Help Me My youngest has Discovered Lol ita

[kuroki]

Originally Posted by ThreeEyesOni

Riiight. Well, so far all of the relevant information is irrelevant for... well, apaprently just because you say it is. I say this because apparently the obvious (and well know at the time it was originaly chose) usage of the word "lo lita" is completely irrelevant.

***Links omitted***

Nope, you've convinced me. Megansmom, you go right ahead. I wish your daughter the best of luck, as she obviously will need it.

I cannot believe I had to make an account for just one damned post.
Your links are skewed. The images that you linked, from the ones that are accurately EGL or GL at all only two are risque, and they are cosplay.

EGL is not, nor has ever been a fetish fashion. You may think so, it is your right to do. But please do not generalize a entire community, sub-culture, and fashion with your idiocy.

Megansmom. I would post links but I cannot. Here are some good places to look at for you. Just google these.

EGL community on Live Journal- they may have drama but they are the best resource for EGL.

Morbid outlook has a good article on EGL.

fanplusfriend - this is a good store to get started out with. They are not too expensive and their products are a good quality.

[ThreeEyesOni]

I'm not claiming that the entire fashion is a fetish one, and of course the images linked are a bit skewed; it wouldn't have been terribly entertaining if I just linked to the google search for "gothic ******" or "goth ******".

Again, people seem to be missing the point that I'm not generalizing the entire damn fashion or all of those that wear it. I'm pointing out the intentional reference to that word and it's specific meaning and to claim that all of it is innocent in both the intention of the wearer and that of the viewer is the "idiocy". And above all, that it's not likely going to be appropriate attire for someone making claims of unwanted advances or sexual situations involving girls aged 12-15.

[Rosie]

First off don't patronise me with "Riiiight" when gothic.net's opinion in this case is most certainly not in the majority and not very well backed. You are not in a position to be patronising.

Second, you're specifically setting out to find racey pictures some of which aren't even gothic ****** but goth/fetish or just plain japanese, which is stupid. You don't seem to even know what gothic ****** IS. Of course if you set out to find racey images, you'll get that. Ever heard of Rule 34?

And how is the first link "sexual"? Oh god exposed limbs and a pretty dress. What is the world coming to! Of course there are going to be some fetish goth lolis. But that wasn't your claim. You claimed it was exclusively a "fetish" thing. Your point is bullshit, yet you still have the nerve to act smug about it. I could find dozens of pictures of racey red heads. Does that mean Red Hair is a sexual thing? No. You compare to the number of total results, of taking into context what it is(pretty much any "pretty" fashion will have a more sexual variation).

This is the first ten in the result set for Gothic ******(which is, of course, going to be skewed by both the individual terms, and alternate combinations of the two) -



The majority of these are NOT sexual in the slightest unless you specifically have a fetish for over-dressing. Gothic ****** was a style started by various musicians and culutral icons in Japan just as goth was over here. It has no roots is fetish, is not intended to be fetish, and you keep making this claim without backing it up.

Third, it filters links. Idiot.

You still have nothing to back your point up. I'm not even trolling you, I'm just genuinely fuming that people can be this stupid. What if there are people who dress in that style who don't consider themselves "fetish", how might they feel?

[Rosie]

Originally Posted by ThreeEyesOni

I'm not claiming that the entire fashion is a fetish one, and of course the images linked are a bit skewed; it wouldn't have been terribly entertaining if I just linked to the google search for "gothic ******" or "goth ******".

Again, people seem to be missing the point that I'm not generalizing the entire damn fashion or all of those that wear it. I'm pointing out the intentional reference to that word and it's specific meaning and to claim that all of it is innocent in both the intention of the wearer and that of the viewer is the "idiocy". And above all, that it's not likely going to be appropriate attire for someone making claims of unwanted advances or sexual situations involving girls aged 12-15.

No, a mix of Edwardian and Victorian styles is a mix of Edwardian and Victorian styles. "Lo lita" is named that way because it is clothing often of an over-stylized, "costume ish" and definatively "young girl" style that is used in a way to present a sexually attractive image. In short, it's fancy young-girl's clothing that is designed to be very sexy.

