Lena Dunham Encourages People To Tear Apart The Movie Posters Of Other Artists

Unknown-1Fresh from declaring her support of Oberlin students in claiming the serving of sushi is cultural appropriation, actress Lena Dunham (creator of HBO’s “Girls,” is supporting producer Tami Sagher’s effort to get people to deface the posters for the Jason Bourne movie. The objection is to the inclusion of a gun. So Dunham and Sagher are calling for the work of other artists to be defaced because they disagree with the content. They are doing so without a hint of recognized hypocrisy. Despite the attack on free speech, the response has been muted from HBO and Hollywood figures to an actress and a producer calling for the vandalization of the work of other artists.

There has been a long complaint that advocates on the left appear to discard free speech values when they disagree with the content of speech, as we have seen on college campuses in recent years. That growing concern is evident in the call of producer Tami Sagher who posted a photo of the gun image ripped out of the Jason Bourne New York subway ad with the caption, “Hey New Yorkers, what if we do some peeling & get rid of the guns in the Jason Bourne subway ads. So tired of guns.”

Ok, you are tired of guns, but what you are really saying is that you reserve the right to prevent others from seeing images if you are “tired” of seeing them. To make matters worse, you want others to tear apart the images of other film artists because you are tired of them. Nevertheless, Dunham loved the idea of vandalizing images that she does not want to see. She reposted Sagher’s juvenile message and added “Good idea @tulipbone! Let’s go!”

It would be interesting to know how Dunham would respond to those people “tired” of seeing her work and proceeded to use the same privilege to tear down her posters or deface her images. How about HBO? Would HBO support the tearing down or defacing of its posters? Presumably, these advocates would draw a distinction on the merits of good and bad speech, a distinction that they reserved the right to draw according to their own values and transient mood. Some speech is tiring while other speech is valued. Not only do they reserve the right to make that distinction with regard to the work of other artists, but to deny others the right to make their own choice. Imagine how far this approach could go with other forms of art like sculptures or paintings. Soon we would release millions of micro-censors to remove “tired” images in the name of “truth.”

61 thoughts on “Lena Dunham Encourages People To Tear Apart The Movie Posters Of Other Artists”

  1. Matt Damon is also anit-gun, I wonder if he will be tearing down posters too?
    A anti-gunner makes millions of of movies with guns, while other anti-gunners want to rip down his posters, so they don’t have to see him with guns…

    You couldn’t make this into a more unbelievable movie script….LoL…

  2. Don’t know who she is, other than someone who could focus her efforts to help humanity in a huge variety of better ways. Hmmmmmmm. Like Brad Pitt helping out the Katrina victims or something. Knee-jerk criticism and responding in a negative to something that offends oneself is easy and usually only makes that person feel better about themselves. Much harder to be positive and put yourself out there.

  3. Oh, dear. Ran across another article about Dunham. I confused her with someone else. Guess I need to join the rest of you. Who is Lena Dunham?

    1. bettykath – she is the one who did NOT get an Emmy nod this year.

  4. Great post Darren, and a good reminder of how we should all avoid the team mentality that Autumn explains well. The violence in our culture comes down from the top. My brother is an avid hunter, outdoorsman, and hobbyist gunsmith; he is amazed by how new hunting rifles mimic assault weapons. That’s marketing, folks!

  5. @Autumn

    I disagree that Republicans are just as bad as Democrats about blindly following a party line. True, they’re bad about that kind of stuff, just not as bad as Democrats because there is a structural limiting factor, that is, the GOP is currently sort of the contrarian party. If you are a poseur and just want to go along, you become a Democrat. It always takes more mental effort to NOT just go along.

    Now, if the GOP becomes ascendant in the country, and stays that way for a few decades, then the dynamic of originality would probably begin to favor the Democrats.

    For example, consider Global Warming. The easy position here is to believe in it, what with all the “9 million scientists agree” claptrap, and the “You don’t want to kill Chilly Willy the Penquin do you???” Rightly or wrongly, I submit that it takes more mental effort to dispute AGW.

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

  6. True enough Paul, but when ya take down a local drug dealer or serve a high-risk arrest warrant the local police don’t flatten the whole neighborhood in the process. A hand held battering ram or a Halligan is sufficient to stuff the door in before storming the house.

