Appearance in Lolita

[Anonymous No.8500256]

How important is appearance in lolita fashion to you or the community at large? Topics:
>attractiveness of face, natural beauty - is it OK to be 'ugly' and still wear the fashion?
>makeup, hair, etc- how crucial is it to the style?
>body weight - is lolita a fashion open to all, or are there certain people that you would rather never wear it?
>other - stuff like tattoos, scars and skin conditions, gear for disability

[Anonymous No.8500268]

I'll type slowly so you can understand.
Most girls that do lolita are not conventionally attractive. They get really good at hiding their flaws.
That's a good way to describe all fashion tbh, makeup game, fantastic coords and paying attention to your posture/hygiene/flaws that you can correct makes a world of difference.
You don't have to be pretty, but you do need to be able to fake it.

[Anonymous No.8500270]

>>8500256
How about posture? That goes a long way
Tell that girl in the pic to stop slouching

[Anonymous No.8500275]

It depends on who you ask. CGL will tell you that you have to look good, be thin, no tattoos, or gtfo. Tumblr will tell you everyone is welcome.

The reality is that anyone can wear but you should learn what looks good with hour body type and face. Good makeup is important if you are ugly. Flattering clothes and a cute face are especially important if you are fat.

Why would you even want to keep looking bad if you know you look bad, why not learn makeup and improve?

[Anonymous No.8500277]

>>8500256
>those shoes

[Anonymous No.8500279]

>>8500268
the average person is not "conventionally attractive" because most people have their standards of beauty skewed by the media

[Anonymous No.8500286]

>>8500268
I appreciate the info but I was really looking for opinions to see how CGL felt. I know where I and the community(s) as a whole stand. Sorry if it came off as a summer scrub thread or something it was more of a public opinion thing.

[Anonymous No.8500289]

>>8500286
You should really know that cgl hates anyone fat, ugly, disabled and no makeup.

[Anonymous No.8500306]

>>8500286
I'm iterating public opinion. It really is a no brainer. It's a fashion, thus you need to take strides to work with what you've got. There are fat girls that pull it off, there are ways to make tattoos less visible, alternatively, I've personally seen kawaii tattoos, they're just few and far between. Sad fucks like the girl in the OP image need to work harder to make it work. For starters, stand up straight, get better shoes, get a petti.
If you want to be taken seriously, you need to conform at least a little bit to the standard that has been set before you.

[Anonymous No.8500324]

It seems like opinion here is pretty straightforward. If I could ask 4chan and tumblr together, then that would be a hot mess. But thanks anyway, that was pretty much /thread

[Anonymous No.8500332]

>>8500256
Are we seriously ignoring her expression? She looks like she was dragged along by a friend who's "into" lolita.

>tfw friend convinces you to wear a weird dress thing
>and a silly hat too
>no way I'm wearing a poofy skirt underneath this shit
>fuck you bitch I'm taking my comfy shoes with me
>gurl hold on don't take my pic- okay

[Anonymous No.8500337]

>>8500324
You also picked a really bad time to ask. The bulk of lolitas on this site stop paying attention to /cgl/ around this time. You'll likely have plenty more responses by tomorrow, regardless of what you want.

[Anonymous No.8500361]

>>8500337
Is that based on an event going on or just that's its late?

[Anonymous No.8500393]

I really wish I was one of those ugly-dolled up girls, like the ones you always see in pictures of lolitas in Japan. They're small and chubbier have round faces and squinty eyes and jacked up teeth, but they still look cute in their twintail clipon wigs. I'm kind of close but I just don't have that same vibe yet, it's probably the teeth.
My personal opinion is being attractive helps, but it's not something I care about much. I care about how the person dresses for their body type the most. Like I'm not one of those "you'd look better in classic" douches. If you want to wear sweet lolita, it should suit your body type and skin tone.
My worst pet peeve is girls who force themselves in brand. Like girl, there are other pastel pony dresses out there. And if it has to be that one, get that shit altered.

[Anonymous No.8500418]

>>8500361
It's late in America, and too early for Eurololitas.

[Anonymous No.8500426]

When attractive people wear far out fashion it can be interesting and impressive to normies. If ugly people wear far out fashion they just look like they are overcompensating or didn't know any better.

[Anonymous No.8500428]

>>8500256
Appearances are important but I'm more concerned with the clothes working with the person rather than the person being beautiful enough for my tastes.