Nice flip flopping. And given much of gothic ****** IS clothing designed for girls age 12-15 from bygone ages to begin with, it's pretty obvious you have no idea what you're talking about, yet again.

There is no intended sexual meaning of "******". It does not mean attractive in a sexual way, in this context, but simply "Pretty". Given that the style emphasises on over dressing and large frilly attire, this follows logically. You on the other hand are just talking shit.

Gothic ****** is not the same as western ******. Let go of it, please, or please provide some actual evidence to back your claims.

[ThreeEyesOni]

Yes, I'm aware of filtering links. As if my mentioning of such in my post, with the above post allready mentioning it? I was going out on a limb that the handful of pictures that included the filtered word would be recognized by anyone bothering to click on them.

And I'm done with this. I'd being repeatedly ignored that she's already making comments about attacking people that are hitting on the girl as it is. Whether you like the connotation or if it's drifted away from the original usage, "lo lita" does indeed refer to sexuality of pre-sexual individuals. My whole original point was "hey, if you don't want older lesbians hitting on your daughter (or fer her to end up in someone's van) perhaps you shouldn't be having her dress up as a baby doll".

If you want to get offended by that, by all means go ahead. Assuming you arn't falling into the catagory of those I'm talking about, then the actions of those that do have no bearing on you. It would be as retarded as my getting offended by references to dumbasses that happen to share (or claim to share) a common thread with me.

[GothicChristian]

I could slap someone at the moment, Gothic L.olita and Lo.lita in general have nothing to do with anything sexual, trust me, I'd know.
ThreeEyesOni, most of those pictures you showed weren't lo.lita at all; they were some sort of spin off of the style, I'll admit, but not the real stuff, dear.
Most lo.lita clothing is meant to look like doll clothing. It's frilly and lacy, most of the skirts are knee length or longer. The entire thing is quite innocent, though I suppose you're going to tell me that it's sexual to have tea parties or bake?
You make me want to cuss, but I won't, because it's not lo.lita.
You're likely to find a few people who have fetishes for this kind of thing, but there are people who have fetishes for feet.
Are you going to tell me I must be into some sort of fetish culture because I have feet?
So long, perhaps I'll see you at my next tea party.

[KontanKarite]

You know what. Fuck it. Wear what you want. I don't give a flying toss. Enjoy the unwanted attention of pedos and weirdos. It comes with the territory. I implore you, continue with your love of lo lita fashion. Do it. Who gives a dead moose's last shit as to what the word loli means.

In the end, do as you will. But you can't simply change the meaning of a word because you say so or even a small group agrees with you. We can't take the word "red" and make it mean "automobile".

We all choose to look like fucking idiots because we're grown up enough to know that the bullshit does come and it will come. So do it. Go right on ahead. But this style choice will either indicate that you're good at fucking at a young age, or you'll just look like a terribly boring and contrived chump. Have fun with your tutus.

[Rosie]

In the end, do as you will. But you can't simply change the meaning of a word because you say so or even a small group agrees with you. We can't take the word "red" and make it mean "automobile".

Goths
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Goth)
• Interested in contributing to Wikipedia? •
Jump to: navigation, search
This article is about the Germanic tribes. For the late 20th century subculture, see Goth subculture. For other uses, see Gothic.
One of the floor mosaics excavated at the Great Palace of Constantinople and dated to the reign of Justinian I. It is presumed to represent a conquered Gothic king.
One of the floor mosaics excavated at the Great Palace of Constantinople and dated to the reign of Justinian I. It is presumed to represent a conquered Gothic king.

