Fuck the rules

File: BWYCDmxgbNs.jpg (443KB, 995x1073px) Image search: [Google]

443KB, 995x1073px

>>9556396

File: BUnkSxRj-VA.jpg (340KB, 1080x1080px) Image search: [Google]

340KB, 1080x1080px

>>9556404

File: BUj0PuNBQQy.jpg (310KB, 1080x1080px) Image search: [Google]

310KB, 1080x1080px

>>9556411

File: BVp41qWF160.jpg (362KB, 1080x1080px) Image search: [Google]

362KB, 1080x1080px

>>9556415

File: BU2U_uBlWor.jpg (516KB, 1080x1349px) Image search: [Google]

516KB, 1080x1349px

>>9556423

File: BVlNpRNgAbD.jpg (203KB, 600x750px) Image search: [Google]

203KB, 600x750px

>>9556426

>>9556434
>>9556428
In what world do these coords break rules? The one on the mannequin doesn't have legwear I guess?

>>9556436
Fanny doesn't have the silhouette, she's just lifting her skirt with her hand. Plus she's wearing normie clothes with it. I didn't post the other one.

>>9556439
>Plus she's wearing normie clothes with it
Yeah, like most of us anon.

>>9556436
I'm not OP but I posted the mannequin one because it's extremely rare to see a coord with a sweater and sweaters (especially non-turtlenecks) aren't a traditional lolita item.

I don't think Fanny Rosie's coord is really lolita, but she's wearing normie rubber ballet flats and sheer socks.

>>9556396
>>9556404
Where can I buy these transparency layers? I really love the idea.

>>9556462
First one looks like Taobao, second one looks like H&M.

File: 3346580_DSC00444.jpg (185KB, 720x960px) Image search: [Google]

185KB, 720x960px

I have pic related and I want to coord it in a non-lolita way but I'm not sure what to do with it. I've always done basic blue x white lolita coords and am kind of scared of adding another color. Any creative ideas? I've had to alter mine because of damage, so the straps are really thin.

>>9556436
In the world of nitpick threads and "UHH LOLITA'S NOT A COSTUME BUT ALSO DON'T BREAK THIS FORMULA".
People don't see enough of what Lolitas actually wear outside of fancy events and/or meetups, so people are still pretty weirded out by simple and silly things. I remember getting posted here a few years back for wearing sneakers with a cutsew dress. They matched, they were those AP sneakers, and hell, it wasn't even supposed to be full-on lolita and someone got butt frustrated about it.

>>9557461
She's not wearing a petticoat though. Even people who say lolita doesn't have rules would question that.

>>9557469
It looks as though she's wearing a very light one. Low poof is a thing, it's more practical for casual lolita or "lolita a la mode", as it was back on LJ.

>>9557472
Sorry, didn't make it clear that Casual and "A La Mode" aren't necessarily one and the same. I swear I'm not an idiot.

Can we post Chinese lolitas? I like their ways of breaking the rules because they just don't seem to have all these hangups like us westerners but still usually manage to look decent.

>>9556443
So now a thing that is unusual is breaking the rules? Its so frustrating to try and talk to people on cgl about this fashion as a FASHION because of shit like this.

>>9557478
No only white people

>>9557461
>LOLITA'S NOT A COSTUME BUT ALSO DON'T BREAK THIS FORMULA

exactly why I still think of lolita as costuming even after being in for ~8 years. Especially these days. Except for the handful of weird losers who wear it every day, western lolita IS a costume now. Even JP designers agree.

>>9557585
Bait harder

File: f02d1c6c7e3de055bd0951b20cb110df.jpg (313KB, 736x981px) Image search: [Google]

313KB, 736x981px

>no petticoats but still cute

>>9557607
So what exactly is so rule-breaking about this?

>>9557629
It's unusual enough

>>9557629
The biker vest with a sweet dress

>>9557478
Why not? I would rather see something decent then nothing at all.

>>9557478
please post some I love chinese lolitas! they always look great. I feel like western lolitas are the only ones who get their bloomers in a twist over rules. If you look good, you look good.

>>9557704
Where do you find those coords from Chinese lolitas? Online I only see those photoshoot types, whereas irl I only see Chinese lolitas with a taobao skirt, no petti and a normie top

File: 6ce67835gy1fhf4r9smtdj21381ivdx4.jpg (207KB, 690x965px) Image search: [Google]

207KB, 690x965px

>>9557704
no blouse no poof still looking good af

>>9557651
This wasn't meant to be lolita

>>9557651
This isn't lolita rule-breaking, this is literally wearing underwear in public. I'd cringe at that shit in normie clothing.

>>9557705
weibo

>>9557708
Didn't she post it in CoF though?

>>9557708
She wore it to a lolita event and posted it to CoF. She called it ero lolita.

>>9557709
Shit's cute, stop being salty.

>>9557708
You don't understand what this thread is for

>>9557651
I feel like I've seen something similar with a jetj skirt and bustier but I don't remember

>>9557723
>shit
well you got something right

>>9557707
I kinda love the one on the left

>>9556404
>>9556415
>>9557607
>>9557707
More of this please

>>9557707
it looks sad, I wish there was at least a bit of puff

File: 5634220753_c5183c26c8.jpg (137KB, 374x500px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 374x500px

no blouse mohawk loli

File: 4780742512_6a9ff46572.jpg (124KB, 375x500px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 375x500px

>>9558401
more no blouse

>>9558401
Well, this is definitely interesting.

File: 4571739887_28d9515f72.jpg (105KB, 375x500px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 375x500px

>>9558403

File: 5651788607_046f6282e0.jpg (143KB, 374x500px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 374x500px

>>9558407

File: Fdxsi.jpg (234KB, 337x640px) Image search: [Google]

234KB, 337x640px

>>9558408
Too long skirt

>>9557673

I like whatever is happening on her leg

File: EyFJ1.jpg (75KB, 272x650px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 272x650px

>>9558411

File: 1588rgy.jpg (211KB, 674x1599px) Image search: [Google]

211KB, 674x1599px

>>9558414
Rule(s) broken: tank top/bare shoulders

File: 4784906701_4a68e2d1d4.jpg (147KB, 375x500px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 375x500px

>>9558418
Rule(s) broken: no blouse

File: 4338827044_01463ec9b7.jpg (97KB, 375x500px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 375x500px

>>9558420
Rule(s) broken: corset/exposed cleavage.

