BEING A FANGIRL IS THE WORST THING A GIRL CAN BE

WRITTEN BY GIA KRUPENS

Illustration By Gerricka Dacpano

Here’s a universal truth: we’re all fans of something.

Maybe it’s a show, a sport, or an artist. Maybe it’s a book, a team, or a company. We all know what it’s like to love something. However, being a fan takes on a whole new meaning when the word “girl” is added.

According to the Oxford Languages Dictionary definitions found on Google, a fan (noun) is “a person who has a strong interest in or admiration for a particular person or thing.” Sounds pretty normal, right? No negative connotation associated with the word. They even cite “football fans” as an example for the term.

Yet somehow, when you Google fangirl in the same dictionary, you get a much different definition. Fangirl (noun) “a female fan, especially one who is obsessive about comics, movies, music, or science fiction.” A second definition uses the word “overexcited” as a synonym to obsessive. The example sentence itself makes a good point about the terminology of the word: “Your average fangirl, despite the implication of the name, is a grown-up.”

Why is it that a fan can be one thing, but to be a fangirl is a completely different (and seemingly much worse) thing to be. “Obsessive” and “overexcited” have a much more negative connotation to them. The idea that fangirls are compulsively crazy has been the social standard for years in pop culture.

The origins of the word can be traced back to the mid-1800s and the fame of pianist Franz Liszt, who is now credited as the world’s first rockstar. Pianote. com claims that Liszt became so famous with his largely female audience that it led to the downfall of his relationships, causing him to leave performing altogether when he was 35.

This ideology of what a fangirl is has continued through decades. Think Frank Sinatra and Elvis Presley, both of whom were largely listened to by teenage girls and young women when they were in their prime. These musicians are regarded as some of the best to ever live, and yet their fans are just regarded as . . . well, crazy.

In a Rolling Stone interview that Harry Styles did in 2017, he comments on the credibility of young female fans. “Who’s to say that young girls who like pop music have worse musical taste than a 30–year-old hipster guy . . . Young girls like the Beatles. You’re gonna tell me they’re not serious? How can you say young girls don’t get it? They’re our future.”

Styles is right. There’s an unspoken different meaning when a guy says he loves the Beatles and when a girl does. Whether or not you agree (or if you’re triggered by the word itself) it comes down to one simple truth: the patriarchy.

In our western, still male-dominated society, a man’s word holds more weight than a woman’s, and that’s proven in the demographics.

In 2022, The Hollywood Reporter released an article about the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences voters (a really long name for the people that vote for the Oscars). They found that –surprise – 67% of the voters are male. The Recording Academy voters (those who decide on Grammy winners) are a little better according to Billboard in 2023, but still not great with 58% male. Even in the sports world, ESPN reported in 2021 that a whooping 85% of sports reporters are men.

This isn’t just to throw basic statistics at you, but to actually show you the proof. Men are listened to more, they hold more influence, and therefore, they believe that their opinions matter more than women’s. When a man says “The Beatles are great,” it means the Beatles are great. But when a woman says “The Beatles are great,” it leads to a whole other barrage of questions: “Oh, really? Can you even name all the Beatles?”

“Name three songs- no, you can’t say “Hey Jude,” name three songs that only a real fan would know.”

“Do you even know what they sang on the Ed Sullivan show in 1964?”

Women have to prove themselves as fans of something for it to be considered real. And that’s not even considering the flip side of what it means when a fangirl loves a female celebrity- that’s a whole different level of misogyny.

If a girl can name any Taylor Swift song in three seconds, she’s obsessive, but if she tells you she’s a fan of The Smiths and can’t name all their albums, she’s not a real fan. If a woman cries while reading Twilight, it’s overemotional and dramatic, but if a man cries when his favorite team wins the World Series, it’s accepted. If a girl buys tickets to multiple Bad Bunny concerts, she’s an attached groupie, but a guy can buy season tickets to every football game and it’s normal.

There are different standards for things that are considered feminine or masculine. If you’re a girl that likes something that is considered girly, you’re basic. If you’re a girl that likes something that’s considered masculine, you have to prove yourself as a fan (because yes, men will question if you can name another football player besides Joe Burrow if you say you like football). Either way, women can’t win. We can’t just like something to like it.

I’m not saying anything new here, and I’m not trying to get all preachy on you, but wouldn’t it be nice if it could all just . . . stop? Why do we as a society care so much about what kinds of things women are fans of? As exhausting as it is as a woman to have to defend the things she likes, isn’t it equally as exhausting to be so worried about what others are spending their time looking at? It’s a lose–lose for everyone.

Shaming people for their interests isn’t doing anyone any good. Perhaps if we were able to share our love for things a little more freely, and everyone else was able to care a little less, we’d all be a little happier. Next time a girl tells you her favorite movie is The Notebook, instead of calling her basic just say “Cool!” and move on.

Let women be excited about things. Let women express their love for something without being labeled as obsessive. Let women be fangirls, and let that be okay.