/cgl/ - Cosplay & EGL

I think classic can vary quite a bit from over the top historical influence to really simple plain dresses, just like you can have simple, plain coords with sweet.
Maybe you have only been seeing the simple side?

>Why does classic lolita seem to be rising in popularity lately?

That's just how trends go, and when new people get into the fashion, they see so many people wearing whatever is popular, right now classic, so that's what they gravitate to until they find what it is they like best. It was like this with sweet when I first got into lolita in 2008. Bright yellows and pinks everywhere, and my first dress was some pastel Bodyline garbage I bought at a con. I don't even like sweet, but I thought, "Hey, that's in, and I don't wanna seem like a newbie." After a year or two, I finally found my niche, and settled on classic, and classic influenced gothic.

I think it'll be a while before gothic really gets popular again; it's commonly thought that you have to have those sharp, aristocratic features to really pull it off, and I think it's not the best starting point, since the popular brands for gothic are pretty expensive, you can easily end up looking an ita Hot Topic mess if you try to go the cheap way.

If you think classic is boring, I've seen people talking about OTT classic, although I have no idea what that could entail, since classic, by definition, is generally more muted, and 'acceptable' in day-to-day normalfag eyes. I'm guessing it would be like your left photo? Bonnets, big bows, and frilly underskirts and bustles?

I think classic is the best lolita genre. It's elegant, dressing as the lolita inspiration, and normalfags accept it more since it's not 'threateningly edgy' like gothic or easily misinterpreted as ageplay like sweet.

>it just doesn't seem to fit the lolita aesthetic
How? It's basically the epitome of what every designer says lolita is. Have you read Kamikaze Girls?

I think classic girls stay classic and a lot of sweet move onto classic (or gothic) as they get older so they can wear something more 'mature' and versatile. There is a lesser focus on prints and more on overall look. I's more acceptable to wear natural hair in classic. Popular classics might have also helped in the popularity.

My opinion is that you're a noob who has no idea what they're talking about.
50s house wife? Nope.

>obvious troll is obvious
>people still getting butthurt

As the only Sweet Lolita in my comm, I'm constantly picked on for my choice of clothing and choosing to wear brand over handmade and loliable finds
I dislike classic because of this.
Every classic lolita I've met has been horrid.

Lone lolita life for me now.

Fashion expands at an exponential rate untill it is just bizarre and alien. Then once jt reaches maximum retard people begin to look back on more classix looks in order to break the mold. Right now the fashions of the 1920s are starting to catch on due to YOLO shirts and skinny jeans are too wide spread to be alternative. Mark my words, mens heels will be coming back soon

>>7411080
What style do you wear, OP? How long have you worn Lolita?
Because to me, Classical has been on the rise more and the dress details and accessories are actually better than ever. OTT Classic is also a thing with many frills and accessories, interesting shoes, fabric textures, gorgeous historical cuts, etc.

As has been mentioned, it's often the best style to use when wearing Lolita in a more toned down situation. I think dark classic coordinates are the best style next to gothic, personally.

>"sweet seems to be declining in popularity"

why are people saying this? do they conveniently forget that the last few AP and Baby releases have been sweet, or at the very least, sweet with some classic elements, and have still had major popularity? sweet is never going away. in the last few years, it's solidified as the most popular substyle, and will probably stay that way for a good, long time. if anything, sweet-classic hybrids i.e. floral prints and classic-influenced cuts are going to be popular, but why does everyone act like it's on the way out? unless you're living under a rock, it really isn't at all.

>>7411116
>...once it reaches maximum retard...

(OTT sweet)

>>7411080
>I feel that lolita is supposed to be different and intricate, however classic lolita, to me, looks like a 50's housewife on a good day.

Classic lolita is abundant with details such as pintucks, ruffles, pleating many types of lace, bustles yokes etc etc.

>other than a fluffy skirt it just doesn't seem to fit the lolita aesthetic.

Confirmed for noob.

>>7411114
sounds like a bunch of bitches.
if I had the money, and knew that I could fit in it, I would buy all the Victorian Maiden and Innocent World I could get my grubby little hands on.

>>7411132
I don't OTT sweet will ever go away but I do think oldschool sweet will regain a place. I think classic x sweet looks good. I think it's a bit of sour grapes because though many dismiss super-sweet, it's one of the most expensive to do because of new prints, shoes, wigs, accessories, etc.
I think chasing the latest sweet print as a craze will die down more but sweet will always be one of the big 3 with classic and gothic.

I think it's because lots of people grow out of sweet but there are plenty to take their place and many who stay sweet.

>>7411088
OTT maybe more like this?

OP here.
I've been in lolita for 3 years, since you were wondering.
I'm not a noob. I was asking a simple question and making a statement based on my observations.

>>7411132
>Sweet is never going away

That's like saying Gothic will never go away.

Sure, it won't go away. But it will decline in popularity and people will move on to other things, and right now that's classic.

Gothic used to be a lot bigger, and then it declined. It'll get bigger along with classic if I had to predict, and sweet will die down, and in 5 or 10 years sweet will make a comeback.

It's how fashion works, it's not some new mysterious concept. Things go in and out of fashion.

>>7411152
You can be in the fashion for 5-10 years+ and still be a noob.

>>7411157
Oh, then do please give me advice, O Wise One

>>7411152
I was curious on your point of view and which substyle you wear. I actually think it's an interesting discussion question even if the way you phrased it may have ruffled feathers, haha.

>>7411161
I float between gothic and sweet.

Yes, I do mix some classic elements into my sweet coords, however I think a full-on classic coord makes for a considerably boring look.

>>7411148
I don't think OTT sweet is ever going away, but omg, it should. It's the tackiest of all styles, I have all types of second hand feels when I meet a OTT sweet lolita.

>>7411114
Back in the big days of sweet, sweet girls in my comm used to say I was barely lolita even when wearing brand because it was 'too simple' and picked on me for my choice of clothing too.
Wear what you want to wear, people trying to be trendy in niche fashion are stupide.

>>7411169
I think they are both more intricate, glamorous and notable than toned down classic but I can also think of so many situations where I'd hesitate to wear a fully done gothic coordinate but wear the same dress toned down as classic.
If I only wore lolita for meets or special occasions, I might think classic was a bit more boring but as it is, classic styling is my key to being able to wear lolita looks in many more situations and have my style look appropriate and not so out of place or attention-grabbing.

