other. In a very real way, Hannah is in the desert. We may argue about how deserving she is, what she really wants, etc., but from an emotional standpoint, Hannah toils in obscurity.”
O: Oh, no doubt – your synopsis of episode seven clearly points that out. Still, to the mind of many guys, she does get the chance of putting her genes into the future – and by all accounts with a guy(s) who are at least a point above her on the scale to boot. Not many guys down through history could say the same – hence the consternation.
It is, what it is.
O.
@Ms. J:
“@Ramble #65
Their SMP is pretty equal from a woman’s POV. Yeah, Adam has a great bod, but he’s a butterface. Women prefer a nice face to a nice body, whereas men prefer the reverse.”
O: Not. Even. Close:
For Long Term, Men Favor Face Over Figurehttp://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/07/fashion/07STUDIED.html?_r=2&ref=fashion
Still chugging down those Blue Pills, I see…
O.
@Ms. Walsh:
“@Ramble
Where would you place his body on a 1-10 scale?
Where would you place her body on a 1-10 scale?
I would give his body a 6-7 and hers a 4-5. However, I would give her face a solid 5, and his a 2.”
O: *Turns to the fellas reading along*
Do any of you believe that? With all due respect to Ms. Walsh, Dunham is AT BEST, a 4 facially. And, keep in mind here – as a Brotha, I don’t have a dog in this fight. I’m just saying, as a Man, that girlfriend is at best a 4. No matter how much weight she loses.
This only goes to show why women – even those like Ms. Walsh – simply cannot gauge a woman’s physical attractiveness accurately…
O.
Sue: “Hmmm, that is only true if you assume an even distribution of looks on the 1-10 scale. I’ve always been told by men that 10s are as common as dodo birds.”
Maybe they don’t know the truth. 10s are as rare as 1s. Men rate women’s looks on a perfectly centered bell-curve around 5, as shown by that OKCupid blog.
@OTC:
You hit the nail on the head1 Tru dat.
O.
Hi Obsidian
“…simply cannot gauge a woman’s physical attractiveness accurately…”
—But many women think they can and I don’t know why many think this. I have always said that men are the ones who determine which women are desirable and are most desirable to them. I don’t think that most women are secure enough in their own looks to make an accurate assessment of other women’s looks (the same goes for men determining other men’s looks). I will admit that I have questioned a lot of women, men have deemed very attractive, but so what?
@Obs
No I meant Rawls – I may have gotten his title wrong.
Re Chuck’s post, he makes a good point. Who are these dudes who spend their time complaining about Lena Dunham’s looks? Take it up with HBO and don’t watch. What a bunch of knuckleheads in the comments, I couldn’t stand to finish them. First, there’s the usual whiff of white (non-Jewish) supremacy. Next, you’ve got guys arguing over whether Adam Driver is good looking and how he’s fit. Women care a lot more about a guy’s face than his body, and Adam Driver has a rodent-like face. In fact, the first time I saw the show I thought of The Rat King in the Nutcracker. For the record, Ray is also pretty funny looking. The best looking guys are the most effete (Charlie and Hannah’s gay ex).
Second, if the show wasn’t playing as “real” it wouldn’t be the talk of the MSM, which it is. I know people of both sexes and all ages watching the show. (Although my kids refuse to watch it with me b/c of the awkward sex scenes.)
Re my inability to gauge Dunham’s looks, I’ll admit I can’t be objective. I think she has very pretty eyes. And for the record, she is always featured after the episode, with makeup and her hair up. She looks like a different person. In the show she wears no makeup, lets her hair go limp, and always wears baggy horizontal stripes. For whatever reason, Dunham is making herself out to be her least attractive as Hannah.
@Liza
The number of women who are uncontrollably angry all the time about the bold part is very, very amusing. Making women the actual arbitrators of women’s looks (even if we have to culturally pretend they are) is feminism’s greatest failure.
@Ms. Walsh:
“No I meant Rawls – I may have gotten his title wrong.”
O: Ahh, I see – you’re talking about the Deputy of Police Ops, Bill Rawls – who was on the Downlow, if you’ll recall (the Gay Bar scene in Season 3?). He was under Burrell, but when Carcetti was elected, he became the defacto chief of B’More police. I don’t consider him as much a “villian” as again, just a diehard careerist, who did whatever it took to look out for his career. Kinda sorta like Stringer Bell…although I would definitely say that of the two, Bell was worse for a number of reasons.