The Goths (Gothic: gutans, Gutans) were East Germanic tribes who, in the 3rd and 4th centuries, harried the Roman Empire and later adopted Arianism (a form of Christianity) while some subsequently accepted Islam in the later centuries.[1] In the 5th and 6th centuries, divided as the Visigoths and the Ostrogoths, they established powerful successor-states of the Roman Empire in the Iberian peninsula and Italy, respectively.
Contents
[hide]

* 1 Etymology
* 2 History
* 3 Archaeology
* 4 Languages
* 5 Symbolic legacy
* 6 See also
* 7 Notes
* 8 References
* 9 External links

[edit] Etymology

Etymologically the ethnonym for the Goths, "Guton", derives from the same root as that of the Gotlanders ("Gutar"): the Proto-Germanic *Gutaniz. Related, but not the same, is the Scandinavian tribal name Geat, from the Proto-Germanic *Gautoz (plural *Gautaz). Both *Gautoz and *Gutaniz are derived (specifically they are two ablaut grades) from the Proto-Germanic word *geutan, meaning "to pour" (compare the modern Swedish gjuta, modern Dutch gieten, modern German gießen, Gothic giutan). Thus, the Gothic tribes are designated as "pourers of water", i.e. "men, people".[2] Gapt, the earliest Gothic hero, recorded by Jordanes, is generally regarded as a corruption of Gaut.

Interestingly Old Norse records do not separate the Goths from the Gutar (Gotlanders) and both are called Gotar in Old West Norse. The Old East Norse term for both Goths and Gotlanders seems to have been Gutar (for instance in the Gutasaga and in the runic inscription of the Rökstone). However the Geats are clearly distinguished from the Goths/Gutar in both Old Norse and Old English literature.

Another theory connects the people with the name of a river flowing through Västergötland in Sweden, the Göta älv, which drains Lake Vänern into the Kattegat. In prehistoric times it had a stronger flow than now. The "man" interpretation, however, fits a general Indo-European naming analogy; e.g., Dutch, Deutsch, man, human, etc., and was preferred by Jordanes, who viewed the Goths as pouring forth from Scandinavia. The Wolfram source below also contains a discussion.
The Mausoleum of Theodoric in Ravenna, the only significant relic of true Gothic architecture.
The Mausoleum of Theodoric in Ravenna, the only significant relic of true Gothic architecture.

The Indo-European root of the pour derivation would be *gheu-d- as it is listed in the American Heritage Dictionary (AHD). *gheu-d- is a centum form. The AHD relies on Julius Pokorny for the same root (p. 447).

At some time in prehistory, consonant changes according to Grimm's Law created a *g from the *gh and a *t from the *d. This same law more or less rules out *ghedh-, The *dh in that case would become a *d instead of a *t. When and where the ancestors of the Goths assigned this name to themselves and whether they used it in Indo-european or proto-Germanic times remain unsolved questions of historical linguistics and prehistoric archaeology.

According the rules of Indo-European ablaut, the full grade, *gheud-, might be replaced with the zero-grade, *ghud-, or the o-grade, *ghoud-, accounting for the various forms of the name; it is preserved until the modern times in the Lithuanian ethnonym for Belarusians, Gudai. The use of all three grades suggests that the name derives from an Indo-European stage; otherwise, it would be from a line descending from one grade.

A compound name, Gut-þiuda, the "Gothic people", appears in the Gothic Calendar (aikklesjons fullaizos ana gutþiudai gabrannidai). Besides the Goths, this way of naming a tribe is only found in Scandinavia.[3]

As mentioned above the name of the Goths is identical to that of the Gutar, the inhabitants of Gotland, a Swedish island in the Baltic Sea. The number of similarities that existed between the Gothic language and Old Gutnish, made the prominent linguist Elias Wessén consider Old Gutnish to be a form of Gothic. The most famous example is that both Gutnish and Gothic used the word lamb for both young and adult sheep. Still, some claim that Gutnish is not closer to Gothic than any other Germanic dialect.

[edit] History

Main article: Gothic and Vandal warfare

A 19th century artist's rendition of campaigning Goths as described by their 3rd - 4th century Roman adversaries.
A 19th century artist's rendition of campaigning Goths as described by their 3rd - 4th century Roman adversaries.

Major sources for Gothic history include Ammianus Marcellinus' Res gestae, mentioning Gothic involvement in the civil war between emperors Procopius and Valens of 365 and recounting the Gothic refugee crisis and revolt of 376-382 and Procopius' de bello gothico, describing the Gothic War of 535-552.

