Oh, rilly?

Lena Dunham has come to the defense of one of her show’s writers who is accused of raping a 17-year-old girl in 2012.
Dunham released a joint statement on Friday with her co-show runner Jenni Konner expressing support for Murray Miller, who is being accused by actress Aurora Perrineau of sexual assault five years ago.
‘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% of assault cases that are misreported every year,’ Dunham and Konner wrote in a joint statement.

Be interesting to hear the evidence which so convinces, wouldn’t it?

22 thoughts on “Oh, rilly?”

  1. So Much For Subtlety

    That would be Aurora Robinson Perrineau would it? And more to the point, Murray Selig Miller.

    What does Lena Dunham have to say?

    Her father is Protestant and of mostly English ancestry, and her mother is Jewish; Dunham has described herself as feeling “very culturally Jewish, although that’s the biggest cliché for a Jewish woman to say.”

    Just as with Dominique Strauss-Kahn. The Guardian correctly identifies his defenders as socialists. But they also attack *French* men. Really?

    In the hours and days that followed the arrest, a string of friends and Socialist allies stepped forward to defend a man they insisted could not have done such a thing. Jean-François Kahn, a well-known journalist, said he was “practically certain” that what had taken place had not been an attempted rape, but “an imprudence… the skirt-lifting of a domestic”. Jack Lang, a former Socialist culture minister, wondered why, when “no man had died”, Strauss-Kahn had not been released on bail immediately. Philosopher Bernard-Henri Lévy, meanwhile, raged against a legal system that had treated DSK like “any other person”. “Everybody,” declared the philosopher, “is not everybody!”

    After all, DSK was also defended by Elisabeth Badinter.

    It is much easier to abuse women if they come from a community you view as hostile and oppressive. You might, like Stokely Carmichael, even call raping their women a form of justice.

  2. While our first instinct is to listen to every woman’s story
    which reflects our default position to be biased in favour of women but…

    our insider knowledge of Murray’s situation makes us confident
    that our prejudice in favour of women should be trumped by support for someone we know personally.

    In short, Willy Nilly.

  3. Dunham lets down her fellow marx- femmis by defending a male. Jewish or not.

    It is good to see anyone NOT believing accusations right off the bat. It is behaviour that needs encouraging in general.

    The vile leftist bitch still can’t avoid the left-lies tho’ “One of the 3% of bogus accusations”. Most amusing . A lying leftist bitch calls out other lying leftist bitches while still trying to maintain the lying leftist narrative.

    “Oh What a tangled web we weave ” indeed.

  4. Solid Steve 2: Squirrels of The Patriots

    Well, it could be rape-rape if he’s a Christian or votes Republican, but what are the odds of that?

    one of the 3% of assault cases that are misreported every year


  5. What is it I’m always reading? Ah yes, that victims don’t come forward because the powerful will use that power against them and they wpn’t be believed. We must learn to believe the victim apparently.
    Until that is the victim pisses off the feminent icon. Then the victim should jump under a bus before she is thrown there.

    Shades of Bill Clinton’s victims.

  6. Bwahahahaha… suddenly evidence and due process are important again…. this time.

    Fuck them. They created this monster.

  7. ‘expressing support for Murray Miller, who is being accused by actress Aurora Perrineau of sexual assault five years ago’

    Maybe he was gay back then.

    Or maybe they just like him, and don’t want to use the Kulturwaffen against him.

  8. Bloke in Costa Rica

    Oh yeah, he’s as rapey as fuck by the look of ‘im. What’s that? Due process? Nah, it’s believe the complainant without question, or so I’m told.

  9. Gamecock: Maybe he was gay back then

    Yes, that would work too, of course.

    My suggestion was that being in possession of a John Thomas is a strict liability offense unless you are known to one of the sisters and thought to be a baa-lamb, in which case it’s as though you didn’t have a todger in the first place.

    Legal practitioners could then enter a plea of penem testesque non habeat which tabloid newspapers might express as “nilly willy”.

  10. “Misreported”, in a “joint statement”. They really think this sort of crap is believed, they think they are the State Department or something, put out a crafty ‘statement’ and that makes everything alright again.

    Dunham has been in the vanguard of this latest phase of the kulturkampf, suddenly she doesn’t like it when her bunker is shelled. Fuck it, you signed up sister.

  11. Suspicion here, having noted nothing in a quick biographical search of Miller to suggest an attachment to any particular female, is that Dunham understands Miller to be gay perhaps? Which might make the suggested attack somewhat less likely if true.

    What I do like in this comment thread is the interesting effect that Dunham suggesting this accusation is false means a lot of commentators here seem to think it is more likely to be true. If only the modern so-called feminists were capable of a bit of lateral thinking, they could use this phenomenon to make right-wing internet commentators support all their accusations…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *