so, you want a quirky girl, huh?

a discussion on the realities of being a woman who dates men and the misuse of the term, "manic pixie dream girl" (i also just made this to piss off men for no reason).

---

NOTE: If you are a man, a heterosexual man, I recommend for you to stop by and read this essay. Especially if you have unrealistic expectations in dating women (And no, I am not sorry for calling you out, duh).

“You are not like the other girls.”

I do not mean to be bitter as I say this, but I have received an awful lot of these so-called ‘compliments’ from men who dated me long before in my 20s.

“No, seriously, you really are not like any other girls”. At first, of course I thought, that it was flattering. I was young, naive, and all that mattered to me at the moment was to have at least an ounce of approval from these men. I mean, who would not want to be seen as unique? As eccentric? Heck, even at the ripe age of 19, I got a 22-year-old asking me if he could teach me the way of life all while saying his ‘i love yous’ to me, with only a week of knowing him. I later on broke it off after realizing his unhealthy obsession with Bojack Horseman. He probably thought he was living in a ‘coming of age’ film and I shall be a tool he can use for his own character development. What a crazy lore I have had, right?

And so, as I grew older, I realized that these words, on me being ‘different’, were more about their expectations of me than who I really was. They did not see through me, but rather a projection— their viewing lenses were highlighted towards the unique interests, the sense of joy, and curiosity I bring to their lives— while everything else that surrounded my being, stayed as a blur.

I was not human to them; I was an idea.

These experiences I had reflect a much larger issue deeply rooted in patriarchy. It really has its tight grip on us that its existence even extended on films and storytelling, where viewers can see women existing solely for the fulfillment and entertainment of the male gaze. These female characters were forced and trapped in this certain characterization and are reduced to become muses— designed only to serve the emotional and personal growth arcs of the male protagonists.

It’s infuriating, as well as interesting.

With that, entering the arena, is the Manic Pixie Dream Girl trope: a quirky, whimsical character whose purpose is to breathe life into the dull, directionless lives of men. My first encounters with this kind of ‘trope’ are from the films like Scott Pilgrim vs. The World, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Minds, and 500 Days of Summer. The thing is, I believe the female characters in the said films deconstruct and defy the manic pixie dream girl trope and its idealism. Viewers mainly put them on this MPDG pedestal since their characteristics somehow fit the usual stereotype of what makes a woman, a manic pixie— hair colors, unusual clothing choices, and their unique interests. But we will be discussing more of that later on.

Going back, this is a hot take of mine but, I feel as if filmmakers— majority of which are men writing about women— apparently, cannot create male characters with real personalities, so they place the burden of being interesting and quirky on the female ones—on manic pixie dream girls. They, the MPDGs, were expected to carry the narrative for the both of them. Men in this trope expect to be saved while the women continue to be interesting. Did I stutter? Absolutely not.

“There’s just something about her, she’s not like anyone else.”

— Leo Borlock, “Stargirl” (2020).

Before we fully proceed, I would just like to say it out loud for everyone; we will not be romanticizing the manic pixie dream girl trope. We will be talking about the realities of being a woman in the dating scene (particularly, when dating men) and the dangers that the MPDG trope, as a term that is being misused.

The Manic Pixie Dream Girl

Image from Pinterest: https://pin.it/44SIdhFfG

It was Nathan Rabin, a film critic, who coined the term Manic Pixie Dream Girl way back in 2007. He explained in his essay, that an MPDG “exists solely in the fevered imaginations of sensitive writer-directors to teach broodingly soulful young men to embrace life and its infinite mysteries and adventures” (must read it sarcastically, the way Lorelai Gilmore would).

Rabin coined the term to call attention to the problematic writing of these characters, not to insult or diminish women who might share MPDG-like traits. He was highlighting a recurring trend in storytelling where women were portrayed as inspirational muses, rather than being given autonomy or depth as real, complex, and multifaceted individuals.

