Lena Dunham made her name pushing back against the extremes of sex positivity. In the second episode of the TV series Girls, which she wrote and starred in, her character capitulates to a sex partner’s insistence that they act out a nymphet fantasy. At the time, Lena said: “It’s definitely going to evoke the feeling like, ‘Why is this self-respecting woman doing this, and if so, is she a self-respecting woman?’” But then she explained her motivation: “relationship statuses are becoming more and more ambiguous in our modern Facebook, texting, Twitter world. And [it] can be really interesting and can also be damaging … you don’t understand how invested in you they are.”
What has happened to Lena? That is one of the questions that rushed through my head when, after two attempts, I made it through Sharp Stick, her first feature since 2011. Others included: what is wrong with this film? Is it a test of the inanity of contemporary critics? Or is she baiting us to cancel her? Or has she, all along, been just as idiotic, just as narcissistic, just as myopic as her crudest haters insisted?
I feel insane even describing the film’s plot. The protagonist Sarah Jo, a 26-year-old caretaker for a child with Down’s Syndrome, begs his man-child father to take her virginity (she had an emergency hysterectomy at age 17, which sexually stunted her). This causes her to instantly transform into an infantile nymphomaniac. Soon enough into the sometimes mushrooms-fuelled, sometimes porn-fuelled, affair, the mother — a sharp-tongued and overbearing businesswoman portrayed by Lena herself, in some strange self-hating gesture — finds out. (Actually, she finds out on the floor of the kitchen after she slips in a pool of her own amniotic fluid.) Sarah Jo is fired — and finds solace in an ethical porn star who resembles her ex-lover. (He addresses the camera with words like “I feel so connected to you” and “I admire your commitment to women’s personal expression”.)
Worried she’s bad at sex, Sarah Jo embarks on a journey of self-discovery that involves hanging elementary-school arts-and-craftsy checklists of extreme sexual acts around her room and soliciting men on fetish apps to participate in them. At one point she jumps out of the bushes and screams at the family she used to work for, “I did bukkake!” The disabled child and newborn react with distress.
The film has received some praise, which has appeared in Instagram ads featuring suggestive photos of the film’s completely conventionally attractive star, Kristine Froseth, who has modelled for Chanel, Armani and Prada. Vanity Fair called it “Supremely Funny”; Rolling Stone claimed it was “both absurd and enlightening” (in fairness, they were running an interview with Lena; to be honest might have been impolitic). But, in a refreshing show of lucidity in the face of a star-studded film that was very diverse — perhaps to clumsily rebuke critics of Girls’s whiteness — most outlets have panned it. To quote The New York Times’s Manohla Dargis: “There’s no point in enumerating all the reasons I dislike it”.
Perhaps critics feel unusually free to be honest about this awful film because of a perplexing controversy around its creation. Apparently Forseth, who plays Sarah Jo, reached out to Amy Gravino, the autism activist — known for her “Why Autism is Sexier Than You Think” TedTalk — about consulting on the film. Then the creators suddenly decided that Forseth’s character would not be autistic. According to Gravino, though, the character is “clearly” coded as autistic, and the “dehumanising” film participates in the “infantilisation of people on the spectrum”.
All my life I have hated feminist propaganda, I have just realised why – feminists are sexist and equally abhorrent and destructive as sexist men. Reading this article brought to mind Toby Young’s autobiography and his realisation, after many wrong turns and mistakes, the best sex is an expression of love.
Excellent comment.
They are worse.
Traditional “sexist” men who existed in Britain say a century ago, at least lived up to their beliefs of being stronger and superior to women, and didnt start whining when things got violent or they had to put their lives on the line to protect women, children and nation. No sexist man shirked when asked to charge machine guns while the women stayed safe at home.
Feminists are supremacists, they believe women should always be treated as better than men…while also expecting to be treated like children, and not to bear any of the responsibilities men bore. Of the many feminists I have met, not one chose to be a breadwinner, run a business or take up a job that wasn’t cushy and office based.
