I quite like 'Girls' the TV series. Today I came across this article on the Guardian website: Lena Dunham tackles diversity and sexism in Girls on heated panel debate. I obviously read it straight away, as representations of women and minorities on TV (and in movies and other media and culture in general) interest me greatly, and the fact remains that there is very little (or no) racial diversity on 'Girls' and I was intrigued to know what Lena Dunham had to say about that. It turns out that the reason the panel was heated was a question asked by Tim Molloy of the Wrap about nudity on the show. He writes his side of the event here: Judd Apatow and Lena Dunham Get Mad at Me For Asking Why She’s Naked So Much on ‘Girls’.
Here's the question Molloy asked:
“I don’t get the purpose of all the nudity on the show. By you particularly. I feel like I’m walking into a trap where you say no one complains about the nudity on ‘Game of Thrones,’ but I get why they’re doing it. They’re doing it to be salacious. To titillate people. And your character is often naked at random times for no reason.”
I must say, if I was on the panel and this question was asked I would be mad as well. For these reasons:
1. Why does Lena Dunham has to justify her nudity on the show to anyone? (and her answer that 'It’s because it’s a realistic expression of what it’s like to be alive' is perfect. But as writer, director, actress and artist if she said 'Cause I feel like it' it would be just as perfect)
2. Why does he feel it's a trap? I don't get it.
3. So Molloy gets the nudity on Game of Thrones, cause it's for titillating pepole (i.e. men). So presumably it's ok to be naked on TV if it's for purposes of titillation, which falls into a very strict criteria of what is titillating and salacious according to our oversexed society. Perhaps I'm reading to much into this but it seems to me that Molloy says it's fine if you are naked on TV as long as it titillates him and his ilk. If you are however not a skinny woman with big boobs running around with swords and dragons, but instead an average young woman, with a very nice body (though not nice enough to titillate Molloy) who get's naked cause she's having sex with her boyfriend, or indeed a random stranger, you have to justify that?!?
What a load of bollocks! Now, I may not be a TV critic, like Mr Molloy, and theretofore I may not know what I'm talking about. But I am an intelligent, decently educated young woman, who consumes a lot of culture and media and spends a great deal of time thinking about what it is I consume. And as far as I'm concerned displaying naked women for purposed of titillation on a main stream TV show is what needs justifying. Not a show that strives to portray, if not the whole of reality of being a young woman in a big western city, then at least a part of it. Myself and many of my female fiends, and I'm sure many more women around the world, find it liberating to see Lena being confident, and showing of her bits even if they are not salacious according to TV critics like Mr Molloy.
And in fact I find 'Girls' ten times more sexy then Game of Thrones. Lena's body, and Hannah's sex life make me fell good and confident and stir my emotions and appetite for life and love and sex. Game of Thrones leaves me feeling annoyed, for the way it presents sex and nudity not as a normal part of exciting life, but as a filler to be used when the writers run out of ideas for a half-decent plot. That leaves me felling about as sexy as a slug. I guess what I find titillating is just diffident from what Molloy finds titillating. My only question is why does he think that what I and many other find titillating and salacious needs to be justified to him (or to his girlfriend).