In the 3rd century, there were at least two groups of Goths, the Thervingi, and the Greuthungi. The Thervingi launched one of the first major "barbarian" invasions of the Roman Empire from 262, sacking Byzantium[not in citation given] in 267.[4] A year later, they suffered a devastating defeat at the Battle of Naissus and were driven back across the Danube River by 271. This group then settled north of the Danube and established an independent kingdom centered on the abandoned Roman province of Dacia. Both the Greuthungi and Thervingi became heavily Romanized during the 4th century by the influence of trade with the Byzantines, and by their membership of a military covenant centered in Byzantium to assist each other militarily. They converted to Arianism during this time. Hunnic domination of the Gothic kingdom in Scythia began in the 370s,[citation needed] and under pressure of the Huns, the king of the Thervingi,[citation needed] Fritigern in 376 asked the Eastern Roman Emperor Valens to be allowed to settle with his people on the south bank of the Danube. Valens permitted this, and even helped the Goths cross the river,[citation needed] probably at the fortress of Durostorum, but following a famine the Gothic War (376-382) erupted, and Valens was killed at the Battle of Adrianople.

The Visigoths were one of two main branches of the Goths, (the Ostrogoths being the other) during the fifth century. Together these tribes were among the Germanic peoples who disturbed the late Roman Empire during the Migration Period. A Visigothic force led by Alaric I sacked Rome in 410. Honorius granted the Visigoths Aquitania, where they defeated the Vandals and by 475 ruled most of the Iberian peninsula

The Ostrogoths in the meantime freed themselves of government of the Huns following the Battle of Nedao in 454. At the behest of emperor Zeno, Theodoric the Great from 488 conquered all of Italy. The Goths were briefly reunited under one crown in the early sixth century under Theodoric the Great, who became regent of the Visigothic kingdom following the death of Alaric II at the Battle of Vouillé in 507. Procopius, writing at this time, interpreted the name Visigoth to mean "western Goths", and the name Ostrogoth as "eastern Goth" which corresponded to the current distribution of the Gothic realms.
.1.

[Despanan]

Originally Posted by GothicChristian

I could slap someone at the moment, Gothic L.olita and Lo.lita in general have nothing to do with anything sexual, trust me, I'd know.
ThreeEyesOni, most of those pictures you showed weren't lo.lita at all;

You know what GC? Die in a fire.

You have absolutely no idea where the word Lo lita even comes from do you? I'll quote:

****** (1955) is a novel by Vladimir Nabokov. The novel was first written in English and published in 1955 in Paris, later translated by the author into Russian and published in 1957 in New York. The novel is both internationally famous for its innovative style and infamous for its controversial subject: the book's narrator and protagonist, Humbert Humbert, becoming sexually obsessed with a 12-year-old girl named Dolores Haze.

During the course of this novel, Lo lita is seperated from her mother, and repeatedly engages in intercourse with multiple peodophiles. That's how the word came into the English and eventually japanese conciousness. When "Gothic Lo lita" style came along it was named that way because the clothes reflected those of a ridiculously young, underage temptress (hence "loli"). Otherwise it wouldn't be called EGL. What you think Lo lita is a word for dolls or something? Sure some people want to use it to describe "Innocent dress" but those people are either ridiculously naive or outwright liars. This is not an acceptable form of fashion for underaged girl looking to avoid unwanted advances, and no amount of of trying to twist the facts through ignorance or misguided conjecture is going to change that.

Hey, if you're over eighteen and wanna wear that stuff because you think it looks cool, that's fine. Just keep in mind that in those clothes you will be someone's fetish, and they'll probably hit on you. Besides, Since when did the Punk and Goth movement become some sort of saturday morning cartoon for kids to emulate? I'm fine with Babybats in a cute gothy outfit, but keep that outfit appropriate for children.

[GothicChristian]

Originally Posted by KontanKarite

You know what. Fuck it. Wear what you want. I don't give a flying toss. Enjoy the unwanted attention of pedos and weirdos. It comes with the territory. I implore you, continue with your love of lo lita fashion. Do it. Who gives a dead moose's last shit as to what the word loli means.

