Quantcast
[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/cgl/ - Cosplay & EGL


View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 54 KB, 480x640, tumblr_lpkhqwPdlh1qbat6to1_500.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10379992 No.10379992 [Reply] [Original] [rbt]

the current unpop opinion thread is for cosplay so heres a jfashion one

>> No.10379993

my unpopular opinion is that the western jfashion community is way too confused and spergy when it comes to substyles.

most japanese lolita and gyaru are just brand loyal or aesthetic loyal. there is no such thing as "amekaji", just gals who were brand loyal to cocolulu. or "av gyaru style" as if it was it's own distinct style and not just how certain gyaru pornstars happened to wear their makeup. same thing with lolitas coming up with super niche substyles like "country lolita", it's just a common theme you see in sweet, not a substyle on it's own. american jfashion enthusiasts trying to make everything into a "-kei" as if "kei" means style.

jfashion follows trends pretty quickly, we get all of our info second hand, and back before instagram and twitter we got our info late. we'd see a new trend in a kera magazine and think "oh this must be a new fashion with a new set of rules" and not realize it was just a temporary trend or just how that model dressed for a photoshoot once.

>> No.10379996

>>10379993
This. I hate how much westerners are obsessed with labeling every little thing. I know a girl who told me she wears “hime and country” lolita. Bitch, just say sweet. And yes, she thinks she’s ultra queer too by giving herself all kinds of unnecessary labels like “demisexual”.

>> No.10379998

>>10379996
i can see why the labels were super useful in 2008 when it was harder to find information, but not anymore. but the misinformation lingers on and has i think seriously hindered the progression and evolution of jfashion in the west and misunderstands how jfashion evolved and came to be.

see also: larme kei and how it was treated in the west. it started off as an offshoot of an offshoot of gyaru and trends that fit a certain aesthetic. the western community latched onto it, made larme into a strict style that had meetups and strict "rules" when really it was just an ever changing aesthetic shown by a magazine. when the magazine moved away from what westerners decided was definitely "larme", there stopped being threads on here.

i think how western girls get into jfashion is the oppsite of how japanese girls do. japanese girls just seem to find a brand they like and support it and add more of it to their wardrobe, whereas western girls find the style fist and then desperately look for brands to fit into it, and then they end up with a bunch of different pieces that aren't cohesive and don't match.

>> No.10380001

>>10379996
>demisexual
Ah yes, the sexuality for frigid girls who were raised Christian but really want to fit in with the cool queer teens now

>> No.10380005

>>10380001
Nah the girl I know is a total sex-addict. She just so desperately wants to feel special that she’ll even call herself something that’s supposed to mean the opposite of what she really is.

>> No.10380042

>>10379993
This, honestly.

Regarding something like hime or country >>10379996 I think it’s useful to have phrases to describe how you are styling something “ie, I am going for a country look with this JSK today,” but the level people take general descriptions is absurd.

Through the years, I’ve found it’s easier to say I am wearing Liz Lisa than getting into a fight about what himekaji is.

My unpopular option is that lolita isn’t a subculture, especially in the current year in the west.

The desire for it to be one imo results in a lot of the strict labeling behaviors, because they want their clothes to work for them the way goth culture does for goths. But calling yourself a mori gyaru ain’t going to do it

>> No.10380047

>>10379993
I totally agree. It's top cringe sometimes seeing people argue about if something fits in a substyle like it's it's own little fashion, and trying to label everything constantly.

>> No.10380052

>>10380042
Lolita hasn't been a subculture since the livejournal days. We're all spread out and we're all too different. Lolitas back in the livejournal days were more similar, similar in age and interests.

>> No.10380073 [DELETED] 

>>10379996
The current trend of these bottomless attention/label whores listing at least twelve of their self-diagnosed mental illnesses mixed with a random array of degenerate fetishes in social media profiles is never going to backfire when they grow up and need a real job. Need security clearance for a job that requires responsibility? Before that, please explain what medical care you got to overcome your asexual autism, your ptsd bipolar schizophrenia, your headmate baddragondildokin identity, your transmasc Ehlers-Danos syndrome, your genderfluid ED self-care, and while you're at it please explain what a little into diaper play is, and also, MAP?

>> No.10380075

>>10379993
I think labels are useful to use for yourself so if you say you're mainly a country sweet lolita then people can understand at a glance that you're probably not into sweet toy prints or sweet retro prints.

When it gets annoying is when people other than the person wearing the outfit try to label it and argue whether it fits into a label or not.

>> No.10380086

>>10379993
everything about gal is incorrect. amerikaji was a thing there, and girls didn't even really label themselves gal, magazines just grouped similar brands and makeup tutorials with specific terms together, and terms evolved from magazine spreads, westerners just used the labels super literally. AV gal is not a thing and never was though.

>> No.10380092

>>10380086
amekaji was a trend surrounding the aesthetics of a few brands not a distinct style on its own. it fizzled out completely, trends die but styles don't, they evolve. most of those terms from magazines spreads never seriously caught on, they were just for the magazine not an accurate 1:1 interpretation of what everyone was actually wearing in daily life.

you're right about girls not labeling eachother gal though, thats another problem the western community has.

>> No.10380098

>>10379993
This, but especially towards the lolita community. Most people who I see that are super nitpicky about styles and trends pretty much have lolita as their only exposure to fashion, which is why the cookie cutter rules work so well for them. But when you expand to other jfashions, these rules don't hold up so well, and a lot of lolita-only wearers don't quite get that

>> No.10380107

>>10380098
i remember back in the day there was this idea that lolita girls had a harder time in gyaru because the community was harsher and there weren't cookie cutter strict rules to follow, and that is still true today. and now the structure of the western interpretation of the lolita community is the mold that every fashion tries to fit no matter what- larme, fairy kei/yumekawaii/decora.

our interpretation of lolita fashion has always been flawed right from the start. like the idea of "otome" being its on concrete style.

>> No.10380112

I'm tired of people's definition of Jfashion only being "early 2000s jfashion"

>> No.10380115

>>10380112

Same desu.

Japan has a really interesting quirky vintage trend when I was there that no one talks about. It's kind of a shame.

>> No.10380117

>>10380115
Try the casual jfash thread? Most of the people in the last one were talking about modern jfash trends. I agree that of all places, you’d think a (half) fashion board like cgl would have more up to date stuff

>> No.10380148

>>10380115
There’s a ton of new vintage coords being posted in the natural jfashion/natural kei thread

>>10380112
western jfashion is always going to be behind current jfashion. Even with international shipping, unless you live there it’s hard to stay up to date

>> No.10380152

>>10380148
understandably, people are going to be around 5 years behind because its difficult to navigate Japanese internet if you don't speak the language.

Some act like they know everything about Japanese fashion while rejecting either the old or the new, or in some cases both.
for example the brief period when people shit on oldschool lolita or toned down lolita coords, and anons outright rejecting most modern Japanese fashion because its not "quirky enough"

this is obnoxious as hell and should be shot down in most cases rather than be accepted as the norm

>> No.10380162

>>10380152
that's true, i think there is a happy medium here. all jfashion doesn't have to be quirky but i do think there should be atleast some theshold of "alternative" that something should count as to be discussed on this board, theres obviously a difference between japanese fashion as in all clothes sold by and worn by japanese people and "japanese fashion" as in unique alternative fashions with japanese origins.

>> No.10380169

>>10379996
sweet is dressing like a toddler. country is exactly what it sounds like (plaid, straw hats). hime is hime - looking royal does not mean looking like an adult in a baby's clothing. a country hime should not look sweet unless it's a sweet country hime.

>> No.10380173

>>10380169
>sweet is dressing like a toddler

if you’re going to bait please try not to blow your load so quickly.

>> No.10380177

>>10379993
Totally agree with this.

Also, specifically with regard to lolita, I think a lot of people into the fashion are literal spergs (myself included) who get obsessed with rules to the extent that it's completely unproductive. People take joy in ridiculing an outfit that looks good to the eye because "she broke the rules!!!!!!", and that's their only frame of reference for something looking bad or good.

>> No.10380180

Sneakers can work with Lolita.

>> No.10380199

>>10380112
Hell, japanese fashion in the second half of the 19th century did some really cool stuff blending european dress styles and traditional clothing, limiting your focus to the last two decades is missing over a century of fashion

>> No.10380201

>>10379993
And this is why larme died in the west, most girls couldn't handle the fact that there were no "rules" at all, just follow the fashion magazine. I remember these cringe discussions whenever larme ~changed style~ and some went as far as try to make "old-school larme" a thing. It was stupid and cringy overall, I'm kinda glad the western comm is dead. Larme is obviously still a thing in Japan and it will remain so as long as the magazine will keep getting published.

>>10379996
I think some labels can be useful, especially because there can be many different styling directions in sweet. As long as people don't treat it as an own substyle I don't see the issue. And kek at the demisexual thing, imagine being so boring and devoid of personality that you need a label for being normal.

>> No.10380203

>>10379993
But Japanese lolitas say there are hundreds of substyles. Like baby blue lolita, which we would just call sweet lolita. They don't put so much meaning in the word substyle.

>> No.10380204

>>10380086
Then why were there guests who called themselves gal on Japanese variety shows

>> No.10380207

>>10380180
U will be judged

>> No.10380223

>>10380203
That is a theme

>> No.10380225

Fancy big tea parties or afternoon tea things are the most boring kind of meet up there is. I hate it how my local comm only has those nowadays.