File: aug039-1.jpg (33KB, 334x639px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 334x639px

>>9558422
Rule(s) broken: no blouse

File: DSCF8966.jpg (57KB, 480x640px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 480x640px

>>9558424
Rule(s) broken: fake dreads, animal ears, animal paws

File: 3837481981_4ac522d6db.jpg (208KB, 375x500px) Image search: [Google]

208KB, 375x500px

>>9558428
Rule(s) broken: Animal ears, too short skirt, and cosplay contacts

File: 20hv9xw.jpg (450KB, 600x800px) Image search: [Google]

450KB, 600x800px

>>9558432
Rule(s) broken: heavy makeup, too short skirt, lace tights

File: 14bqmv6.jpg (319KB, 1200x1600px) Image search: [Google]

319KB, 1200x1600px

>>9558433
Rule(s) broken: no blouse

File: 315ww.jpg (290KB, 436x650px) Image search: [Google]

290KB, 436x650px

>>9558434
Rule(s) broken: bare legs

File: 73611186.jpg (81KB, 487x650px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 487x650px

>>9558435
Rule(s) broken: fake dreads

>>9557707
Left girl has broken the rules and my heart because we will never date
>sad gay gull noise
Right girl is cute. Can't see her dress too well without the poof though.
>>9558420
So different to see OTT sweet with no blouse. I'm shook. But also intrigued.

File: tumblr_l4b50wXJmi1qapfr8o1_500.jpg (110KB, 500x750px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 500x750px

>>9558436
Rule(s) broken: no blouse, unnatural hair color

File: w206172002.jpg (109KB, 500x750px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 500x750px

>>9558438
Rule(s) broken: Short/unnaturally colored hair, no blouse, mismatched accesories

File: thatsamazing.jpg (70KB, 362x577px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 362x577px

>>9558440
Rule(s) broken: animal ears

File: IMG_5157.jpg (83KB, 750x769px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 750x769px

Rules broken: No petti, mismatched shoes

>>9558433
I dislike the makeup and random red bear. Other than that, this would win as ero in my book.
Also getting Claudia from IWTV vibes

>>9558436
I really like this coord from the neck down.

>>9557708
>>9557709
God I love when that coord gets posted. Gulls always gets pissy over it. Never fails to enrage some of you dumb bitches.

>>9557353
I think touches of gold would go great with this. It's such a vivid blue that you'd need to be moderate with, which I understand your nervousness about.

File: tumblr_ljsrzgySDM1qelprmo1_500.jpg (133KB, 500x641px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 500x641px

I like to call this ruleless style Alice deco

File: tumblr_nogzjk8H2u1ur6t3uo1_400.jpg (93KB, 400x544px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 400x544px

>>9558673

File: tumblr_nogzjk8H2u1ur6t3uo2_400.jpg (111KB, 400x553px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 400x553px

>>9558674

File: tumblr_nogznartf91ur6t3uo1_540.jpg (159KB, 540x748px) Image search: [Google]

159KB, 540x748px

>>9558675

File: tumblr_nogznartf91ur6t3uo2_540.jpg (157KB, 540x740px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 540x740px

>>9558677

File: 20091.Summer-AliceDECOalamode2.jpg (215KB, 620x536px) Image search: [Google]

215KB, 620x536px

>>9558679

File: AlicaDeco2c.jpg (51KB, 337x536px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 337x536px

>>9558681

File: ruan.2011.5.jpg (168KB, 379x536px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 379x536px

this is not from alice deco a la mode but she's wearing a moitie petti
>>9558682

File: GLB50d.jpg (35KB, 320x484px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 320x484px

Before AP did it
>>9558689

>>9558673
Wow that one on the right is ita, it looks awful.

>>9558424
That's an OP, the sleeves are just mostly hidden by her arms being held up.

>>9558401
She could probably have gotten away with the mohawk if she'd actually worn a blouse.

>>9557610
>>no petticoats but still cute
but would be objectively cuter with petticoats.

>>9557607
This is probably the best-executed unusual coord in the thread.

>>9558729
I don't think you get the concept of this thread.

File: IMG_5158.jpg (93KB, 750x738px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 750x738px

Rules broken: no legwear, no petti, tiara without being hime, flats(?)

>>9557650
Ero-lolita feels so nostalgic, like the photo was plucked right out of 2007. I'd be weirded out seeing a girl wearing ero to pretty much any lolita event but for photoshoots and street snaps I think it's dope.

>>9558883
She's clearly wearing a petticoat underneath and that tiara rule isn't even a thing.

>>9558917
Nayrt but who cares.. Decide if you like the coords without obsessing over rules.

>>9558428
>>9558432
>>9558433
>>9558436
>>9558438
>>9558440
>>9558441
Half your rules aren't actually rules....

Actual rules:
>petticoats required
>blouse required
>legwear required
> skirt must be just shy of knee length to tea length
>petticoats must stay under dress
>colors must all match

>>9558966
Even then the definition of colors must match is variable. You can wear two different pinks if they mesh well and are the primary color. I think this even relates to in "the rules"

Otherwise I agree. Another "rule" could be considered to relate to shoewear

>>9558966
Lolita literally has no rules, we made them up to define what it is for people who are too retarded to tell from the pictures.

File: 1373912132950.jpg (132KB, 500x666px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 500x666px

Saw this blog post containing a lot of rule-breaking coords recently: https://livlotte.blogspot.nl/2017/06/lolita-fashion-creativity-vs-rules.html#more
(pic related)

>>9556396
No rules broken, this just looks bad.

>>9558983
Yeah, I saw this post too. Don't think all the coords she listed are actual lolita coords but I agree with the rules/guide lines split-up

>>9558978
I'm >>9558966 and I agree that they're really guidelines and not rules but if you're going to have a thread dedicated to breaking the "rules", you better understand what the commonly understood "rules" are.

>>9558972
I agree but I added it because those are what people commonly agree are "rules" to the fashion.

>>9558983
That's a Vivienne Westwood ad...

>>9558966
They're not rules but rather things that cgl can't handle. Like even if the theme of the thread is all of those things, gulls still get triggered as fuck and complain.

>>9559254
That's just because gulls hate everyting.

>>9559251
I'd be surprised if there are lolitas who don't know that since that collection had a big influence on lolita

>>9559251
And..?

>>9558966
Heavy makeup and animal ears absolutely were heavily enforced "rules" back 10 years ago or earlier.

