There is no way to actually do an exorcism.

Look, even without the knives, and performed on those who are not toddlers, the very concept of exorcisms is INSANE. It is literally not a sane thing to support, believe in, or be a part of. Demons inhabiting people and needing to be extracted through ritual? Do we live in a fuckin' medieval fantasy novel? Grow up,…

The point is that using the bible as a guide for how we ought to run our government is stupid, because the bible is often shitty and violent. And by highlighting the sheer brutality of the bible with a visual aid, she's demonstrating how arbitrary bible thumpers are about what they choose to follow from it.

Oh did that woman just totally call the religious right out on their bullshit?

GOD DAMN, she is hardcore. I am in awe of her.

What is not a good thing is when the magazine decides to take that woman and tweak her appearance enough such that she's "acceptable" for the cover.

The best possible way to address it. I think hell has frozen over because I genuinely do not like Lena Dunham or her work and I'm so in her corner on this one.

Respectfully, if you guys have something specifically against Vogue then it would be great if you would just write up a big retrospective piece. The more you make this about Lena Dunham and effectively force her to respond to this—which no matter how you slice it is a direct discussion about her body that invites a…

Jez,

Admit it, Jez. You were wrong.

Actually, her twitter response was much better: "Way cooler when people do things out of pure blind spite than out of faux altruism". Faux altruism describes this whole shitshow perfectly.

So the conversation has already been started, but feel free to pile onto a woman who is already constantly berated for what she looks like. HOW EMPOWERING, Jez. Do you feel good about yourselves? 10 fucking thousand dollars. Donate it to a battered women's shelter. Do something USEFUL for once.

"Stunt" is absolutely the perfect word. This is the furthest thing from actual journalism, and they know it.

All due respect Dodai, I thought the point being made back then was that Faith Hill is already a conventionally beautiful woman, and they still felt the need to Photoshop her - that was the shock factor that garnered so much publicity and started a much-needed conversation.

That article was huge and landmark in pointing out the issues with photoshop. It started a dialogue and that was crucial. It brought a lot of people to this site, people who have been devotees ever since. We all know this now though. You did a great job showing us (the photoshop of horrors series was always great).

The 2007 post is a general call for un-retouched photos as a collective effort to point out ridiculous magazine standards. This is a very specific call-out for a female actress because you know un-retouched photos of Dunham will be better clickbait than, say, Mila Kunis. Also, this isn't 2007. You aren't a fledgling…

"Commodifying women's bodies"— you're doing it right, Jezebel!