Dear Lena Dunham: Let's Talk Sexual Objectification
Lena Dunham's once again controversial comments landed her in the hot seat after making some bold accusations about Giants WR Odell Beckham Jr. The outspoken feminist made claims that OBJ insulted her physical appearance and rejected her at the Met Gala. Dear Lena Dunham, the man did not say a word. You cannot simply invent a conversation in your head about what someone is thinking.
Her comments were highly personal and directed at him in full fledged attack mode, daring him to challenge her predetermined implications. She spoke with conviction about his macho exterior preventing them from communicating because of what was perceived to be her "inferior" beauty. (Raises hand) Why is he obligated to speak/flirt with her in the first place? Couldn't she have initiated a conversation? This is not the 1920s... as a personable, bold female, she could have taken the first step. She is definitely not shy and believes in equality so why is it his moral obligation to greet her on command? Her expectations contradict her firm notions of equality by reverting to gender norms in which the man is expected to make the first move.
In her initial tweet, she does not hold back in attacking the NFL star.
“It was so amazing because it was like he looked at me and he determined I was not the shape of a woman by his standards. He was like, ‘That’s a marshmallow. That’s a child. That’s a dog.’ It wasn’t mean — he just seemed confused,” Dunham recounted in the newsletter. “The vibe was very much like, ‘Do I want to f— it? Is it wearing a … yep, it’s wearing a tuxedo. I’m going to go back to my cell phone.’”
She added, “It was like we were forced to be together, and he literally was scrolling Instagram rather than have to look at a woman in a bow tie. I was like, ‘This should be called the Metropolitan Museum of Getting Rejected by Athletes.’”
Still recovering from the Josh Norman drama that tainted his reputation last season, OBJ is seeking a new level of maturity based on level of play and respect. He said that her comments did not shake him, stating that "he does not want a problem with anyone" (Hats off to his PR team for that one).
This is just one prime example of hidden hypocrisies that males endure everyday. Dunham took insult because she did not receive attention. The underlying implication is that all males strive for a females attention. If he does not blatantly pursue a female, he gets labeled as feminine or gay, losing his masculinity under false pretenses. It was not that he does not like girls, but perhaps just not "that" girl. A guy doesn't return your advances or ignores your text and female clans begin forming a long winded list of reasonable insults. He's gay, you can do better than him anyway, and my personal favorite: he's not even good looking. But you thought he was good looking five seconds ago when you meticulously came up with a way to attract his attention.
Dunham is using feminism when it is convenient for her and this is where I find fault with her label as an outspoken feminist. As someone who is pursuing equality for both genders, she has no problem dragging down one under the notion that it is just and beneficial for females. It is the deepest hypocrisy to not only assume that he must speak with her, but that he must be attracted to her. As a bold independent woman, does she need the attention of a male? But when she does not receive it, it hurts her ego. So congratulations, Dunham is human like everyone else and any form of rejection hurts. But A.) please don't assume and B.) do not be a feminist when it is convenient--use it as a way to speak about actual important issues that do not undermine the actions of one sex to benefit another.