Yet over time, the term took life on its own, as the majority began misusing it through oversimplifying quirky and eccentric female characters in general. It also affected women who relate to the MPDGs, thinking as if that they are being limited to who they truly are as women— as humans. This led to his apology for introducing the term later on.

“I coined the phrase to call out cultural sexism and to make it harder for male writers to posit reductive, condescending male fantasies of ideal women as realistic characters. But I looked on queasily as the phrase was increasingly accused of being sexist itself.”

— Nathan Rabin, on his essay, “I'm sorry for coining the phrase, Manic Pixie Dream Girl”, published in 2014.

Screenshot from Tiktok, on a video where they were discussing about the MPDG trope.

With regards to the image above, there’s so much to be furious about a term becoming an insult for women— a term where it should have been serving as a mockery for male screenwriters and directors who cannot seem to grasp the fact that women are not rehabilitation centers— for we are real people.

Truth be told, the reason why these writers hated the term as it developed a different meaning over time is because, it exposed more of the reality behind it. The manic pixie dream girl, through its reflection, made people slowly begin to see its manifestation in the physical world. As the term evolved, it not only became misused, but also revealed the sexist and misogynistic undertones it carries—especially in the context of dating, where it gave light to the harmful expectations men set on women.

We keep saying, praying, and hoping that life will miraculously turn out like into a movie. Well, in many ways, it did— except it also has revealed, for women, something darker, or maybe just to think and consider about; that there are men who see us women as concepts— as fantasies to fulfill their own narratives. This then made me realize; they are all too real. They, unfortunately, exist.

Performing for the Male Gaze (in media and in real life) and the Manic Pixie Dream Girl being a Misused Cultural Label

To be a woman is to perform, they say.

This idea, not only rooted from the manic pixie dream girl trope (but also enabled it), exposed that it has already been happening long before we saw it in movies and books. The emergence of the term only brings us to a larger and harsher truth— that to be a woman is to perform. To be a woman, is to constantly fulfill the expectations set by others— by society.

And to whom does the society conform? To the male gaze. To patriarchy.

The male gaze is something that is already established and us, women, have almost no control of it since we unknowingly, confide with it. What do I mean by this? Well, it is a camera that never rests. We often find ourselves wanting an approval that is male-centric even though some have been practicing the art of decentering from the gaze (I too, as well). The gaze never rests for it resides deep, deep down within our consciousness. Like what Margaret Atwood said, “You are a woman with a man inside watching a woman. You are your own voyeur.” We have a man inside our heads. It is not our fault, definitely. But it was the way we were taught on how to live life— as a woman. Because of the unrealistic standards and expectations set by patriarchy, all of us unknowingly watch ourselves constantly strive the unattainable perfection; through our bodies, our actions, and our goals— we try to live up to its warped fantasy.

This does not mean as well that the male gaze solely exists within us, it also is perpetuated by people, especially men, who live up to this societal delusion that prioritizes their desires, even at the cost of us, women’s expense. Basically, due to the fueling of centuries of patriarchal norms, the male gaze does not just limit how we are viewed by men, it also limits how we view ourselves. That’s how dangerous the male gaze can be. The performance becomes so internalized that even without an audience, the act continues— as if we are living for the eyes that are not actually there.

Unlike the realities of dating and how one can easily define if they are unconsciously masking who they truly are, the male gaze is easier to identify in the cinematic world. Laura Mulvey, in her essay "Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema," argued that mainstream films catered to a "male gaze" because the film industry, which is predominantly controlled by men, naturally portrayed women from a masculine perspective— which makes the intentions even more obvious.

“Traditionally, the woman displayed has functioned on two levels: as erotic object for the characters within the screen story, and as erotic object for the spectator within the auditorium, with a shifting tension between the looks on either side of the screen.”