>>9558401
>>9558403
>>9558407
>>9558408
>>9558420
>>9558422
i loved her back in d_l days.

>>9556411
>>9556415
>>9556423
>>9556426
>>9557353
>>9558673
>>9558689
>>9558983

These are literally not even lolita tho

Wearing brand doesn't make it lolita in the first place.

>>9557651
This isn't the cursed image thread anon

>>9556396

these kinds of threads always strike me as new people waltzing in and protecting their inexperience or laziness by shouting about roolz and how they so totally suck.
some really good coords come out of experienced rule bending (emph. on experienced) but I'm uncomfortable with, to be quite dramatic, the glorification of ignorance.

in order for a coord to be recognized as lolita it needs a handful of foundational things, depending on the style (pettiless is good for old school and casual, blouseless for ero and summer). however, these nuances are only apparent after enough exposure/research.

if you want to experiment with the fashion for yourself, that's totally fine. but people need to stop pushing back at the community when the outcome isn't accepted as lolita. it's immature and anti-social imo

>>9557650
I weirdly love the garter belt on this

>>9559370
No they weren't, wtf?

>>9559486
>>9559556
Enjoying coords that are not recognizable as lolita is kind of the point of this thread
> it's immature and anti-social imo
I think you're being a bit dramatic. At this point it doesn't matter if people decide to disregard the rules completely, there's still enough information, brand and examples available to wear lolita properly.

Why can't we have a breaking the rules thread that isn't 95% itas and magazine scans? You can totally break the rules in lolita but it still has to look good as an outfit. Throwing on crap that doesn't go together and removing elements that balance the coord is ita; not because it breaks the rules, but because it looks like shit.

Imagine if there had never been rules/the guidebook. Would a skater dress with hot topic accessories be acceptable as lolita? Would AP be making shorts? Would we be dressing like Chinese lolitas do? Would lolita have died?
Brands like Victorian Maiden and Moitie would probably be making the exact same clothes as they do now.

>>9559288
No shit sherlock

>>9559805
Go look for your own shit if you find you consistently don't like what's being posted here.

>>9559556
>if you want to experiment with the fashion for yourself, that's totally fine. but people need to stop pushing back at the community when the outcome isn't accepted as lolita. it's immature and anti-social imo
>it's immature and anti-social

So it's "be one of us or get rekt"?
That sounds more anti-social than what you're talking about. Shit is subjective. If someone pushes back, it's because they don't share your perspective on it.

>>9559844
Do you seriously consider a "this isn't lolita" comment to mean "get rekt"?

>>9559845
I was referring to the "stop pushing back" comment.

People can push back all the fucking want. It's weird that people are supposedly just supposed to accept it when they're told no, but the other party can't accept it when they push back?

>>9559865
Mte. Besides, people who experiment and don't mind the rules so much are usually oldfags who consider lolita more than just clothes, whereas newfags need the rules to even be able to tell what is and isn't lolita. If people're always this strict, we wouldn't have shiny fabrics, see-through fabrics, all over prints etc.

Whoever is posting the ancient coord images is really hitting me in the nostalgia feels, thanks bro

>>9557707
I want to see more of this kind! Give me more chinese rule-breaking lolitas instead of pp barely passing as lolita

>>9559556
Couldn't agree more.

>>9557707
Left looks good, reminds me of Vivienne Westwood ads. Right... Doesn't look lolita, probably because of the lack of petti. Nice, but not lolita.

>>9558446
This dress looks six sizes too big for her. I know it's brand and all but when it's so big maybe alterations are in order.

>>9560066
I think right looks more lolita than left

This entire thread is proof of why lolita has become a costume in the west. Let fashion evolve and stop being stupid gatekeepers. Do you have any idea how Japanese lolitas/brands perceive this kind of behavior?

>>9560104
>Do you have any idea how Japanese lolitas/brands perceive this kind of behavior?
No? But I'd honestly like to hear it.

>>9560106
Nayrt but maybe look at their websites, blogs and how they style, plus Japanese magazines. But whenever jbrands do something unusual cgl screams "just because a brand did it doesn't make it lolita".

I think some anons in this thread need to take into consideration that outside cgl, people really don't care about the rules that much.

In my comm, wearing a blouse is not even a rule because it's hot as fuck here. There's no guidebook in our language but they've seen brands styling without blouse so it isn't a rule.

>>9560066
Right looks far more lolita IMO, everything is lolita except the petti.

>>9560106
They would say lolita is about finding your true self and expressing it or not losing your young girl heart whatever

>>9560106
On my most recent trip (lolita has become much much less popular as streetwear there over the years as I'm sure you know) the only two girls I saw that day wearing burando who weren't definitely tourists stopped me to talk - they were in what I'm sure /cgl/ or even rufflechat would call "not lolita" with sneakers and very larme-ified coords. For reference I'm a 5'9" white girl, obvious American and was wearing a very strict sweet coord. They asked if people still wear stuff like that in the US, and when I explained that our comms have ~ruurus~ they literally laughed. One of them said basically "then that's a cosplay, if it's so strict."

Let. Fashion. Evolve. Don't be that salty bitch up the thread who calls everything that's not the most cookie cutter OTT sweet "not lolita" or "breaking the rules". I promise, 100% of the people in Not Lolita are gonna keep on having fun and enjoying how they dress, and calling it lolita in their tags so that everyone eventually winds up with the Simplicity perception of lolita. Some gulls don't seem to get that the only place where people care if you follow ~the rules~ is right the hell here (and it's not a popular location).

The entire point of lolita fashion, when it was inventing itself, was to reject other people's expectations of how a young person should dress. The fact that it's turned into a bunch of gatekeeping hags who screech at each other to keep it to a uniform look ("lolita silhouette" my ass, sack dresses without pettis have been around since 2005) is the saddest irony.

Expand your fucking world, gulls. Want better for yourselves than a stale, stuck-in-the-mud clone contest.

>>9560137
So you met two random Japanese lolitas, it proves nothing (even if this story isn't made up). A Japanese girl could come over here, meet two itas or newbie lolitas, and go back saying the same.

I agree the Western comm can be two rule-obsessed but your anecdote doesn't prove anything, especially when it doesn't come from a respected figure like a shop staff.

>>9560149
>I agree the Western comm can be two rule-obsessed
*cgl

>>9560149
Also had a few conversations with them, but who cares? Shop staff don't make the clothes you know. And that's my anecdote, but where's your personal recent experience with lolitas in Japan to counter it?

