Thought Catalog

Dumb Reasons Why Some People Don’t Like Girls

  • 0

Okay, listen. I know everyone and their mother has been talking about Lena Dunham’s new show, Girls, on HBO. Nary a day goes by without having to read some outraged or heartwarming op-ed on some blog. (Add this one to the list.) The attention is not just limited to the Internet either. This past weekend I went to a friend’s housewarming party and got into four different conversations about Girls and what it meant and why it was being criticized and blah blah blah. (Granted, this was a party full of New York media types, so our antennas were naturally  up.) So look, let me just say a few words on  it and then I’ll be done. Promise.

To my understanding, there are 3 major reasons why Girls is attracting such intense media coverage.

1. It’s a show starring a bunch of vaginas

Anytime something comes out that’s centered around the female experience (Sex and the City, Bridesmaids), it naturally garners a bunch of attention because, well gee, I don’t know. Maybe because Hollywood is still just a giant boys club and it’s a freaking victory when something that doesn’t involve explosions and poop jokes manages to make it through. (And let’s face it, Girls probably gained major traction when Judd Apatow signed on. Who knows if it would’ve made it through without his endorsement. I feel like even now you need the help of a man to get something female-driven up and running which is infinitely depressing.) And not only is Girls a show about, well, girls, it’s created by and starring a woman who doesn’t fit the Hollywood mold. I remember first seeing Tiny Furniture in the theaters and almost gasping when I saw Lena Dunham’s naked body. And it wasn’t because it was hideous and terrifying. It’s because it was a body that looked like mine. It was a body that I’ve seen numerous times before and even slept with (well minus the lady parts). I just had never seen it before on the big screen.  It was then that I realized what a little asshole Hollywood had been to me. The fact that I was so shocked at the  mere sight of seeing a real body made me realize just how long I had been force fed BS images of unrealistic ones. So not only is Girls a show about women (during a time when many execs still believe that women don’t go to the movies or watch TV), it’s by a REAL feminist woman with a real body. (And let’s not kid ourselves here. As quirky and brilliant as Kristen Wiig is, she still had to be very thin in Bridesmaids.) I guarantee you if someone like Harrison Ford’s son made a show called Boys about he and all of his privileged friends, it would not be under the same scrutiny Girls is. Since so few (read: almost none) progressive female shows actually make it on the air, the ones that do are put under a magnifying glass. They need to speak for all the voices that didn’t make it through, which is a totally unfair and unrealistic expectation to put on something that’s just one person’s voice.

2. The issue of privilege

People seem to take issue with the fact that Lena Dunham was born into a well-to-do family, went to an expensive liberal arts college, and has chosen to capture this kind of #whitegirlproblems brand of entitlement in her work. And OMG, the people she casted are all spawns of wealthy parents. I couldn’t possibly watch these women pretend to struggle knowing that they came from cushy backgrounds! Um, but hi, it’s called ACTING?! People seem to have confused Girls with being a reality show when it’s actually scripted television. I don’t care if Allison Williams was riding a golden camel in Dubai and eating duck before she got casted as a down-and-out twentysomething. All  I care about is if she does a good job. And guess what?! She does. They all do! When Charlize Theron was casted as a serial killer in Monster, were we not able to have a suspension of disbelief? We weren’t watching her live in destitute poverty and murdering people being like “Um, LOL. Yeah right. This isn’t believable because IRL Charlize Theron is rich and totes doesn’t kill people!” That’s what acting’s all about: playing someone different than who you are. What was Dunham supposed to do? Cast starving artists in a bid for authenticity? Give me a break. This is what filmmaking and TV is all about. People write about the world they know and/or inhabit and make something from it. Filmmakers like Woody Allen and Spike Lee make films on some variations of the same topics over and over. It’s what they know and they do a good job of it. But they’ve never been under the scrutiny that Lena’s been under. No one’s telling Woody Allen to make a movie about the orphans in Nigeria or asking Spike Lee to make a movie about housewives in Brentwood. They exist in very specific realms, just like most artists do. Lena is just writing what she knows. All she should be judged on is whether or not she’s doing it well. (And most criticisms of Girls don’t dispute the fact that Lena is funny and talented. They just take issue with the privilege which is just foolish, in my opinion.) People have scapegoated her as being a part of this larger issue about a lack of diversity in TV and film. But don’t blame Lena for writing about her experiences and getting a TV show out of it. Blame the networks for being too fearful to air a show about real poverty or a show that doesn’t star exclusively white people. They believe that people just won’t want to watch stuff like that so they never greenlight the projects. It’s disgusting and sad, but it really has nothing to do with Dunham.