>>7411148
That's exactly why OTT sweet looks so shit. It's the most expensive to wear but people are cheapasses and expect to be able to wear a replica, a GLW wig and half of Claire's Accessories and expect it to look good. It's the modern equivalent of wearing a black and white lacemonster or maid dress

>>7411208
Agreed! I love seeing OTT sweet in magazine stylings even though I'd never wear it but oh my lord what some people do to it once it's off the rack. The points you mentioned coupled with poor fit and a certain amount of derp attitude and it is easy to see where this particular style got it's less than stellar reputation.

Though to be fair, I've seen more than a few 'goffic lolis' add inappropriate Hot Topic stuff, junky jewelry and cheap shoes too.

I wish 50s housewife was even remotely similar to classic lolita because then I could actually use all those dresses my grams are trying to unload on me. Don't get me wrong I like 50s style too, but it just really doesn't suit me. I also don't feel comfortable selling off my grams' gifts so now they're just collecting dust in my closet.

>>7411240
Oh yeah, in time we'll get our classic itas too, just pointing out that people don't hate on sweet just because it's sweet (I rarely see old school/toned down sweet hate) but because it's got the greatest number of horribly painful gtfo my tea party itas.

Because of this I find the sweets hating on classic just because it's taking popularity pathetic. They probably look how I've described.

>>7411266
I agree. Although I think that classic itas will look more frumpy and boring like some nerd raiding her grandmother's wardrobe whereas sweet itas tend to look like a five-year-old girl's first attempt at dressing herself, so while they still look shitty at least they'll be a tiny bit less embarrassing.

>>7411088
>>7411150
OTT Classic is when it is norrmal classic with tons of accessories and layers, just like how it is at OTT sweet.

Pic related.

Speaking as a sweet-turned-classic lolita myself... there are two forces at work that I see.

1. Like the Misako thread discusses, the average age of lolitas seems to be higher today than in the past. I've been in the fashion for almost a decade. When I started out in high school, sweet suited me, but now that I'm an adult, classic suits me much better. I'm drawn to the elegance and opulence of classic, and not to the plastic jewelry and bright colors I used to like. Many of the e-famous lolitas on tumblr have also been lolitas for a long time, and have been aging out of sweet. They set the trends, meaning the trend is classic. I don't expect that to move back to sweet anytime soon.

2. Classic is generally more expensive. As we get older, we can afford much more expensive items. I couldn't have worn classic even if I wanted to when I was younger.

Considering the age-based trend and its impact on tastes, what suits lolitas, and disposable income, I think the next trend will be the incorporation of "real" designer items into coords. Mark my worlds, the older lolitas will start carrying Prada bags and accessorizing with Chanel soon.

>>7411150
Aside from the belt, I think this is perfect. I don't see this as boring or 'housewife'. I find it tasteful, dressy and elegant. Sometimes Sweet and Gothic can look a little too costume-y to me.

But there is a lot of ways of make classic coords, I agree that lots of classic looks like 50's housewifes ( I deeply hate extremely tone down coords like Fanny rose one - nothing against the girl, just don't like her style). You can find really cool coords in every style, i think that maybe it's a little too much brush aside a whole style. Pic related I love that kind of classic coords.

>>7411287
Awyiss. I'd like to see that. Though my bank account is crying right now.

>ITT: people who have no idea what the 50s looked like

>>7411287
I actually have a few designer pieces I've been working into my coords already. Bought a really nice Chanel suit secondhand once just to use the jacket in a coord (and was still fucking cheaper than a brand OP)

>>7411318
woa, you really don't think that this looks like a 50's housewife?

>>7411327
She's only wearing one or two lolita specific items there and in an non-lolita outfit. It's possible to wear brand but not have a lolita outfit, you know.

>>7411327
Also, no. High waists, full skirts and collars ≠ 1950s housewife.

>>7411320
That sounds awesome. I try to work designer shoes into my coords (I have big feet so it's practically a requirement) but would love to get my hands on something like that. Classic would look really neat with Chanel jewelry and suiting, like how it was used in The Devil Wears Prada!

>>7411327
Those stockings? No, that's not 50s housewife. It'd be bare leg or nylons with lines going up the back, because that's how old school pantyhose looked.

It's also not the look of a housewife. That's the looks of a modest, Sandra Dee type schoolgirl in the 50s.

Even the makeup is called into question if you're going to try and act like this is 50s. Despite romanticized things that we see, women typically wore red lipstick during evenings back then (like for dinner outings or dates) and pastels during the day. Eye makeup was also kept to a minimum.

The only thing we could say about this that is "50s" is how far the dress comes down and even then, plenty of dresses excluding flappers covered the knees for women until it gained popularity again in the 60s/70s.

Jesus..

>>7411327
You seem to confuse the 50s with the pre WW2 housewifes.

>>7411327
This is also most likely one of her work outfits, which she intentionally tones down.

>>7411332
but it's from her tumblr, and it's tagged as lolita. Surely I have nothing against wearing lolita items in a not lolita coord, don't get me wrong please, I respect your opinion but you have to admit that her coords are very 50ish. not OP btw.

>>7411327
>>7411318
:sigh:
And not even Rockabilly shit is accurate

>>7411357
>tagged as lolita
>implying that there aren't stupid shits who arbitrarily shit up that tag and tag veggie patties (pic related did) as lolita

Also, no, they're not 50s. At all. I don't know why this is so hard for you to see.

>>7411091

>classic girls stay classic

Yep. I don't really consider it being popular all of a sudden a thing really, I have been and will always be a classic lolita.

>>7411366
tagged as lolita by herself in her tumblr. girl, Im not saying that her coords are a cosplay from a 50's housewife, I'm saying that the inspiration is obvious and maybe one of the most boring sides of classic lolita, that it was OP concern in this thread.

>>7411381
Oh the horrors of using brand as regular clothing and then tagging it as lolita because it's from a lolita brand.

>>7411408
but it says "classic lolita". Don't get so mad, it's just a point of view and I'm trying to be the more polite about it as I can.

>>7411381
Yes, that's legit use of the tag if it has burando in the post but most people are going to object to it because tagging lolita implies a Lolita coordinate

What a terrible thread.

>>7411080
Why? Because some prefer the toned-down elegance and versatility of classic, more timeless pieces.
It's just a matter of personal taste and choice.
The fashion isn't suddenly overrun with classic to crowd out your gothic or sweet, it's just another fashionable trend.

It's going to likely increase too, in response to the 'nymphet-tyle lolita' that's a trend for spring and summer. It's also maybe a sensible response to things like that Living Doll show and people like Venus Angelic.

Who wears it?
Likely the same people who might find your intricate, glamorous coordinates flashy, gauche or too costume-like.

Btw, have you seen the floral Moitié dress for spring? The...classic...one with the overlay...?