And brand designers have gone on record a bunch of times saying some polite version of exactly that. You have to know how to hear what's not being said, but they think western lolitas are a bizarre outgrowth of a fashion that's mostly died off in Japan. They're happy to take your money but it's super weird to them how conformist we've become with a counterculture fashion. Why do you think the Chinese comms have all the attention? They're the ones actually consuming brand like a fashion instead of a cult of sameface.

File: 1484588609474.jpg (14KB, 236x265px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 236x265px

>>9560137
>Wearing larmeified lolita

>>9560164
>Why do you think the Chinese comms have all the attention?
Because they're new money and drop thousands of dollars on every new release. Unless you're hella rich you can't compete with that kind of buying power.

>>9560174
>because they're actually consuming it like a fashion

Ok, glad we agree. That's how it was consumed in Japan in the 00s, too.

Also wake up. Buying power isn't the problem. It's that there's a vibrant secondhand market in the west and shipping things here is ridiculously expensive from Japan. That culture of procuring someone else's previously worn items doesn't have anywhere near the same foothold in China that it does here, so brands smell money.

File: 1498665527535.jpg (141KB, 1035x1394px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 1035x1394px

>>9560164
Where have brands said that? Seriously, I can't find any brand designer interviews in English at all. Imo people are pretty chill about the rules in Euroland. We do get posted in the ita thread sometimes. Most recently I saw pic related posted on a lolita comm page with a text about enjoying fashion without worries, and the CoF thread did not appreciate it. Not my comm btw, I follow a lot of European comms and I've seen French lolitas mix larme with lolita main pieces as well. We make jokes about cgl and the lolita police.

>>9560182
When AP starts making shit I care about again instead of their chiffon sack dress crap I'll buy from them. I bought new from Baby this year. If people are interested in a release they'll buy it, but brands have been for the most part not putting out things Westerners want, so of course they're more active on the secondhand market.

>>9560187
Nah sorry I'm being a shitty American and using "the west" to mean basically just US comms. IME euro comms are much less like this, and behave more like fashion followers. And yeah, I don't know of English translations of the interviews.

>>9560190
This is precisely the attitude that explains why brands stopped paying attention, anon. Your spoiled brat attitude of "it has to be this precise cut and never change!" is exactly what I'm talking about. You aren't consuming lolita like it's a fashion. You're consuming it like it's a costume. If it doesn't have x shape and y detail and adhere to whatever "accuracy" is in your mind, you don't want it. That's not a fashion, that's a cosplay.

>inb4 sack cuts look bad on westerners
I always see people complain about length, cut, OTT prints, yet those people don't buy from brands like Physical Drop or Seraphim either.

>>9560198
Also 100% true, and probably both cause and effect if we're honest. Of course they're not going to design for a market that makes up such a small percent of their total sales.

People who are sitting back waiting for AP to "make something I like again"... lolita has moved on. Move with it or accept that you're cosplaying 2014.

File: 9733babd.jpg (372KB, 720x540px) Image search: [Google]

372KB, 720x540px

>>9560182
>>9560164

....That's not why they pay attention to Chinese lolitas, anon.

America has around 300++ million people. The number of lolitas is in the hundreds. The number of lolitas who buy direct from brand is probably half of that.

China has a population of 1.3 BILLION. Lolitas? thousands. And their fuerdai is in the middle of finding things to enjoy money on, including buying multiple $$$$ special set MTOs at every single tea party.

They aren't paying attention to China because Chinese girls are "consuming fashion", ya moron. They're paying attention to China because money, money, money, money, money, money, money, money, money, money, money, money, money.

There's zero change in how US lolitas wear it that can change it, they aren't going to pay attention to the western market unless it starts overtaking the Chinese lolitas. And how are you going to do that when the Chinese population is a literal 4-5 times the size of the American population *and* in the middle of some kind of spending boom?

>>9560195
>>9560204
Why would I buy and wear something I hate? Sounds like the opposite of buying for ~fashion~ and ~wearing what you want~.

>>9560210
No one is saying you need to wear it. Just that if you pretend like lolita stopped evolving in whatever year your dream dress came out, you're living in a fantasy land. And that if you're gatekeeping about what is and isn't lolita based on that fantasy, you're being both unnecessarily rude and factually wrong. Look at how designers style models these days (yes, for the Chinese market mostly). If you're not doing that, you're not doing lolita.

>>9560204
It seems to me that you and I are making the same point. I agree, and either way "lolita" is continuing to evolve and trying to hold it in place with some artificial "rules" is silly.

>>9560164
>chinese lolitas
>consuming brands like a fashion

You've clearly had very little interaction with chinese lolitas.

>>9560215

We're nowhere near agreeing.

You're saying the brands will pay attention to western lolitas if we drop the gatekeeping ~rurus~

I'm saying they never will, rules or no rules.

>>9560215
Nah, sack dresses are lolita, unfortunately, they're just not something I will ever buy, so while brands keep making them they will not be getting my money for those releases.

>>9560227
Nowhere did I say the brands will pay attention to us if we do anything. I'm sorry you've assumed that, but that's not the point I was making. The point I'm making is that brands have moved on and no matter how hard we kick and scream, we won't get their attention and fashion will not move backward.

>>9560217
It seems you're thinking that that quote refers to how they personally talk or behave, but I'm talking about how they're driving brand consumption from a purely business sense.

>>9560137

>I explained that our comms have ~ruurus~ they literally laughed.

I think you gave them the wrong explanation, anon.

Other gulls even explaned it up thread for you

>we made them up to define what it is for people who are too retarded to tell from the pictures

The rules aren't even a gatekeeping device.

wtf are you even arguing about gatekeeping for?