3. Bitches be jealous

A lot of this criticism is rooted in envy. People are jealous that, at the tender age of 25, she’s already made two movies and a TV show while most people her age are still struggling. Yes, Lena did have a leg up on a lot of twentysomethings because of her privileged background. She had the luxury of moving back into her parents house and working on her scripts. I’m assuming that she didn’t have to get a barista job. But you know what? She worked her ass off. She made two web series, Delusional Downtown Divas and Tight Shots, and wrote two movies, Tiny Furniture and Creative Nonfiction, all while basically still in college. You know what I was doing in college? Coke and Bravo marathons. Lena saw her good fortune and took advantage of it. How could you penalize her for that? There are so many privileged kids who  don’t do anything. That’s the real shame. So my advice? Use Lena’s success as a motivator. MAKE SOMETHING instead of sitting idly by, feeling pissed that everyone is eclipsing you. Make your mark. Jealousy is the most useless emotion ever. It won’t get you anywhere besides writing a mean post on your personal blog about how much Girls sucks. If you don’t like what you’re seeing, make something you would want to see.

ANNNNNDDD I’m done. This has been your obligatory Girls blog post for the day. TC mark

image – Girls

Read This

More from Thought Catalog

Thought Catalog Videos


    • Lenarules333

      zzzzzzzzz

    • guest

      Well said. Amen. 

    • http://twitter.com/emilcDC Emil Caillaux

      Is it bad that a big part of my crush on Allison Williams has to do with the fact that she’s Brian Williams’s daughter?

    • douchegirl

      Ummm ok. First things first: I LOVE Girls. I thought the pilot was funny, insightful and pretty well done. 

      Now, according to its critics I’m actually not supposed to like it because *gasp* I’m not a white girl. SO WHAT?! I’m still a girl, still twenty-something, still struggling with my finances/job/parents/relationships so I can totally relate. 

      It doesn’t reflect my life experience 100% because I wasn’t born with a silver spoon, my parents don’t pay for anything, I don’t live in NY and I didn’t even go to college. BUT I CAN STILL RELATE. 

      Everyone needs to calm down and enjoy the show. 

    • Susie

      PREACH.

    • Brennaelisepye

      First, “casted” does not sound correct.
      Second, sure fine, she writes what she knows. But id like to know if she made ANY attempt to make any of the other leads a woman of color. I will not blame it all on HBO.
      Id probably really enjoy this show, but it makes me so sick to see another show about how hard life is for rich white girls, with their rich white girl problems.

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jonathon-Ferrari/100001319787228 Jonathon Ferrari

        If television shows about white girls is what makes you sick, you’re probably pretty privileged yourself.  

        • Brennaelisepye

          Why are people so literal?
          Was I supposed to enumerate all the OTHER things that make me sick? Like child abuse and pedophilia and war?
          The essay is about the show. Therefore I wrote about THE SHOW, and my feelings about it.
          Good grief.

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jonathon-Ferrari/100001319787228 Jonathon Ferrari

          I know you weren’t being literal.  I’m just saying if you a show about white girls garners the same reaction as child abuse, pedophilia and war, you’re probably pretty privileged.

        • Aelya

          When did she say that? You’re just extending this unecessarily by connecting it to other things. It’s just a matter or representation in media, or rather, lack of it.  The fact that “Girls” stars an all white cast implies that one assumes whiteness to be the standard for any label, and everything else as the other. Give me a show about WOC that doesn’t have any reference to their skin colour, their religious affiliations, or any political. Oh, and the show must be in the same line as Girls or Sex and The City. 

    • Guest

      Yes, jesus thank you.

    • Anonymous

      “Coke and Bravo Marathons” was actually my first tattoo

    • http://twitter.com/jenn_agius Jenn Agius

      I’m sorry, I didn’t like it. But frankly it’s for none of the reasons you listed. I love Lena Dunham. 
      As a poor twenty-two year old girl living in a shoe box in New York, I found it unrealistic to an annoying degree.