>>7411080

I'm also a lolita who used to primarily wear sweet and has since moved to classic.

Age and experience had a lot to do with it. I would go out in my huge AP coords to meets and feel like a clown or a parade float in public. While I still really love the dresses and think some of that shit is cute as hell, I know I'll feel awkward wearing it in public. I'm much more comfortable and confident when I wear something that is elegant and tasteful. And I think people who don't understand lolita are less likely to see me coming and think age player or clown.

Also, sweet got repetitive. Once in awhile a brand would come out with something different, maybe a rare color dress, but most of the time it was the same themes and prints over and over again. How many unique bunny/toy/pony/candy coords can you do without feeling like you're just dialing it in? I feel like I have to be more creative when coming up with coords for classic. I can't just buy the matching candy socks, purse, jewelry and dress and call it a day.

Also, I had a taste for something that stood out in the beginning which is why I liked sweet better than classic. I saw classic as boring once upon a time. But then stuff like JetJ prints started turning up and I started to realize that classic is not all just browns and beiges. It can be statement pieces as well and still avoid looking like an easter parade float.

>>7411140
Don't get so defensive over someone's opinion

>>7411266
>sweets hating on classic just because it's taking popularity

Um, don't get me wrong, but that's exactly what classic lolitas did for years? And now it's "haha your style is dying!!!" I get it you ladies don't like sweet lolita, but is it really necessary to try to enforce your "superiority" that much?

>>7411091
>sweet
>easily misinterpreted as ageplay
>using Kamikaze Girls as an example

0/10

>>7411677
Old school != lollipop/horse print craze.

>>7411132
But haven't AP and Baby always been primarily sweet?? So the fact that their releases have been sweet lately isn't a big deal since that's what they've always done.....I mean the fact that some of their releases lately have classic influence only goes to show that classic is gaining popularity and they're going along with the trend while still doing what they do

>>7411152

I'd love to look like a 50s housewife any day, but the clothing in my closet doesn't really reflect that. Victorian housewife with a shorter skirt? Yeah, I'll take that for ten bucks.

>>7411683
>victorian housewife
no.

I like classic and seeing girls wearing it. But on myself? Nope. Its a different sort of feeling when Im wearing mature/sweet otome. I just feel happier and in my own skin.
Id love for more otome brands to pop up.

>>7411698

Take comfort in that I was probably as accurate as OP anyways.

>>7411680
I never said it was, dumbass.
Kamikaze Girls isn't the handbook for sweet lolita.

>>7411726
Wow, that's uncalled for. Did someone piss on your bloomers or what?

I'm saying that Kamikaze Girls basically spread the idea of lolitas being elegant and pure. (Not that I agree with that, so don't be a jerk and assume I do either.)

>>7411644
Failure to read detected. Do not pass go, do not collect $200

>>7411745
The GLB did that way before the movie already though with all their guides about lolita manners.

>>7411080
I love all lolita but I'm drifting towards classic because I am in love with the frill ruffle an details, and sweet seems to be exploding with prints, and none Of The extra detail that I grew to love 9 year ago. Like APs newest print has lace in the print...instead of using actual lace there...I adore prints like decoration dream and romantic rose letters because they have beautiful prints PLUS the lovely detailing. With a lot of classic items its a lot easier to fun the stuff with the lovely detailing. Sweet Dresses with prints only and no detailing is what's boring looking to me.

Speaking as a male, I'd prefer it if you girls wore more of this "classic" stuff, it's more attractive.

>>7411273
My comm is full of classic itas, all loliable handmades in boring patterns and colours without the lolita silhouette.
No one does their hair and the main topic of conversation is "lol brand how lame lolol it's dumb that you buy it"

>>7411908
Because we dress for male attention.

10/10

I wonder if this has anything to do with economics or how the world is going.

Like hipster fashion rose because of a bad economy and having your hair "ombre" was a fancifying name for not being able to redye your roots for a long time.

Or like how music pre-9/11 was more upbeat than post-9/11 for years until it changed to less emotionally-tied to the listener stuff owning the radio like music about getting drunk going to parties and whatever. Like it was to block something out with the loud thumping.

I wish I could find the article about it, but fashion trends DO change depending on factors like economics, what's on the news and social pressures.

I imagine the lolita in 2014 is worried about losing her true lolita heritage. (ie pastel wigs, age play debate etc) So she's going back to her roots which comfort herself in this fashion.

>>7412061

>>7411088
I think gothic also looks good on girls at the opposite end of the spectrum.
Nothing like the look of a spooky doll who's going to slip poison into your tea any minute

>>7412073
Yes!

I jumped on the classic lolita train, but only because I graduated college in 2012 and now have an office job so I'm trying to settle on "work appropriate" lolita. Maybe others are doing the same, IDK.

I still love sweet though, but I just find as I grow up, my tastes mature. Apparently that's how it is in Japan, too. I have a friend who lives in Japan and said that it's very common for Japanese lolitas to "graduate" from sweet & gothic to classic as they get older.

>>7411680
old school looks more like what ageplayer would wear, giant bonnets, knee socks, extra long bloomers, and plain pastel dresses with details. Little girls maybe attracted to lollipops and carousels but you don't seem them wearing it out in the street, the sunday dress is generally in light pastels colors....like old school sweet dresses.
I'm not hating because I wear both but to say oldschool isn't ageplayish, is bullshit.

>>7411483
Is English not your first language? Because none of what you just wrote makes sense.

>>7412224
Not the person you responded to, but how does that comment not make sense? Did you reply to the wrong comment?

>>7411908
Ok, I can see having an opinion on this, haha but you are brave to post it here.

I don't dress <for> my boyfriend but I do take his opinion very much into consideration just as he does mine in his dress. He likes for me to buy what pleases me but he much prefers Gothic and Classical. Elegant ruffles.

So, Mr. Male, I'm curious.
If you like Classical I wonder, what is the weirdest, oddest or scariest Lolita thing you've seen that you do NOT like? Hopefully with photo.

>>7411905
That sounds tacky and frumpy. When I think classic, I think solid color lolita dresses, hime style dresses and JetJ.

I'm sure too much 'loliable classic' could turn 'thrift-store crazy cat auntie' really fast.

>>7411745
>Kamikaze Girls basically spread the idea of lolitas being elegant and pure
Wow, did we even watch the same movie? Momoko was a selfish self-centered manipulative bitch. Nothing elegant or pure about that

>>7411080
Isn't "classic lolita" basically original lolita? Or, at least, lolita that's more heavily inspired by the original time period it's based off of?
And how the hell do any of those outfits look like a 50's housewife? The only thing that looks like anything someone ever wore on a day-to-day basis is the middle one, and that one looks Edwardian.

