Defending the ‘pick-me’ girl

When you get right down to it, she is not like other girls. 

She casually sits on a couch talking about the latest football game with ‘the boys,’ when unexpectedly, their conversation dies down. The room goes silent, and she realises she is running out of ‘guy things’ to say. The silence is getting louder, about to shift from comfortable to awkward. In the spur of the moment, she digs into the part of her brain labelled ‘internalised misogyny,’ grabs the first thought, and loudly says, “I’m so glad I don’t hang out with other girls. All they do is cause drama!” Some might call it ‘intentional’ and maybe call her ‘calculated,’ but most would call her a ‘pick-me girl.’

A ‘pick-me girl’ is an individual, usually a heterosexual, cisgender woman, who presents herself as being against stereotypical ‘feminine’ behaviours. In doing so, these women often make microaggressive comments directed at other women. The trope was popularised by TikToks around 2021, and as of 2023, TikTok posts under the hashtag ‘pick me’ have more than 8.9 billion views combined. Given our excessive use of social media, it should be no surprise that the term ‘pick-me’ has slipped into the vernacular to such an extent that it has now become customary to use it as an insult in daily conversation. Additionally, there appears to be some sort of pleasure in teasing the pick-me girl online. For instance, some content creators have multiple videos on the subject, speak in an exaggerated high-pitched voice and interact with comments that are also poking fun at the pick-me girl.

My main issue with the act of calling out pick-me girls is that it is advertised as a form of feminism. Gen Z claims that these mocking TikTok are meant to educate them on her microaggressive behaviour. This is not to say that their behaviour should be excused, but rather we should begin to question why certain women feel the need to seek male attention in the first place. The answer to this might lie in the 1993 novel The Robber Bride, where author Margaret Atwood writes, “Even pretending you aren’t catering to male fantasies is a male fantasy […] You are a woman with a man inside watching a woman. You are your own voyeur.” In the time of ‘pick-me girls,’ this quote seems more important than ever. It is easy to forget that like all women, the pick-me girl also lives under the patriarchy where she is subjected to male fantasies, the male gaze, and male entitlement. Under such a world, there is no escaping the effects of patriarchal structures. Specifically, how women view themselves in relation to men, how they tie their self-value to male attention, and how they interact with other women as a result of their deformed relationship with men. For most women, the patriarchy teaches them that certain ‘feminine’ attributes are needed for them to be accepted or desired by men. This is not true, but due to culture, religion, relationships, family, and other social institutions, not all women have the privilege of differentiating between what behaviours they want to embody and what behaviours have been instilled in them by external forces, like the patriarchy. 

These so-called ‘feminine’ attributes are reinforced in the fictional stories we consume today. Yet, when we encounter women who adopt them, we choose to roll our eyes and scoff. In particular, the 2013 film, The Wolf of Wall Street, does an excellent job of depicting these male-desired ‘feminine’ attributes, while simultaneously strengthening the idea that a woman who stands out among others will ultimately be chosen by a man. For example, the main character, Jordan Belfort, cheats on his wife with Naomi, a character who is written merely for the male gaze. Naomi is depicted as passive, nurturing, easygoing and most importantly, different enough. Jordan’s wife, Teresa, is the opposite. She is simply assertive. The film deliberately chooses to ignore the female character’s perspective and how they have been personally affected by the patriarchy, almost in the same manner that Gen Z does with the pick-me girl.

In her book, Reviewing the Female Gothic Heroine: Agency, Identification and Feminist Film Criticism, Helen Hanson brings forth the idea that women in gothic literature seek individuality at the expense of other women. She explains that “the female gothic text is interesting precisely because it explores the negotiations of ‘female selfhood.’ It does so textually through the female gothic heroine’s identification of another woman’s story and the determination of her own fate as different. ‘Not being like that’ is the formation of the heroine’s self-image.” I argue that this idea can also be applied to the binary of the pick-me girl and the ‘girl’s girl,’ as they both rely on one another to find their own individuality. The girl’s girl is meant to oppose the pick-me girl. She supports and uplifts other women rather than degrades them. However, in my opinion, the concept of a girl’s girl is contradictory. The pick-me girl is ridiculed because, through language and behaviour, she is trying to set herself apart from other women. Yet, women who call other women “pick-me girls” while implying that they are girls’ girls are doing the same thing; they too are setting themselves apart from a collective group. Thus, it points to the question of whether women can ever achieve true individuality without being dependent on other people.

Here is where I propose a possible solution to end this quarrel between the pick-me girl and the girl’s girl. First, we must stop categorising women into binaries and pitting them against each other. This only reinforces the misogyny that has been ingrained into all women. Secondly, we need to acknowledge that every woman at some point, with or without purpose has acted in a way that catered towards the male gaze. Once we acknowledge this, we will then be able to have honest and constructive conversations about how women adhere to and perpetuate misogynist rhetoric. When we can have meaningful discussions to identify internalised misogyny; we can challenge these patriarchal ideas.