>> No.10380234

>>10380225
Why do you dislike them? What kind of meet do you prefer?

>> No.10380238

Now that posts require approval, COF mods are going to destroy the group with their questionable taste. The current ones have no sense of style.

>> No.10380240

>>10380148

Not the same particular ones as the ones I saw although some got close. It was a more casual street style. I really liked the natural kei thread though, it helped me find some japanese tags that they're currently using and I blew a ton of money on PH after that so there is that.

>> No.10380242

>>10380052
That’s not what subculture means lmao

>> No.10380244

>>10380225 I wouldn't say they're the most boring because that largely depends on the company, but I feel you. I dislike how it's often a similar expense to a decent meal in a nice place, but with a less convivial atmosphere and really uninspiring food, especially if you don't have much of a sweet tooth.

>> No.10380256

>>10380244
whenever someone in my comm hosts an afternoon tea, they always go "Don't worry, you'll be able to eat, they have a vegan option!"

Bitch, I'm coeliac.
I'd rather just go for a sit down meal where everyone can have different things and actually be full.

>> No.10380260

>>10379993
>same thing with lolitas coming up with super niche substyles like "country lolita", it's just a common theme you see in sweet, not a substyle on it's own
Country is like a theme to style your coord around. You could style a sweet dress country, or a classic dress, you can likewise have sailor lolita that's styled more classic or sweet or even gothic, but it doesn't have to be its own substyle, and I think that's where people get confused and start getting nitpicky. I think having distinct labels for themes can be useful if you're looking for specific accessories or even main pieces with specific features (for example, if you want a cape or a dress with button details, military themed stuff features both often). And it's also fun to take a hard direction with one main piece to see how different of a coord you can make with it. But it's hardly a rule and more of a direction or guideline than anything.

I feel like this is not as much of an unpopular opinion since the issue tends to be pretty evenly split, but this is what kind of irks me about bittersweet lolita. It's really just sweet in a dark colourway, there's nothing wrong with that (or sweet non-print in black). But it doesn't need its own label. If anything, if bittersweet really was a thing I'd imagine it to look like some weird fusion of sweet and gothic, which many attempted bittersweet coords fail to do anyway.

>> No.10380285

>>10380260
>it doesn't need its own label
why can't themes get labels for convenience? 'bittersweet' is easier to say than 'sweet in a black colorway' just like 'sailor' is easier to say than 'navy uniform inspired"

>> No.10380287

>>10380285
I mean, I don’t have a label for sweet in a red colorway or goth in a white colorway. After a certain point, labels get cumbersome and stop serving a purpose

>> No.10380295

>>10380285
Because it's literally just sweet and colour aside it doesn't require anything special.

With country, you try to evoke the feeling of "yeah, I could take a stroll through the countryside for a picnic and then pick some wildflowers" or "village girl heads to market to sell eggs in the morning" or whatever. Military lolita has elements taken from military uniforms, sailor has elements from navy uniforms, which means both themes would need specific pieces with specific design elements (it would hardly be sailor if you wore an ott classic chiffon dress and no sailor collar, right?).

I think some people erroneously assume that somehow black is opposite of sweet? They think black automatically means gothic and they label any predominantly black coord as gothic regardless of if the dress has sweet or classic design elements, or of the styling the wearer did. Which I think contributes to people clinging to the notion of bittersweet having to be a separate theme or style - because black is not a sweet colour somehow. That's not really true though, and even if light and pastel shades are the most common, it's not like sweet doesn't exist in super satured colours or jewel tones, and it's always existed in black. People don't bother calling predominantly sax coords or pink coords or red coords anything, it's just sweet otherwise, so I don't see why black alone needs the distinction.

>> No.10380298

I agree about the lolita substyle thing. I think there's only 3 substyles: sweet, classic, and goth. Everything else is just somewhere in between those.

I don't have a problem with people labeling themes like sailor, country, etc. Hell I think bittersweet is a totally valid label for a theme. Ultimately it's just semantics, but I think we should get rid of the LJ-era advice.

>> No.10380299

>>10380180
I agree.. I know tons of lolitas that will wear these if there's a con or something.

>> No.10380300

>>10380180
It's rare but I agree. I'd call it an "experienced lolitas only" thing, but I've seen a handful of cute sneaker coords.

>> No.10380303

>>10380180
agreed, can't you just make a normal coord with lolita shoes then swap them out for sneakers? not hard

>> No.10380304

>>10380303
>can’t you just swap out sneakers
No. If you want to make a good coord with sneakers, you should design the coord around them as they are a more unusual element. That being said, I wear lolita in a lot of everyday situations and I’ve been known to throw on Uggs when it’s too cold or uncomfortable

>> No.10380311

If you say lolita is your hobby I can't take you seriously. It's fashion. Does punk people tell it's their hobby? No. It's the way they dress and related stuff are the hobbies.

>> No.10380313

>>10380311
Fashion can be a hobby. Collecting vintage clothing is a hobby. Anything that you collect is a hobby. Maybe not a particularly complex one, but since when has complexity factored into whether something is or isn't a hobby?

Also
>It's the way they dress
You mean... the fashion they're wearing?

>> No.10380316

>>10380203
That’s just a theme, nobody in Japan is solely wearing baby blue lolita and there’s no brands dedicated to baby blue lolita

>> No.10380317

>>10380092
oh yea i know, i was just trying to say it wasn't an western invention like AV gal.

>>10380204
obviously some girls used the term, and people would certainly use it to go on TV but the term doesn't mean much of anything, not nearly as much as it seems to mean in the west.

>> No.10380318

>>10380203
you also need to remember you're getting a translated version of what's being said. most translators tend to imprint their own feelings onto their translations.

>> No.10380321

>>10380311
Shopping is a hobby, so yeah

>> No.10380323

>>10380311
100% agreed. But nowadays the majority sadly sees it like a collectors hobby instead of a proper street fashion. Just look at how often people who talk about their wardrobe now call it their collection most of the time and compare it to the word choice a few years ago. It's very subtle, but it's just one thing indicating where we are headed.

>> No.10380325

>>10380323
People have been calling their lolita wardrobes "collections" for literally 10+ years, at least in the west.

>> No.10380326

>>10380323
None of this is nw anon, unless I dreamed up the 90 main piece wardrobe posts on LJ

>> No.10380327

>>10380316
I mean nobody is a strong word. There are lolitas who have pretty monochromatic wardrobes pretty much everywhere. I get your point though

>> No.10380328

>>10380325
>>10380326
>Just look at how often

>> No.10380330

>>10380328
You have to understand a couple of things:

1) you are being exposed to more lolitas now because it’s easier to do things like post pictures

2) it’s easier to get lolita now so more people have large wardrobes

It’s not new. Just more easy to do

>> No.10380331

>>10380328
Yes, and they did it often then too. If you perceive a greater increase, it's probably because more people have decently-sized wardrobes now rather than because of a shift in attittude.

>> No.10380336

>>10380330
>>10380331
I'm not saying it's new, I'm saying they call it their collection most of the time instead of calling it their wardrobe or their clothes. That word choice is used much more often now than how it used to be, which is subtly indicating that there's a switch in what the main purpose of lolita clothing is ("something I collect" before "sonething I wear"). That doesn't really have anything do with our wardrobes getting bigger or lolita being more accessible.

>> No.10380337

>>10380336
>most of the time
Hard disagree, but I don’t know who you are talking to

>> No.10380338

>>10380223
>>10380316
That's what YOU call theme but that's how they use substyle in Japan. It doesn't mean their entire wardrobe looks like that, just a description for their current coord. Even in a tv show segment where a lolita came on to explain lolita to Japanese normies, she stated there are more than a hundred "subu sutairu".

>> No.10380341

>>10380336
I just don't agree, but this is the unpopular opinions thread after all. Going back to the post that started this, how is your definition of what lolita "should" be not a hobby anyway? Even if you're treating it as "proper street fashion" doesn't that make street fashion your hobby? You are doing it in your free time for fun and not for pay. That's the dictionary definition of a hobby.

>> No.10380342

>>10380338
stop being so literal about words, retard. you better have sauce for all this.

>> No.10380348

>>10380342
Look for lolitas on Japanese tv on sites like bilibili and youku

>> No.10380353

>>10380256
That sounds like a you problem

>> No.10380355

Salopettes are lolita.

>> No.10380370

>>10380355
Seconded. I don’t know why AP skirts are considered lolita but salopettes aren’t. Even AP skirts that aren’t labeled as miniskirts are 45 cm. My JM skirts are that length.

>> No.10380371
File: 41 KB, 360x480, 1585359948511.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10380371

>>10380355
Yes, I agree

>> No.10380376

>>10380311
It can be someone's fashion and their hobby

>> No.10380377

>>10380311
Punk is a horrible example, though. Punk is an anti-consumerist subculture. Lolita is a consumerist heavy fashion, and yes, hobby.

I know plenty of normies who consider normie fashion a hobby.

>> No.10380380

>>10380377
Agreed, it makes a difference if you just wear it or if you dedicate a lot of time to discussing it, engaging in the culture surrounding it or even making it, just saying someone wears lolita doesn't necessarily describe their relationship to the fashion.

