Whenever an argument gains momentum, trends, and turns into gossip fodder – on the internet or otherwise – it's always best to hear both sides before making an assessment.
Today, the tiff in question is a debate between Lena Dunham her Girls TV show associates versus a reporter at the Television Critics Association press tour panel. During their winter press tour, reporter Tim Molloy inquired about the level of nudity on the show - comparing it to Game of Thrones, before deducing that the latter had purpose while the former did not. Tim had commented during his question:
“They’re doing it to be salacious. To titillate people. And your character is often naked at random times for no reason.”
Affronted, Dunham retorted, “It’s because it’s a realistic expression of what it’s like to be alive, I think, and I totally get it. If you are not into me, that’s your problem.” Lena’s colleagues then chimed in, chastising Molloy for his unfavorable phrasing.
But what about the reporter's side of the story?
Well, in his online recollection of the story, Tim Molloy addresses Lena’s comment, saying: “Huh? But I didn’t say that,” recalling that subsequently the “conversation continued its personal turn as Apatow asked if I had a girlfriend.” During the panel, Apatow had followed up Molloy’s affirmative reply with, “Let’s see how she likes you when you quote that with your question.”
Molloy’s online response went on to say that his girlfriend “wondered about it too” and was “cool with it”.
Ultimately the problem wasn’t so much about the question of nudity so much as how Molloy asked it. By saying it was “for no reason”, the implication was that it had no artistic merit. By highlighting the disparity of thread-shedding in Thrones versus Girls with the adjectives he did, the inference could be made that Dunham’s natural nudity is merely pointless and “random”, while saline tits are “titillating”. That adjective, however, he omitted as recalled the exchange and stood his ground online:
@thehilblog No, it just isn't. Salacious has a negative connotation. There are much better things to be offended by than this.
— Tim Molloy (@TimAMolloy) January 11, 2014
The happy ending to this story is that all press it good press for professionals whose livelihood depends on it - especially when it's so well timed. Oh, gee. Did I leave that out? Yes - since the first episode of Girls premieres Jan. 12, 2014, it’s such a happy accident that this amplified coverage of perceived body-shaming will ignite a buzz-trend on Twitter to remind viewers to watch it on Sunday.
Meanwhile on Twitter, Mr. Molloy seems to be enjoying his 15 minutes of infamy from Lena's legions of followers as his article gets heaps of hits from haters.
But I’m, like, totally sure this little dispute wasn’t blown out of proportion or planned for publicity... whatsoever.
I mean, what would either party possibly have to gain?
Image via Youtube