In the end, do as you will. But you can't simply change the meaning of a word because you say so or even a small group agrees with you. We can't take the word "red" and make it mean "automobile".

We all choose to look like fucking idiots because we're grown up enough to know that the bullshit does come and it will come. So do it. Go right on ahead. But this style choice will either indicate that you're good at fucking at a young age, or you'll just look like a terribly boring and contrived chump. Have fun with your tutus.

Kontan... I refuse to try to tell you how wrong you are, I'm just going to shake my head and walk away.

MM, you shouldn't post so many threads asking for advise about parenting.
Kristin seems like the type you should talk to about those things; these guys don't know anything about raising teenage girls.
My opinion on raising us is to let us learn through trial and error, if we have stalkers, let us call the cops, if we want to wear something, let us. If we aren't harming ourselves or others, then we must be turning out okay.

[Rosie]

Originally Posted by ThreeEyesOni

Yes, I'm aware of filtering links. As if my mentioning of such in my post, with the above post allready mentioning it? I was going out on a limb that the handful of pictures that included the filtered word would be recognized by anyone bothering to click on them.

And I'm done with this. I'd being repeatedly ignored that she's already making comments about attacking people that are hitting on the girl as it is. Whether you like the connotation or if it's drifted away from the original usage, "lo lita" does indeed refer to sexuality of pre-sexual individuals. My whole original point was "hey, if you don't want older lesbians hitting on your daughter (or fer her to end up in someone's van) perhaps you shouldn't be having her dress up as a baby doll".

If you want to get offended by that, by all means go ahead. Assuming you arn't falling into the catagory of those I'm talking about, then the actions of those that do have no bearing on you. It would be as retarded as my getting offended by references to dumbasses that happen to share (or claim to share) a common thread with me.

You still have nothing to back your argument with.

[GothicChristian]

Originally Posted by Despanan

You know what GC? Die in a fire.

You have absolutely no idea where the word Lo lita even comes from do you? I'll quote:



During the course of this novel, Lo lita is seperated from her mother, and repeatedly engages in intercourse with multiple peodophiles. That's how the word came into the English and eventually japanese conciousness. When "Gothic Lo lita" style came along it was named that way because the clothes reflected those of a ridiculously young, underage temptress (hence "loli"). Otherwise it wouldn't be called EGL. What you think Lo lita is a word for dolls or something? Sure some people want to use it to describe "Innocent dress" but those people are either ridiculously naive or outwright liars. This is not an acceptable form of fashion for underaged girl looking to avoid unwanted advances, and no amount of of trying to twist the facts through ignorance or misguided conjecture is going to change that.

Hey, if you're over eighteen and wannand that in those clothes you will be someone's fetish, and they'll probably wear that stuff because you think it looks cool, that's fine. Just keep in mihit on you. Besides, Since when did the Punk and Goth movement become some sort of saturday morning cartoon for kids to emulate? I'm fine with Babybats in a cute gothy outfit, but keep that outfit appropriate for children.

You should know, that SL, GL, and EGL have nothing to do with that book.
It's illegal for anyone over the age of eighteen to make advances on anyone who is considered a minor. When I look younger than my own age, I shouldn't have to worry about twenty-something to fifty-something year olds attempting to "get together" with me!

I think it's inappropriate to wear bikinis when in mixed company, it's the equivalent of wearing underclothing, but, according to you, it's inappropriate to wear clothes that completely cover ourselves? It's not inappropriate for teenagers to wear corsets and miniskirts? I must have the definition of modesty wrong! Oh my, I'll definitely go change it in my dictionary.

Again, I'm going to bring up the people with feet fetishes, I have pretty nice feet. That turns some people on. Should I stop taking care of my feet?
Is it my fault that some people like that? If I make it clear that I have no interest in them, should it still be my fault?

[edit] Also, Lo.lita Fashion was around in Japan before the word came into Japanese conscience, I believe it was misnamed by someone who had some sort of misconception.