>> No.10380381

>>10380355
Why? Just because a brand made it?
The length and silhouette isn't lolita at all.
>>10380370
Regular AP skirts should be considered lolita but the miniskirts shouldn't. I've never seen someone say the miniskirts are lolita.

>> No.10380383

>>10380381
“Regular” AP skirts are short as fuck. The 45 cm reference was for their normal skirts. I have never seen a single AP skirt at 55cm (typical Baby skirt length)

>> No.10380385

People who shove petticoats under Babydoll dresses and sack dresses not designed for them are trying way too hard to “follow the rules.” At a certain point you have to admit the borders of lolita are fuzzy and the fuzz starts around shoving a deflated two layer petti under a dress to check a box

>> No.10380386
File: 847 KB, 586x594, 1585362379242.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10380386

>>10380381
>The length and silhouette isn't lolita at all.
neither was petit patisserie's OP sack cut but now look at how common it is to see now with holy lantern, sailor series, etc. almost as if fashion can change and evolve

>> No.10380389

>>10380386
See >>10380385

Lolitas put itty bitty useless petti under said dresses to make them make sense.

Western lolitas have their little list, and if they check all the boxes it works, but if they don’t then it’s not lolita. Nevermind aesthetics or or trends or design house visions or anything.

And you wonder why we have itas

>> No.10380393

>>10380381
>Why? Just because a brand made it?
>The length and silhouette isn't lolita at all.

Actually, yes. The brands dictate the fashion. Obviously the Jenga outfit AP made isn't lolita, but they didn’t release that officially that was a one time commission for a non lolita event.

Salopettes are casual lolita, easy and comfortable to wear. They come from a time when fairy kei styles were popular and they bled into lolita a little bit.

>> No.10380396

>>10380393
It's more fairy kei and casual J-fashion to me than lolita.
>the brands dictate the fashion
Please don't tell me you're the kind of person who thinks you have to wear brand in order to wear lolita or that everything a brand makes is automatically lolita.
>>10380386
I guess I'm more of a traditionalist because I don't think the sack cut OPs are very lolita either. But they're still more lolita than a salopette is.

>> No.10380397

>>10380396
No you don’t have to wear brand but eho do you think offbrand looks to for inspiration? Lolita designs don’t grow organically or come from thin air, the brands do influence the fashion and what’s considered lolita.

>> No.10380400

>>10380396
It’s fine to have dislikes and likes (hence this thread) but it’s also fair to say Lolita has evolved to the point that salopettes are as normal as tea length gowns, neither of which people considered lolita in the early 2000s

>> No.10380408

>>10380400
>salopettes are as normal as tea length gowns
thank you.

>> No.10380436

>>10380355
Salopettes are ageplay, so it's only -sweet- lolita

>> No.10380440

>>10380436
stop

>> No.10380445

>>10380383
Either youre retarded or an amazon, but most of my AP skirts are 50+ cm long. Just because they hit mid thigh for you doesnt make them suddenly not lolita for others.

>> No.10380446

>>10380341
nayrt but it's just clothes that I wear. Jeans and a t-shirt are not a hobby, either.

>> No.10380448

>>10380445
I would love to know what skirts these are

>> No.10380449

>>10380446
They can be if you give a shit about them

>> No.10380453
File: 75 KB, 482x427, 1582921138962.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10380453

By the time most of you hit 30+, jfashion, particularly Lolita fashion, will be irrelevant.

>> No.10380454

>>10380446
It's a hobby if you're going out of your way to wear something so far from jeans and t-shirts.

>> No.10380455

>>10380453
oh no not my instagram likes and retweets how will i get tiktok upboops

>> No.10380457

>>10380453
Most of this board is 25+ And we’ve been hearing this since 2010

>> No.10380458

>>10380453
An AP store in china had a mob crash thru a window during release hype. I don’t think lolita is going anywhere

>> No.10380460

>>10380458
Legit, brands shouldn't do such limited releases especially in countries where there is a higher demand

>> No.10380463

>>10380458
Lolita is not but Lolitas will.

>> No.10380470

>>10380180
Reported and blocked.

>> No.10380475

>>10380448
nayrt but the new neon star diner skirt is listed as 53cm. they definitely run shorter than baby, but plenty of their skirts are right around 50.

>> No.10380483

>>10380336
Are you autistic? I have a big wardrobe and wear lolita 90% of my free time and I call my wardrobe a collection when I do wardrobe posts. Because I collected these pieces over years and years, it took a lot of effort to get.

>> No.10380485

>>10380453
Lol the lolita is dying meme has been around as long as the fashion itself. One day you’ll be right I guess.

>> No.10380536

>>10380453
tfw when i'm already 30+

>> No.10380538

>>10380453
Lolita will be defunct in just 5 years?

>> No.10380555

tea length dresses should not be considered lolita

>> No.10380557

>>10380311
What exactly do you see buying clothing in excess as? Some kind of extension of your identity?

Unlike punk and goth, lolita doesn't really have a culture or idea behind it besides the aesthetic, so.

>> No.10380561

>>10380256

You could call and ask for a coeliac option beforehand?

>> No.10380566

>>10380446
The difference is people don’t have Jeans and T-shirt Meetups

>> No.10380605

>>10380180
yeah, I saw more lolitas in japan in sneakers than I did lolita shoes

>> No.10380687

>>10380555
Longer dresses have always been a thing in lolita

>> No.10380695

>>10380555
Spot the retard

>> No.10380711

>>10380454
Doesn't take that much effort to wear lolita
>>10380566
Meetups are not required
Just admit there's some people who do lolita as a hobby and some people wear it as just clothing

>> No.10380724

>>10380458
Wait, I need a source on this. When did this happen and is there pics from weibo?

>> No.10380728

>>10380711
Yes it does take effort though? You had to search for the pieces, look up how to wear it properly, etc etc. Sure, it takes no effort now because you've built up a wardrobe (a "collection", if you will) but comparing it to jeans and t-shirts is just bad faith. You didn't just grab your lolira clothes off the rack in a regular store, right? You've set aside money and put in special effort to look the way you want. Because that's one of your hobbies. Maybe not your main one and maybe not in the same way as a lot of other people in the fashion, but still a hobby. It confuses me why some people are so loathe to admit this. Are you afraid it makes you uncool or something?

>> No.10380729

>>10380724
It should be in the archive.

>> No.10380731

>>10380711
I could maybe believe that if you weren't on what is essentially an anonymous hobbyist forum discussing the fashion.

I get the feeling you wear lolita similarly to me, honestly. I wear it every day (toned-down classic usually) I don't really participate in comms, I find my lolita acquaintances' devotion to Mana and obsession with the rules a little offputting and creepy, and I can only assume that the fashion doesn't mean nearly as much to me as these girls. But that doesn't mean it's not one of my hobbies.

>> No.10380732

>>10380042
>ugh the years, I’ve found it’s easier to say I am wearing Liz Lisa than getting into a fight about what himekaji is
Totally agreeing with this! I'm not trying to shit on the international gyaru-comm, but I feel like a lot of the "leading voices" and most popular girls (who will, in the end, be what every new girl sees as the standard) are very stuck in 10-20 year old styles. There is nothing wrong with wearing those styles, but saying that current LL isn't what himekaji looks like these days feels gatekeep-y imo
You can just say that you prefer oldschool gal, and there is nothing wrong with that, but the truth is this is what the style has evolved in to, even if you don't like it

>> No.10380741

>>10380557
>buying clothing in excess
Some people actually wear what they buy regulary, so you can't generalize what mighy be your own behaviour. Ironically, claiming lolita is ones hobby is actually treating it like some kind extension of your identity instead of seeing it as clothes you wear.

>> No.10380743

>>10380741
But if it's just clothes you wear, why are you on /cgl/? Surely there's nothing here for you. I mean, it's "just clothes" for me too, but I'm interested enough in the general zeitgeist to be on this board.

>> No.10380744

>>10380555
Dresses are only lolita if they come from the lolita region of japan, everything else is just sparkling ruffles

>> No.10380745

>>10380724
https://warosu.org/cgl/thread/10279064?__cf_chl_jschl_tk__=dd690a66eeaff80c26984701fecbc44d02a419ad-1587719481-0-Ae4EHmD4xnFRbARfWZ-rT3uQz9jYunuduFVur4JeDv4oxXKSMlrk1CkEB3YdpbKNVh7y0o1OWAMUdh-K11482B5GzJ9K72hGRtKhhhHOIgtFv9qhPM3TXS8yrE5FttJCmt_-PFBXcB_uACc8cRIQR99k1MfANkBhFRwZjvaXbzunATbjIMlUDDnAvXJLZfxPvMLeyssrXkH8mDumkf65rdMlgWZCXHf0KknKR0xbE8hVcUHcI0IvWPns4huFPXb_WV0uGbsPrl6V9iZQu_loZ9HkaUbnD1jv6vUcI8Ma1fWZ#p10279192

>> No.10380749

>>10380341
I just think calling your natural fashion a hobby is kind of weird. Like calling eating, riding a bus, sending packages or getting groceries a hobby just because you like it. It belongs to my everyday life and isn't a special activity to waste my freetime with. But then again, I think it ultimately depends on how one treats lolita and how/when one wears it. If it's more like a dress-up, it probably could be called a hobby.

>>10380483
Read slowly before you get personally offended.