The fact is there are many AVERAGE girls in this fashion with very little self-confidence. It gets annoying that the fashion aspect is forgotten in favor for nitpicking how ugly, pretty or exotic someone looks when it just depends on everyone's individual tastes anyway. Seagull's can't fucking stand a straitforward critique of clothes without a comment about the person's face, weight, or height which is unnecessary. The need for validation of beauty standards on here is thirsty as fuck.

[Anonymous No.8500439]

I do think that attractiveness plays a part in lolita. Girl in pic related makes some great coordinates but is always posted here because of her face. She's definitely not conventionally attractive, but she knows how to coord and has an impressive wardrobe. I think if she were better looking, /cgl/ would have no problem with her (except maybe jelly?). People like Connie Tuttle are very good looking and make good coordinates, but because they're attractive, people praise them much more. Personally, I dislike her boystyle coords, but I always see comments like "you're confusing my vagina" and "hnnng". I don't think she's as amazing as people make her (or other people like her, just using Connie as an example) out to be.

As for makeup, I think it's pretty important. Nobody looks as good without makeup as they would with it. Not trying to humblebrag or whatever, but I do think I look pretty good without makeup, but I'd never step out of the house without a bit of makeup, because what's the point in not looking your absolute best? Especially when expensive, elegant clothes are involved.

[Anonymous No.8500440]

>>8500428
It is sometimes necessary to point out those details.

[Anonymous No.8500451]

>>8500440
Necessary? Depends.
>"The girl is too overweight causing the blouse to fit incorrectly and giving the bodice of the jsk an awkward fit. A bigger size would look better."
Good.
>"She's short so perhaps a shoe with a heel would flatter her better with a tea length dress instead of wearing flats."
Good.
>"A bit of makeup particularly in/on _____ would compliment the style of the cooRd and highlight her best features."
Good.

>"Lol what a landwhale she shouldn't even bother like why live."
Shit.
>"Haha she's so tall like zero way to make cute things work for her."
Shit.
>"Omg anon is so ugly like I would cry if my nose were that big."
Shit.

[Anonymous No.8500461]

>>8500418
and shit posting Aus lolitas are still at work or centrelink

[Anonymous No.8500468]

>>8500439
>comparing that girl to Connie
It's not a fair comparison anon. That's like comparing a convention photo with flash to Chokelate's shooped studio photos.

I can tell you everything wrong with that picture and it has nothing to do with that girl's attractiveness or lack thereof:
>tights are stretched out and not flattering, dark brown is a poor secondary accent in this coord and she should have went for a beige or coffee color like on the trim of the dress
>wig is poorly styled
>facial expression as well as posture is forced and looks uncomfortable
>the bodice of the dress looks very snug and boobloafy
>the white blouse is boring and clearly adds another dimension of mismatched whites since it is true-white and not ivory
>blouse would have looked better in a chocolate ot beige tone
>the photograph itself has an unappealing composition
>the background is distracting and screams con picture

[Anonymous No.8500476]

>>8500468
I didn't say that this girl's coords are perfect, they definitely have some nitpicky things about them. My point is that Connie's aren't perfect either, but nobody notices because she's pretty. People are so quick to judge the girl above's coords because she isn't attractive - they're instantly harsher and more critical.

[Anonymous No.8500481]

>>8500476
You don't get it.

Sorry if you are the girl on that picture, but Connie is a better outfit coordinator and her posture, facial expressions, hair styling, and photo compositions are superior.

If anything should make you feel slighted it's all the dyke pandering coming from tumblrinas who cream themselves over any girl dressed in boystyle. Stop being bitter.

[Anonymous No.8500483]

>>8500256
>attractiveness of face, natural beauty - is it OK to be 'ugly' and still wear the fashion?
honestly idc much if someone's ugly and they wear it but i personally find it takes away from a good coord. you could have the best coord in the world but if you have an unfortunate face its going to take all the excitement out of the coord.
>makeup, hair, etc- how crucial is it to the style?
makeup is a must. i expect long nails and false lashes, filled brows, blush, lipstick or at least gloss depending on the coord. i dont mind natural hair in classic or some toned-down sweet coords but i think it looks bad in sweet-er coords most of th etime. gothic/sailor looks fine with natural too i think. if your hair is flat as fuck tho go for a wig.
>body weight - is lolita a fashion open to all, or are there certain people that you would rather never wear it?
there is no world where i'll ever look at a 300lbs lolita and think "yeah, that works".
>other - stuff like tattoos, scars and skin conditions, gear for disability
idc if someone needs a cane/wheelchair ect for themselves but if you have scars/conditions for fucks sakes use your makeup to cover them. i think tattoos look rly tacky/trashy for the style too.

