f

Get in on this viral marvel and start spreading that buzz! Buzzy was made for all up and coming modern publishers & magazines!

Fb. In. Tw. Be.

Donate Now            Our Story           Our Team            Contact Us             Shop

Dunham has shown us who she is, and white women have continued to support and uplift her as a feminist hero.

by Sherronda J. Brown and Lara Witt This essay contains discussions of sexual violence, including r/pe and molestation Last week, a writer at The Guardian posed what she no doubt thought was a poignant question: “Lena Dunham is a hugely original writer. Who cares if she’s a good person?” Before you ask—yes, she is. See, Martha Gill is deeply invested in protecting a fellow white woman from the consequences of her actions, and she is willing to tell lies about Lena Dunham’s talent, ignore truths about her poor character, and gaslight the people who have and continue to rightfully criticize her and her dangerous white feminism in the process. Just a few days after Martha's contribution, Katie Herzog wrote "The Pleasure of Hating Lena Dunham Is Less About Her And More About Us" for The Stranger. All things considered, it looks a lot like Dunham or someone close to her enlisted white women writers to do proactive damage control ahead of her latest apology in a long, long string of apologies for shitty behavior. Even more frightening than the idea that this might be premeditated apologism on her behalf, is the fact that white women reflexively feel the need to defend Dunham in the first place, because like so many terrible white men artists and literary figures, she is a terrible white woman who makes media that they enjoy. So they stand by her in the name of abusive white feminism, and perhaps like the terrible men, they feel that she too deserves a chance to stand separate from her art, able to continue succeeding while she uses the bones of Black and Brown women as her throne. Gaslighting us, shifting the animus for the criticism of Dunham onto people of color rather than Dunham’s proven record of investment in white supremacy, is easier than interrogating themselves and the white womanhood that connects them. When Aurora Perrineau revealed last year that she had been raped by Murray Miller, Lena Dunham called her a liar. Dunham, who has long used “feminism” as a platform for herself, her voice and her work, issued a statement along with Jenni Konner, co-showrunner and writer of “Girls” stating, “While our first instinct is to listen to every woman's story, our insider knowledge of Murray's situation makes us confident that sadly this accusation is one of the 3 percent of assault cases that are misreported every year. It is a true shame to add to that number, as outside of Hollywood women still struggle to be believed. We stand by Murray and this is all we'll be saying about this issue.” But it's Dunham who was lying. As part of her recent PR run—which comes after the death of her website, the dissolution of her production partnership with Jenni Konner, the very public and controversial resignation of a Lenny Letter writer, and a call for women of color to no longer work with/for her—she has now apologized for this damaging lie one year later. And in classic Lena Dunham form, she centered herself and her own feelings in her apology for a lie that harmed a Black person who was sexually assaulted at 17 years old: “I didn’t have the ‘insider information’ I claimed but rather blind faith in a story that kept slipping and changing and revealed itself to mean nothing at all,” writes Dunham. Aurora Perrineau deserved far better, but women like Dunham are only consistent in perpetuating white supremacy and, in particular, misogynoir.
SUPPORT WEAR YOUR VOICE: DONATE HERE 

Spoilers for The Handmaid's Tale - if you aren't caught up, you may encounter spoilers.

When The Handmaid's Tale first premiered on Hulu, I wasn't quite sure what I would be up for. I'd never read the book, though I had a vague awareness that the world of Gilead was not for the weak of heart. Margaret Atwood created a world that encompassed all of the worst atrocities throughout history, normalized for audiences to feel the true weight of these events.

One of the things that Handmaid's Tale does well, in my opinion, is story-writing. The show does a great job of building up suspense and creating a sensation of genuine fear and dread for the characters.

Normally, I hate these kinds of episodes in series  ones that act partially like filler episodes — where we get little to no new information about the main character and the conflict we've been exploring so far in the season. But instead, "The Other Side" begins to answer some of the questions that have been building up all season.

We were outnumbered at the “Battle for Berkeley,” and we can’t afford to let that happen again. The Handmaid's Tale reveals exactly why.

I originally sat down to write about being in the age of Trump and watching the first three episodes of The Handmaid’s Tale, a new series from Hulu that debuts April 26, with a couple hot takes to offer the masses. Then I went to what is being called “the Battle for Berkeley” on April 15, and I realized that any SEO-friendly thinkpiece I could write was complete and utter bullshit compared to the call to awareness The Handmaid’s Tale is. I was struck by the similarities between the rise to power of Gilead, the fascist religious regime controlling the world of the main characters -- particularly Offred -- in The Handmaid's Tale, and the rise to power of Trump, Pence and the alt-right. Related: How White Millennials Became Neo-Nazis Be forewarned: there are some spoilers (especially relating to the third episode), but if you’ve read the book, you won’t be too surprised. 

You don't have permission to register