>> No.10380750

>>10380743
Out of bad habit and loneliness

>> No.10380751

>>10380749
>Like calling eating, riding a bus, sending packages or getting groceries a hobby just because you like it
This is a strange argument. Sure, none of those things are inherently hobbies, but any one of them can be (okay, maybe not sending packages). If you're into eating enough to try out different restaurants for fun, it's your hobby. If you enjoy taking time to source special and rare ingredients to make a delicious meal, that's a hobby. A hobby isn't necessarily an extension of your life. It's just a thing you do regularly to a greater extent than the average person. I also enjoy learning languages and playing piano, for example. It doesn't mean those things are my whole life.

>> No.10380752

>>10380751
extension of your identity*, not life.

>> No.10380758

>>10380744
Did you know that AP produces dresses in the Philippines and China? The material is the same but legally you have to call the style prolitto when it's sewn in those regions

>> No.10380769

>>10380448
Aryt, heres a few examples. Some i own and others i dont but are listed as 50+

>melty ribbon chocolate skirt
>neon star diner
>horror garden
>cake applique
>holy rosary
>happiness easter
>heavenly cross
>lovely check

The really short ones are usually the ones with matching blazers or pre-2012 from what I’ve seen.

>> No.10380801

>>10380555

You're one of those people who haven't let go of the well intentioned but flawed rulebook.

>> No.10380810

>>10380769
>melty ribbon chocolate skirt
High waisted, includes waist in measurement
>neon star diner
Pleasantly surprised. Thanks!
>horror garden
High waisted and the non transparent measurement is less than 50 cm
>cake applique
Also glad for this, thank you.
>holy rosary
Yeah this one is very long
>happiness easter
I don’t have just the skirt measurement, but the whole thing isn’t less than 90 cm, including a heck of a lot of transparent fabric at the bottom...
>heavenly cross
Also high is waist with several cm of transparent fabric included in the measurement
>lovely check
The only measurement I could find again was from the apron skirt, but it looks to be around 49-50 cm

The actual skirt part these are almost all 49 cm or less much less.

Anon, I buy a lot of skirts both for lolita and casual. AP’s skirts, even ones designed for a petti, have always been significantly shorter than other brands. I’m not sure why this is an argument.

But thanks for the couple exceptions. I’ll add them to my list

>> No.10380813

>>10380810
Sorry for the typos. My phone is stupid

>> No.10380832

>>10380749

Eating hobby = gourmand
riding a bus hobby = travel blogs
sending packages = redditgifts.com

"groceries" is the only one that throws me, and that's mostly because the kind of ladies who live for the weekends when the samples come out and knows when the supermarket restocks aren't interested in calling it a hobby.
No one's gonna talk about cooking? Most people cook, right? Does that make it an unhobby now, so all those people who own towers of cookbooks and spend weekends experimenting with new recipes now officially don't have a hobby anymore?

>> No.10380841

>>10380810
Well, nta genuinely impressed by your knowdleg of skirts. Do you have any longer skirt recommendations?

>> No.10380844
File: 1.60 MB, 1000x1000, champ.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10380844

>>10380744
very funny anon

>> No.10380846

>>10380749
Following that logic artists can't have art as their hobby because it's their profession.

>> No.10380850

>>10380832
i think anon is saying it's a hobby only for the people who treat it as such. Like, I heated up a microwave meal this morning so that I stay alive - I wouldn't call that a cooking hobby. On the other hand, my friend held a sushi-making party once to teach what he knows about it - for him, it's a hobby. but i think anon is still being intentionally dense because going out of your way to make a fancy dish instead of a microwave meal/wearing alternative fashion instead of normie clothes intrinsically makes it a hobby. unless you bought them back when it was your hobby and are now no longer buying more pieces, just wearing what you have because you have it.

>> No.10380869

>>10380841
Baby seems to always use the same skirt patterns and release a skirt for most of their new releases, so definitely them. Meta and IW can be quite long, especially if IW releases a long length. Atelier Pierrot and Sheglit can have some long skirts if you are interested in gothic.

I tend to be pretty brand loyal so I don’t have confirmed experience with, say VM.

>> No.10380882

>>10380743
I came to derail the thread dumbass. Looks like it worked

>> No.10380889
File: 853 KB, 1037x1478, EEE1869C-AE5F-489F-A618-A3CF0909B59A.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10380889

>>10380744
Thanks, anon

>> No.10380892

>>10380844
You didn’t need to explain the joke.

>> No.10380895

>>10380882
Stop replying in my place and take your meds.

>> No.10380907

>>10380844
>>10380744
and like real champagne, american ones are shit.

>> No.10380913

>>10380889
Thank you for this art

>> No.10380919

Two-part unpopular opinion: I actually like Tyler's videos, they grew on me after watching them for a while, but I feel like her channel is tainting the western comm, so to speak. For some strange reason her channel attracts a lot of people who aren't lolitas, who take her word as god, and then flood here and every other online lolita comm when they're either lolitas at heart, larpers, or awful newbs who don't want to improve because they think they've got it set due to Tyler. Cgl has always had roleplayers/larpers, and since r9k came back we have lots of robot-trannies/scrotes too, but there seem to be a lot of summerfags that sound exactly like the comment section on Tyler's videos and it's fucking infuriating sometimes, especially in coord-based threads because these non-lolitas are only exposed to Tyler's AP style sweet so they flood discussions about other styles with tons of misinformed comments. Also I've noticed recently the generals have been polluted with lwln plot twisted into ~personal stories~ and it shuts down actual discussion about lolita faster than tranny- or fatty-chan bait. Tyler is also getting more hugboxy like Lor (not as bad yet but I don't watch Lor), and while some of it I agree with, it's fueling this fire harder in a way that I think she didn't anticipate, it's giving people false confidence to settle for ita instead of inspire to be the best lolita they can be, and then the western comm gets diluted to people who are really just a fan of a show than the fashion itself. Sorry for the incoherent rant, this shit has been bothering me for a while to the point I can't even accurately describe what makes me mad. I've gone through this with retro gaming and the popularity of avgn, so maybe my brain has given up after seeing this happen in another hobby I thought would be safe from half-baked know-it-alls because they've watched a few yt vids.

>> No.10380922

i hate when people claim fashions or styles that aren't extremely popular are dead, especially when they then insult people who still like them. it just feels like normie-speak to me. most of these fashions still have brands catering to them, they just aren't a huge fad anymore. i feel like this is mostly an issue in western communities, who don't understand that magazine popularity is usually a peak rather than the norm. a lot of people will still wear the fashions they loved from even 10+ years ago, and that's great.

>> No.10380926

>>10380919
i agree but i don't fault Tyler or any other content creator for it (outside of people actively and intentionally spreading misinformed opinions). idiot LARPers will always be able to invade non-vetted online communities, and the vetted ones normally have at least one moronic badmin poisoning everything. all we can do is is try to set them straight, bully them, or ignore them.

>> No.10380929

>>10380926
i kind of fault tyler because she is starting to cater more to these types for the views.

>> No.10380935

>>10380926
This. I’ve always liked Tyler and I think her brand of honest is real but not too edgy. It’s not her fault other people watch her and glean incorrectly info, when what she’s saying isn’t wrong. Just not all encompassing.

My only disagreement is with >>10380919, from the normies I know and the comment section, I think more of them are coming from Lor than Tyler. I’d be surprised if even half of Lor’s following is actual lolitas. I’d say most of Tyler’s following wears lolita to some extent based on comments and what gets upvoted.


The only thing I think you got right is newbs who are expose to Tyler think her insult comedy about rules is real and not, you know, a joke

>> No.10380937

>>10380929
In what way? I haven’t seen a major change in her content, unless you think her not being a douche during I’m Telling Tyler is somehow catering

>> No.10380941

>>10380929
i don't really think so, her whole "brand" has been gossipy silliness. if anything i see things like I'm Telling Tyler as her getting more confident with herself, the super scripted nature of LWLN reminds me of myself since i'm uncomfortable doing natural speech at a camera.

>> No.10380943

>>10380937
mainly what OP said about getting hugboxy. not so much her not being a dick, but she's definitely started to go a bit easier on some things imo, which i think is the wrong direction because it lends itself to people interpreting things in a different way. the community has gotten more hugboxy in general by force, so it's going to bleed into a lot more.

>> No.10380944

>>10380256
Oof or try being lactose intolerant. One tea place my comm likes to go has literally nothing I can eat.

>> No.10380945

>>10380943
Idk, I. Just not seeing the “more hugboxy” from her, do you have examples?

Also the community has always been this hugboxy, this isn’t anything new. I was just archiving on LJ and boy howdy people gave asspats back in the day

>> No.10380948

>>10380311
I disagree with your analogy, punk is not a fashion first, it’s a music genre first. The clothes come afterwards. That’s why punk is more of a hobby/scene whereas lolita is just a style. But besides that I agree with you. It makes me sad when people say it’s their hobby. How boring. Clothes are something you wear, not what you do. All the people I’ve met who say lolita is their main hobby are boring people with milquetoast personalities and blah lives and tend to be conlitas

>> No.10380949

>>10380944
>>10380256
try being both. You literally stop going to any meeting unless you're able to bring your own food.

