My friends seem puzzled when I recommend “Girls.”
Based on its first season poster with four attractive New Yorkers making eyes with the camera, the HBO dramedy looks like its target audience could be prepubescent females. It looks like it could pass for an ABC Family series that leads into “Pretty Little Liars.” Maybe it’s because of my overwhelming masculinity or that bold M on my driver’s license, but my friends think I’m too much of a man for a show filled with X-chromosomes.
Well, they’re wrong. Lena Dunham’s “Girls” isn’t the tawdry, run-of-the-mill melodrama my friends think it is. The plot isn’t filled with insignificant first world problems, and The Fray doesn’t play during the end credits. More than anything else, “Girls” is a compelling story about trying to make it in our generation. It’s a poignant, messy, remarkable study of the 21st century — like a sexed up version of FX’s “Louie.”
Yes, I get that some guys may not understand. Female characters gripe about their female problems, and there’s more than one trip to the gynecologist. But right now — being of sound mind and body — I will attempt to defend my self-professed love of “Girls” and maybe convert a few dudes too.
Here are three easily-digestible reasons why “Girls” is top-rate TV even for those who pee standing up.
**Judd Apatow and company:** I don’t care if it’s an infomercial selling pictures of dogs who look like famous people — if Judd Apatow’s listed as an executive producer, it’s almost certainly going to kick ass. With “Girls,” Apatow has put his name on something truly magnificent. And his rat pack of celebrity pals — well, they want in on the action. Donald Glover plays a black Republican. Mike Birbiglia plays a hapless douche bag. Rita Wilson plays a high-society prick. There are so many funny people in the show it’s like a comedic “The Expendables.” Now if only they can get Arnold Schwarzenegger.
**Relevant commentary:** Great TV programs have something to say about the times they’re in. “The West Wing” intelligently commented on a modern political process just as “The Dick Van Dyke Show” provided insight on married life in the 1960s. “Girls” is no different. Dunham’s generational comedy is like an open letter to the 21st century’s smartphone-savvy, complacent douche bags. It pokes fun at youth culture while also exploring the perils of being an unemployed 24-year-old. Like great programs before it, “Girls” comments on relevant issues with wit and depth — like “The Dick Van Dyke Show,” with nudity and cocaine.
**Perfectly raunchy:** There are many reasons why subscription-only HBO is a great network for “Girls.” Viewers don’t have to suffer through an endless loop of 5-Hour Energy commercials. Curse words don’t have to be bleeped out like an explicit rap album. Among other reasons, it allows writers to get raunchy. Sex scenes are beautifully awkward and cringe-inducing. Dialogue is gleefully profane. And the scene where Dunham’s character has to help her dad up after he injures himself having shower-sex — it’s a damn cinematic achievement. When Dunham says, “That is fully your wet butt,” I think I cringed, cried and laughed at the same time.
But many of my fellow men still can’t see the light. The show has won two Golden Globes, is in its second season and still has an unfair stigma attached to it. I know that I shouldn’t feel personally invested in people tuning in. I know there are plenty of other good TV shows out there. But this argument for “Girls” — a show literally named for its primary viewer — is profoundly important for all men like me.
This is for the guys who love “(500) Days of Summer.” This is for the guys who watch “Downton Abbey” with a cup of lukewarm tea. This is for the guys who snuck in a side door to see “Les Miserables” a second time. Often a pop culture staple can cast off an entire demographic of people from a false reputation. Well I’m here to say that I shave my face, I love “Die Hard,” I have way too much hair on my legs and I am hooked on “Girls.”
So don’t seem so damn confused when I recommend it to you.
