Yeah so this article came across my path today and needless to say, I am not amused by this at all.
So basically by wearing Lolita and looking like a doll, all Lolitas are pandering to pedophiles/ hebephiles or the degenerate sect. Also by dressing in Lolita we are basically infantilizing ourselves and it is somehow for the pleasure of men and all of this goes against the feminist movement. What the shit are you talking about lady?! And despite all the "research" you put into this topic, it still came out half assed! So let me, the 37 year old Lolita break a few things down for you.
One of the first things I learned about Lolita very early on, is how the fashion became a rebellion for the over-sexualization of women. When Lolita was becoming extremely popular in Japan during the early 2000's, many famous female Japanese musicians, at that time, would dress extremely scantly clad (Kumi Koda I'm looking in your direction) and Lolita was the antithesis of that. It was saying, you can be beautiful without being under dressed. A lot of people don't know that about Lolita, but I remember reading that around 2003 or 2004 and it made me admire the fashion a little more because of that.
Now back to Miss Judgey bitch's article. She says in her article, "Why aren’t Lolitas dressing like Lolita (from the novel) actually did, like a tomboy? Just because a Lolita girl refutes the sexualisation of her image does not mean that sexualisation does not exist. It’s essentially meaningless.
This is what happens when you put an adult woman in a little girl’s dress. So no, fully grown women dressing pre-sexually is not feminist in any way."
First of all, Lolita the fashion has NOTHING to do with Lolita the novel. Secondly, yes, you will have people who will objectify those who wear Lolita clothes; but for the record, I could be wearing jeans with a tee-shirt and be objectified by men. Women will always be perceived as sexual objects, because women are ALWAYS objectified, regardless of what they wear. Women are always judged by the way they look and not the content of their character. And for you Miss Judgey bitch, to judge others solely on the criteria of dress, especially being a so-called "feminist", shows just how much you are NOT a feminist at all!
Why is it that in order to be a feminist you have to don a certain pro-woman uniform? Can't I wear a frilly dress and still support the cause? Why is it that what I wear or how I do my make up automatically disqualifies me from supporting the cause of equal rights and opportunities for all women? I don't see how the two are exclusively synonymous and if you think they are, perhaps you need to reevaluate your opinions lady.
She also talked a little bit about that Venus chick. Look, I know the whole thing with that Venus chick is really suspect. But that's more of an overzealous stage parent farming her daughter out to be some super cutey model than anything else. As others in the comment section pointed out, that Venus girl isn't a Lolita. All she is is a model and really, you shouldn't use her as a shining example of how Lolitas are. We don't all get together an speak in ear-piercing high pitched tones. We don't all want to be "living dolls". We don't pretend to be children. We certainly don't frug around men, seducing them with our pastel colored dresses, as if it were a siren's call to boink us silly.
You know I have previously stated that I am not a feminist. I am a humanist. I believe in equality for all under humanity's large umbrella, regardless of gender, race, religion, sexual orientation, age, ect. But after reading drivel like this I am so glad that I'm not a feminist. If I'm going to be judged on what I wear to the feminist rally, I'd rather go hangout with my Lolita counterparts who accept me for who I am and my amazing fashion sense.