>> No.10380956

>>10380926
OP here, yeah I don't directly blame her, just her channel's weird attraction to these non-lolitas, although I'm kinda thinking >>10380929 isn't wrong, going through a recent video binge the tone in her videos feels different now and monetization does seem important to her so views would be important too, but she's still not as bad as Lor.
>>10380935
That's a good point, maybe the comments I'm used to seeing when I check the comment section are mostly crossover from Lor, and maybe in comparison Tyler has more lolita commenters.
>>10380937
It's subtle but it's there, like I said before I'm shit at putting my frustration into words so I'll leave that for someone who can better describe the shift in tone that I've noticed in her more recent videos, >>10380943 is pretty spot on with how I feel about it. I'm happy for her and I understand why she'd wanna go softer, but I feel it's having a different effect on the community and newcomers than what she might have anticipated, like I said. I guess there's no way around it, but it just sucks. Vetted online comms do sound like a good solution but I'm socially awkward and like anonymity, like most of these opinions, mine included, wouldn't be openly discussed with a face attached. That's a huge "me" problem though that I gotta work on.

>> No.10380960

>>10380882
>I was only pretending to be retarded

>> No.10380961

>>10380945
I might do another binge rewatch of her recent videos today for specifics, notably the I'm Telling Tyler because thinking about it given the other anons replies, I think those might have been the specific videos that are influencing my opinion on the shift in tone. I do like them, but from what I recall the write in stories felt really "true story bro" sometimes. Nothing really unbelievable, but they felt embellished or asspat-bait, and Tyler came across as really overwhelming with apologizing/praising and whatnot. I agree with her stances on acceptance like what I've said before (and happy she puts down those toxic to the community) but the loudness of it feels unnecessary? and more hugboxy rather than pragmatic and down to earth. It's like she's saying what the lolitas at heart and half baked newbies want to hear now, even if that wasn't intended on her part.

>> No.10380976

>>10380961
I guess agree to disagree. I could see where it would come across that way, but I to me it seems less that she is forcing something and more that she’s is trying to balance giving a humous response with not coming off like a dick.

Your point about newbs grabbing at “da rules” because of her may be into something, though. She’s more of a 2010 sweet “rulez or get the fuck out” type, especially for jokes, and that may be why there’s an uptick in stupid.

>> No.10380979
File: 137 KB, 758x767, ryz9yxzfx7011.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10380979

Not all criticism is constructive. It's fun to shit on an ugly coord! You don't have to spread a veneer of helpfulness over it to assuage your guilt. Just admit it and stop pretending you're doing the person a favor.

>> No.10380989

>>10380979
THIS
If ur gonna be acing don’t try and justify it lmaooo
Be rude w ur whole chest

>> No.10381024

>>10380979
for real, just own it if you're going to be a bitch. better than going on an "um sweaty this is for ur own good" style rant.

>> No.10381025

>>10380919
Tylers "ap sweet style" is so bland an indistinctive i don't understand how anyone could find her coords interesting or memorable. her hair is always down, she usually wears some kind of set and thats it. it bad even by 2010 sweet standards. her clothes always seem like they're wearing her, not the other way around.

>> No.10381041

>>10381025
Her outfits are too bland to look like they're wearing her

>> No.10381050

>>10381025
>>10381041
I’ve never seen anyone say her outfits are inspired, though if you think they are bad I don’t not know what to say. Boring, but not bad.

>> No.10381055

>>10381025
Tyler wears lolita like they're normal clothes, while Lor tries to be ~inventive~. Its actually why I like Tyler


I'll admit, I'm boring. I like simple coords and OTT turns me off. I'm not trying to reinvent the wheel, I like how it runs.

So to see a YTber, just wear lolita without trying to be special is something I'm interested

>> No.10381058

>>10381055
i don't think there is anything wrong with boring, I'm just surprised people notice her coordinates at all. they're the last thing i find notable about her content.

>> No.10381071

>>10381058
That is true, they're like a nice backdrop

>> No.10381139

>>10380298
You forgot the fourth- oldschool!

>> No.10381145

>>10381139
Nta but old-school can be sweet, classic, or gothic. It falls under the three substyles.

>> No.10381149

>>10380976
It's not even just da rules, it's AP sweet or it's not lolita for these half-asses because they can't even be arsed to do any further searches than what they're exposed to from the video content, which is clearly their only exposure to lolita (maybe outside of Lor) then they try to put other substyles into AP sweet full set rules. Fuck, I wonder if that ita that thought that Boz and Sheglit weren't lolita was one of those people I'm talking about.

All my bitching about AP sweet and da rules aside, I agree with >>10381055, I actually find Tyler's coords refreshing because 1) I hardly see lolita being worn as it's intended on a public platform (as *normal* clothes) and 2) it's so rare to find full sets being worn as is, everyone and their moms, quite literally in some cases, try so hard to be unique that the millionth """experimental""" or OTT coord is just the same shit to me. I do like good experimental coords, but sometimes it's nice to see what the clothes themselves look like in their natural setting. That's just another unpopular opinion though.

One more unpopular opinion that really is only unpopular among a certain group of people, whose wrath I'm probably about to summon: fishnets under your otks/utks are not experimental, mana and his moitiefags have been doing that since the dawn of time, congrats for reinventing the wheel.

>> No.10381182

Tyler is cringe. Her fans are worse. Most of them rush to every facebook drama as soon as possible to say something rude (read salty) for a chance to be featured in her videos. Heads up, being a bitch on the internet doesn't make you cool, that's what cgl is for; because it's not something to be proud of.
>Especially when the girls flinging shit don't own a single polished coord. We can SEE your profile when you comment abuse, Karen. She doesn't even go here!

>> No.10381257

>>10381182
>Especially when the girls flinging shit don't own a single polished coord.
I get the feeling that this goes for the fans of most lolita YTer/influencer/content creators. My community is huge and has a lot of active lolitas who wear it daily and/or have big impressive wardrobes, but none of them really follow Tyler or Lor or K8 or whoever. A few months ago someone asked our comm which guests they’d like to see at a lolita event and the comment section was full of lolitas-at-heart asking for Lor and Tyler. I don’t think a single one of them has more than two main pieces but they’re all over the lolita FB groups and our discord posting memes, giving unsolicited crit and making snarky comments. It’s especially annoying on discord because they’re all using nicknames and you can’t so easily check who it is you’re talking to and whether they even wear the fashion. I’m at a point where if someone says they’re a big fan of Tyler I just assume they’re a lolita-at-heart who lives vicariously through her.

>> No.10381292

>>10380453
Imagine wearing something only because it's popular or relevant

>> No.10381303

>>10381182
I don't particularly like Tyler either and usually can't stand watching her videos because of her intonation, but I have to admit that she's a breath of fresh air compared to all the cutesy overly weebish lolita youtubers out there.
It's slim pickings with lolita youtubers and she at least has her own original format. That being said, the only lolita youtuber I actually like is Rose Nocturnalia.

>> No.10381306

>>10381257
If this is the comm I think it is, I wish we could have a Discord without all the noobs. The fact that they're almost the only ones who are active means none of the actual experienced lolitas from our comm post anymore.

>> No.10381308

>>10381182
Someone asked on rufflechat if we would let Tyler and Lor do the whole what not to wear schtick with our wardrobe.
Throw away my wardrobe for only 5K and have 2 people with boring and or terrible sense of style dress me?
No fucking way.
Why do people look up to them so much style wise, they don't dress very well.

>> No.10381321

>>10381308
I don’t even mind their content but that’s dumb as shit. Tyler only wears AP sets and Lor dresses like a literal clown, so what kind of style advice do people expect from them? I wouldn’t even trust them to style a Baby-style sweet wardrobe, let alone gothic or classic. People follow them for their opinions and humor, not their sense of style.

>> No.10381340

>>10381308
Tyler is cute for a casual/ wearable daily sweet but I don't wear that style of sweet. I like OTT sweet, gothic, and oldschool. I wouldn't trust her and especially not Lor to make coords I like

>> No.10381379

What I dislike about Tyler is that her coordinates really are almost all the same- the exact same. There’s girls who are into 2010 sweet who mix things up still, wear different blouse combinations or change their hairstyle, wear a bolero or cardigan.

Not Tyler, who wears an elbow length blouse with absolutely everything, even if the blouse is too frilly and formal for the JSK she is wearing. And that’s fine but it doesn’t mean I’d ever want coord advice from her.

>> No.10381389

>>10381139
How fucking new are you

>> No.10381398

>>10380960
Pretty much yeah, thanks for humoring me

>> No.10381490

>>10381379
Absolutely agree. It irritates me how she doesn't even try another hairstyle, at the very least. Always the same, shoulder length, noodle-hairdo. Her coords are good but I wish she wouldn't stick to her formula so much

>> No.10381492

>>10380201
>imagine being so boring and devoid of personality that you need a label for being normal.

That’s about right. Her entire personality revolves around how “queer” she is and not much else.

>> No.10381527

>>10381490
Shoulder length noodle hair? She has long curly hair.

If you're going to bait, then try better

>> No.10381556

>>10381308
Same I'd never take coord advice from her or Lor

>> No.10381600

>>10381527
If her hair was blond it would look exactly like overly-moussed trailer trash ramen noodles, and you know it

>> No.10381617

>>10381303
>Rose Nocturnalia
Oh Shirley, I’ve only seen her instagram. I didn’t even know she was one YouTube. Thanks for the rec

>>10381257
As another anon said, there isn’t a lot of YouTube options and Tyler is at least genuine and relatively normal. It’s unfortunate noobs flock to her, because some of us are just normal lolitas looking for decent content. Of course, I rarely interact with comms so maybe her fans are disproportionately annoying.