[Anonymous No.8500491]

I appreciate it a lot if people at least put in the effort to do their hair & makeup, and wear clothes that fit. It's such a fancy style that I think it looks out of place if you are ungroomed. If you're attractive it will look better, sure, but I think anyone can wear lolita.

[Anonymous No.8500497]

>>8500481
woah okay anon, there's no need to be like that. We're kinda on the same page here, Connie's posture and expression, and photo composition are superior. I disagree that her outfits are any better, there are often a lot of flaws to them. The fact of the matter is that the reasons mentioned above - and her attractive-ness - compliments her outfits, as opposed to her outfits being better.

[Anonymous No.8500510]

>>8500497
But if you're saying that her picture and outfits are fundamentally superior then it makes no sense for you to assume she's getting likes on the basis of attractiveness. Do you seriously believe an attractive person in a poorly executed outfit, horrid photo, and awkward posture would get as many likes as opposed to them being pictured with a good outfit, excellent posture, and great photo comp?
C'mon anon, that doesn't happen.

[Anonymous No.8500519]

>>8500256
>attractiveness of face, natural beauty - is it OK to be 'ugly' and still wear the fashion?
would it be ok? yes. would it look good? not unless a lot of work is put in the makeup.
>makeup, hair, etc- how crucial is it to the style?
i'm not someone who wears make-up every day, but in lolita it seems necessary, since it's kind of a fancy fashion. a lot of the time, the face sticks out weirdly among the colorful clothes when the person isn't wearing makeup.
i don't think much hair styling or a wig are necessary if you've got good hair. with ott though, you need to have some decent volume, or the whole coord looks unbalanced, and some people can only achieve that with a wig.
>body weight - is lolita a fashion open to all, or are there certain people that you would rather never wear it?
i think some chubby lolitas are really cute. but if you're too big to achieve the lolita shape and end up looking like a ball no matter what you do, it can hardly be called lolita still.
>other - stuff like tattoos, scars and skin conditions, gear for disability
unpopular opinion here, but i don't mind tattoos or piercings as long as they don't distract too much from the coord.
now disability gear is not really something you can harp about, but i think some stuff like glasses can be chosen with lolita in mind and i wish more people would do it. of course this stuff is often costly and i can understand why some couldn't, but still.

[Anonymous No.8500521]

>>8500510
I definitely didn't go into it in my original post, but yeah, things like photo quality and posture and attractiveness will bring an average coord up. I think that if girl A has the exact same quality of coord as girl B, but girl B is better looking and takes nicer outfit shots people will like girl B's outfit more despite them being the same. Hence why people are so quick to judge girl A's coordinate and nitpick it at, as opposed to girl B. There are definitely a lot of things that play into it, but if they were both just outfit collages, they would be on the same level because nothing aesthetically pleasing is involved to form a bias.

[Anonymous No.8500534]

>>8500521
It also depends on their popularity and how long they've been around. Connie is very popular and highly recognizable. I haven't seen the girl you posted around too frequently. People have bias in ways that aren't due to aesthetics as well.

All I'm saying is that Connie isn't getting the attention she gets because she's some sort of unattainable hot mama in lolita, that's far from the case.

[Anonymous No.8500540]

>>8500521
Could you at least post one comparison collage of one of Connie's outfits compared to one of the girl's outfits you posted? Genuinely curious about this bias you're trying to prove.

[Anonymous No.8500544]

I've noticed this strange phenomena where somebody will receive flak for posting on CoF or /cgl/ because they're either, a.) ugly, b.) have an unfortunate body or simply, c.) they're shit at coordinating.
So they'll be told to change x and y; receive some abuse along the way etc.

And THEN; THEN they'll post, what we perceive, to normally be a 5/10 coord and the crowd goes fucking WILD!

Hopefully this made some sense. I'm drunk as shit and don't know what's going on anymore.

[Anonymous No.8500556]

>>8500332
no thats christine love she dressed herself like that

[Anonymous No.8500562]

>>8500544
>a nobody posts a shitty coordinate and receives flak
>when they improve it cgl lauds them
Maybe I've been here too long but that's a good thing. It means seagulls favor people who listen to them, unsurprising.