    • Guest

      I’m sick of all this “real body” stuff. Yes, women in hollywood are pressured to maintain a size two and we typically are not shown bodies like Lena’s or mine or maybe the majority of us regular people.  But Lena’s body isn’t any more “real” than any other woman’s body.  Kristen Wiig and many other women are naturally thin. Let’s leave the “real women have curves” argument alone and instead focus on celebrating the rising inclusion of women of all body types.

      • Ryan O'Connell

        kristen wiig is not naturally thin. have you seen videos of her before snl? i mean…. homegirl is HUNGRY.

        • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1046820072 Dalia Asfoor

           Bahahaha

    • Bridget

      No. And I’m sorry, because you’re my favorite writer on here, but no. Why does every show need to be ‘quirky’ now to get a laugh? Everything about this show was completely bleak, including the cinematography. I’ll admit, I thought the best part of the whole episode was the dinner conversation with her parents. That sort of dead-panning sarcasm was funny. But to extrapolate that kind of comedy to a sex scene, one that can only be described as painfully sad and just weird, only formed a disconnect between me and any of the characters. Sex and the city worked because the audience either related to one of the women, or they wished they had equally fucked up stories to tell to their friends. I mean I’ll give it another try, but I just felt depressed after watching only one episode. 

      • Anonymous

        … now i KNOW you didn’t just put the words “Sex and the City” and any variant of the word “relatable” in the same sentence.

        • Bridget

          Wait…..you mean you don’t ride on camels in Morroco for like….a vacay?  

        • Anonymous

          No, I ride camels in the United Arab Emirates. Boom. #getonmySATCfanlevel

        • Bridget

          Bitch…it was filmed in Morocco. Get on my imdb level. 

        • Anonymous

          Congrats, Madam Google. It was SET in Abu Dhabi. If you’re going to use wildly fantasized television shows as “show that works”, at least get your shit together and pick ONE reality. Unless you’re mixing the two, which would just be…… sad.

        • Bridget

          Gurlllll. It’s Monday, take it easy. Second, I’m not even a fan of Sex and The City. I was just making a comparison to another critically acclaimed HBO show that critics have compared it too. If you want to be all Diva about who knows SJP more, please enter a contest in some trashy bar in Hoboken if you need to prove that. Lastly, I was just forming an opinion while being extremely respectful of the writer. And if not knowing my Sex and the City trivia makes me a ‘dumbass’ … I’m sorry but that’s just sad. Wasn’t looking to start a fight so please chill.

    • Alyssa

       “You know what I was doing in college? Coke and Bravo marathons. ” More like alcohol and Lifetime marathons, but we can all relate. I agree entirely with this piece. 

    • Guest

      Ryan, your thoughts on this show read like a breach of the fourth wall. You’re right, these are dumb reasons to dislike Girls.

      Now, challenge yourself and write on the good, intelligent reasons why some others dislike it. 

      Just try, I’ll hold your hand.

    • MissLady

      No one is ever “casted” in anything.  Jesus. 

    • Ari

      Bitches be defensive.

    • http://hotfemmeinthecity.wordpress.com/ natasiarose

      I liked this show a lot. It certainly doesn’t capture the everything about the experience of being a woman in NYC, but it is well written, well acted and def touches on a few universal topics.

      • JustSayin'

         Ryan mentions this, though.  It’s one voice: one group of women’s perspectives, a singular experience.  Nothing, ever, in the history of art or entertainment, is going to appeal to every single person or capture a universal experience.  It’s just too specific.
        If we look at the show as a story of a privileged 25 year-old WOMAN (p.s. why are grown women always still refereed to as “girls”?  THAT annoys me) it was alright. 
        I have a bigger problem that none of the characters are likable and they’re all too similar and too hipster. 

    • http://www.facebook.com/anthony.b.smith1 Anthony Smith

      A more elegant version of this at some point, potentially, but I just wanted to do some really quick bullet points about this incendiary little strawman you’ve written here, O’Connell. In my heart, this is called “Rly Smart and Ultra Valid Reasons to not Like Girls,” and it’s carrying a Leaderboard ad for Bridesmaids at 100% SOV.

      1. Mad heads have been talking about why this show has been such a lightning rod for critical discourse, or at least discourse by critics, whereas other shows have been getting a free pass. Maybe it’s because the title of this show is “Girls,” when it doesn’t have to be. It could have easily been called something about cutting your child off– which seems to have its finger on the pulse of what this show is actually about– or maybe some title about men with weird eyelashes and the young girls who love them, which would have also orbited closer around the truth than its current title.