>> No.10381658

>>10380850

Even if they're old clothes, most of lolita requires so much intentional layering and coordination, at the barest minimum you still need some styling and a petticoat under most dresses or else it doesn't look lolita, I have trouble braining that someone is trying to argue that you can apparently whoopsie casually into accidentally wearing lolita thoughtlessly and then call it not-a-hobby.

>> No.10381677

The only reason I don't buy replicas is because they're too different/easy to spot. If they actually were exact replicas, like bjd recasts are, I'd buy some.

>> No.10381679

>>10381677
I feel the same way. I buy brand when brand makes things that actually accommodate for my height, but there are a few prints I wish I could get a customized replica of, just to wear it. Its not like the brand ever planned to accommodate to my tall size to begin with, so I wouldn't feel bad about it.

>> No.10381689

>>10381677
Dollfag here but BJD recasts aren't exact replicas. The resin itself is often thinner/inferior quality, and even if it's on par, the worksmanship is shoddier/the molds used aren't as good. In a photograph it's indistinguishable, but irl it's more apparent.

Not to get preachy, but the main reason replicas are frowned upon isn't for that reason but because it drives the original content creators out of business. Shops folding leaves us with the same circulated prints and dresses and that's boring as hell. As I've witnessed in the doll community, it also makes scamming 10x worse with people trying to pass off fakes as the real deal.

This anon >>10381679 is the only time I can actually sympathize

>> No.10381706

>>10381689
duh, I think she knows why replicas are frowned upon. she’s saying she would still buy them if they were close enough to get away with it. And I would too.

>> No.10381723

>>10381677

It's actually why I can't respect replicachans.

I mean, yes, there's the whole trying to pass them off as the real thing, that they like to pull the discriminat classist victim card instead of just admitting their replica looks like shit, the narcissistic mentality/attitude, the art theft, the damage to the community, etc.

It's just, on top of all that, they picked a hobby where most of the replicas are pretty obvious, and not only that, they seem to be made by people that try the hardest to skimp on the amount of lace and fabric. I'm pretty convinced most replicachans are blind at this point, I mean with the quality of the some of the HL we've seen lately you might as well buy a couple of F21 dresses and it'd be cheaper at about the same quality.

>> No.10381755

I wish people would use substyle labels more freely without worrying that cgl will moan that it's a theme. Imagine how much easier it would be to find coord inspiration on Instagram if people tagged with #babybluelolita, #tartanlolita, #poplolita, #nunlolita etc.

>> No.10381777

>>10381755
I understand your idea, but what in hell is pop lolita? If these were added besides general tags like #sweetlolita, it would be great for browsing. The problem isn’t cal itself, but the history this community has with idiots trying to make some normal theme a “big new thing” which obviously is also “original do not steal”.

>> No.10381786

>>10381755

I'll settle for people just tagging their goddamn dress names, print names, heck if folks would tag even just the brands, that would be good too. Way easier to search, and you can bet I'm already browsing my favorite brands pretty regularly.

Heck tag it #egl or #eglfashion while you're at it. At the moment the only one people reliably use is #lolita, aka the tag with the most problems and attention hoes associated with it. Seriously, why. We should be using every other tag except this one.

>> No.10381793

>>10381777
I saw pop Lolita in kera a few times but idk how to explain it

>> No.10381795

>>10381723
The thing is, these people never cared about or respected the community.

My unpopular opinion is those sorts of people shouldnt be welcome in lolita circles. If they cant respect the community, they dont get to take part in meets/tea/online groups. If they want to treat it truly as just clothes with no history or culture behind it, then they can. In their own space separate

>> No.10381805

>>10381793
Is it retro inspired like Diner Doll, Milkshake, etc. from AP? Or is it graphic bold simple prints like dolly dot done in primary colors or black and white like pop art? I think it's the latter iirc

>> No.10381820

>>10381805
It was bold, vibrant colours. Sometimes they also had non-lolita coords called pop kei and that just looked random to me.

>> No.10381821

>>10381795
Eh, I wouldn't say there's a jump from buying replicas to not respecting the community, lolita isn't exactly an active culture anymore so much as just people buying things and showing off what they buy online. It shouldn't be encouraged to wear replicas to, for example, meet ups or to post coordinates of only replicas and why they're gods gift to humanity, but in normal fashion circles people buy and wear replicas quite often (usually they don't even know it's a replica/knockoff), and it has its own following just as well as people who wear only namesake brands.

>> No.10381825

>>10381821
Oh sorry, I guess I just imagined meetups, cons and tea parties. I am someone who beats the “Lolitas is not a subculture” drum, but things haven’t changed in the hobby community respect

>> No.10381835

>>10381706
Poorfag

>> No.10381840

>>10381786
This is why I wish Lolibrary could be expanded to support COF's functionality or have a separate platform that aggregates COF and integrates with Lolibrary to tag pieces like Lookbook does. I can't code though.

>> No.10381844

>>10381786
If people tag print names i still wouldn't get all nurse coords in one tag.

>> No.10381851

>>10379993
Tbh I just don't see the harm in making up substyles or calling your coord bittersweet. It's not like we decided democratically that classic, gothic and sweet are the only types of coords allowed to be substyles and nothing new after that. This is a foreign fashion so why take the American meaning of substyle extremely literally and force foreigners to try to pronounce "theme"? When someone at a meet asks what substyle I wear most and I say sailor, nobody is openly bothered by it either. If you often wear florals, call your substyle flower lolita for all I care.

>> No.10381865

>>10381795
That's not an unpopular opinion. People who openly wear replicas get piled on and shamed even in hugboxes like cof.

>> No.10381868

>>10381844
Also not everyone even wears prints?

I wouldn’t hate if #nursecoord or #sailorcoord came into use. Less controversial than calling it a theme or a substyle but still searchable

>> No.10381888

>>10381755
>>10381793
>>10381820

Pop lolita isn’t a real thing, it’s just magazine spreads in Kera using random words.

However nobody kn /cgl/ is mad about people tagging shit like #nursecoord, #nuncoord. That’s different from insisting that sailor lolita is its own distinct sub style thing with a dedicated brand and everything, which a lot of early lolita advice DID suggest.

>> No.10381897

>>10381888
They didn't suggest that they have a dedicated brand, idk why some gulls suddenly think that's a requirement for a substyle

>> No.10381939
File: 562 KB, 1200x1736, 022.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10381939

>>10381793
what the magazines consider lolita should be taken with a heavy grain of salt. nobody would consider these lolita.

>> No.10381941
File: 444 KB, 1400x2037, 013.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10381941

>>10381939
heres a "pop lolita" scan from KERA

>> No.10381942

I wish there were more non-religious gothic releases. There’re so many other macabre motifs to use.

>> No.10381943
File: 545 KB, 1400x2037, 014.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10381943

>>10381941
but its also paired with "80s mix lolita" and "honey lolita". is this lolita because KERA says so?

>> No.10381946
File: 582 KB, 1400x2037, 023.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10381946

>>10381943
it's safe to say "pop lolita" was just a fun magazine spread idea

>> No.10381959

>>10381941
That coord does have colour pops

>> No.10381963

>>10381689
I remember when the most replicated brands, Baby and AP, went out of business bc replicas

>> No.10381964
File: 556 KB, 1400x2037, 037.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10381964

>>10381946
from what i can tell "pop" is just the KERA name for colorful, slightly 80s inspired, looks

>> No.10381972

>>10381964
You know all of us can also look up pop kei right?

>> No.10381978

>>10381964
>>10381972
Pretty sure pop-kei is like otome in that they're fashion styles people outside of Japan made up based on some one-off line in a fashion magazine that was taken out-of-context.

Googling pop-kei gets you a bunch of English results about the style, but ポップ系 gets nothing.

>> No.10381979

>>10380453
Been into it since I was 15 and now I’m 29. I seriously doubt it. Most of us have never worn it to be relevant. Most of us started before it was popular and so known in the west and we (and newer lolitas) will continue it past the kawaii boom in the west. I truly believe that lolita is timeless.

>> No.10381980

>>10380919
I like Lor and Tyler but it drives me nuts when they give asspats to trannies and itas and even actual disgusting sexual creeps (see Lors horror story #1).

Also as much as I like Lor I can’t watch her fixing coord videos because she complements the most ita things and is afraid to give genuinely good advice.

>> No.10382001

>>10381978
>>10381964
pop just means colorful like you said. i remember there being pop-gal labels for outfits too in magazines.

>> No.10382015

Tyler is fine, her outfits are fine and videos fine, but I desperately want to fix her hair/wig/bangs every single video, and get her to please for the love NOT wear the same red lipstick and same 10 layers of pink blush with every single coord. Makeup is a great tool for lolita coords - and just like your clothes and accessories, your makeup colors should match or compliment your outfit. It's nothing against her personally, but colors matter people. Even the ones on your face.

>> No.10382020

>>10382015
when has Tyler worn red lipstick and garish blush? The fuck are you rambling about? Are you talking about Lor?

