/cgl/ - Cosplay & EGL

>>6924680
>>6924736
It was sarcasm and a blatant self-post.

Yes, Milwaukee lolitas are not always flawlessly dressed. There are a couple itas (sometimes one of them is me). But there's no drama and no fighting and I will take that over flawless brand coords.

>>6860286
You're welcome. :3c

One of the girls from Harajuku Hearts -- not Ellejay -- suggested a corset with the skirt. I have no idea how to make it work but I'm going to give it a shot since I impulse ordered a set.

>>6647286
They're almost all made of zyl or titanium, unless you pay $900+ for Cartier or Gold & Wood which are made of expensive hard woods (probably from South American rain forests).

>>6647284
Love these. I want to say Vera Wang is relatively common brand, you could try calling around and asking if they A. carry it B. Have that frame in stock. We got calls like that fairly regularly.

>>6647329
I'm guessing you're not in the US? That's too bad. My noss was practically a hoarder so we had a wonderful collection of vintage unsold glasses from the 1960s. So many great colors and they all had such cute accents and falir. The majority of people don't want any sort of decoration on the temples (the arms) or the front.

The thing about full rimless glasses is that the lens can be just about ANY shape because all that matters is that the shape can withstanding having holes drilled into it to mount the temples and bridge. They probably made you look old because they were a shape that flattered a mature man's face. If you got something like >>6647284 they could be cute and subtle.

>>6647267
They're not in fashion anymore. I have a very small face as well and my plastic frames are a brand called Micro Shapes (and it's discontinued and I use them for cosplay so if they ever break I will be upset.

On the plus side, three-piece rimless -- the kin with no frame at all -- do have a following, it's just mostly older people. I've had a couple teens and 20-somethings get them though. One of my friends wears them with lolita because they're subtle enough.

>>6647264
I'm not tired of square and oval frames, I said I'm tired of Buddy Holly hipster glasses -- specifically gigantic ones too large for teenage girls' faces.

I prefer catseye and oval-shaped for zyl and oval and round for metal, yeah. Preferably in colors other than black and tortoise.

Pic is one of my (two) pairs of glasses. It has the heavier, more fashionable look of plastic but A. metal B. balanced out by being semi-rimless. The picture doesn't really do them justice, I have them in a dark purple.

>>6645392
A lot of name brands are meaningless (with some exceptions -- Chanel, Prada, and Cartier make incredible eyewear for example although of course they're made in Italy and France respectively). 75% of them are all made in the same couple of factories in China anyway. Check the inside of the frame to see where they're manufactured.

It's really all about how you handle them, though. Always take them off and put them on with both hands, keep them in a case whenever they're not being worn, don't leave them in a freezing or boiling car (temperature can warp zyl very easily -- in fact, my boss had this heated "sand pit" I called it full of hot, tiny plastic beads; we would dip frames into it before adjusting them or to add or remove the lenses).

>>6645222
I know a ton of lolitas that hate BJDs. They're not as intertwined as you think.

OKAY DONE sorry.

High index in a 1.74, that was it. http://www.eyewearbrands.com/prescription%20lenses/

If your prescription is over -5.00 I would say avoid chains like Lenscrafters because some of them can't get as good a lens (depends on how much money they pull in, some of them can't afford to get deals from the good manufacturers like Essilor that makes the 1.74). If you can find a local optician who who does all the work him or herself, that's the way to go but maybe my opinion is colored from working for a private practice with a single owner.

I CAN confirm there are varying degrees of quality amongst Lenscrafters though based on which chains were getting which brands of lenses and frames.

>>6645426
Former optician here, this isn't unreasonable for extremely high-powered lenses. I quit almost one year ago so I forgot the name but even the wholesale price is about $200. They're for prescriptions over -5.00 or so.

That said, I am kind of tired of Buddy Holly hipster glasses and miss petite metal frames and old-fashioned oval lenses. Pic sort of related.

It doesn't hurt to take them off for photos when you're dressed to the nines in lolita or whatever though.

>>6576967
* community singular

>>6576948
I've only got a few more months to enjoy the thriving Chicago lolita communities because I really like it so I'm not going to yap about the past on /cgl/ anymore than I already have (I probably shouldn't have made that first post but I can't resist opening my mouth to defend something). You can message me on FB or whatever if you'd like.

>>6576885
There hasn't been any drama in Chicago since I got blamed for everything.

>>6475106
Sup.

