Lena Dunham’s serial self-inflicted credibility wounds appear to have gravely eroded even the small but fervently loyal following the “Girls” star and creator has enjoyed for the last few years. This past Sunday, the ratings for Dunham’s HBO show “Girls” bottomed out to a record low for the entire run of the series:
“Girls,” which has already been renewed for a fifth season, drew a paltry 0.2 adults 18-49 rating with 406,000 viewers. As far as the initial broadcast goes, it was the least-watched “Girls” episode on record.
The previous episode drew a 0.3 rating with 721,000 viewers.
The piece linked above attempts to put part of the blame on the competing Grammy telecast, but last year the Grammys aired on Sunday, January 26, and on that same night “Girls” pulled 655,000 viewers, almost a quarter million more than this year. In the 18-49 demo, “Girls” pulled a 0.34 last year compared to the 0.2 this year.
The piece also suggests the AMC premieres of “The Walking Dead” and “Better Call Saul” might have hurt “Girls,” but that just means Dunham’s loyal audience isn’t so loyal.
“Girls” has never been a big ratings hit. Thanks to its standing among the media and entertainment elite, however, it has received the kind of outsized and unearned publicity and fanfare usually reserved for blockbuster films. Especially in the run-up to this season’s HBO premiere. The elite desperately wanted Dunham to impact our culture, so they blew her up into something much bigger than she ever was.
And it almost worked.
Between the mammoth publicity surrounding her memoir and the “Girls” season 4 premiere, there is no doubt that 2015 was supposed to be the year it all came together and Lena Dunham broke out into the mainstream. Rumors flew she might star in a “Ghostbusters” reboot (didn’t happen), she had glommed on (literally) to Taylor Swift, one of the biggest mainstream stars on the planet, and the HBO/Random House/Elite Media publicity machine was at full throttle.
…then Dunham pratfalled all over the Hypocrisy/Lies/Children third rail of celebrity scandal.
If the Lena Dunham Era is indeed coming to a close, here are five tips for the next Elite Precious the New York Times chooses to anoint as The Voice Of a Generation…
1. Don’t make stuff up about your sexual assault. Rape is serious business to decent people, and most people are decent. Rape is an abomination, a harrowing crime, not a political talking point.
2. Sexualizing your infant sister in any way should be kept to yourself. Yes, our culture is skidding of a cliff into depravity, but we are not quite ready to normalize this.
3. If you haven’t voted, don’t get on your high horse telling others to vote. Especially in your underwear. You look foolish and sanctimonious and hypocritical.
4. Being a walking, talking symbol of opposition to the Left’s fascist war against our God-given right to not live on a treadmill and shop at Whole Foods is truly a righteous and worthy cause. But that doesn’t mean we want to see you without your clothes on — ever, much less all the time. I mean no offense. No one wants to see me naked. I respect that judgment.
5. When you get in trouble, running to dishonest cowards like ESPN’s Bill Simmons and NBC’s Savannah Guthrie only makes things worse. They make you look even more insulated, bubbled, protected, and by extension, dishonest. Nobody likes someone who sees themselves as too precious to answer lingering questions. Address fully what you’ve done. Don’t cower behind cowards.
An Immigrant Speaks : Stop Canada’s Immigration-Driven National Suicide
Hello, I am an immigrant and have been following “Immigration Watch” for the last two years. I can confidently say that you are doing an admirable & exemplary job.
I came here two decades ago from India. However, I feel quite sorry about the current state of our country which to a large extent is the result of an uncontrolled immigration intake. This is not the country or the society I migrated to. Since my arrival, Canada has changed beyond recognition. Canadian values & ethics are eroding fast. The society is disintegrating and is being replaced by alien & sub-civilized cultures—- all in the name of multiculturalism & accommodation to new immigrants.
Multiculturalism makes a nation no more than a holding pen. These multi-ethnic people of Canada have failed to integrate even among themselves. Isn’t it foolish to assume that one day they will all live together in one happy family? That wishful thinking will turn into a nightmare. In my two decades of “rich multicultural experience”, I’ve yet to see a business owned by for example, a Chinese-Canadian or Indo-Canadian or a Pakistani-Canadian, employing anybody outside their own ethnic group. The exceptions are far & few between. The policy of multiculturalism has failed drastically. It has become a one-way street : “You give & we take”.