>>7411856
Umm... Strawberry millefuille had lace in the print, and it was released in like 2007. It's not a new lazy thing the sweet brands are doing because they couldn't come up with anything else, it just has a different look to it.

>>7412428
Edwardian with a flared, petticoat skirt.

>>7412043
>>7411908
I kind of like to get male's opinion on this, not because I want to look good for them but I'm curious what the other gender thinks of it from another point of view it's very interesting.

>>7411708
What you're probably thinking of is more upper-class, maybe even borderline aristocracy, Victorian and Edwardian outfits.

>>7411266
Classic itas already exist, imo. When you see 'babby's first classic coord' that's just white blouse+ basic floral skirt+ solid tights and boring oxfords or flats, maybe a simple necklace, and hair tossed in a ponytail.

I see that all too often and have for years, it's a pretty common sort of noob/borderline ita. I feel that it's harder to be eyesearingly ita in classic, but instead you get the 'deathly boring' itas instead.

>>7412470
...which is exactly what >>7411905 and >>7411273 described but I failed to read ahead, haha.

>>7411287
This is already happening, just look at the popularity of shoes from brands like Fluevog and Westwood right now, though Westwood items have always been popular in lolita. But I feel like the frequency of their use in the west is growing only now. I agree bags and jewelry, maybe hats and such will come next- I know if I could afford the D&G baroque-trend jewelry, I'd be coording with it.

>>7411821
But Kamikaze Girls made it widespread. It's like popular culture from movies.

>>7412395
It's what she said and her philosophy, of course she was a bitch. Maybe I'm getting it more from the book.

>>7412499
I think Louboutin simple 85's in black would look better with JetJ than their brand shoes do. Fortunately I get to test this theory for holiday at the end of this year.

>>7412470
I feel like I am one of these boring classic itas, just with JSKs instead if skirts. I've always been a bit of a fashion dunce so I'm trying to improve. What exactly makes a classic coord less boring?

>>7412660
accessories and, in my personal opinion, using colors that play off each other well, instead of just sticking to the palette of the actual dress.

>>7412662
This. Also mixing in interesting textures, ie a chiffon blouse with lace tights under a velvet or corduroy solid dress can make even a 2-color, solid dress coord interesting to look at. Texture is more important in gothic I think where you have a lot of kuro/samey color coords, but it helps in classic too.

>>7412529
What about that part in the book where she gets all hot and bothered by Baby?

>>7412668
ooh yes texture!

>>7412651
Their brand shoes are basically pumps as well, with tulle on the back. Also those ugly boots.

>>7412685
Yeah but I'm 170cm with size 26 feet so even if I wanted them, no can do. They also look to be 120mm. I like heels but not that high.
I'm not keen on the boots.

>>7412428
>Isn't "classic lolita" basically original lolita?
No.

>Or, at least, lolita that's more heavily inspired by the original time period it's based off of?

Lolita isn't "based off" any time period, it has a number of influences.

>>7411152
op:
I suggest that since this is an image board you post pictures of classic that you think is boring and housewifeish as well as what you would prefer to see.
Without these images what you are saying feels a bit trollish but with them there could be a lot of room for people to understand your point of view and agree/disagree with evidence.

Also, sweet is far from dying. Someone starts screaming that the sky is falling every time AP releases something brown. Sweet is still the most desired and popular style. AP still sells out very quickly and sells insanely high second hand. Just because classic is also coming up in popularity does not mean that sweet is dead.
Gothic probably won't reign supreme for a good long while. Why? Because non loli goth is at a low. Because loli goth was ruled by Mana fans and fewer people care about him or his brand at the moment. Goth needs the music and lifestyle influences to swing back before the style will be big again.

>>7412804
sauce for dress?
that boob gaping though

>>7412814
Juliette et Justine. Petale de rose et ruban + Caraco de rose et ruban.

>>7411905
Non-printed dress have to be higher quality than printed dress, because it's the actual focus of the dress. Nothing can drive you eyes away from the dress's quality fabric or design, so it NEED to be flawless. It goes this way for all three styles, but even more for classic since dresses tend to be plain. High quality fabric and lace is the key for a good classic outfit. Classic brand knows that and put a lot of effort for their design to be perfect, and as it's much more tailored than printed dress, they often don't offer bigger size because it would totally alter design's integrity, thus the entire point of the dress.
I've just recieved my first Mary Magdalene item, a skirt. It run super small, but it's really greatly tailored, and honestly altering it would totally kill the design.

You don't have to buy brand to be a good classic lolita, but fabric quality and good design is actually way more important in plainer, simpler styles, so good offbrand or handmade is a must.

>>7412428
Hum, as classic wasn't much vivid, it stayed more old school yes, but the original lolita is between classic and sweet, something like country, plus the gothic dash on it that became gothic lolita. But it's true that natural-kei looks like classic/old school seweet country.

>>7412660
Basically texture and accessories, as other anon said. The focus point of your outfit don't have to be your dress. You can build an outfit from your bonnet, or shoes etc. If you have an unique, handmade or sought-after item, valorize it. Also texture. Velvet in winter, chiffon in summer, be elegant, princessy or lady-like.

Honestly I feel classic lolita is becoming the new sweet since there's a lot of prints out for it.
If you haven't noticed every time this conversation of classic vs sweet goes on, there is always associating sweet with just prints and classic with plain cuts.

But whenever I see someone wearing classic it's always a painting dress as of late. Which I feel is starting to get way overdone. The only difference with classic is that people are noticing the plain clothes (referring to non prints) and buying them. While in sweet they just complain about how there's nothing besides prints ever.

In the end, I don't think it's people are just changing into classic. But classic lolita is making itself more friendly for other people to get that's all. So you start to see a surge of it.

I feel this topic always gets brought out during the fall/winter season.

S/S = sweet is back on the rise, guys!
A/W = classic is definitely the new thing, guys!

>>7412903

Yes, this. As a long-time classic lolita, I keep hearing sweet shitting on 'plain dresses' and classic spatting on 'bad quality prints'.

I own old school sweet pieces that are super high quality and I've seen a few bad quality classic prints. Prints and non-printed dresses aren't the same thing, as >>7412895 said.

Classic is having is OTT period right now, it will last a few years as for sweet (let's say 4 years), then it'll be gothic turn.
People start to plunge into the classic bandwagon because it now have this very collector feel you can find in sweet prints. I'm not an huge fan of that, nor do I like prints, and painting dresses are really overdone, I'd like to see someting else by now. As a very traditionnal classic lolita, I have trouble considering newer dresses as classic. Like, your pic is classic (I wouldn't wear it thought), but pic related isn't really classic for me, yet most people sees it as classic. I think sweet have been so OTT and pastel these days that people tend to forget that 'sweet' is a wider range of things and tend to label classic eveything that isn't AP's pastel sweet, like old school, gingham and such.