    But, I guess the federal government’s elected officials believe it is permissible in the Panama case to blow stuff up and kill lotsa people to serve an arrest warrant. And yet, they come after local cops for mistakes\screw-ups which are a thousand times less costly.

    I remember seeing after Manuel surrendered, he was then handed over to federal agents to make the formal “arrest” so that justice may be properly served. Book’em Danno!

  7. Autumn

    I’m sorry to hear about your friend who disappeared, tragic. Sorry for your loss.

    In early 1991 I was in a CJ class with two guys who worked for Kent. Previously they were in the military (I forget which branch) and participated in the Panama Invasion to take out Manuel Noriega. He reflected on one operation they were on and came under sniper fire from someone in a building. The structure was four or five stories high and had a load-bearing support column at each corner of this square building. He told me they called in an AC-130 gunship (aircraft) which circled around and fired its 107mm gun at each of those columns, the last caused the structure to fail and the entire building collapsed. He thought the war there was crazy. He did his duty and I don’t fault protecting our men from gunfire, but when President Bush said this was all a police action to bring Manuel to justice for cocaine trafficking and money laundering the entire action was absurd. Blowing up everything to take out a drug dealer? Preposterous.

    The irony of it was that one of the classes we attended at that time was on Use of Force and constitutional issues.

    1. Darren – Panama is an interesting invasion. We wanted Noriega, but he was protected by heavily armed and well-trained (by us) troops. We had to get past them to get to him.

  8. @Squeeky

    re: “Far too many people are Democrats not because they have studied the issues and policies, and made an informed decision.”

    I would argue the same logic applies to Republicans.

    Rigid, party partisans are a major problem.

    As you point out it SHOULD be about the issues and policies.

    Personally, I think both the DNC and RNC should be destroyed so we have more parties to represent our interests. Right now, sticking with those two parties ensures that nothing significant changes as they are all beholden to corporate interests which are destroying civil society and the environment for short term profit

  9. The very existence of a nice and innocent person presumes that some people exist who are neither nice nor innocent, and thus will hurt you and take your stuff. If you are nice and innocent then one of two realities exist for you:

    1. You have no weapon (gun), and thus rely on someone else with a weapon (gun) to protect you; or

    2. You have a weapon (gun), and thus rely on both yourself and someone else with a weapon (gun) to protect you.

    It seems pretty obvious to me that Option 2 increases your chance of survival. Option 1 is for people who are really optimistic.

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

  10. Almost half the images that represent a movie on Hulu, Netflicks, and Amazon feature someone holding a gun in them. Guns and gun violence sells movies.

  11. You should hear Camille Paglia rip Lena Dunham. Eviscerates the b!tch.

  12. @autumn

    Because Matt Damon is probably just a poseur, like so many Democrats are today. Far too many people are Democrats not because they have studied the issues and policies, and made an informed decision. Instead, they don’t have a clue what is going on, are mentally unable to make such decisions, and thus just latch on to the Democrats because the media signals that the Democrats are the party of smarts, and tolerance. They can appear to be smart, without actually having any smarts. College educated white folks in the Blue states are really bad about this. That is why their arguments are chiefly composed of name-calling and commentary on the form of the conservative arguments, not the substance of the arguments.

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

  13. @

    “He has many issues, but he is going to have to work pretty hard to leave the swath of death and destruction that woman has. Maybe her campaign poster could be the Bourne piece with her holding the gun instead of Matt Damon.”

    I agree, and ironically, Matt Damon, who suckled at the teat of Howard Zinn, endorses HRC. Very bizarre – HZ must be whirling in his grave.

  14. @Darren

    Actually Ghaddifi WAS a threat to the Establishment corporados because he wanted to introduce the dinar which would have challenged the banks.

    Aside from Libya, Syria, I have a personal interest in Honduras as my best friend moved there and has been disappeared. SOS clinton backed the coup leaders which displaced democratically elected Zelaya in 2009 – this benefitted her corporate peeps who of course donated heavily the Clinton Foundation. Now Honduras is one of the most dangerous states on Earth.

    I won’t even go into Ukraine.

    How anyone can vote for this woman who sanctioned violence globally is beyond comprehension!

  15. Exactly Darren. And you see it here. As long as she’s on the right team, it’s really OK. And for those of us not on the team, or perhaps any team, get bulk-labeled as “Trumpkins.”

Comments are closed.