I'm more inclined to root for characters of any gender who are oppressed by their circumstances as opposed to themselves. This is why I usually like books with swords more than Philip Roth novels.

I love the backpedaling on that Moviefone piece which was clearly NOT satirical.

Episodes 2 and 3 of Girls are decidedly better than the pilot. People seem to project too much responsibility on this show. It's not Norma Rae. It's not the story of the women of Harlan County USA. It is a good thirty minute show of its ilk. Its ilk being sit-coms where genuine social or psycho-social conditions with which to sympathize pretty much don't exist. There are scenes in there you just don't see anywhere, which I admire about it, too.

Girls is awesome. Are awesome? I need italics to support my grammar. Anyway, it gets really good.

I don't think Lena Dunham intended for people to empathize with Hannah (or any of the other characters, but esp. Hannah); she is a horribly self-involved person, who in the second episode of the season joked about wanting AIDS!

That said, I like the show. The characters are sort of one-dimensional, right now. Yet, scenes like this one show an inkling of future laughs: http://youtu.be/aRauGuaaXlg

I agree with TSW about people projecting responsibility on the show but when your little indie movie gets in the Criterion Collection your next piece of work is going to be under a lot of scrutiny. Dunham seems to be handling it pretty well, to her credit.

Gasp! Eddard, you BRUTE!