>>7412234
Same guy you replied to.

>I don't dress <for> my boyfriend but I do take his opinion very much into consideration just as he does mine in his dress. He likes for me to buy what pleases me but he much prefers Gothic and Classical. Elegant ruffles.

This is what I prefer too. Two reasons, the first is quite shallow and I just find it cuter and more attractive on a lewd level I suppose. Second is because it's more aesthetically pleasing, all the ruffles and stuff like that are quite, well, elegant.

>If you like Classical I wonder, what is the weirdest, oddest or scariest Lolita thing you've seen that you do NOT like? Hopefully with photo.

I'm not sure how I answer this without sounding like a dick. There are some really, really obese girls who I think would benefit from getting /fit/ and don't really suit the whole "dainty" look of it I suppose. I also think white and asian girls tend to look better than black and brown girls, but there are always exceptions.

>>7412921
I feel the same way you do on pretty much all of that. My friends actually tease me about how my concept of classic is so different from theirs. Like you I don't consider most stuff Baby/AatP comes up with to be classic at all, yet think a lot of what people tag gothic is really just classic in black. I like sweet, especially oldschool, but I don't like how its popularity seems to have warped how the other styles are perceived.

>>7412980
I never know how to tag my A/P and baby coords... they don't look classic to me, but they don't really look sweet either... what do you see them as?

>>7412980
>>7413033
I often tag my outfits according to brands. Like, I have this nice outfit which is somewhere between classic and really plain gothic. Main brands are classic, I tag it classic.

Some people tag my old school sweet coords as classic or gothic when reblogging, and I'm always a little bit puzzled by it. It's Baby, sure blackXwhite but the cut is definitly old school sweet and I have an huge bow on the head. How is this classic or even gothic ?

>>7412968
I more meant which style in the fashion puts you off, what kind of Lolita clothes are just a big nope.

I don't mind men putting forth their opinion on Lolita fashion, no one said we dress for you so that comment being always harped on is silly.
Men often have a different perspective.

>>7413033
I think it would depend how you style them. I think a lot of items from both could go either way. I think that's a real plus.

>>7413257
The reason these comments get shut down is because they are unsolicited, irrelevant and intrusive. It would be like a woman going into some random /v/ thread and posting
>"Um you do know that women are totally not attracted to guys who play video games, right? Like at least play something manly like Call of Duty."
It does not add anything to the discussion because nobody plays video games for that reason and it's also downright stupid and quite egocentric to A) pretend to speak for an entire sex and B) assume your opinion as a man/woman is so damn important that it's going to change the way people enjoy their hobbies.

Now of course the anon in this thread wasn't quite that dickish and probably didn't mean it that way, but it's still coming from the same place. Add to this that it's annoyingly common for men to butt into discussions on female-dominated pastimes to tell us exactly what we need to do to be attractive to him (see also every few makeup threads, fortunately it's in decline) and I hope you'll see why people tend to be a bit snappy in response to this sort of thing.

>>7413257
>I more meant which style in the fashion puts you off, what kind of Lolita clothes are just a big nope.

In that case, sweet I guess? Not necessarily because of all the bad rep it has by association, but because I find it too over the top. On that note, that whole "mori" thing can be cute but I'm sure I've seen hipster girls dressed similarly before it became a "thing".

To follow on from above, brand is kind of overpriced from my perspective. I like fashion in general but I don't really see much difference in the quality of textiles/workmanship.

>>7413294
>"Um you do know that women are totally not attracted to guys who play video games, right? Like at least play something manly like Call of Duty."

Sounds like a decent troll.

>>7413317
On /v/ it would be. On /cgl/ I'd also like to call troll on such comments but I've heard them too often from people in real life ("Hey hey Anon why are you dressed like that, you don't look good okay why don't you just wear skinny jeans those are hot" says dude in my class in response to simple but lace-covered sundress) to safely assume it's not someone's actual opinion.

Maybe lolita is about going all out for you, but it doesn't have to be for everyone.
I like the plainer outfits, and it's not because I'm afraid to be stared at or anything like that. I still get stared at.
I just don't like the sweet aesthetic. I don't feel cute, I feel elegant. I don't feel youthful, I feel mature.
If classic keeps getting more popular, prices on sweet items should fall, so why complain?

>>7413349
Right, I understand. I'm not here to stoke your ire though. There are certain things I find cute/attractive about lolita stuff and I'm giving my input in regards to that.

Skinny jeans can be hot to be fair. I find the whole tussled-hair hipster look to be rather cute in general however.

>>7413361
Look, no one asked for your input.
It's like, I don't know, people discussing different editions on /tg/ and some random girl coming in and saying that she's never fuck a guy who played board games, except maybe pathfinder because she had an ex who did that and he was kinda hot but really you should try playing an instrument, guitar players are seexy~ and who cares about rules and stuff reading is boring so stop hitting on me!
Are you annoyed yet?

>>7413355
I agree with this strongly. Classic to me is about simplicity and sophistication. I hate seeing OTT because its a turn off for me...

>>7411116
I pray for the day men's heels come back, anon. I'll hold you to your word.

>>7412061
>having your hair "ombre" was a fancifying name for not being able to redye your roots for a long time
YES. FINALLY, SOMEONE SHARES MY OPINION. It looks fucking retarded.

>>7413397
With height being a big issue for guys since women got the right to choose their mate, I don't think it'll happen. If someone found a way to make anything taller than a cuban heel not gay, they would have already.
My guess? The proliferation of lifting insoles and a move to higher cut shoes to the younger male demographic. At this time, the only popular high cuts for guys are basketball shoes, and fuck if you're putting a lift in one of them.
Boots shouldn't be an exclusive manual labourer/gays/cowboys/metro thing. Only when Johnny DeGuido and Tyrone Jefferson starts wearing them can they be accepted.

>>7413379
>Are you annoyed yet?

No, your annoyance is silly though. Men should have at least some small say.

>>7413469
Yeah, the ones in the fashion. Unlike most popular fashion, appeal to the opposite gender is ignored.

>>7413472
>Unlike most popular fashion, appeal to the opposite gender is ignored.

Is that necessarily true of most popular fashion? I don't think Japanese fashion emphasizes really outrageous "sexyness" for example, which is why more understated feminine attire like lolita seems to be an active subculture there. There's still male appeal at work though, just like there's female attitudes towards male attractiveness at work in the officiality of a business suit.

