Pedo iljin queen IU is back at it again according to netizens, who are saying that part of her “Palette” music video where she dances against the wall is her invoking “lolita” or something.
That is a lot of people mad online.
Thankfully, this time many are shutting that down as fucking ridiculous.
Still though, as I’ve pointed out before, this is the problem with people not defining what lolita actually is.
The lack of a concrete definition or some kind of standardization about what we’re even talking about when we mention lolita is a perk of this trend, not a flaw. Since K-pop fans basically can’t define it without coming off like a hypocrite (either to others or themselves), they make it as vague and wide-ranging as possible. That empowers them to apply lolita to whatever they want, and thus it’s commonly used as a catch-all term for anything that makes people uncomfortable, as can be seen by how these lolita (or shota) accusations are popping up all over the place.
It’s laughable when people throw out shit like “well she looks young and shows skin” or “well she’s wearing this clothing item and is showing skin” as their definition for lolita and connect that to promoting pedophilia. Because you end up with shit like this happening all the time, where you can’t show midriff or wear a skirt or whatever without some emotional dipshit saying it’s lolita.
It’s just funny to me how in an industry that consistently sexualizes actual underage kids and has “lolita” concepts galore (by one definition), it’s only when adult women start making their own decisions that people begin to find it problematic.
Oh well, at least these witch hunts that international K-pop fans bandwagon from stuff Korean K-pop fans start are always grounded in reality and context, which is why IU’s career is now over like they said it would be.