“Re Chuck’s post, he makes a good point. Who are these dudes who spend their time complaining about Lena Dunham’s looks? Take it up with HBO and don’t watch. What a bunch of knuckleheads in the comments, I couldn’t stand to finish them. First, there’s the usual whiff of white (non-Jewish) supremacy. Next, you’ve got guys arguing over whether Adam Driver is good looking and how he’s fit. Women care a lot more about a guy’s face than his body, and Adam Driver has a rodent-like face. In fact, the first time I saw the show I thought of The Rat King in the Nutcracker. For the record, Ray is also pretty funny looking. The best looking guys are the most effete (Charlie and Hannah’s gay ex).”
O: LOL! Yea, I can see your point(s). Still though, as reprehensible as the socalled “Fat Girl Jihad” may be, they still make a point – the (female) obesity problem has really gotten out of hand – and this is coming from a Black Man who is a friend of the Zaftig Woman – but even I gotta say, it’s really going to extremes now. In the Black community, where female obesity is well documented, it is not at all unusual or uncommon to see Women weighing upwards of 300lbs or more(!), and keep in mind, most of the Women in question are UNDER 5’6″ – so we’re really talking big here. So, while again, I can definitely see where you’re coming from, I gotta tell ya, they DO have a point. Again – I’m Black, and Black Men are known to like a thick(er) Woman than do most White Men, and even I can see their point. More here:
Black Women and Fat
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/06/opinion/sunday/why-black-women-are-fat.html?_r=2
As for what Women desire, what you say doesn’t comport to what Buss himself has reported – which is, that Women most desire the “V” bod and, at certain times of the month (ovulation), more “hard” masculine facial feautures – in fact, this is why Daniel Craig can be so successful as James Bond.
“Second, if the show wasn’t playing as “real” it wouldn’t be the talk of the MSM, which it is. I know people of both sexes and all ages watching the show. (Although my kids refuse to watch it with me b/c of the awkward sex scenes.)”
O: LOL!-now THAT’S something I’d like to hear you discuss a bit more about! LOL. But yea, I think the show gets a lot of things about right, and again, I don’t have a dog in the fight, as the show has virtually nothing to do with me, either personally or demographically. But based on my time in NYC in particular, as well as quite a burgeoning SWPL scene here in my native Philly?-yea, I thin Dunham nails it.
“Re my inability to gauge Dunham’s looks, I’ll admit I can’t be objective. I think she has very pretty eyes. And for the record, she is always featured after the episode, with makeup and her hair up. She looks like a different person. In the show she wears no makeup, lets her hair go limp, and always wears baggy horizontal stripes. For whatever reason, Dunham is making herself out to be her least attractive as Hannah.”
O: Ms. Walsh, with all due respect, no, you simply cannot be objective. Again – I don’t have a dog in the fight, because my first choice is Sistas – but I gotta tell ya – and this is coming from someone who’s closely viewed at least half a dozen “red carpet” pics of Dunham – she’s at best, a 4 facially. As you know and know well, feminine beauty is NOT something that Men consider “subjective” – regardless as to a Man’s personal preferences, he can spot a Woman who’s physically attractive, especially facially, which, as I’ve proven by the NYT “Faces” piece earlier, Men in particular look for when it comes to wifing a Woman up. I think a big part of the consternation on the part of the guys who comment on Chuck’s blog and elsewhere, comes from the fact that Dunham’s character is gettin’ it in with guys who by all accounts, should be outta her league. In a way, I do kinda see their point – but I also see the fact that guys and that includes ones with options, can and will hit a Dunham, provided it doesn’t “cost” them anything in terms of wooing said Women, or them taking a hit to their Social Proof. In this, I think Adam’s role, to this point, fits to a tee.
It will be interesting to see what happens from here, indeed…
O.
To be fair, there isn’t a shortage of guys who get pissed off when women say what they find attractive, either.
Re: Dunham
Not really what she looks like away from the show, but put “Hannah” on a college campus and she’s easily in the bottom 20%.
I actually think LD is kind of cute on the post show interviews. Oh well. Guess I am odd.
1 2 3 »