Tweeter Jimmy Princeton makes a good point on several levels. Twitter is abuzz today with talk about Lena Dunham’s memoir, “Not That Kind of Girl,” which was released Sept. 30, a full month ago. On Saturday, Dunham tweeted a complaint about a “right-wing news story” accusing her of molestation, and now an excerpt from her book published in National Review has most of Twitter terming what she dismisses as “being a weird 7-year-old” just that — a sickening case of child molestation.

How could such a disturbing passage have made it past reviewers? Is it possible the “red meat” of the book — the chapters detailing Dunham’s rape by “a mustachioed campus Republican” — was fed to reviewers in advance?

Time declared that Dunham’s “story of rape is a must-read.” The Huffington Post covered exactly the same chapter, in which Dunham “opens up about being a rape survivor.” The Los Angeles Times’ take on the book? “What you can learn from Lena Dunham’s rape disclosure.”

Before this “right-wing” site is accused of advocating rape (we’re proud supporters of the right of women to arm themselves against rapists if they so choose), consider the original observation: how did reviewers overlook Dunham’s admission of trying “anything a sexual predator might do to woo a small suburban girl”? Isn’t that too part of her “must-read” book?

* * *


‘I feel sick’: It’s not just ‘right wing’ disturbed by Lena Dunham’s story about ‘being a weird 7 year old’