A Site of Field Notes
2006.08.24 |
||
I decided to try re-reading my site and realized that I had left out a very important part about being lolita. Some people, a sadly large number of them in fact, appear to be lolita
because it gives them an opportunity to make fun of other, often -
but not always - more sensitive or socially awkward, people. Some
of them love the attention and power it gives them over others. Others
may be attention-whores, and still others are just arrogant (which
is why they chose a clothing style so focused on natural looks). For
an example of this, I would direct you to the 2ch lolita message board
translation in the research section. This itself is very Japanese.
In fact, the Japanese government just discovered that schools have
been mis-reporting the number of bullying-related deaths, which occur
with enough frequency to warrant an emergency investigation, re-budgeting,
and the nation-wide introduction of school councelors. Although it's
mostly for higher grades, this will also include elementary schools
it seems. If you need an example of this, please see Mihara Mitsukazu's
Angel short in the Doll book series. "Kitto, tenshi ga iru..." Coop & Noah Where to start? First off...we've never met an academic who'd start a sentence with 'and' - nor have we ever encountered an academic who didn't at least put forth the pretence of objectivity... but dear, that's the least of your worries. We find it odd that you call yourself an anthropologist yet on numerous instances you contradict yourself, make biased observations, do not approach your subject matter with any impartiality and you make no use of references. Although you claim to have extensive communications with lolitas living in Japan, for your ‘work’ to be considered a serious academic study there would need to be thorough documentation and evidence to substantiate your claims. While we understand that using such a conversational tone renders the material more accessible for the casual reader, it comes across as pretentious and lacking in academic credibility. When you flout your credentials (anthropologist, economist, etc.) as often as you have, it seems incongruent to not at least represent your material in a way befitting a serious researcher. Also, from our experiences your conjecture does not ring true, with much of what you say coming across as ill-informed and juvenile. -- Noah & Coop. PS: You can’t spell very well. It’s called spell check. Srsly. Obviously Im not very worrid. Rly ^_^ Other than that, just a note. Never trust any modern anthropologist
who claims complete objectivity, or puts forth the pretense of objectivity
(the phrase in itself implying dishonesty). To claim such is to show
that.... As for the "conjecture" in question, I don't know what they are talking about so... This site is over 5 years old, some of the content is over 5 years old. It is one of the original english sites on gothic and lolita, and I am happy to leave it as it is for now. Somehow, it is still accurate. So please, just learn from it, question it, and use it for your own studies if you so please....don't argue with me or insult me. And read the entire site before you write negative comments in my guestbook; you've probably missed some important info if you haven't. That's all really.
|