[Godslayer Jillian]

****** is materialistic as fuck. That's my reason for not liking it. It's nothing but an expensive fancy.

[KontanKarite]

You're stupid AND you look like shit if you dress like a 10-12 year old girl who's good at fucking.

My god, you're a moron and everyone here knows it. At least everyone here who's worth listening to.

We're not talking about your intentions with the fashion. We're talking about what is understood about lo lita. The TEXT BOOK definition of it.

I don't care if you want to look like a porcelin doll. Go right on ahead. It's neither original or interesting. Yes, there is a duality in the meaning. But the sexual connotations will trump every single time, the meaning of "doll like".

[GothicChristian]

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

****** is materialistic as fuck. That's my reason for not liking it. It's nothing but an expensive fancy.

That's why I have my mom make my stuff, or I make it myself.
I'd never by name brand stuff, way too expensive!

[KontanKarite]

Originally Posted by GothicChristian

You should know, that SL, GL, and EGL have nothing to do with that book.
It's illegal for anyone over the age of eighteen to make advances on anyone who is considered a minor. When I look younger than my own age, I shouldn't have to worry about twenty-something to fifty-something year olds attempting to "get together" with me!

I think it's inappropriate to wear bikinis when in mixed company, it's the equivalent of wearing underclothing, but, according to you, it's inappropriate to wear clothes that completely cover ourselves? It's not inappropriate for teenagers to wear corsets and miniskirts? I must have the definition of modesty wrong! Oh my, I'll definitely go change it in my dictionary.

Again, I'm going to bring up the people with feet fetishes, I have pretty nice feet. That turns some people on. Should I stop taking care of my feet?
Is it my fault that some people like that? If I make it clear that I have no interest in them, should it still be my fault?

[edit] Also, Lo.lita Fashion was around in Japan before the word came into Japanese conscience, I believe it was misnamed by someone who had some sort of misconception.

God damn it, we're not talking about it being inappropriate. We're talking about it being a bad fucking idea. But whatever.

[GothicChristian]

Originally Posted by KontanKarite

You're stupid AND you look like shit if you dress like a 10-12 year old girl who's good at fucking.

My god, you're a moron and everyone here knows it. At least everyone here who's worth listening to.

We're not talking about your intentions with the fashion. We're talking about what is understood about lo lita. The TEXT BOOK definition of it.

I don't care if you want to look like a porcelin doll. Go right on ahead. It's neither original or interesting. Yes, there is a duality in the meaning. But the sexual connotations will trump every single time, the meaning of "doll like".

-smashes head against the wall-
You are thick!
I'm saying that I like the clothing, I like tea parties; I like it, end of story.
I'm also saying that, even if some people have a fetish for it, people have fetishes for a lot of things. That doesn't make the whole thing a fetish, it just means certain people view it as such.
Seriously, do I have to mention the people with feet fetishes again?
People view goth as a fetish, does that make it one?
Also, if I'm such an moron, I'd like you to explain my nearly 200 point IQ and nearly perfect scores on any standardized test I've ever taken or the fact that I can out teach most of my teachers on the subjects that they are supposed to specialize in.
I must be an idiot.

[GothicChristian]

Originally Posted by KontanKarite

God damn it, we're not talking about it being inappropriate. We're talking about it being a bad fucking idea. But whatever.

He was the one who called it inappropriate, I was simply stating my point that it is not an inappropriate way to dress.

[Rosie]

Originally Posted by KontanKarite

You're stupid AND you look like shit if you dress like a 10-12 year old girl who's good at fucking.

My god, you're a moron and everyone here knows it. At least everyone here who's worth listening to.

We're not talking about your intentions with the fashion. We're talking about what is understood about lo lita. The TEXT BOOK definition of it.

I don't care if you want to look like a porcelin doll. Go right on ahead. It's neither original or interesting. Yes, there is a duality in the meaning. But the sexual connotations will trump every single time, the meaning of "doll like".

Oh wow, you really are a twat.

[Despanan]

Originally Posted by GothicChristian

You should know, that SL, GL, and EGL have nothing to do with that book.