File: enjoy it wear it don't call it lolita.jpg (28KB, 357x679px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 357x679px

>>9560137
a huge part of lolita for me is that princess/upperclass young lady air. another part is the visible effort that goes into procuring matching items for a good coord.
I'm all about different styles like punk and ott sweet that pull more from the Japanese alt scene influence than the uppity historical clothing influence.
it isn't participation in a clone contest to want to wear that regal, beautiful, distinct silho.
this "new lolita" you're talking about isn't an evolution of lolita at all. what we're seeing is the birth of new girly fashions, heavily inspired by gyaru, mod, school uniforms, and retro lingerie, among others.
it's cute, but calling it lolita is conflating anything with a flared skirt or lace with lolita fashion, which is a rookie/ita mistake.

the rules aren't arbitrary, they're kind of awesome as they define the fashion and make it distinct.
it used to be much more intense. back in the late 90s some Japanese bloggers wrote a whole set of strict rules for how lolitas should sit, behave, and pose, let alone dress.

some girls just want to freestyle dress, drawing from different soft and girly j-styles. that's cool. lolita has a basic skeleton and then the rest is actually a whole lot of wiggle room. if it all looks the same and you can't figure out how to be creative within the bounds of lolita's several substyles, don't blame the rules.
if you prefer another fashion there is nothing wrong with that. but why are you so stuck on calling it all "lolita?"

start playing with the idea that perhaps you've grown away from this niche and fully find your groove in a different one.

>>9560259
>princess/upperclass young lady air
explain to me where that was in lolita in 2003? 2006? oh, lolita evolves? ok. The rest of what you're saying is your personal preference/headcanon of what lolita is.

>new lolita
Not a thing.

>define the fashion
Can you describe even one other "fashion" style that can be easily encapsulated by 5 or 6 hard and fast "rules"? Now consider: Can you do that for retro styles that have become so idealized as to be recognizable halloween costumes?

I quite enjoy lolita in all its variations, and have for almost 15 years. I even enjoy the aesthetic of the brief lifestyler peak that defines what people on here consider "the rules." I'm just not silly enough to think it stopped there (or that it stopped when I discovered it, which is usually the case for lolita prescriptivists, I find).

tldr; lolita has probably been here longer than you, and used to be a lot of things that don't fit "the rules," so why be so pompous as to think you know the formula for what it must look like forever? Let go of your pride. It's just clothes.

>>9560251

Here's where you implied it:

>>9560164
>Chinese comms have all the attention[...] They're the ones actually consuming brand like a fashion instead of a cult of sameface.

And here is where you directly said:

>>9560182
>Buying power isn't the problem.

Whereupon I stepped in and said buying power *is* the main reason behind Chinese lolitas having all the attention, not the gatekeeping.

I'm not sure whether you suck at communicating or reading, either way this discourse doesn't seem worth my time to pursue since apparently we can't even agree on what you're trying to say. So I'm giving up and going to bed, we'll just have to disagree on agreeing.

>>9560252
cgl loves gatekeeping and several people in this thread are claiming something is or isn't lolita based on their understanding of the rules, without even knowing the intention behind the coord.

>>9560266
>Chinese comms have all the attention[...] They're the ones actually consuming brand like a fashion instead of a cult of sameface.

Yes? "Consuming it like a fashion" means buying a lot of it, considering it relatively temporary and disposable, and always being hungry for more.

>Buying power isn't the problem.
was in reference to the previous poster discussing a SINGLE lolita's buying habits. Of course the buying power of "Chinese lolitas" broadly matters. But so does context.

I'm sorry you're going to bed angry, anon. It sounds to me like we agree and you've just misunderstood some things. But that's okay, especially if you're up late.

>>9560271

The way I'm reading it they're trying to decide if the pictures belong here or not.

>>9560265
When I look at ootds posted by legends like Lauran I still see the basic tenets of the fashion that I hope won't ever be lost.
it has definitely grown and changed (all over graphic prints, chiffon galore, sack dresses).
>explain to me where that was in lolita in 2003? 2006?
I'm confused: are you saying the princess feel wasn't a thing in 2003? Innocent world, chantilly, MAM were all producing pieces with that wealthy decadent air at that time.

I'm genuinely interested in examples of experimental coords you like and think represent the future of lolita.
The things that worry me are tumblr-tier creations that don't come from an understanding or even appreciation for the fashion's foundation, quality or history. That's what I have a personal interest in distinguishing from.

what is lolita to you?

>>9560215
>>Look at how designers style models these days (yes, for the Chinese market mostly). If you're not doing that, you're not doing lolita.
>if you're not wearing current trends you're not doing lolita???

>>9560265
>>princess/upperclass young lady air
>explain to me where that was in lolita in 2003? 2006?
Have you literally ever looked at a G&LB from back then? There were a lot of princess and aristocracy themed-things and chatter about that.

>>9560275
>>Chinese comms have all the attention[...] They're the ones actually consuming brand like a fashion instead of a cult of sameface.
>Yes? "Consuming it like a fashion" means buying a lot of it, considering it relatively temporary and disposable, and always being hungry for more
Which isn't how lolita was ever consumed before in Japan, with the high cost of living and all in addition to their culture of being careful with old things. If you read old blogs and interviews there's a lot of talk about people being careful, saving for releases, making handmade, treasuring each piece, etc. Ther'es an interview someone did for a thesis where they remarked on how surprised they were that a lot of the Baby and MM shop staff were from working-class families and quite poor backgrounds, which seemed not uncommon for lolitas. Second-hand shops like Closet Child have existed there for decades, which is notable when thrift stores in general are not that common/popular in Japan.

>>9560294
>The things that worry me are tumblr-tier creations that don't come from an understanding or even appreciation for the fashion's foundation, quality or history. That's what I have a personal interest in distinguishing from.
This used to be something to worry about, when there wasn't that much information available and it was hard to buy from brands, therefor people needed to have it written out for them what kind of things to look for, to make or to buy from vintage/normie shops. To say, you can't just buy/make any dress, you have to buy/make a dress with ruffles, lace, x shape etc. It was also a way for Western lolitas themselves to figure out how to wear it. Now it doesn't affect lolita at all what someone on tumblr does because the rest of us can just keep buying the brand we love.

>>9559803
They absolutely were? Every lolita guidebook had a photo of an "it's Lolita" wearing black and white striped tights and cat ears. We are way more lax on animal headbands now then back in the day.

>>9560117
>I think some anons in this thread need to take into consideration that outside cgl, people really don't care about the rules that much.

It is fucking amazing how there are some gulls who post here that think this place is the end of all be all in the lolita community.

I've had anons tell me that just because it's happening in Japan that it doesn't matter, and what ever rule they have made up for the fashion is the way it is and that Japan is full of itas who don't know what they're doing apparently.

>inb4 you just got trolled
Sure, I mean, I was the one who egged them on by arguing in the first place, but I think there are definitely people posting here who don't realize there are more facets to the lolita community than just cgl.
Like for fucks sake, look at any CoF thread where gulls are trying to talk shit about someone in hopes the person will actually see it because they think everyone lurks here.

