It’s funny that you all get that “best/worstism” is destroying internet culture but then turn around and become run-of-the-mill internet “Girls” fanzombies. Here’s the truth: it’s pleasant, but more clever than funny, and a C+/B quality show. But mention that on the internet that it’s obv. not A quality and that we maybe don’t need to see the homely heifer of a showrunner expose herself each week and you are suddenly the worst misogynist that doesn’t want to see a female project succeed bla bla bla. At least “Community” fans just bug you to watch the show, if you don’t like it they don’t say you’re impeding social justice. Thanks to people like you guys, I will never watch another ep of “Girls,” since it just promotes this poisonous discourse where you either have to see it as the key to understanding the elemental young victimized female or else you’re on board with Rick Santorum. Haterism sucks, yes, but boosterism is just as destructive
I don’t see the relationship between “best/worstism” and liking Girls, other than their both being things on the internet you apparently don’t like.
I don’t think there’s anything destructive about championing something you love. The fact that you’re so insecure as to take such “boosterism” as an affront says more about the shaky intellectual ground you’re standing on. Maybe you should re-examine what it is you really don’t like about Girls.
Case in point: I don’t think you’re a misogynist for not liking Girls. Calling Lena Dunham a “homely heifer,” though, makes a damn good case that you are one.
I didn’t say that I personally enjoyed that show, which was kind of my point-it might not be my thing but that hardly invalidates it for the people it speaks to/identify with it. Thanks for listening, all the same. Also, there are better ways to say you’re not into something than reductively and negatively objectifying a person.
It’s funny that you all get that “best/worstism” is destroying internet culture but then turn around and become run-of-the-mill internet “Girls” fanzombies. Here’s the truth: it’s pleasant, but more clever than funny, and a C+/B quality show. But mention that on the internet that it’s obv. not A quality and that we maybe don’t need to see the homely heifer of a showrunner expose herself each week and you are suddenly the worst misogynist that doesn’t want to see a female project succeed bla bla bla. At least “Community” fans just bug you to watch the show, if you don’t like it they don’t say you’re impeding social justice. Thanks to people like you guys, I will never watch another ep of “Girls,” since it just promotes this poisonous discourse where you either have to see it as the key to understanding the elemental young victimized female or else you’re on board with Rick Santorum. Haterism sucks, yes, but boosterism is just as destructive
I don’t see the relationship between “best/worstism” and liking Girls, other than their both being things on the internet you apparently don’t like.
I don’t think there’s anything destructive about championing something you love. The fact that you’re so insecure as to take such “boosterism” as an affront says more about the shaky intellectual ground you’re standing on. Maybe you should re-examine what it is you really don’t like about Girls.
Case in point: I don’t think you’re a misogynist for not liking Girls. Calling Lena Dunham a “homely heifer,” though, makes a damn good case that you are one.
– David
I didn’t say that I personally enjoyed that show, which was kind of my point-it might not be my thing but that hardly invalidates it for the people it speaks to/identify with it. Thanks for listening, all the same. Also, there are better ways to say you’re not into something than reductively and negatively objectifying a person.