We're both attracted to each other, trying to eschew the influences this has, or pretend they're entirely bad is stupid. I will agree raunchy shit is just off putting though.

>>7413469
They can, but they'll get shit about it even if just stating their preferences. He didn't say he thought anyone should dress to his preferences, he just stated them.

>>7413474
Such is life in lolita threads.

>>7413473
>I don't think Japanese fashion emphasizes really outrageous "sexyness" for example
I think that's broadstroking. I'm pretty sure if you look at the percentages, there are more japanese girls in fashion styles that emphasize open sexiness than in styles like lolita or mori.
>There's still male appeal at work though,
It's not the same "male appeal" that's in popular fashion. A guy can't point out a girl in lolita to his friend and say "That's hot". Also, no lolita designer has "sexiness" in mind when designing, unlike a TNA or Gucci designer. If they do, it isn't conventional sexiness.

>>7413491
>I think that's broadstroking. I'm pretty sure if you look at the percentages, there are more japanese girls in fashion styles that emphasize open sexiness than in styles like lolita or mori.

I go to the Far East pretty often and in my experience it's cuteness that is emphasized above sexyness. A good example of this is how showing off your cleavage is viewed as a big faux pas in Japan.

>A guy can't point out a girl in lolita to his friend and say "That's hot".

I can. Not hot, but certainly cute.

>Also, no lolita designer has "sexiness" in mind when designing

Mr. Yan would beg to differ.

>>7411281
isnt your pic sweet though?

>>7413498
>it's cuteness that is emphasized above sexyness
What I should have said then was conventional attraction/appeal to men. Cuteness is the norm, but the overall lean is still toward the gyaru than the lolita. At least in what is attractive to guys.

>I can. Not hot, but certainly cute.
I got some bad news. You have a minority view. Sure, Model-san in full IW spaghettis my pockets, but fuck if I'm telling that to any of my friends. Moot point, though. No one is catering to us. And I don't think they're doing the lolita fashion any good by even considering what a guy finds attractive by today's standards.

>Mr. Yan would beg to differ.
I don't think Mr. Yan has designed anything since they stopped making dildos and blow up dolls. Well, maybe the ads.

>>7413517
>What I should have said then was conventional attraction/appeal to men. Cuteness is the norm, but the overall lean is still toward the gyaru than the lolita. At least in what is attractive to guys.

It's hard to explain to a girl since I'm not entirely sure you have a clean fit equivalent but
as men, we have what we find attractive on a raw, animalistic, very sexual level (i.e. overtly slutty gyaru stuff) and what we find lastingly attractive (more reserved lolita/mori stuff). At least, that's how myself and my friends (no neckbeards, all fairly normalfag-ish) see it.

>>7411327
I don't understand why people are saying that this outfit isn't lolita? Someone give me a definition of lolita that would exclude this sort of style.

I get the impression its down to personal preference, like how some people say that old school isn't lolita or is Ita.

>>7413561
>It's hard to explain to a girl
Don't worry about that guy, I'm a straight aspiring brolita. And I get it, but I just don't think lolita designers even consider any form of attractiveness wrt guys today. Not only that, I also think that they know there is a crowd who are more into that reserved look that they don't have to try and appease them. I think it's akin to the "dual fanbase" type of thing, where the secondary demo just pops up on it's own, and is very loyal and less finicky than the primary demo. As you said, cuteness over hotness over there, so they really don't have to worry about it at all if they believe that the men who are attracted to this sort of fashion should have any say in it. What I think I should be saying is that it isn't that they should consider what men think, but more that they don't have to.

>inb4CLAMP production references

>>7413561
>It's hard to explain to a girl
Don't worry about that, guy, I'm a straight aspiring brolita. And I get it, but I just don't think lolita designers even consider any form of attractiveness wrt guys today. Not only that, I also think that they know there is a crowd who are more into that reserved look that they don't have to try and appease them. I think it's akin to the "dual fanbase" type of thing, where the secondary demo just pops up on it's own, and is very loyal and less finicky than the primary demo. As you said, cuteness over hotness over there, so they really don't have to worry about it at all if they believe that the men who are attracted to this sort of fashion should have any say in it. What I think I should be saying is that it isn't that they should consider what men think, but more that they don't have to.

>inb4CLAMP production references

>>7411150
>you will never inherit Fanny's wardrobe

>>7413572

This probably sounds stupid, but to me that outfit 'feels' somewhere in between Lolita and Otome.

>>7412061

>>7413473
>>7413561
>>7413619
I like how he went silent after finding out he was trying to mansplain to a guy.

>We're both attracted to each other
Someone sure doesn't realize how many lesbians there are in this community...

>>7413469
>Men should have at least some small say.
Why?

>>7414242
I was the guy he was talking to. He was talking to some other anon at first. I just forgot to say /dif. I think what he meant by
>Men should have at least some small say.
was that what guys think has had to have some influence in the style.

>Someone sure doesn't realize how many lesbians there are in this community...
It surprised the fuck out of me when I found out. Then I realized stuff like this (subcultures and shit with a young demo) has got to have a disproportionate amount of non-heteronormative(fuck me for using that term) members. Sometimes I feel like Otacon seeing it, but like in a blushing sort of way.

>This is like one of my Chinese cartoons based on all girl academies.

>>7413561
>gyaru is more attractive to men
Uhm, many gyaru in Japan actually talk about how non-appealing their style is to men, and with the exception of agejo (a style that began with a professional interest in the matter), they accept that and don't really care.
In a recent piece which asked girls what gyaru meant to them, many of them mentioned not paying attention to male interest as well.

I guess most people into alternative fashions agree that the idea is that if a potential partner can't respect your style and you self-expression, this partner is just not worth it.

So, I don't know, rather than butting in and demanding to have a say on it, you should just look for a girl who enjoys dressing in a way you like rather than trying to change a girl who doesn't.

>>7414309
I think the way he said it was in comparison to lolita. Willing to bet my left nut guys are more attracted to gyaru than lolita.

>>7414325
The casual styles, maybe. But the outfits that scream gyaru don't seem too much more appealing than the ones which scream lolita.

>>7414345
Strangely, I can get into this. I can see the veins. Just gotta ask how well would you say her top is fitting her?

>>7414354
I hadn't even noticed the veins before and the fact that you pointed them out already proves me wrong.
Otherwise, the tight fit is certainly intentional.

>>7414309
>rather than trying to change a girl who doesn't
Thank you!
The majority of us are already in relationships, are lesbian, and/or don't give a flying rats ass what men think.
It's safe to say that from all the stares, comments, and insults we get, that we KNOW we're weird. We get it! We make your dick soft! Get over it and fuck some normalfag girl instead! I'm sure she'd be delighted to be with you!

