I never liked Lena Dunham. Sure, she is currently a Hollywood darling, and loads of critics loved her show "Girls".
But I find her to be an ugly (inside and out), self-indulgent, mega-attention-whore who is vulgar for the sake of vulgarity.
This story really takes the cake, though, and I wonder why the mainstream media just let it slide into oblivion (actually I don't wonder...)
You would think that, with the focus on Bill Cosby recently, there would be a push to encourage women to report rapists, while at the same time directing a clear and vicious backlash against proven false accusers. After all, false rape accusations are extremely damaging to all women, as each instance degrades people's trust in legitimate rape claims, and that's a huge shame. Any true feminist should HATE false rape accusers.
So Lena Dunham got a $3.7 million advance from Random House to write a book last year.
In one passage of the book, she described a "rape" at the hands of a guy named Barry. She did NOT note that Barry was a pseudoname, as she had done in other parts of her book when changing people's names. The reader was left to assume that Barry was the actual name of her rapist.
First off, she twisted the term "rape" to mean something it doesn't. In her story, Barry supposedly shoved his fingers inside of her during a makeout session "without permission", but she claimed to have been on drugs and forced herself to like it. She also invited Barry back to her room for sex. However, Barry secretly removed the condom twice during sex, and after the second time, she got angry and threw him out. He left without incident.
Does that sound like rape to you? Obviously not. However, Dunham frames it in a drama queen fashion that basically she was too drugged up (by her own doing, not by Barry secretly drugging her) to know what was going on, so even though she consented to the sex, she didn't really want it, so therefore it was rape.
What?!
But that's not the worst part.
It turns out that Barry was not the "rapist's" actual name, yet her description of him came extremely close to that of an actual Barry at her college.
The Barry she described:
1. Is named Barry.
2. Was an Oberlin College graduate
3. Attended Oberlin at the same time she did at the time of the "rape" (2005)
4. Was a Republican.
5. Was a prominent campus Republican.
6. Worked at a school library.
7. Was a super senior (a 5 year-student).
Oberlin is a small, liberal school of 3,000 people with very few Republican students.
"Coincidentally", there was an actual student at Oberlin, who:
1. Was named Barry
2. Graduated Oberlin College in 2006
3. Attended Oberlin in 2005 when the "rape" occurred
4. Was a Republican.
5. Was a prominent campus Republican, active in the campus' only Republican organization.
6. Worked at one of the libraries at the school.
7. Was a 5th-year senior in the 2005-2006 school year.
However, the Barry in Dunham's description also wore purple cowboy boots, had a huge mustache, had a super-low voice, and hosted a conservative radio show in the area.
The actual Barry above did not own any cowboy boots, did not have a mustache at the time, had a normal voice, and did not host any radio shows. Lena actually described throwing his cowboy boots out the door when kicking him out.
The other odd thing was that the details about Barry's political affiliation and employment at the library were extraneous. If it was a fictitious story, why insert these weird details, unless you are basing it upon a real person and making up nasty stories about them?
So it's pretty clear to me that Lena knew of Barry at the school (despite the fact that he never met her), disliked him because of his outspoken conservative politics, and decided to craft a phony rapist around him.
People read Dunham's book, were of course curious as to who raped her, and googled "Barry Oberlin Republican class of 2006", and instantly came up with the guy's name.
But that's still not the worst part.
Dunham's book was released on September 30, 2014. Barry immediately received threatening and harassing phone calls over the rape accusations, and quickly hired an attorney. By October 6 (just a week after the book's release), Barry's attorney contacted both Random House and Dunham to clear his name. They were ignored for over 2 months, until Breitbart and the National Review repeatedly took them to task for it.
It took until December 8 -- two days after a media storm erupted over a crowdfunding campaign to pay for Barry's attorney -- for Random House and Dunham to admit that this Barry was innocent. This was 63 days AFTER hearing from Barry's attorney about the situation, and 56 days after reading the National Review article about Barry's life falling apart over the situation.
Over $20,000 in legal bills were racked up during this time by Barry.
Dunham was definitely aware of it, because she read a National Review article about the situation on October 17, and then attacked the article on Twitter the next day. While bashing the article, she never once indicated that Barry was indeed innocent!
Here is a timeline of the situation: http://www.breitbart.com/big-hollywo...-to-barry-one/
It took the beginnings of it bleeding into the mainstream media (she thought she could just ignore Breitbart and the National Review, being conservative publications) for her to clear this poor guy.
So you can't even say that this was all just an unfortunate coincidence, and that Dunham never meant to hurt anyone.
What a selfish cunt.
I guess when you are a super-rich liberal media darling, you don't have to care about ruining the life of an everyman Republican.
So why hasn't the mainstream media condemned Dunham for this? Oh, I forgot... because she's their darling, and they don't want to say anything bad about her.