>>9560424
People in IRL communities usually care about the rules even more, they're just too polite to say it to people's face and cause friction. It's absolutely not only a cgl thing.

>>9559556
>in order for a coord to be recognized as lolita it needs a handful of foundational things, depending on the style (pettiless is good for old school and casual, blouseless for ero and summer). however, these nuances are only apparent after enough exposure/research.
this is the most noob thing in this entire thread

>>9560451
no they don't.. when you go to comm meets there are a lot of people breaking the rules, imagine what people dress like outside of meets

>>9560451
As someone who hosts a lot of meets I'd rather have a bunch of good-looking rulebreakers than itas. It's fine to break the rules, just. look. decent.

Note that it often goes hand-in-hand. But not always. Therefore it's easier to give noobs a set of rules to adhere to until they get an eye for not looking like shit. Then again some people will always have garbage taste so what's the point in trying to police them?

>>9560451
>they're just too polite to say it to people's face and cause friction

I'm a part of huge comm with 300+ members. The mods are extremely protective and do a damn good job. Maybe it's just because of where I'm located, but people are pretty honest with each other. They also understand that, if you don't like something, that doesn't make you right. It only means that you yourself, don't like the thing.

Plus we have 300 some people, every meet usually has different people present and the discussion of rules comes up pretty often as well as the online culture. Most people agree the online culture is bullshit. (weeeh anecdotes)

It's not JUST cgl but cgl is not some fucking lolita court room where we vote on rules and who does and doesn't get to be a lolita.

I'm sorry but that's fucking dumb and close minded. There is A LOT that goes on outside of cgl, let alone fucking 4chan.

You know what site you're on, right? Same one that has pictures of girls eating shit if you accidentally click the wrong board. There's probably someone on /r9k/ right now who also has a cgl tab open and is jerking off to this conversation we're having. This place is a god damn cess pool.

Get out of your head for a minute and realize that there is a world going on around you.

>>9560455
I mean, it depends which rules we're talking about (not stupid shit like the anon upthread saying no sweaters was a rule or the people getting their knickers in a twist about petti poof and skirt length), but this has been my experience in all the comms I was in, and I've moved around a lot in the past few years so I've attended meets in six different comms in two countries and in every comm there've been situations where a girl "broke the rules and looked good!!" - wore too much make-up, ballet flats, sneakers, whatever - but even though they might smile politely and nod at meets when she bragged about how 4chan was full of stupid bullies, the same people were actually talking behind that girl's back about how it was embarrassing to be seen with her because she looked bad but they didn't know how to bring it up without causing offense. The fact people turn up to meets in rulebreaking coords doesn't mean that those people look good or are accepted/loved within the comm, and it's often the same people who end up being excluded from private meets even though they're not outright ita.

I'm not sure if I get what >>9560469 means about preferring good-looking rulebreakers to itas either. Most itas break "rules" by definition, there aren't many itas who obey all the rules and still look ita rather than nitpick. There aren't many people that can pull off good rulebreaking coords either. I'm not against the idea of this thread to inspire people how to bend/break the rules and look good, or the idea of a la mode coordinates or lolita evolving, but I stand by my statement that people care about rules outside of CGL (*especially* newer lolitas, even on tumblr).

>>9560501
*sorry for massive run-on sentences, I'm tired

>>9560501
I can't relate to this at all. Most lolitas I hang out with break the ''rules'' all the time, and they've been wearing it for 5+ years, some of them are mods of our comm (there're only 2 comms in our country). People wear Milk, JM, ETC and LG to meets, go without legwear and blouse when it's hot. I'm not talking about a few people here but the majority of active girls in the comm. I believe lone lolitas care even less about the rules.

>>9560519
I guess every comm is different. If it helps, I'm from a colder country where it's never necessary for people to go blouseless - I don't think it's unreasonable for it to be normal in comms in hotter countries to not worry about covering your shoulders. Milk, JM, ETC etc main pieces are things girls here would think is cute but people wouldn't normally wear to a meet. I've seen girls wear ETC to meets a couple of times but nothing else.

>>9560202
>cosplaying 2014
So I take it that people who are into retro western fashions are all just cosplaying the decades they like most? You can like the look from a specific time period and still be wearing that look as a fashion not a costume. Being into fashion isn't about following the latest trends it's about wearing what you like and what looks good.

>>9560632
I wonder if she's a troll but I also think she has a point
I feel like new lolitas (started wearing it in the past 3 or so years) don't think about what looks good or what they like but about what they think lolita is supposed to look like and copy that.

>>9560638
That's fair, but there's also plenty of newbies who throw on anything with lace and call it lolita. I think it's ok for lolita to expand and change, but there also needs to be certain elements that stay the same or else it's a new style entirely.

Really the issue should be "what makes lolita, lolita?" Make that list only the essentials, and leave the rest up to good taste.

>>9560765
The thing is, it's less of a laundry list of essentials and more of a list of things where it has to have, say, 5/10 to qualify but no individual item is a must have. Making a list of things all lolita *must* have means people boil it down to petticoats and can't understand the concept of oldschool outfits without it, and then make prints of totally non-lolita things in non-lolita style but say it's lolita just because of the silhouette.

>>9560765
Who cares if they throw on a potato sack and call it lolita? Nothing bad happens because of it

>>9560632
>people who are into retro western fashions are all just cosplaying the decades they like most?
nayrt but yes??? You're recreating an existing look that has roots in another time or place, not engaging with a currently evolving fashion. Why is this hard to understand?

>>9561093
I mean, apart from the erosion of any actual definition of lolita resulting in the style fading away.

I genuinely think the rules is why lolita is one of the longest-lived Harajuku styles, up there with gyaru (and it's now outlived gyaru after that threw out its rules with neo-gyaru). None of the others last more than a few years because they're either too strict and lack variety to evolve or too vague and fizzle out.

>>9561095
I don't understand what your problem is with this as a concept.

>>9561114
>the erosion of any actual definition of lolita resulting in the style fading away.
Except this doesn't happen, at all

>>9561131
This will absolutely happen if we're not careful and I think it's a far greater threat than the fashion not evolving. Lolita is already much less popular in Japan, brands like MmM and MM barely release and brands like BPN closed down. AP keep making releases catering to larme fans and larme is extremely popular. Without some strictness, lolita will become amalgamated into larme and go the way of gyaru.