If a lolita was going around whining
>tfw no bf
>how do I into bf
The obvious answer that she should dress like a normalfag for a bit or at least tone it down. If we asked, "Why don't men like lolita????" then it'd be perfectly warranted for men to explain why. But guess what! That's not the topic of this thread!
The topic is: "Why is classic becoming more preferred among lolitas?" and "Is classic even lolita?"
The closest you can get is: "maybe they're trying to appeal to men" BUT: you're in the position of guessing what HER opinion is! Your opinion is not relevant!

I don't know how the girl who asked the guy to extrapolate could be such a massive newfag that she's never encountered men butting in with their opinion- here and in real life.

10/10 jimmies in orbit
Sick and tired of guys trying to force me to be his ideal woman as if it's a sought-after honor to touch his hairy dick.
I am not interested in these men. Their self-entitlement is vile. I'm not even single! I've been in a relarionship for three years! Let me be frilly in peace. It's not like normalfag girls are going extinct.

>>7414354
I think the veins are from having pale skin. I'm pretty pale and my veins show through the skin on my boobs too.

>>7414575
This plus my arms and thighs, ugh...pale skin curse, that translucent skin!
Just another reason I like being covered up in Lolita.

>>7413561
>I'm not entirely sure you have a clean fit equivalent...
Sure we do, at least some of us. We like pretty boys or bad boys for fun and nice men for real. They often dress very differently as well.

Fortunately I don't get my twat in a twist when a male comments his opinions (invited or no) on a fashion topic.

I'm just here to say that

Classic is the closest to the lolita aesthetic.

Being able to pull elements from throughout history gives classic lolita endless possibilities.

Classic is the most mature, and dignified sub genre.

A good classic coord can be appreciated by lolitas and normals alike.

Classic is best lolita.

>>7412921
>>7412903
>>7412804
>>7411300
>>7411281
>tfw you regard most of the "classic" coords postet ITT as Sweet lolita.

Fuck I feel old. I still remember what Classic Lolita looked like around 10 years ago when I first discovered the fashion and it has changed a lot since. Classic used to be plain and boring compared to today's standards. What made classic more popular and interesting to a wider audience are the sweet and colorful elements and the numerous amount of original prints you'll find there today. It became more of a collector's thing as well. The prints are really a key factor to this.

>>7411080
>classic

>>7414378
You. I like you.

>>7415005
I think the earliest classic street snaps I've seen were heavily inspired by bisque dolls. Big florals (aka grandma couch fabric), wide lace, big fluffy ringlets, overall creepy antique doll look. As far as I can tell the earliest incidences of wigs in lolita were in classic (and classic-y gothic) styled coords. They looked at least as crazy as the sweet girls. Maybe I just didn't pay much attention to the more toned-down ones, though.
When I get home I'll see if I can dig up a picture of what I mean.

>>7413619
I don't know what a brolita is, but you're spot on.

>>7414242
>I like how he went silent after finding out he was trying to mansplain to a guy.

Nah, I just had things to do then went to bed.

>mansplain

You're not seriously using this word here are you?

>>7414274
>was that what guys think has had to have some influence in the style.

That's it.

>It surprised the fuck out of me when I found out.

I'd be surprised if there were that many lesbians.

>>7414309
>>7414345
That girl just isn't very attractive in general anon, and by gyaru I'm going by what I've seen on JAV - Bleached hair, kind of slutty attitude, it can be hot. There's one particular JAV where I think the girl is giving a handjob while texting on her (naturally overdecorated) fliphone. Hot as fuck.

>>7414378
Why are you so angry?

Lolita can be attractive to men, we've already established this...

>Sick and tired of guys trying to force me to be his ideal woman as if it's a sought-after honor to touch his hairy dick.

This is really over the top anon.

>>7414608
Can't a man be both somewhat impulsive and dangerous and nice? I think that balance is what a good relationship is all about. Most men know when to be a bit dominant and tease, and when to be genuinely empathic.

>>7414756
Stunning pic, whoever she is. This is what I mean by "classic".

>>7415255
>Lolita can be attractive to men
You're not getting it, are you?
WHO CARES
We DON'T CARE if we're repulsive to a guy or if we're their wet dream. Men's opinion- whichever way it leans- DOESN'T MATTER AND IS NOT ON TOPIC
We've heard it before. It isn't special or new. We don't need your approval.
Those who selfpost here come for the approval of other LOLITAS. We discuss what a good coord is with other LOLITAS. We trash on bad coords with other LOLITAS.
The fashion sense of men is not applicable here. If you want to say, "Wearing patterned tights with that dress looks too busy." then you're welcome here.
If you want to say, "AS A MAN, I find this coord attractive/unattractive!" then get out. Leave sexuality out of this. We want to know if the colors match, not if we're making guys sneer or leer.
Have you even seen the fashion sense of men? Haven't you seen men complain that they prefer natural women while posting a girl with natural-styled makeup? Are we supposed to trust that they know what looks good?
There are men with fashion sense, yes. They can critique the clothing just like everyone else, specifying that works and what doesn't. Pointing out their gender implies that their opinion is supposed to hold more value. How full of themselves.

I'm angry because men keep coming up to me, online and in real life, and try to tell me that "They know best." They critique- positively or negatively- in terms of whether or not what I'm wearing is appealing to men. It is uncalled for and inappropriate.
There are women who dress for men, but that doesn't mean you should give her unwarranted advice. It's insulting to assume EVERY WOMAN is just trying to appeal to YOU. If they ask, go ahead and give advice. Don't assume everyone wants it. Do you know how many people have told me, "You'll never find a man wearing that."? Too many! They don't know me and they don't know what I want. If they did, they'd know that I'm taken!

It's NOT okay to talk like this.

>>7415297
>I'm angry because men keep coming up to me, online and in real life, and try to tell me that "They know best." They critique- positively or negatively- in terms of whether or not what I'm wearing is appealing to men. It is uncalled for and inappropriate.

I'm not one of those men. Stop projecting this shit onto me.

> It's insulting to assume EVERY WOMAN is just trying to appeal to YOU

I never believed that, I'm not attractive enough to be the object of women's desire in a really visually conceptualized way like that. Most people in general aren't that arrogant.

>>7415303
If you get it, Then why are you making off topic comments in this thread?

>>7415297
Wow, you sound so angry anon, seriously. I mean, sure is opinion don't matter, but it isn't worth any of that either. He was intelligent enought to formulate is own idea in a pretty clever way. He as the right t think something is cute/pretty/attractive, being a man doesn't lessen his right to do so. You're the one shitting up the thread here.