— Laura Mulvey, ‘Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema’, in Feminism and Film Theory’, 2013

We easily notice the male gaze in cinema since the portrayal is exaggerated and stylized, and with time, the patterns of it have become visible. With the techniques being used by male filmmakers as well as the narratives they have set, these films can be more readily identified by the women audience when a female character is being portrayed for male pleasure. The manic pixie dream girl trope, like I said, is the best example for how idealized women are in media. So, in this essay, let me discuss a little bit about the movies that deconstructs the MPDG trope, that most of the people from the internet (at least from my country) often mistake the following films for being an enabler of the said trope and also because that there is a correlation with the MPDGs and the real-life dating situation for women (who date men).

Summer, Ramona Flowers, and Clementine Kruczynski— these female characters are the holy trinity of today’s generation’s depiction of the manic pixie. The thing is, they are not even perpetuators of the label; it was set upon them.

Now, let’s start with Summer. In the movie 500 Days of Summer, the story was told through the eyes of a man, Tom, and with this perspective, the film actually critiques the idealization the main character has for Summer. This is actually pretty self-explanatory since it is already clear for the most of us, nowadays, that the film’s actual ‘villain’ is Tom. Yet the reason why I am discussing this is because I still see in various social media platforms that some internet users also romanticize the relationship Tom seems to have with Summer. That is dangerous. It brings us back to the realities of burdening women the expectations they never asked from society— this reality of being cooped up within the male gaze and continuously performing for it. I do not want to see the future generations of women having to conform to this gaze ever again. But I cannot alone fix that overnight.

Anyway, similarly, Ramona Flowers in Scott Pilgrim vs. the World and Clementine Kruczynski in Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Minds are often mislabeled as MPDGs, but they too resist this trope. Ramona, like Summer, is not designed to save or "fix" the male protagonist, or even serve Scott himself. At first, we see Scott romanticizing Ramona to be able to get over from his unresolved feelings from Envy (his first ex-girlfriend). Yet eventually after battling Ramona’s 7 evil exes, he comes to terms with his past and he begins to realize that Ramona is a flawed, multifaceted person, which made him love her even more. People often forget that Ramona was clear and honest about her past and the struggles she has gone through— which I think is the reason why she was often categorized as an MPDG.

Clementine, on the other hand, was even more explicit about who she truly is as a person. She famously says, "Too many guys think I'm a concept, or I complete them, or I'm gonna make them alive. But I'm just a fucked-up girl who's lookin' for my own peace of mind; don’t assign me yours." Do I need to say more? Clementine clearly wants Joe to see her for who she is— not merely what she can bring to the table and solely catering to him (God, I love this movie so much).

And so, with that, for the readers of my age who are from my country; please stop associating and idealizing the trope portrayed in these films. That was not the artistic intention of the writers and directors. The female leads may share similar characteristics with an MPDG but all of them showed their humanity in the films.

Whenever I scroll on Facebook, I see a lot of accounts who associate themselves with the glorification and idealization of being a manic pixie dream girl. I think, this was also the reason why the one who coined the term apologized since it became dangerous even if that was not the initial intention. Language and meaning do evolve and it’s dynamic— and he might have forgotten that. They may have also overlooked that despite the apology, the term will continuously be misused, glamorized, and be used as an insult in today’s generation of women or teenage girls who identify to the quirkiness exhibited by the MPDGs. There is also a danger in enclosing yourself as a woman or maybe as a teenage girl to the trope since, MPDGs are expected to perform and continuously do so for the satisfaction of the man. Aside from that, boys will also idealize girls due to the set expectations of the label imposed by the MPDG. Since they have this specific interest in music or film, they also have this expectation in the girl they are going to date without acknowledging their flaws, since that is the only thing, they want to see— the aesthetic these girls bring.

Now that we are on the topic of dating in real life, here’s a quick question for you: have you ever been Manic Pixie Dream Girl-ified?