>>9561498
Gyaru didn't die just because of that, I'm 100% sure you're just saying that because of what another gull said before or you are the same gull.
By your logic, lolita would already be dead a long time ago outside the English speaking world, because in most countries they don't have such a strict guidebook or rules.

>>9561498
BPN is actually one of the brands that people argued is not a lolita brand, just like they're trying to do with JetJ and Excentrique now. AP has always catered towards trends in Japan.

>>9560198
The problem is that we want AP that looks like golden era AP but slightly longer. No one wants the PD look outside of edgier daily lolitas

File: 19961529_208722576320494_4934661621094494658_n.jpg (29KB, 456x810px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 456x810px

>>9556396
Anyone knows who is she?

>>9562180
The vision from my nightmares

File: pd6.jpg (39KB, 286x400px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 286x400px

>>9562174
What era is golden era AP? I just think people who complain about AP changing sound silly, and most of the time they have no clue about what other sweet brands release, besides Baby, and just end up buying from taobao.

File: AP-SCClones.jpg (597KB, 983x700px) Image search: [Google]

597KB, 983x700px

>>9562453
Nayrt but I'm pretty sure anon means pic related, many sweet anons are nostalgic for the days of AP in 2008-2012.

>>9562496
I still see this style a lot..

>>9562542
Yeah, it's very popular to the point where if AP released more glorious 2010 style pastel sweet prints people would actually buy it new

File: 90e6327dcba4df458f80ae4f62d8ffed--lolita-style-gothic-lolita.jpg (55KB, 500x600px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 500x600px

>>9562698

I think they tried, but I'd give a whole lot to know exactly wtf is happening inside the company. One of the main things that distinguished Bodyline from AP was that the lace is custom design and dyed to match, and they've done away with that. I wonder why.

(I know their lucky packs and special sets used white lace, but those are lucky packs and special sets, I expect cut corners. It's another story to pay full price for a dress that looks kinda budget cut-cornery)

>>9562712
They still do custom lace

>>9563342

Yes, but they used to be custom AND dyed to match.

>>9563342
>>9562712

I don't think that dyed lace is the reason AP isn't as apealling then they used to be. I feel it's the prints themselves. They are often overloaded and feel unbalanced these days. Back in the days you could stand in front of someone wearing AP and could clearliy see what's on the dress. These days you often need to shove your face into the dress to see what's on it because there is so much on it. But it's not only overloaded on details but sometimes colors are weordly unbalanced. In the golden era everything used to be pastel shit so everthing matched more easily. Now with all the more colors tjey use they make some very odd chices in prints which are often unappealing. I feel like they put on the dress what they can because they can. It used to be simpler and more carfully balanced.

File: IMG_7944.png (1MB, 1058x660px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1058x660px

>>9562712
>>9563936
Here's a photo comparison of old AP and new AP. The issues with their new releases are in the prints and overall design of the dress.

File: 06151352_5942128d83d6e.jpg (227KB, 500x600px) Image search: [Google]

227KB, 500x600px

>>9563936
>>9563965

That's another issue that bothers me too, like Maki and Asuka are still working there aren't they? How are they not stepping in and saying "the balance on this is off, don't release this". Did they get old and lose their sense of design balance, or maybe they never really had that much input in the first place, and the other person that was calling the shots behind the scenes has been replaced and the new person kinda sucks at designing?

The lace is yet another story altogether. Sometimes they release something like this where you wonder if they designed around the white lace so they would only have to dye one batch black to save on costs. Like was this a real design decision, or did they do it to save costs? How solid is their financial footing anyway?

>>9563965
I just hate how the prints on the newer pieces go all the way up to the bodice. I prefer a much more simple design through the bodice and the majority of the skirt and a nice, detailed border print. I would have really liked the new perfume dress if it was less busy through the bodice, it's just too much for me.

>>9563936
>Back in the days you could stand in front of someone wearing AP and could clearliy see what's on the dress.
But they were infamous for prints where it was difficulty to distinguish any details among the low-contrast pastelsplosion, leading people to complain that they all looked samey (and extremely washed-out in the black colourways).

>>9558535
>dumb bitches
Who exactly is mad, friend?

File: 17-07-15-16-43-47-212_deco.jpg (2MB, 1440x2560px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1440x2560px

just. this.

>>9564047
I feel like the designs would have been a clustfuck back in the days if they could have done this, but they were limted technically. The OTK show this the best. OTK were always fitted to the print but not overdone. Now we have printed nylon OTK that have more print than the actual dresses.

>>9564311
>you have to be upset if you're calling people dumb
Nah, I was just stating the obvious. Take a look at you for example. Prime stupidity on your part, here.

>>9564047
>How are they not stepping in and saying "the balance on this is off, don't release this".
It's like you can't see it any other way. You just presume they have the same taste as you. This is just something YOU want.

I don't mind the change in style AP included. I don't buy a lot of stuff that they release, but not a lot screams "terrible what were they thinking." I think every brand has a few of those designs anyway.

File: 259056B3-D414-4256-BD17-105F6F779396-532-0000007BF52EA043.gif (597KB, 500x328px) Image search: [Google]

597KB, 500x328px

>>9564439
>glances at thumbnail
Probably nitpick, needs better petti
>opens image
Pic related

>>9564857
Nayrt but the AP overloaded clusterfuck dresses don't seem to be the taste of the wide majority. AP doesn't have any bloodbath anymore and last years dresses as well as the overloaded dresses this year didn't sell out at all. They even struggle in the sale. Most rereleases however do sell out quickly.

>>9566703
This makes me sad that Hawase Doll will never be flattering on me, it looks so comfy.

>>9559803
The point of this thread is

"Post and discuss coords of lolitas that said NO to the rules."

Not

"Post things that use lolita brand pieces but are not lolita."

You've missed the point 100%

>>9566738
No, you have missed it. You can absolutely post coords that use lolita main-pieces and ignore literally EVERY rule. Saying ''this is not lolita'' to no coord in particular is not ''discussing coords''.

>>9566758
>to no cord in particular

Literally there was a list of coords that aren't lolita by any stretch of the imagination.

>>9566857
And that's your opinion that I disagree with, but since you didn't point out what makes them non-lolita to you there's no discussion

>>9566918
This anon is right.

>>9566857
Sounds like you just don't like the thing.

>>9567000
>>9566918
I mean I could have gone through each one and pointed out exactly why they're not lolita but nobody wants to read that. Most of them straight up don't have the silhouette, and IMO that's the one singular thing you NEED to call it lolita.