>>6474869
I think it's interesting that I'm such a big source of drama given I don't think 90% of the group knew my name until the bringing-kids-to-meetup thread when I got buttmad at having someone say most lolitas are OTT and all lolita is "little girl dresses" (which is still stupid IMO).

I've never even participated in any of the lolita-centric LJs (lolitafucks, getoffegl, daily_lolita, lolisecrets, BtB) except for the occasional comment to a post on egl like four years ago and a couple sales on comm_sales (of which there has been drama).

>>6473755
As previously mentioned, no one will be mean to your face. In fact I've seen a number of girls that wear Bodyline, replicas, and Anna House in Chicago so please don't let the vendettafaggotry chase you away.

>>6473708
Come to Milwaukee. We might be itas but at least there's no drama or backstabbing.

Chicago meets are still cool though.

>>6473435
It's like you're reading a completely different thread, I don't get it. I never called anyone a slut or a whore, I said "I can't wrap my mind around it" -- as in it just does not click for me and I don't get it.

Does that mean I think nobody should be allowed to do it? Do you think I don't respect the majority of my friends who believe differently from me?

The only person I was judging was LE's sister and that's for more than just having multiple sexual partners.

Also I've been to maybe five or six meets? And the only one where I was involved in a discussion of /cgl/ drama was when I was talking about it with chunlichan. Most of the rest of the discussion was about nail polish, traveling, people's work drama, and lolita.

>>6473199
Yeah it was totally uncalled for that I didn't want to fight about why I personally don't care for one night stands on someone else's Facebook. TOTALLY UNCALLED FOR. And then I did anyway because MF just HAD to be a hyperbolic drama queen just because LE and I aren't swingers.

"Uncalled for," thanks for the laughs.

>>6473026
Sup Christina, oh look it's from the ONLY CHIGOTHLOLI FB THREAD I got into the drama about -- THE ONE ABOUT BRINGING KIDS TO MEETUPS, exactly what I said!

And I was arguing against someone who said we should allow children to meetups because lolita fashion is "little girl clothes."

I think the fact that I've been in the chigothloli FB group for almost two years and the fact that I have only recently participated in dumbass drama (not counting one person's personal FB) goes against your "I cause everything to escalate" argument.

>>6472887
I love how all of a sudden I AM HUGE BITCH ALL OF A TIME when the only time I've ever been involved in Chicago drama was that shitstorm about bringing kids to meetup.

I've come to a handful of meetups and I almost never have anything to do with your shittons of drama besides white knighting people that are unfairly shat on here.

Shine on you crazy, oversensitive diamonds.

>>6308470
No. But that's the other one.

>>6308439
Well I'm glad to hear the former but oh my gosh, all this second-hand embarrassment of the latter.

If the Milwaukee Lolita Society were a bunch of cat ear wearing obnoxious high school weeaboo itas, I could completely understand but the few weebs are extremely closeted and there's only two obnoxious bitches (I am one of them).

>>6308036
>>6308036
A bunch of those aren't from Milwaukee you illiterate dipshit. I said I was posting ancient con photos.

I really hate when appearances are more important than having a good time with people when it comes to lolita. WHAT? CLOTHES FROM EBAY? ONE OF THEM IS OVER 50? OH HEAVENS I CAN'T BE SEEN WITH THEM. BETTER NOT GO HAVE FUN.

>>6308056
DAMN. Oh well, it was worth a shot. Also lol I don't even know who two of those people are. And Jeanette has come a long way.

>>6308074
Shit I don't even know what some of that stuff means, haha.

Image limit.

Oops, forgot my pic.

>>6308008
I don't have an account so it's always just been my imagination. BDSM was my guess but is she a dominatrix? That's always been my burning question.

THIS BITCH IS MY FAVORITE. Everyone was so nice to her in spite of her fucking real fur cat ears and her juvenile attitude and then she and her boyfriend complained that we were all fake meanie faces who discriminated against poor people and they were going to start the South Wisconsin Lolita society.

I'm so glad she's gone. Also you should PM me on Facebook. Your secret is safe with me, Anon.

I forgot about my ancient con photos. 2006 AX.

>>6307976
No, I feel like I look pretty manfaced a lot of the time. Thanks though. Tempted to get bangs.

>>6307970
I always wondered what Jen's fetlife looked like. I know she's in the fetish scene but I've never been able to guess exactly what.

Also damn it those girls are very nice people but... yeah. That's Milwaukee lolitas in a nutshell, really -- mostly very nice people who can't always dress themselves.

I am dying to know who you are, Anon. Did you move to CA?