Some of my family members settled in this country a century ago, but they came here to live in & adopt the ways of Canadian society. Their goal was to assimilate, whereas now, I see that East Indian (and all other immigrants) are flocking to Canada not to assimilate, but to berate & hate Canadian society, create their own ghettoes, live in their cocoons—- all the while milking all the benefits Canada has to offer. I would describe what is happening as an ‘invasion’, not ‘immigration’.
As you’ve correctly mentioned, we need to cut down on our annual immigration numbers drastically. Those high numbers are not only shattering the centuries-old, established morals & principles of this nation and wrecking the lives of existing Canadians, but they are affecting immigrants like me too who came here to adopt a new & morally-superior culture—– something which was missing in our own cultures. Canada’s current immigration policies support cultures which will degrade it. This is not how you make a nation great..
Just think : What actually does make a nation great, livable & developed?? It is their people. And why are some countries undeveloped and “Third World”? Again, it’s because of their people. So, if we let people from these Third World countries immigrate into Canada by ship loads, what are they going to bring in with them?? The same ethics, values, etiquette, habits & culture—– everything they had in their left-behind backward societies. And when these people come in hordes, they will never aspire to, integrate & assimilate into Canadian society. Therefore, their “NET BENEFIT” to Canadian Society is absolutely ‘ZERO’. How could people who couldn’t make their own country great, livable & developed be of any good to Canada? Don’t you think they will make (and have already made in many cases) this once great country like their own Third World country?
Canada became a great Nation and a developed country because the people who made it like that emigrated from the developed & moralistic societies of great countries. The only way we can save this once great nation from becoming another backward Third World country is to cut down on immigration—– especially immigration from Third World countries. Because of flawed immigration policies, the UK, Sweden, France, The Netherlands & Belgium, are spiraling down fast and heading towards their demise.
My aim in expressing these opinions is to spread some awareness among my fellow citizens. We all would gain if we worked together and saved Canada from rolling down a path toward National Suicide .
Save Canada while there’s still hope of survival !!!.
The University of California, Berkeley will be hosting a lecture next week dedicated to the peculiar matter of“Queering Agriculture.”
“So why queer agriculture?” the event description opens. “This seems like an odd question but becomes more obvious with research and analysis.”
The lecture will be given on Feb. 10 by Bailey Kier, a Ph.D candidate at the University of Maryland. Kier is no rookie when it comes to queer studies, having already written a dissertation on the “queer geography of the Potomac River Basic.”
It is difficult to explain just what it means to “queer” something. But in essence, it amounts to re-evaluating the basic nature of a topic from the perspective of sexuality and reproduction. Helpfully, the event description includes a drawingof a person of uncertain gender passionately kissing an enormous strawberry.
Confusing? Sure, but according to Kier it is an extremely important matter.
[Q]ueering and trans-ing ideas and practices of agriculture are necessary for more sustainable, sovereign, and equitable food systems for the creatures and systems involved in systemic reproductions that feed humans and other creatures,” the description continues. “Since agriculture is literally the backbone of economics, politics, and ‘civilized’ life as we know it, and the manipulation of reproduction and sexuality are a foundation of agriculture, it is absolutely crucial queer and transgender studies begin to deal more seriously with the subject of agriculture.”
Kier also suggests that since 9/11 (which is somehow related), the movement toward “sustainable agriculture” has been burdened by unwarranted assumptions that give agriculture a heterosexual, human-centered identity.
“By focusing on popular culture representations and government legislation since 9/11, it will become clearer how the growing popularity of sustainable food is laden with anthroheterocentric assumptions of the ‘good life’ coupled with idealized images and ideas of the American farm, and gender, radicalized and normative standards of health, family, and nation,” the summary says. The consequences of such anthroheterocentrism can only be guessed at.
UC Berkeley currently receives over $300 million a year from California taxpayers to aid its operations.