Like, for example, >>9556426

If you're wearing a brand dress, but have no peti, no blouse, no legwear, and are wearing sandals, it's not lolita, it's a just a sundress. You can break any multitude of rules, but once you break so many that the silhouette and/or aesthetic are lost, you have to just stop and say, "Okay so, even if this outfit is cute, it's definitely no longer lolita at all."

>>9567253
>nobody wants to read that.
Ya got that right.

Also, there are known variations of the silhouette over the years. You're missing things here and there.

>>9567253
>>9567843
>nobody wants to read that.
Actually I do, and I made the thread. Looking back at it, I should have changed the name and description but I was pretty drunk and didn't think about it at all.

I think it's really interesting how lolita and the rules have evolved and how it influences our idea of what lolita is now. If you look at early images of lolita, they don't always have the right silhouette but we still point to them as examples of (old school) lolita. If the lj handbook had been written at that time, would lolita fashion look different now? (I don't think it would have changed much because the brands pretty much control it).

>>9568177
>I think it's really interesting how lolita and the rules have evolved and how it influences our idea of what lolita is now.
Me too, but it's very rare to find actual decent discussion here.

>the brands control it
I wish more people understood this here.

>>9557662
This is Linda Friesen isn't it? Love her clothes! Used to have some accessories from her, but sold because the colour didn't suit my wardrobe anymore. Would love to get a bustier and skirt set in this shape from her once.

>>9568249
I don't think brands control the evolution of lolita. Do they influence it? Sure. For example brands introduced a lot of cuts that are now considered lolita, like sack dresses. Yet the community are the consumers that buy or not and depending on that brands decide what to sell or not.

>>9564047
I have that dress, and irl it's one of AP's nicer releases. The lace is extraordinarily detailed with alternating AP logo, ribbon and dots

the photography really doesn't do it justice

>>9568470
AP could start selling trainers and people would buy it. But the designers decide not to make them.

>>9568470
Then where does this weird backlash come from?

If they're pumping out sack dresses, according to you its because people keep buying them.

Its possible that gulls refuse to admit that the opinions on those cuts are mostly only held here and we all know deep down that stuff posted here doesn't matter outside of this site- but that leaves it open for being more of brands do whatever they want.. Which I'm sure they do. Maybe they even choose to do what they want based off what people are buying, but thats still their decision and whatever cgl thinks is like 1% of their customer base.

>>9568470
>I don't think brands control the evolution of lolita. Do they influence it? Sure.
What is the difference? When brands influence the fashion by introducing new cuts, lolita evolves.

>>9569389
This. At the end of the day, the brands are the ones who decide what gets put out. I bet it's a little bit of both. Like, something sells well, so they put that out. And then other times it'll just be something they want to put out themselves.

>>9564854
You need to calm down

>>9559556
This response sounds kind of nooby itself. A lot of these coords are pre-2012, back when lj was still popular. I agree with this comment >>9559878. It seems like oldfags are more comfortable with being experimental, while noobs cling to this idea of what is and isn't lolita because they're too inexperienced to stray from the formula.

The idea of lolita needing rules is a very Western concept, I think. I don't see the same adherence to the rules when I look at Japanese coords. If anything, they seem like they're always experimenting, and that's why brands evolve. Like that one person in the cof thread raging against wings, while wings bags and animal ear headbands are sold by brands themselves (so how can that still not be lolita enough?)

>>9570941
I have a Chinese friend with whom I talked about this. She had talked about her friend in China about the "rules" and she was shocked. Like an "that's horrible" type of shocked. Rules are not a thing in Asia from what she told me. People just wear what they like, and generally, they know what is lolita by looking at it, just like we don't keep a checklist of what a gothic outfit has to contain to be considered gothic or not, and get mad when one part is not there. You just know, it has an overall feeling to it.

>>9566703
i love this

>>9571625
>armchair activated
I wonder if it's due to the strict societal rules Asia tends to have? It wouldn't surprise me to learn that that's why Japanese and Chinese lolitas tend to experiment so much; they have to follow the rules to perfection all day in their normal lives, so lolita and other alternative fashions are the few times they get to actually show their true personalities.

File: f1f3fe700b27f7554dc6fe15cd1d9919--cage-skirt-tokyo-fashion.jpg (145KB, 736x1046px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 736x1046px

>>9572365

File: eda93bd44a0ee7e012abffe519826b4a.jpg (385KB, 1000x1500px) Image search: [Google]

385KB, 1000x1500px

>>9572378

File: 6b8812d98bd9a368e7d5b6d35eeb4fa1--tokyo-street-style-tokyo-street-fashion.jpg (110KB, 600x900px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 600x900px

>>9572381

>>9572371
If you're gonna go down that pop psych route, you could say that the reason that system tends to work for those countries (if that is indeed the system, which I don't 100% buy since G&LBs and similar have featured guides on becoming a lolita and Chinese lolitas' rep for being bitchy as hell) is because people from those countries are more attuned to picking up the rules to fit into a social group and having an eye for detail, so they stick within the rules instinctively without needing it spelled out. Like, it's in their upbringing to follow rules and the group even if they're trying not to, which makes them less likely to end up hot messes.

Pure speculation of course, can't say how many horrible ita messes Japan has/had compared to here without living out there (and how much of avoiding ita messes comes not from the rules but from shops staff giving advice when new girls go there). Generally though I don't think the average Western lolita can be trusted without rules, comms have a stupid amount of itas as it is (although I guess most of those people just ignore the rules we have anyway, because they're incapable of following simple instructions...)

File: e6ec45754d54f44d02d5b595448c06c4.jpg (54KB, 341x510px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 341x510px

>>9572386

File: c218faaeb0c84050af716e87b0ea2f18.jpg (91KB, 564x866px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 564x866px

>>9572399

>>9572393
Shop staff in Japan has been seen without petticoats

>>9569951
>someone is saying something negative so they must be in an enraged fit
Sitting at a computer and typing is about as calm as it gets, moron.

Lolita or not, liker 90% of the outfits in this thread are horrible.

>>9559556
Nice blog

>>9572365
This one is a nitpick, nothing about it screams fuck the rules.

>>9558677
I love he shit out of the leggings, but maybe thats the emo kid in me

>>9577254
I'm definitely getting a scene vibe from that second one, but I'm not a fan.