      Instead, luckily for HBO’s marketing team and less so for Mizz Dunham, they’re calling the show “Girls.” You’d think it would say something– anything substantive or even substantial, but we’ll settle for tepid and slight as we did many times throughout SatC– about a gender that the Republican party has somehow turned into a real hot-button issue. If Entourage had been called “Men,” it would have opened itself up to the same level of scrutiny– it’d be claiming it made a point about something. But as it happens, it primes itself to enter a dialogue about fame first, with gender as a secondary concern, and while I dislike Entourage, it ultimately succeeds at painting a clear picture, regardless of how broad its brushstrokes are.

      Girls doesn’t. And if you’ll forgive the cliche, it actually “sets women back.”

      But hold on stfu Anthony a show about an unattractive (let’s call a spade a spade and say mediocre looking instead of unattractive) woman and her three friends is sort of empowering, isn’t it? The post-primetime proto-neo-primetime equivalent of burning a bra? Slow down there, Valerie Solanas. Let’s move on to point two.

      2. It’s been done. And better.

      Girls came on last night at 10:30, meaning that its audience actively sought it out to watch it. In other words, all preach, all choir, no converts. If anything, I left the parish a satanist.

      But I digress. It’s been done. And much more sharply. Ugly Betty came under similar criticism, but ultimately it was able to surpass it by being more winsome and more coherent. The fact that Betty wasn’t your typical looker was directly related to the world in which she lived, worked, and ultimately had to thrive: the hypersuperficial world of fashion, an exaggeration of the extensions of our world. 

      While never a primetime audience darling, it won hearts– which is more than anyone will be able to say about Girls– and had a relatively modest viewership and relatively long run, clocking in at 4 Seasons before the cord was cut.

      And it’s not like Ugly Betty’s the only example. What about the Golden Girls? That show ran forever, had an old and unattractive lead (Bea Arthur), and actually offered insight into what it meant to be both old and a woman in nineties society. Oh, did I mention that was the nineties? We talk about this show like Lena’s a goddamn pioneer, the patron saint of getting there first. I can’t tell if we’re forgetful, we like patting ourselves on the back, or both.

      I’ll concede that maybe it’s bold and progressive to do a show about women where you like literally no one and root for the men in their lives (a boyfriend who goes out of his way for one of them in a sort of bungled Michael Cera channeling, a father who tries to find the right words to motivate his daughter, and a pseudo-boyfriend who isn’t terribly interested in associating with a failure). But then again, a show about four gay men in New York City who vote for Santorum for be progressive for exactly the same reason– primed antithetically against our expectation of what a woman should be, and saying only that some women are not that way. I guess what I’m trying to say is that the opposite of heads is tails, but you’re still flipping the same dirty goddamn coin each time.

      3. We aren’t lazy or jealous, we’re angry.

      Ryan, I think your point about laziness and jealousy is really unenlightened, and it actually moved my disagreement from a place of “oh, well, oconnell and i disagree again” and more to, like, righteous indignation. For that matter, people lose their homes because they’re lazy, and they get angry about it because they’re jealous of the rich.

      Jealousy never got in the way of talent. Look at Hemingway. I’m digressing now. Back to this.

      We can all concede that days have twenty-four hours, and most spans of college last four years. In short, laziness and tenacity aren’t the only factors at play. We’re all dealing with fixed amounts of time, and we’re all working within bodies that get tired and have to eat and shit too. So saying that we’re jealous of how hard Lena Dunham worked is utterly preposterous.

      Here’s an experience that you’re probably familiar with, but maybe in a more peripheral way: students who come from middle class families who have to do work studies in addition to their already loaded course schedule. Students who have to work whatever job comes their way right after school, who won’t get to work those all-too-integral unpaid summer internships in New York and LA because their moms and dads can’t bankroll it. Students whose parents couldn’t arrange for the right handshake over the right lunch.

      I do not mean to denigrate the work that Lena Dunham did during her free time, but I do want to call attention to the fact that Miss Dunham had free time. Which is more than I can say, and which is more than a majority of students (a majority, Ryan!) in this country can say.

      That’s why we reject Miss Dunham. Tiny Furniture was marketed as something anyone could do, a victory for the meritocratic nature of film in the youtube generation, of mumblecore and what it could do for writer/directors. But that’s not the case. This is just another rich kid who got to say something, anything at all, and chose to just go “blah blah blah lol sorry jk.”