[Anonymous No.8500602]

does anybody know who this is (OP pic) cause bitch could be my doppleganger

except I would never wear those shoes

[Anonymous No.8500636]

>>8500602

>>8500556

[Anonymous No.8500709]

>>8500256
That girl would look 100x better if she stood up straight and stopped making a derpface. I wouldn't call her ugly at all (those shoes are, though).

>attractiveness of face, natural beauty - is it OK to be 'ugly' and still wear the fashion?
Eh. Obviously we can't tell ugly people to not dress the way they want to so do your thang girl, just don't expect anyone to fawn over you and learn to work your angles and makeup. There's a girl in my comm who looks like a cross between professor Umbridge and a bullfrog and there's not much she can do about it, but we're not going to kick her out for something she can't help. I just prefer to take pictures without her.
>makeup, hair, etc- how crucial is it to the style?
Very. Even just natural makeup and a simple hairstyle is absolutely necessary to look decent. If you're going to spend so much time/effort on your outfit, why ignore your face?
>body weight - is lolita a fashion open to all, or are there certain people that you would rather never wear it?
Don't force yourself into anything that doesn't fit and we cool
>other - stuff like tattoos, scars and skin conditions, gear for disability
I personally think tattoos and piercings are fugly and secretly judge girls who have them but scars/conditions/disabilities isn't something that a person chooses to have.

[Anonymous No.8501217]

>attractiveness of face, natural beauty - is it OK to be 'ugly' and still wear the fashion?
Very few girls who wear lolita are conventionally attractive, a lot of alternative fashions attract not so pretty girls from what I noticed.
>makeup, hair, etc- how crucial is it to the style?
I think it's very important
>body weight - is lolita a fashion open to all, or are there certain people that you would rather never wear it
Just wear what fits and looks good for your body type.
>other - stuff like tattoos, scars and skin conditions, gear for disability
I understand people's needs for disability gear, so it doesn't bother me. The other stuff is easy to cover up.

[Anonymous No.8501233]

>>8500256

>>attractiveness of face, natural beauty - is it OK to be 'ugly' and still wear the fashion?
Pretty girls get more of a pass but if you can see there is effort made and track improvement, that's good enough.
>>makeup, hair, etc- how crucial is it to the style?
Vital. It can make or break it. I think lolita is a package deal. Shitty hair or wig and no mskeup or jacked up makeup are really Ita to me.
>>body weight - is lolita a fashion open to all, or are there certain people that you would rather never wear it?
They can but after a certain point I think it looks bad.
>>other - stuff like tattoos, scars and skin conditions, gear for disability
Things you don't choose or truly cannot help or control should be given a pass. I personally would cover most tattoos or stand so they showed least but I'm not a tattoo person in general. I think piercings and tattoos can certainly be distracting from the overall look.

[Anonymous No.8501240]

>attractiveness of face, natural beauty - is it OK to be 'ugly' and still wear the fashion?
If you dress well and know how to mitigate the effects with makeup/good photography, I don't really see the problem.
>makeup, hair, etc- how crucial is it to the style?
Very. You don't have to go all out all the time, but you have to at least look neat and put-together. Foundation and a bit of eyeliner can go a long way.
>body weight - is lolita a fashion open to all, or are there certain people that you would rather never wear it?
Be reasonably within the measurements of the dress you're wearing or get it altered/wear another dress. You can be a lolita at any size, but not every size fits every dress.
>other - stuff like tattoos, scars and skin conditions, gear for disability
Tattoos are okay if they don't clash with the coord, otherwise pleas try to cover them up. Skin conditions and scars should be covered up within reason, if something like makeup is going to make it worse I'd rather you not hurt yourself to look pretty. Disability gear is a-okay, and you get bonus points if you deco'd them to complement what you're wearing.

Honestly I'm more concerned about whether or not someone's dressed well as opposed to how pretty they are. We're in a fashion hobby, after all.

[Anonymous No.8501249]

>>8500510
You're deluded if you think a person's lack of attractiveness doesn't make others more critical of them.

[Anonymous No.8501256]

>>8501249
Prettier people tend to have a halo effect, yes.
But I have never seen a flawless outfit get ripped apart just because someone was facially unattractive or fat.

>>8500439 is a shit example because that outfit has serious flaws and it's an ugly photo to boot. No delusions here. Stop being petty.

[Anonymous No.8501270]

>>8500483
>unfortunate
Can you not?

[Anonymous No.8501278]

>>8500439
This isn't a good coord.
People aren't criticizing it because she's ugly, they're criticizing it because it's underwhelming and a really bad attempt at the chocolate trend. That wig is hiddy too.