>> No.10382035

>>10381793
A titled few page spread in magazine is not a sub style jfc

>> No.10382054

>>10382020
Tyler always wears a dark fuschia color on her lips and way too much pink blush. Look at any of her vids. Also too pale of a foundation. Same makeup every time and it just personally bothers me. But compared to Lor, agreeably it's nowhere near as offensive. Tyler's is like...mid-2000s makeup. Lor straight up wears clown makeup and sharpies in her eyebrows.

>> No.10382055

>>10382054
Fuschia and red aren’t the same color and I would argue it’s not that dark. Her makeup isn’t great but it’s fine. I think that’s her (industrial?) goth coming through.

Regardless, she isn’t famous for her coords. She makes videos which she does well and dresses perfectly acceptably. Frankly I like it that way since it’s not distracting

>> No.10382069

>>10382055
Actually, her most recent vid it is most definitely red lipstick, garishly paired with super pink blush all over her face... in an all lavender coord. It looks horrid. Light pink, like the shade in her hair and dress print, would have matched great. But nope, 10 layers of harsh pink blush and red lips. I can't fathom how people think red and lavender look good together. It's not the worst makeup, but it's far from "fine."

>> No.10382083

>>10381964
pop in this image looks like the latter end of the scene trend.

>> No.10382091
File: 798 KB, 1536x1012, B6454C4D-3D71-4A8B-B495-636CE63ADCB4.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10382091

>>10382069
>garish red
I had no idea what you were talking about so I went to check if I issued something and... anon that’s a fucking light lipstain. It’s also cool toned? Like her dress and blush? It’s not amazingly applied but it’s hardly terrible.

Honestly, you gotta really hate this bitch to be that annoyed by a slight lip tint

>> No.10382094

>>10382091
>red lips
are you okay anon? her makeup looks fine and she's wearing a rose color similar to the stripes on the candies on her jsk.

>> No.10382095

>>10382094
Sorry if I wasn’t being clear. I agree with you. Her lip stain is fine and weird “garish red” anon needs to chill

>> No.10382097

>>10381963
I know, it was so terrible. Each Angelic pretty garment was lovingly handcrafted by Japanese lolitas instead of made in china

>> No.10382105

so honestly im not upset about dudes and trans doing lolita, as long as they follow the rules and give a shit about the fashion. It becomes a problem when amabs are given the benefit of the doubt for being shitty at the fashion when women would be called itas. i hate all the sissies, they can choke, but if we held all amabs to the same standards we held women, i think things would be better.

>> No.10382109

>>10382105
I spearheaded the hate for sissies in lolita and I'm fine with trans people.
I do think that all amabs should be held to the same standard, vetting should be mandatory to get rid of sissies, which would honestly get rid of some trans people as well, and honestly, if they don't care enough about the fashion to not get filtered out, fuck em.

also inb4 terf anon starts derailing the thread

>> No.10382112

Know what I think that's fuck in g "controversial"? I think that all weebs in lolita SUCK.

IF YOU AREN'T A DELUSIONAL WOMANCHILD AND YOU WEAR LOLITA, GET FUCKED.

You should have a personality to match the style you wear. If you like lolita because you see it in your chinese cartoons, then FUCK YOU.

Classic lolitas should be delusional Victorian era larpers

Sweet lolitas should be magical unicorn sunshine womanchildren living in fantasyland

Gothic lolitas should be dark mysterious vampire aristocrats

IF YOU'RE A FUCKING NERD THAT LIKES VIDEO GAMES AND TUMBLR MEMES, FUCK YOU. YOU'RE A CLOUT CHASING POSER AND PROBABLY A CAMGIRL

IT'S A FEMININE FASHION
STOP ACTING LIKE SCROTES IN DISGUISE

>> No.10382115

>>10382112
Did I miss a copypasta somwhere

>> No.10382124

>>10382115
Know what I think that's fuck in g "controversial"? I think that all weebs in lolita SUCK.

IF YOU AREN'T A DELUSIONAL WOMANCHILD AND YOU WEAR LOLITA, GET FUCKED.

You should have a personality to match the style you wear. If you like lolita because you see it in your chinese cartoons, then FUCK YOU.

Classic lolitas should be delusional Victorian era larpers

Sweet lolitas should be magical unicorn sunshine womanchildren living in fantasyland

Gothic lolitas should be dark mysterious vampire aristocrats

IF YOU'RE A FUCKING NERD THAT LIKES VIDEO GAMES AND TUMBLR MEMES, FUCK YOU. YOU'RE A CLOUT CHASING POSER AND PROBABLY A CAMGIRL

IT'S A FEMININE FASHION
STOP ACTING LIKE SCROTES IN DISGUISE

>> No.10382126

>>10382115
Nah, this is OC. I mad

>> No.10382135

>>10382112
>mtfw I was a camgirl who cammed wearing lolita and bluntly told everyone it was an ageplay fetish thing just to shit on people like you

I wore an angelic pretty print kek

>> No.10382173
File: 203 KB, 348x430, 1516995840201.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10382173

>>10382095
uh oh, it was actually me being unclear! i meant to respond to >>10382069 and totally agree with you.

>>10382112
fukken saved

>> No.10382288

>>10382035
That's not what I said... My unpopular opinion is that I don't care what cgl decides about what's allowed to be a substyle. I think it's fun and handy when people make up their own.

>> No.10382309

>>10382091
And for once her blush means she doesn't look like a washed out corpse. Does anon know you don't have to match your blush color to your clothes?

>> No.10382310

>>10382309
She is wearing way too much blush though

>> No.10382323

>>10381963
Mary Magdalene did die though

>> No.10382345
File: 30 KB, 500x749, bcd61886aeeb425fd2295d7ecc447fba.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10382345

>>10381963
Grimoire stopped making legwear because of replicas

>> No.10382356

>>10382112

wait, if I wear all the substyles, do I have to timeshare my delusions or something?

brb I have to go math my multiple personality disorder according to the ratio of my wardrobes.

>> No.10382364

>>10382310
Not really.

1) this is jfashion. If you aren’t wearing a metric fuckton of blush you are doing it wrong

2) blush doesn’t show up on camera well so you have to go harder. She just switched lighting, so this one may be picking up her blush more

>>10382309
This.

>> No.10382366

>>10382345
Yup and it makes me so upset. Considering they are kill and mostly were known for legwear, I’d call that a solid replica killed the brand situation

>inb4 dolly kei died tho
The versatility of their legwear for other fashions was what made their legwear a staple of their brand. Had they not been copied to death, they might have stuck around as a legwear focused brand

>> No.10382367

>>10382364
No, i can see very red cheeks and that means too much blush was used stahp

>> No.10382372

>>10382367
Good lord you are a moron. When multiple people are saying that is an appropriate amount of blush for being on camera in lolita, maybe consider that you are being stupid.

>> No.10382373

>>10382364
Really bothers me how she wears it right where highlighter should be

>> No.10382374

>>10382367
>I can see blush therefore there is too much blush
Holy shit open a GLB

>> No.10382375

>>10382372
There are also multiple people who think she’s gone way overboard, so maybe it’s a matter of opinion?

>> No.10382377

>>10382373
Taking your blush up the side of your cheeks under your eye is a trend in both normie and jfashion right now. Also highlighter doesn’t typically go there in jfashion

>> No.10382378

>>10382375
It’s possible. Although many if not most jfashion photo shoots use this quantity of blush, so I’m really thinking its people who either don’t not like Tyler or don’t pay attention to jfashion makeup

>> No.10382392

>>10382364
>If you aren’t wearing a metric fuckton of blush you are doing it wrong
god i hate newfags

>> No.10382406

>>10382373
>Really bothers me how she wears it right where highlighter should be
She's... wearing it where blush goes though?
Also >wearing hilighter in jfashion
ew

>> No.10382420

>>10382323
Was it because of replicas? I’m always wondering why tf my favorite brand died

>> No.10382423

I hate generic taobao tier rococco inspired dresses and how they became the thing to wear in special events. Even brand are doing it, if you look it closely, even brand is using bad lace with it. Thanks, I hate it.

>> No.10382427

>>10382392
I’ve been wearing lolita for 5 years and jfashion for much longer. Normies wear very little blush and jfashion makeup is very blush focused. I’m curious what styles you wear or magazines you look at for inspo if you think otherwise

>> No.10382428

>>10382406
>the gals have entered the chat
But seriously, it seems like a lot of people ITT basically adapt normie western makeup for lolita. That she fine, but to pretend like trends are same in both is wrong

>> No.10382429

>>10382420
I mean, here was also a rumored split of the seamstress and the owner because he was a creep iirc

>> No.10382432

>>10382427
>jfashion makeup
lmfao this level of larp is sad.

>> No.10382435

>>10382091
I think this looks bad because the blush isn't in the byojaku e-girl place, it's kind of doing an 80s power makeup thing which looks weird and harsh. The pink also might not be right for her undertones as well potentially?

Honestly I think her eyebrows are a bigger crime, she be looking like a Mii lmao

>> No.10382436

>>10382432
Sorry, please name one jfashion where blush isn’t heavily used or literally defined by. better yet describe “lolita” makeup, since it pulls from other fashions.

Right now it seems to be influenced by neo-romantic and other post larme/gyaru styles, unless we are talking gothic which dips more into punk (but not always... larme style did a big number on makeup trends). Or are we talking older, gyaru inspired styles? And if so, which ones? Really, if you want to point out examples I would love to know. I love makeup trends and am always looking for new inspiration

>> No.10382453

>>10382436
Anon stop. This is cringy now. I get that you want to be right but you're not. Blush being popular due to it's youthfulness doesn't translate into it being some jfash requirement.