Let’s go back to the topic earlier— it is easier to determine the intentions men have in the dating scene in films than in reality. Since in real life, the male gaze can be subtler and more pervasive. It is embedded in social norms and everyday interactions, making it harder to pinpoint because it operates within lived experiences and expectations. Real-world dynamics also involve complex power structures and emotional entanglements, which blur the lines between objectification or idealization and genuine interaction.

So, I will be asking you the same question again: have you ever been Manic Pixie Dream Girl-ified? Well, unfortunately, I have. In fact, I think a lot of the women I know have been idealized— always expected to pose the exciting personas the men we dated wanted us to have.

The challenge in seeking validation from these men was not only because performing was difficult; it was that reclaiming your sense of self afterward was far from easy. I had my first boyfriend at 14 and we lasted for about not more than 3 years. I can still remember how he manipulated and caged me from having interactions from both men and women. That boyfriend also expected me to cater to his emotional needs while he neglected the desperate calls for vulnerability I keep saying over and over. I always had to ‘keep my cool’ and let him depend on me while dismissing my emotional and mental needs. Throughout those years, I felt alone. When we broke up, he still pushed the idea on me that I am the only one who can save him while at the same time, telling me that I am crazy enough for having real mental problems as well. At the end, he only cared about himself. To him, I was only an object that he can use to tread through life while I continue to lose my sanity.

Thankfully, it was all over now. But I still find myself seeking for the approval of the gaze. Each time I interact with others, a part of me instinctively searches for their nod of approval, as if to confirm my existence and relevance. It is a cycle that is hard to break, always leaving me questioning my authenticity in moments where I should simply be.

I don’t want to perform anymore. My feet are tired— it is now full of callouses. I’m bleeding.

So, you still want a quirky girl?

If you are a heterosexual man that has reached the conclusion of this essay, the question above is none other than for you. I literally owe you no explanations. I literally owe no explanations to men who have idealized women in the dating scene and how your fantasies damaged their beings. Yet here I am, wanting to make a stance that women have minds and souls, as well as just hearts (I love you, Jo March). So please, please, do not enclose us on boxes. We are real people. We can have similar interests while acknowledging that we are all different. We can be quirky and complex. We are humans. I am saddened by the fact that I still have to say this out loud in 2024! It is unbelievable. But as a writer, it is my duty to educate no matter how tiring it can get.

So, again, you still want a quirky girl?

Most of us cannot even handle complex female characters in any media. People keep on calling out for more, yet they keep on stripping the personalities off of the existing complex female characters. They continue to scream that they want the authenticity yet when these women show us their flaws, they run away. They deny its existence. But let’s save this topic for another time.

The manic pixie dream girls, and its term, continue to stay relevant because people do not want women being real. They do not want women being human.

They— you— cannot stand a realistically flawed woman. It is way easier to accept a one-dimensional character who exists to inspire men rather than confront the messy reality of a fully realized female existence.

News Flash: I am the quirky girl.

In this world, being a woman often feels like being a character in someone else's story (yep, to the man)¹. And when we embrace the imperfections, the fears, and the rawness of our humanity, it always seems to threaten the very fabric of the idealized version of femininity that is so widely celebrated.

I also hope you know being a Manic Pixie Dream Girl is not the problem; it is the men who perpetuate the trope that diminish us to mere fantasies. Like I said, it is completely fine that some of us relate to the traits MPDGs’ possess. You are different— we are different, and that difference is our power. Embrace your realities and complexities; let your quirks coexist with your flaws. You are not here to fulfill someone else’s narrative or to make their life more interesting. You are here to write authentically on the pages of your life and live your own story—one that is unapologetically human.

It is time to reclaim our narratives because, the truth is, there is no blueprint for being a woman. And it is because you do not have to have a manual on being one!

“You are not like other girls.”

I know. I am. I am truly not like other girls, in fact, I am nothing like anyone. And I will not become anything for you.

1. Read Simone de Beauvoir’s, “The Second Sex”. The most mediocre of males feels himself a demigod as compared with women.