I totally agree. The traditional roles for men have many benefits for women – equally, the traditional roles for women have many benefits for men, whereas contemporary feminism is almost entirely destructive. Quotas are wrong as they promote the incompetent, equally, excluding people on the basis they possess particular physical characteristics is wrong and detrimental to society.
Feminism is not liberation – it’s a power play.
It has to be a part of love. Sleeping around is a dead end and leaves a lot of guilt. You have to quench that guilt by mixing with those who are as bad as you. An honourable woman would resist it.
Oh for heaven’s sake. Have we reached peak bourgeois decadence yet?
Lena Dunham is the archetype of the modern feminist. Shallow, annoying, ugly, and dumb
Awwwww Lena Dunham. She goes beyond question mark to full blown puke in mouth when thinking of her career. If one actress could encapsulate the sheer non-sensical, disgusting, insanity of our current age, it would be her.
Could it be much simpler than all this? Could Lena just be acting out her exhibitionist fantasies?
LD went wrong when she began to listen to her critics. Not the ones who thought her characters were awful (as the writer says, Dunham knew that, and they could be glorious in their grotesqueries). She listened to the critics who said her characters weren’t diverse enough or unproblematic enough to warrant attention.
Good God.
“has she, all along, been just as idiotic, just as narcissistic, just as myopic as her crudest haters insisted?”
Read again the first 2 paragraphs. Gives a good summation of the rest of the article.
My life is so much better since I stopped thinking there was some sort of ‘trick ‘ to being loveable or sexually viable. I wish more young people, boys and girls would realize it’s actually not that complicated.
Lena Dunham has always been a female-hating, male-worshipping sell out. Why on earth is she associated with feminism in any way? Her “Girls” was so disgusting, including her showing her boyfriend slapping a woman as he rapes her. Nothing about her is remotely feminist. It’s all about money and career. But she still is incredibly boring. Hate her for so glorifying girls and women pornifying themselves.
So, if I understand correctly: Dunham has moved from attempts authentically to portray the struggles and traumas of sexually actively young women as they seek to form relationships with themselves and others with perhaps a romantic ideal of marriage and, possibly, children in mind as an end goal (at least in principle), to attempting to promote a less realistic, idealised, didactic narrative of guilt-free, frictionless sex with strangers in which women are pretty much indistinguishable from men in terms of their desires and needs, in which procreation does not feature at all?
Is it a coincidence, then, that the image for this piece shows Dunham with only one eye fully visible, and heavily accented with make-up? cf https://vigilantcitizen.com/vc-resources/the-one-eye-sign-its-origins-and-occult-meaning/
Maybe, maybe not …
I see that the image has now been changed …
I find this confusing
Jeez, made it to the end of this article on a crazy subject. Box ticked for trying to be open minded.
“has she, all along, been just as idiotic, just as narcissistic, just as myopic as her crudest haters insisted?”
Yes.
I find Lena Dunham an absolutely repulsive person, inside and out. I wish she would keep her inside in.
Lena gives new meaning to the expression, “Let it all hang out” : )
Once again, Manov shows that she’s the best reviewer writing in English today. Keep it up, Ann!
I see the reviews paint this film as awful. This article tells me why.
Gosh that sounds dreadful. Thanks for watching it so I don’t have to.
Women – Sex – Remuneration. That’s life. Prostitution is just a tiny part of one corner of that eternal triangle.
It’s a Quadrangle: It didn’t happen if you don’t publish your experience.
Try to not see things, because it is hard to unsee them. From the 90s, I recall a woman with a rocking body in a see through dress, angry because everyone was looking, not just those whom she gave permission. And a wildly popular young dominatrix, letting the world know that SHE was the exploited one, because her “arms hurt” as the laborer in her voluntarily entered into remunerative contract.
I hope we are bad television for alien viewing.