Yeah… I don’t know. I kind of hate-recap it. I don’t hate it that much, but I just… I feel like I knew those people in high school, and I hated them in high school, and now they have a TV show. And I’m just like, good for you. You got a show. But then you’ve got the whole culture of “It’s un-feminist to criticize another woman, we should all just be happy that a woman is on television and leave it at that. You guys are just jealous.” So if you say anything that’s critical or against this, you’re automatically painted with that brush. But being a woman doesn’t mean that you’re absolved of any and all criticism — you can still fuck up, and still need to be called out.

But I think that the problem is that people really do identify with Lena Dunham, and so they feel that rightful criticisms of her are somehow a criticism of them — which it often is. I see a lot of the same middle-class, white feminists defending her because, to them, she is finally a chance to see themselves in a more unique, real role on television. She really is doing it for them. But it leaves so many people out of the conversation, and to paint Girls as finally being a story for everyone is so unfair.

I think that having to admit the things that Lena Dunham is doing or saying wrong also means looking at those things in yourself, and no one wants to do that. So it’s easier to defend her in saying that, if you criticize her, it’s because you have a problem with women. It’s the painless way out. And yes, a lot of people have gone in on her, but that’s because for months leading up to the show, they hyped it up so much as the show that was going to change everything. And personally speaking, I don’t think it’s lived up to any of its expectations. I don’t think that it’s nearly as funny as people have been saying, or as different. But again, it’s not a criticism you can make because it is “un-feminist” to make any judgments on it.

But just look at the marketing they do — a 45-dollar set of promotional nail polish, one for each girl on the show. You’re supposed to buy those as a fan. Who the fuck buys 45-dollar nail polish? And they did, like, free blowouts at this really nice salon. Who are they marketing this to? Like, this is not for me. Whoever this was directed to, it is absolutely not me. You are clearly targeting a certain type of person — they know what they are doing. And that’s fine, you have your demographic. But then don’t fucking turn around and tell me how universal your show is and how it’s speaking for everyone. Because it’s not, and you know it.

Identifying as a person of color in solidarity with other people of color says ‘hey, my people have been oppressed by White people, maybe in a different time and space than your people, but we can work in solidarity.’ The identification needs to carry some degree of humility, and a deeper commitment to allyship . The POC umbrella is not an excuse to disavow the ways we benefit from various racial structures and sit idly by as our communities reap advantages from racism towards other people of color.

Black-Asian solidarity in the US, for instance, is hard to find and it will continue to be difficult to build if we continue to use the uncritical ‘POC’ label. Rather, we can use ‘POC’ as a way of reflecting on our different racial histories and building coalitions in our struggles and their difference. POC is a term for building solidarity between movements, not a movement in itself. That distinction is important.