      But back to the show at large. Never mind the social posturing. Never mind the thoughtlessness. Never mind the vitriolic attack on less fortunate dissenters. People don’t like this show because it’s bad. It’s poorly written, poorly shot, and poorly acted. Its absolute sharpest moment is the sex scene, which is actually quite jarring and executed perfectly, but the fact that nothing afterwards calls the action of that scene into question is suggestive of a larger problem– that if Lena Dunham has any talent, and it’s quite possible that she does, she hasn’t matured yet to a level by which she can and should be judged, fairly or unfairly, by adding her name and brand to a show called “Girls” in an era where women are under attack.

      But for now, what she lacks in talent she makes up for in having rich parents and a television series.   

      • Guest

        KO’d

      • Aelya

        holy shit 

      • Guest

        yup

      • http://twitter.com/shineesherlock Josh (조쉬)

        Sad when the most thoughtful writing happens in the comment section

      • http://twitter.com/jcfrancisco Carlo Francisco

        lol oh fuck

      • Friggin'Hamburger

        I actually quite liked “Girls”- in the same way I like, say, Gossip Girl or How I Met Your Mother (ie brainless entertainment, rather than political statement or cultural movement). But WOW, you nailed this!

        • http://www.facebook.com/anthony.b.smith1 Anthony Smith

          Thanks :-)

          tl;drness of my rant aside, I would have experienced the show a lot differently if it were primed as a show about entitlement and cutting the strings. We’ll see what happens next. I’ve also noticed that a lot of people who don’t like it have only seen the first episode (including me), whereas the overwhelming majority of positive feedback about it comes from advanced screenings of the first few episodes. Based on that, it could be safe to say that it gets smarter, better– or at least more enjoyable and endearing– and maybe it offers something that speaks to its title, “Girls,” and not something about cutting the cord and the strings. 

          I’m so open to its getting better, but if it continues in the manner of the pilot, my blood may never cool down.

        • Friggin'Hamburger

          Agreed.  I feel like it’s a real shame that this show has been packaged as presenting *The* female post-grad experience- there is no singular experience that we all have. Instead of carving itself a nice little niche as the commentary on entitlement etc that you describe (and something a lot of us can obviously relate to through friends and peers, even if we haven’t experience it ourselves), it’s being sold on the premise that it’s our reality. 

          The funny thing is, I *can* relate to a lot of elements in this show.  The disappointment of being unable to find a job in your field immediately following graduation, the awkward sex with the boy you probably shouldn’t be sleeping with, the parents who want to know when you’re going to get your life together- this isn’t even a “girls” thing, I’m sure plenty of boys can relate to it too!  Plenty of shows present vastly less realistic perspectives of adolescence (I’m looking at you, Gossip Girl), but they pull it off because they don’t sell it to their audience by telling them “this is your life, but on TV!” That said, I haven’t read enough background info to say whether this image is one that’s been presented by the show’s producers, or whether it’s media-driven.  I’ll certainly be watching the next two episodes to see where this goes!

      • moleplayingrough

        Agreed.  One of the most ridiculous claims the writer made was that a show called “Boys” would not have been subject to the same scrutiny.  I don’t know what planet she is from, but almost literally no one would take such a show seriously.

    • grammatically peeved

      Please! It’s “cast” not “casted!” It will never be “casted.” This is the second article of yours I’ve read with this mistake, and consequently my second comment about it; I harp because I care.

      Apart from grammar and general irritation regarding privilege, I agree.

    • Michelle

      I’ve never loathed a TV show more. And for 0 of the reasons you listed here. GIRLS was gross, pandering, and whiny. I was left wondering what show everyone I know had been viewing advance episodes of. Surely it wasn’t the same crap I watched.

    • Meh

      I know this show is being all critically acclaimed and Ms. Dunham is being heralded as “the voice of her generation” and all that good shit, but quite frankly I have no desire to see how the rest of this show plays out. On most, if not all fronts, this show failed to compel me. I really could not sympathize, or feel pity for, or find the humor in seeing a young, white, 20-Something year old girl rolling on the floor begging her parents for money. I have to applaud Ms. Dunham for being saavy enough to not call this show White Girl Problems, put it on ABC and slap a laugh-track on it, but even if she did there would be very little difference in my opinion. I cant tell if this is a step forward or a step backwards for this demographic, but I dont think I’ll stick around to find out, unfortunately. IDK, i guess this type of thing just isnt for me, and I’m okay with that, I just couldnt see what all the fuss is about.

