queerness and homosociality in lolita fashion

Lolita has always been a highly feminine, if not female, subculture. It takes inspiration from historically feminine and "girly" motifs, encourages the participation of female-identifying or female-presenting persons, and soundly rejects the imposition of the male gaze on either the fashion or the people wearing it. Simply put, lolita is a celebration of the feminine, by the feminine, for the feminine — a place where people who enjoy this particular form of gender expression can express themselves openly.

Stock image for Innocent World's Emma One Piece, released 2020.
Image courtesy of Innocent World's official online shop.
(https://innocent-w.jp/onlineshop/en/)

It is because of this that I view lolita fashion as a queer, homosocial space, with a culture that is distinct from much of mainstream heteronormativity and patriarchal expectations. And, as a very late Valentine’s Day tribute, this blog post is going to be discussing queerness and queer theory in the context of lolita fashion, exploring manifestations of homosociality and homoromanticism in lolita communities and media. 

The term "homosocial" was popularised by queer theorist Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick in the 1980s. It describes the particular relationships that form between people of the same or similar gender expression in segregated or semi-segregated environments — such as bathhouses, boys’ or girls’ schools, sororities, fraternities, etc. It has commonly been used in the study of male-orientated and male-dominated spaces in late Victorian and twentieth century society, which Sedgwick and other queer historians identified as places which fostered deep social and physical intimacy (often bordering on the homoerotic or homoromantic), but also bred misogynistic ideas that further enforced patriarchal lines on the outside, so as to protect male gender dominance. These male-dominated environments offered refuge from the pressures of gender performance under the highly rigid heteronormativity of Western society, creating a space where men could express themselves freely with one another, without upsetting the status quo. 

Obviously, lolita bears some key differences to this. One, the fashion is orientated around the feminine, not the masculine — however, it is not segregated, as there are many lolitas who are not cisgendered women. Furthermore, while the lolita subculture draws inspiration from history and traditionally feminine motifs, it is not interested in upholding the status quo, and in fact often runs counter to conservative ideas about gender and gender expression.

Advertisement for Moi-meme-Moitie in Gothic Lolita Bible 24, March 2007.
Image courtesy of Lolita History. 
(www.lolitahistory.com)

Thus, homosociality in lolita fashion could be said to run more along the lines of the female relationships observed in women's colleges, sororities, or the “friendships” between women who choose to cohabitate with each other rather than succumb to the pressure of marriage. While not all of these organizations were necessarily “lesbian” or “queer” (at least, not in the way that we might understand those words today), they certainly gave those participating in them a space wherein strong and intimate relationships between people who embrace and appreciate femininity might flourish, creating a sense of community and solidarity. When considering such forms of feminine and female homosociality, both in these historical contexts and that of lolita fashion, I am often reminded of a quote from Audre Lorde: "The true feminist deals out of a lesbian consciousness whether or not she ever sleeps with women."

Advertisement spread for Metamorphose Temps de Fille, Kera 26, November 2000. 
Image courtesy of Lolita History.
(www.lolitahistory.com)

With this in mind, lets examine the way lolita fashion and the culture around it has been constructed by, and for, female and female-presenting people. At its core, much of the lolita community is built on femininely-orientated relationships and homosocial interactions. Whether it's fixing a fellow lolitas waist ties or helping with pictures at a meet up, lolitas are constantly admiring and caring for each others' sense of expression. We guard each others' safety fiercely, refuting attempts by outsiders to sexualise us and invade our spaces. Nonconformity with the patriarchy is a core tenant of the fashion, and participants are far more concerned with the approval of fellow lolitas than "fitting in" or appealing to men. These behaviours might not be queer in the sense that they indicate sexual or romantic interest between lolitas of the same gender or sexual orientation, but they do show the centrality of femininity and queer experiences to the consciousness of the subculture. Perhaps this is the reason why so many of us who wear lolita also identify and present as female and/or part of the LGBT+ community — the fashion provides a space free from conventional gender and sexual norms, empowering us to express ourselves and encouraging friendships with people who might feel the same. 

In lolita media, is not uncommon to see the lines between this sense of camraderie and homosociality blur with the homoromantic or even homoerotic. Many photoshoots in lolita magazines and advertisements feature sapphic imagery, and male models are seldom included - those who are featured tend to be styled in feminine or androgynous manners, rather than ways that align with mainstream views of masculinity or male sexuality. Again, we see femininity, in its various forms, put into the spotlight. The queer-coded and feminine fantasies that lolita media portrays simultaneously elevates the viewer’s sense of romance, while creating an implicit challenge to the heteronormative society and the male gaze, saying: this is for us, not for you. 

Stock image for Moon River's The Song of Spring OP, released 2020.
Image courtesy of Moon River's official Taobao storefront.
(https://shop570111785.taobao.com/?spm=2013.1.1000126.2.3f7d733fVaPuIF)

Kamikaze Girls is one of, if not the, most famous example of this in lolita media. In both the original novel and the 2004 film, the relationship between the main characters, Momoko and Ichiko, take center stage, with their rejection of mainstream society and conservative patriarchal values being one of the few commonalities between them. Ichiko’s crush on a minor male character is fairly insignificant compared to the lengths that she and Momoko go to support one another — in fact, Momoko’s attempt to comfort Ichiko following her heartbreak is presented in a far more poignant manner, showing instead the deep connection between the pair in a moment of vulnerable intimacy. The final scene is that of the pair riding off into the sunset on a motorbike, with Momoko embracing Ichiko from behind, an echo of so many classic romances. 

Kamikaze Girls / Shimotsuma Monogatari, 2004

The homosociality of lolita lies instead in its rejection of the male gaze and all of its heteronormative, patriarchal, and sexual implications. It is a refuge wherein the “rules” of mainstream gender performance do not apply. Rather than pressuring participants to dress or behave in a way that is concerned with male attention or societal approval, lolita encourages its wearers to dress primarily for themselves and other lolitas. It promotes female or feminine-centred friendships, self-indulgent romance, mutual support, and nonconformity. This is reinforced through lolita media, advertising, and the etiquette of the community itself — creating what I would argue is a feminine (if not female) homosocial space that serves and protects its participants, much in the same way that all-male spaces often do, by providing an environment for interaction, expression, and vulnerability that is shielded from the conventional social norms.