>> No.10382454

>>10382323
>>10382420
Maybe because their shit hardly fit anyone

>> No.10382460

>>10382454
The logic response to this is changing the size chart, not simply stopping business. Also, their biggest market were probably chinese and japanese woman and their sizes do fit most of the girls on those countries so this doesn’t really convince me.

>> No.10382469

>>10381963
Learn to read dumbass. I said this happens in the doll community. The reason it hasn't happened in lolita is because replicas are frowned upon unlike in the doll community.

I get that someone under 18 doesn't have money to spend on real clothes but you shouldn't be on 4chan either lol

>> No.10382470

>>10382469
no the reason it happens in the doll comm is because recasts are way easy to pass off as real. they are still looked down on when people post about buying them.

>> No.10382472

>>10382454
MM sizing is very similar to VM and even tends to be a bit roomier in the bust, yet MM went into a coma long before VM did and VM is doing fine now.

>> No.10382477

>>10382469
calm ur tits haggard

>> No.10382480

People thinking PICTORIAL makeup is appropriate for IRL makeup... bruh, photoshoots heavily exaggerate makeup application for artistry. But you should not be covering your face in blush daily IRL. It is cringey af. And if you MUST, for the love do not apply it that way EVERY time. Switch it up a bit please, especially if you're making youtube videos.

>> No.10382499

>>10382469
Except it never happened in the doll community either. Fairyland is by far the most replicated brand and they're doing great, still have bloodbaths for new Minifee releases and all.

>> No.10382513

>>10382432
asian makeup trends have always been different from western trends, how is that LARP?

>> No.10382514

>>10382499

Replicas are banned on denofangels much like egl, which is still the main community, unlike egl.

No idea which other smaller comms tolerate replicas. nayrt, btw.

>> No.10382517

>>10382513
that's not the part that's larp. it's the whole "blush" thing. like >>10382453 said. it's not some magical jfash specific trait.

>> No.10382522
File: 115 KB, 367x594, 20161130191526-1f1279fd-me.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10382522

>>10382480
lolita is an OTT fashion. why would you care what passes for normie makeup when doing lolita makeup?

even in older GLBs, the minimal no-makeup makeup looks only look good because they're photoshopped to hell and back

>> No.10382526

>>10382469
Okay but tell me where recasts have NOT been frowned upon? They're not accepted in the BJD community either, and that's why people request CoA for sales. And it's not because they hurt business, it's because they represent a lack of integrity (in addition to inferior quality).

Lolitas on the other hand, don't really care about integrity, they just want to post pics and look like they own popular prints for the 'likes.'

>> No.10382529
File: 84 KB, 400x523, tumblr_kxmya5B5hl1qzblcxo1_400.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10382529

>>10382517
its not a jfashion specific trait but its always been more prevalent in japanese/korean makeup. just compare the sheer number of blush products asian vs western brands sell.

>> No.10382535

>>10382423
I'm pretty sure brands were the first one to do that.

>> No.10382536

>>10382423
I hate overly Roccoco-inspired lolita in general. It was such a tacky era.

>> No.10382538

>>10382529
i know that, but that still doesn't mean it's some kind of requirement like the OP implied. tyler's shit makeup having too much blush has nothing to do whether or not blush is more prominent in japan (hence the larp).

>> No.10382553

>>10382538
But their argument as that blush is prominent in jfashion. I’m not sure what you are arguing here or why you are calling larp

>> No.10382555

>>10382526
I fail to see how BJDs are somehow different than dresses in your mind. The BJD community is equally is social media focused with the advent of Instagram

>> No.10382560

>>10382538
they never implied that it was a requirement, that was your assumption.

>> No.10382561

>>10382538
Wait did you take me exaggerating with

>if you aren’t wearing a fuckton of blush you are doing it wrong

To be literal? Oh, no I mean obviously there are exceptions but blush, and frequently heavy blush, is really prominent in Japanese street fashion.

>inb4 I was just pretending to be retarded lol
Clearly other people understood my intent, but I get how that was misinterpreted. I still think the *quantity* of blush in the picture, particularly on camera, isn’t an issue

>> No.10382626

>>10382454
That's just you projecting. MM fits girls who are fat by Asian standards just fine.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XjhSaefJVYc

>> No.10382627

>>10382626
That’s because they are short by western standards. Regardless, the western market isn’t their primary or secondary market so it does rn matter who it fits here

>> No.10382630

>>10382561
Nta but you sound really upset over nothing.

>> No.10382634

>>10382627
Quit shutting down conversation dude. People are just speculating why the brand closed.

>> No.10382644

>>10382627
My point was that sizing was not the issue. IIRC people were complaining about the 2016 Fleur Antoinette rerelease being bigger than the previous ones. And basically everything they released sold out on reservation in their last years.

>> No.10382673

>>10382429
I wanna know more

>> No.10382684

>>10382634
This is the first time I’ve commented on this subject? I’m not sure how stating that western markets aren’t their primary concern is “shutting things down”

>>10382673
From what I heard, the seamstress left because the owner was dating a high schooler

>> No.10382694

>>10382673
don't listen to >>10382684 they're an idiot

>> No.10382724

>>10382514
Recasts are banned in almost all bjd groups, including local meetup groups. So idk where anon is getting that idea. Lolita is way more lax about replicas for sure, I've never seen any lolita meetup groups explicitly ban them.

Also DOA hasn't been the main community for a long time kek. Addicts on FB is the main.

>> No.10382762

>>10382684
It would be really depressing if that were true. I consciously choose communities and even careers that are separate from the mainstream where predatory men control everything, and lolita fashion (sans bodyline) seems like one of those — most of the visible people and designers are women. But brands are still business, and I wouldn’t be surprised if the people in charge of them were the usual predators. Anyway, I’d definitely jump to buy from a brand started by a former MM seamstress, whatever the backstory behind her leaving.

>> No.10382771

>>10382536
Sorry you have such bad taste

>> No.10382773

>>10382480
>wearing lolita and caring what others thinks looks cringey
oh boy

>> No.10382824

>>10382694
That’s just what I heard here in a MM thread a little bit back. If the news changed, I would be glad to hear it

>> No.10382952

I wish “make it into a rectangle skirt” would stop being everyone’s go to for when sewing lolita dresses, especially to veteran lolitas and seamstresses.

>> No.10382961

>>10382771
Sorry you like to dress like people who shit on the floor and didn’t bathe.

>> No.10382972

>>10382952

If someone needs to ask "how do I make a skirt" they're assumed to be newbies, no matter what else they type, so they get recommended rectangle skirts. It's easy, basic, and if you use a border print you get a very lolita skirt with very little effort.

I just don't understand why people bother pretending to be experts when they clearly need help and need a lot of terms explained in step-by-step detail. Experts don't need to ask how to make a skirt in the first place.

>> No.10382982

>>10382961
I forgot those were key parts of wearing inspired looks

>> No.10382995

>>10382762
You'll regret having this opinion on men later in life.

>> No.10383012

>>10382762

keep in mind this is coming from an unverified source, so I wouldn't put all my bets on it.

On the other hand, the VM designer I believe is female. And you always have IW's designer who is a freaking doll.

>> No.10383016

>>10382961

That's been all white people throughout most of history anon.

And the not bathing applies to at least half of them even today desu.

>> No.10383019

>>10383016
White-hating white person detected.
Sickening honestly since our race was the most civilized with perhaps exception to the Chinese for the longest period of time. Please don't disparage whites when other races didn't even have indoor plumbing for hundreds of years, its gross.

>> No.10383025

>>10383016
read a book

>> No.10383026

>>10380436
Y'all realize normies wear pinafores all the time too, especially during this era of fashion? Not everything that isn't fully off your body is ageplay.
>>10380728
I'd agree with this anon's description of clothes v. hobby. I mean, even with "a t-shirt and jeans" people whose hobby is fashion try to have a cohesive aesthetic and nice-looking outfits. It's silly to ascribe hobby status because of meetups or collections, since that would extend it to every single lolita, but there are plenty of people who wear lolita for the fun of the experience, not just the final look. Especially everyone with an instagram presence

>> No.10383029

>>10380889
this is Behind-The-Bows adjacent.

on that topic: I kind of miss BTB? I enjoyed the memes on there a lot, and the format felt easy-to-digest and nice to look forward to at the end of the week.

>> No.10383031

>>10383019
Unless you're Roman, you can't even say you've had plumbing for hundreds of years

>> No.10383079

>>10383019
So that's why you spread your infectious diseases everywhere.

>> No.10383085

>>10383079
LOL Chian is the origin of the current pandemic I wouldn't even talk considering the Chinese tried to cover it up and silenced doctors trying to warn the world of the impending disaster. Dumbass progressive fuck off

>> No.10383145

>>10383019
Have u ever been to a con lmao

>> No.10383531

>>10382472
>VM is doing fine now.
They aren't lol, they lost half of their staff

>> No.10391818

>>10382135
thanks for visiting, /r9k/, now go upstairs and help your mom with the dishes.

>> No.10391819

>>10382995
some of us aren't hyperstewardisized hets, Karen.

>>
Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Name
E-mail
Subject
Comment
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.
Captcha
Action