    • GoFidelGo

      I love what you wrote about doing something….about making something happen for yourself. I agree, totally. And props to Lena. So what she comes from money, she’s talented.

    • ZacheryAllanStarkey

      When I moved to New York City, I took an Amtrak train from Cleveland. I’d never been to NYC before. I had $2,000 saved up, and a room in Bed-Stuy I found on Craiglslist. I had no job, or support from my family. When I stepped off the train at Penn Station, that $2,000 was all I had to get started. Still it was better than Ohio, where there are no jobs.

      I come from a poor, working class blue collar family, grew up in a poor, drug infested inner city ghetto in Columbus, and worked my way thru college while living in an apartment that had no heat in the winters.

      I lived on $15,000 a year my first 2 years in NYC, all from working odd jobs. I got used to eating once a day. I worked shitty retail jobs 7 days a week while doing freelance marketing work, and earned what extra money I could from playing out with my band and doing photography work. All while looking for a decent job.

      Now I am a Marketing Director at a music promotion firm in Soho. I am underpaid for the work I do, but I am still grateful for the job I have.

      I had no family support, no internships. I succeeded in NYC on my own.

      Fuck Lena Dunham, fuck this show, and fuck the spoiled brats who continue to make excuses for their fellow spoiled trust funders.

      You know what I love? People always make excuses for kids who come from Privilege, but no one ever makes excuses for those who grow up poor and work to succeed, or who never get the chance to succeed because they never get the opportunity.

      Zachery Allan Starkey
       

      • Aj

        Knock the chip off youre shoulder please. I was on my own at 17 and came to new york on my own and would never post a comment like yours, it smacks of bitterness and pettiness . Youre self righteous and you need to get over it. You should most definitely be proud of yourself for all youve done but why would say fuck you to someone who came from privilege, it makes no sense whatsoever.

        • ZacheryAllanStarkey

          Aj, I understand where you are coming from, and to a certain extent I agree, it’s better to just not carry negative feelings of this nature around. However, at the same time, I think I am frustrated because I never see a voice similar to my own in the media, all I see are the voices of people from privilege, and after a while, that gets frustrating.

          People who come from Privilege have said “Fuck You” to me and people like me my entire life, and I am sick of them thinking they can walk over people. I am allowed to voice my views, and I am sorry but this show Girls is a perfect example of something I rightfully despise. It’s my right to think that, and it’s my right to voice it, just as it Lena Dunham’s right to make an entire TV series about a bunch of spoiled brats.

          Also, the scene at the end where Hannah takes the money her parents left for Housekeeping really angered me. The Housekeeper that money was meant for does more work in one day than Hannah does in one year. 

    • whatever

      you really are quite dim (got casted – was cast, etc).  it’s great that tiny furniture was an awakening for you, but not all of us were so sheltered.  some people actually saw movies that showed real people long before 2010/2011 (or whenever it came out).  as for your criticisms, simple minded crap.  i’m not bothered that their parents are all wealthy, i am bothered that most of them can’t act, and the reason they are on the show is that their parents are wealthy.  the show does take a turn to reality i would like to see, but it also gives in to pretentious self-indulgence that make the characters unlikable and boring (pretentious dialogue [or dialog for americans] is usually predictable).  it’s also a good thing that you’re getting in touch with your feminine side and supporting women, but you don’t need to be such a pussy about it.  from your writing i would guess that you are exactly (or nearly exact) like the awful people in the show (self-righteous, pretentious), which is why you feel the need to defend it without thought to the weakness of your arguments or consideration of the show’s shortcomings.

      • moleplayingrough

        Holy shit.  I thought to myself, “I could take 45 min to respond to all the retarded points in this rhetorical holocaust” and then read this post.  You did it much faster.  If the writer of this blog could put her ego aside, she could actually benefit enormously from reading every goddamn word of this and meditating on it for a year.

    • me

      this is god damn pathetic. judd apatow, for shame

    • me

      also whats up with the loads of smart water and satc name dropping? everything is so hipster typical. is this what “real girls” are about? this is seriously fucking pathetic.

    blog comments powered by Disqus