>in be4 shut up man
Nope, I'm a lolita and I consider myself as a feminist, but being a raging cunt doesn't help at all.

>>7414575
>>7414590
...I'm actually attracted to that. But I'm not white, so I guess it's maybe an 'exotic' type look to me.

>>7415255
A brolita is a guy who dresses in Lolita fashion. And yes, there are more gyaru in AV. All the "lolita" ones have costume tier outfits, so it really doesn't make me feel guilty for watching them. I swear they all order from milanoo, and would be torn down in rate my coord threads.

>>7415297
>I'm angry because men keep coming up to me, online and in real life, and try to tell me that "They know best."
Who the fuck does that shit? What do they say to you when you're in lolita? Do you give them the sassy independent black woman stare?

OT
As a beginner I'm kind of confused as to what I'm supposed to say what style I like is. I into coords like >>7411300(blue), so what should I call it? If I call it sweet, but someone corrects me and says classic do I just keep quiet? Or should I call it classic just to be safe?

>>7415462
Thanks bro.

>>7415463
>A brolita is a guy who dresses in Lolita fashion. And yes, there are more gyaru in AV. All the "lolita" ones have costume tier outfits, so it really doesn't make me feel guilty for watching them. I swear they all order from milanoo, and would be torn down in rate my coord threads.

Yeah, there's a ton of gyaru in AV apparently. That's what I meant about it having more of a raw, sexual appeal. It must do on some level or else it wouldn't sell!

>>7415255
>Can't a man be both somewhat impulsive and dangerous and nice?

Of course, just like a woman can at times be "overtly slutty (and wear) gyaru stuff" and then at other times be "more reserved (and wear) lolita/mori stuff"
(To use your own words)

I was wondering if you caught that I simplified the categories much as you did and it's not quite accurate is it? It was posted with no small irony since you pigeonholed your likes so separately...yet very interesting women are multifaceted as well and easily include the juxtaposition of both ends of your attraction spectrum to a greater or lesser extent.

You were quick to categories women 'either/or' there but a smart woman who is in tough with her own emotions knows when to be a bit wild and passionate, then sometimes can naturally be suddenly shy, a demure coquette or equally empathetic, don't you think?
The best ones act according to their whims and moods and not as a contrived or artful thing. (though that's an interesting topic unto itself, perhaps)

I'm not trying to pick a fight but let's keep things a bit more level and less simplistic, maybe.

>>7415573
>Of course, just like a woman can at times be "overtly slutty (and wear) gyaru stuff" and then at other times be "more reserved (and wear) lolita/mori stuff"

I wouldn't cut against this assertion since that's generally the kind of woman I like and have dated.

>You were quick to categories women 'either/or'

If I gave this impression, it wasn't my intent. The sort of duality described above is appealing and I know it exists first-hand.

How has janitor not cleaned up all the male shitposting in this thread yet?

>>7415005
Second to last definitely is sweet and first and last arguably could be, but the rest are certainly NOT sweet.

Why is a male even here? I highly doubt he's into lolita, thus the opinion is not warranted

>>7417053
>>7420931
Why are you so mad?

I just like lurking.

>>7421343

Your posts were kind of off topic but I sort of enjoyed your POV, but dude, that's not lurking.

Plz lurk moar. Literally.

>>7421346
99 percent of the time i lurk.

>>7421343
Well, lurking is different from putting forth personal opinions in ways that are pretty much guaranteed to stir up trouble. If your real reason for posting was just to share your point of view, it would have been stated using better terms.

You don't seem to be very knowledgable about Lolita fashion so your personal opinions on the topic aren't really valuable or useful to anyone here since we don't really care how males in general perceive our style.

>>7421369
>You don't seem to be very knowledgable about Lolita fashion so your personal opinions on the topic aren't really valuable or useful to anyone here since we don't really care how males in general perceive our style.

And that's where I disagree.

>>7421372
Lol, about which point?
- You haven't displayed any relevant knowledge about the fashion other than to tell what you like-dislike,
- Many people have told you they don't care what your personal opinion is and
- Do not care a fig for your male POV and input on the fashion.

So...your relevance to the thread is where, exactly? Help me out here.

>>7422041
Because I'm a male and all male opinion is dominant over female. Especially in cosplay because, guess what? Most game developers are male.

>>7424758
Guy, you're on the wrong tab. This is the /cgl/ thread, not the /v/ one.

>>7413361
>>7413469
>>7415255
>>7421343
>>7421355
>>7421372
>>7424758
janitor pls.

The thread is supposed to be a community relevant discussion on the rising popularity of classic. If you're not part of the community (i.e. wear lolita) or posting in regards to the community (brands increasing dress length) it is offtopic shitposting. Nobody cares if you're male or if you find it sexy. Go back to /r9k/ here we talk about buying and selling and wearing frillies.

>>7424758
Bahaha, Lolita isn't cosplay, fool. GTFO.
Go beeZ dominant over there------------>/v/

>>7424805
>>7424783
It is cosplay. Lolita is just a costume. No one wears that shit everyday.
I feel you submissive sides emerging.

>>7425108
By your logic, a tuxedo is a costume, too.
Guess what! It isn't!
It's fancy dress; fancy, but still a way of dressing, and definitely NOT a costume.

>>7424758
>>7425108
I don't think it's the same guy now. This is regular tier trolling.

Anyway, what was this thread about?

>>7424758
Oh, sorry, are YOU a game developer? Are you anybody important?

We'll THINK about listening to you when you are.

>>7425118
OOOo, sick burn.
Nasty age play slut.

Is it possible to have a 100+ reply thread on cgl without people responding to obvious trolls? No? Ok.

>>7424758

>>7425435
>nasty age play slut
>dat bait
>even if it were true, shaming someones kinks, really?
0/10

>>7425437

This. Even if they were semi serious like the random dude who came in, did it warrant butthurt "I HATE IT WHEN MEN OBJECTIFY MEEEEEE!!1111" replies? Dude seems pretty set in his ways. No anonymous raging butthurt is going to change his opinion. Yeah, it was annoying he posted to a thread about sweet vs. classic lolita, but man, the replies doomed the thread to derailment.

>classic becomes popular
>everyone sells off their sweet
>scoop that shit up for cheap while bitches buy ugly painting dresses

In all fairness, I don't really have a problem with classic. I just hate painting dresses.

>>7425437
Unfortunately not.

>>7424758
I hope we all get killed by a giant planet or something. Mankind has been rotten to the core and here's living proof.