by Mark Angelides
If you haven’t heard this yet, the sorry excuse known as Lena Dunham has created yet another “micro-scandal” by sending her dog back to a shelter after four years. She said that “after four years of challenging behavior and aggression that could not be treated with training or medication or consistent loving dog ownership, Lamby went to live at an amazing professional facility in Los Angeles”. But this is a lie. She is so determined to maintain her public persona that she spins webs of deceit; unfortunately for her, others are not willing to uphold her deception.
She said:” after four years of challenging behavior and aggression that could not be treated with training or medication or consistent loving dog ownership, Lamby went to live at an amazing professional facility in Los Angeles.” According to her, the “challenging behavior” came from Lamby suffering terrible abuse as a pup, making him dangerous to people.
The Animal shelter she got him from begs to differ. They say that the dog has not been through four different owners at all (one owner without enough time) as Dunham claimed, and that there were no personality problems with the dog at all. In fact, they say that Lamby was “very loving”.
Dunham, coincidentally, bought two new Poodles before sending her old dog to a different shelter (which is incidentally against the agreement she made with the original shelter that asks the dogs to be returned to them only).
But I digress, the point of this is not that Dunham is a liar, nor that she dumped her dog when “new shiny cute dogs” caught her attention. The point is that she represents the incredibly vacuous and disposable age we are living in. Real connections man nothing to these people and all can be sacrificed on the alta of their egos.
Celebrity has become something important, but yet more fleeting than ever before. People are chewed up by the notoriety they receive and are condemned in a moment. Studies show that the increased use of Social Media can be linked to increased mental health problems (and thus suicide). How often do we hear of the unfortunate child who is harassed or bullied online and end up taking their lives? Too often.
These are hollow people who happily turn on individuals if they do not follow the “party line” exactly. They claim to be “the caring people”, yet engage in rants of hate against those that disagree with them. This time the victim of this shallowness was “just a dog”, but read the papers, see how many children die of neglect or negligence, and how many children are mistreated by the real animals who care for nothing but themselves and the cult of “popularity”.
by Mark Angelides