Bullshit. That book is the whole reason that word even exists. Look it up in the dictionary, any dictionary you have on you right now, it'll say some form of this:

–noun
1. (italics) a novel (1955) by Vladimir Nabokov.
2. nymphet (def. 2).
3. Also, Lo·le·ta. a female given name, form of Charlotte or Dolores.
4. A seductive adolescent girl.

I'm going to say this very clearly:

THE NOVEL IS THE ONLY REASON THE WORD EXISTS AT ALL YOU IGNORANT COCKSLUT.*

It's illegal for anyone over the age of eighteen to make advances on anyone who is considered a minor. When I look younger than my own age, I shouldn't have to worry about twenty-something to fifty-something year olds attempting to "get together" with me!

Yeah, you're right. You shouldn't have to but you probably will be (unless you're fugly and even then, it might be a problem). Just because it's illegal doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Just ask Chris Hanson.

Also, Lo.lita Fashion was around in Japan before the word came into Japanese conscience, I believe it was misnamed by someone who had some sort of misconception.

Yes, because you believe it that makes it true.

Listen girl, I know I've been a little harsh in this post, and for that I apologize, but you have to understand that you're talking with absolute certainty about something you know nothing about and that just pisses me off. Your intentions are noble but you're totally misguided. You can't keep contesting cold, hard, textbook facts with hearsay and rumors from your friends or some otaku from the internet. And don't trust that stupid "Gothic ****** Bible" That thing's about as reputable as my retarded uncle Wally. It's just a way to make money off confused teenagers.

Seriously, look at the pattern of behavior:

M&M Dresses her daughter up in "Gothic ******" and takes her to a rave.

At said con/rave Daughter is subjected to unwanted advances.

Coincidence?

I think not.

*Beyond it's use as a proper name

[badteccy]

Originally Posted by Rosie

Given there's absolutely nothing to back up your point of view, I think you'd be a better person to ask.

It's bee backed up multiple times now in this thread. It's so incredibly stupid to think that it isn't a fetish. Also, mind you...their isn't anything particulary "wrong" with it (as long as you are of legal age...though I still find it to be creepy as shit). Just face the facts jack, it's fetish, stop being a dumbass.

[Despanan]

Originally Posted by GothicChristian

He was the one who called it inappropriate, I was simply stating my point that it is not an inappropriate way to dress.

Ya know what, sure wear whatever you want, but when the pedos are buzzing around you like flies on a dead moose, don't come running to us.

PEDOBEAR IS AFTER YOU.

[badteccy]

Also, wikipedia isn't always the most reliable place to get information, btw.

[KontanKarite]

Originally Posted by GothicChristian

-smashes head against the wall-
You are thick!
I'm saying that I like the clothing, I like tea parties; I like it, end of story.
I'm also saying that, even if some people have a fetish for it, people have fetishes for a lot of things. That doesn't make the whole thing a fetish, it just means certain people view it as such.
Seriously, do I have to mention the people with feet fetishes again?
People view goth as a fetish, does that make it one?
Also, if I'm such an moron, I'd like you to explain my nearly 200 point IQ and nearly perfect scores on any standardized test I've ever taken or the fact that I can out teach most of my teachers on the subjects that they are supposed to specialize in.
I must be an idiot.

You must be missing a LOT of common sense then.

You know what, I think you miss the point. We totally agree with everything. In the end, I think you look god damned stupid. That's all.

People view goth as a fetish? Well if people have a fetish for it, then YES, goth is a fetish.

PS: To other people, I'm really not a twat. I promise.

[korinna5555]

In Japan.. Loligoths are often seen with significantly older men. I have spoken to several people from Japan about this scene, and it does tend to attract pervs. It may not be intended to, but it happens. I personally would never allow my children to dress so provocatively, but they are your kids. I also feel that Loligoth is rather tasteless and overdone.

However.. I would either invest in a good sewing machine and buy/design patterns, or be prepared to spend a buttload of money.
http://www.inthestarlight.com/
^ good website to start with