Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- lb:aesthetics.wiki [2025-10-22 17:37:19] – created ninjasr
+++ lb:aesthetics.wiki [2025-10-22 20:00:03] (current) – [Trivilinks] Just a small addition. ninjasr
@@ Line 7: / Line 7: @@
 What do I mean by biased? Politically biased. This becomes obvious after a casual browse, but I can point it out explicitly.
-A long time ago (though I don't remember exactly when), they previously had an article on Fashwave. This article no longer exists, having been relegated to a mere section on [[https://aesthetics.fandom.com/wiki/Political_%27Wave%27_Aesthetics#Fashwave|this one]]. But when it was a thing, it had a warning card at the top of the page explaining that the wiki doesn't supoport fascism and it's simply for the sake of documentation.\\
+A long time ago (though I don't remember exactly when), they previously had an article on Fashwave. This article no longer exists, having been relegated to a mere section on [[https://aesthetics.fandom.com/wiki/Political_%27Wave%27_Aesthetics#Fashwave|this one]]. But when it was a thing, it had a warning card at the top of the page explaining that the wiki doesn't support fascism and it's simply for the sake of documentation.\\
 I have no issues with that, since the aesthetic not only sucked, but promoted a bad ideology.\\
 However, the bias is notable because, in the same time period, they had a few aesthetics related to communism. Those didn't have any such warning cards.\\
-This pro-communist bent seems to have been amended as both [[https://aesthetics.fandom.com/wiki/Communist_Chic||Communist Chic]] and [[https://aesthetics.fandom.com/wiki/Nazi_Chic|Nazi Chic]].
+This pro-communist bent seems to have been amended as both [[https://aesthetics.fandom.com/wiki/Communist_Chic|Communist Chic]] and [[https://aesthetics.fandom.com/wiki/Nazi_Chic|Nazi Chic]] feature the warning. Though, notably, the warnings are //different// between the two of them.
 Now, at this point I was gonna go out and say "they fixed this, but here's this other bias that is present" until I noticed that the bias I had noticed was gone. I'll note it here anyway.\\
@@ Line 27: / Line 27: @@
 Though that would get into a whole thing about how [[lb:SocJus]] actually hates women and femininity, which is why it desperately and pathetically attacks everything that is even vaguely feminine.\\
 I'm getting distracted.\\
-Another example of such is on the [[https://aesthetics.fandom.com/wiki/Gyaru|Gyaru]] article. I like [[lb:gyaru]], so what criticisms do they level. The following ones:
+Another example of such is on the [[https://aesthetics.fandom.com/wiki/Gyaru|Gyaru]] article. I like [[lb:gyaru]], so what criticism is leveled? The following one:
 <blockquote>
+Ganguro and its subcategories are known for their heavy tan, sometimes to the point where outsiders to the subculture claim they are trying to look like a different race, specifically targeting Black people. However, with Ganguro being long past its heyday and almost extinct, having an overly unnatural tan is rarely seen nowadays. There also has been controversy about Gyaru wearing B-Kei fashion as the tanned skin in combination with hip-hop style fashion could be interpreted as cultural appropriation, even though the fashion style is now extremely rare.
 </blockquote>
+I don't particularly like [[lb:ganguro]] personally, but here we see cultural appropriation mentioned. Cultural appropriation is mentioned several times across the wiki. At this point it should probably be considered a 'dogwhistle', eh?
+There's always an emphasis on criticizing anything that "reinforces traditional gender roles and stereotypes" and then absolutely no problem with encouraging things like casual sex (labelled as 'sex-positive' of course).
+**Actually**, I realized/remembered what it was that initially motivated me to write this: [[https://aesthetics.fandom.com/wiki/Cottagecore|Cottagecore]], which is probably one of the most unhinged articles I've seen.\\
+You can read it yourself of course, but the gist of it is that it started as an ‘aesthetic’ that was popular among the [[lb:SocJus|LGBT]],((:fn:>There's also the fact they use ‘LGBTQ+’ which is only used by adherents of SocJus. It is one of the more obvious linguistic tics.))((:fn:>Though I realized that there are even more blatant signs of this with the use of ‘women-loving-women’ and ‘nonbinary-loving-women’ instead of the use of the term ‘lesbian’, which makes way more sense.)) but it has since been co-opted by groups like the [[https://aesthetics.fandom.com/wiki/Tradwife|Tradwives]]. I don't really care for either group, but it's obviously super biased yet again.\\
+The criticism section also mentions ‘Lesbian Desexualization’ which is something I wasn't even aware of as a concept prior to this.\\
+And, obviously, colonialism and eurocentrism.
+This is basically all that I really wanted to mention. Though keep in mind that I dislike the aesthetics wiki for a few more reasons besides bias. Such as them defining aesthetics at all, possible over-categorization (and anachronistic categorization) and an //under//-categorization (there are waaaay more types of gyaru than just //one//).\\
+Another thing is...I guess they're best described as ‘phantom movements’? A lot of what's on the aesthetics wiki doesn't really seem to actually exist in real-life as a distinct aesthetic movement. Instead, it's more like they're documenting //internet trends// that //appear like aesthetic movements//.\\
+Basically...how can we be sure that these aesthetic movements actually exist outside of the confines of obsessed bloggers and terminally-online people who simply stitch together random images and videos that look vaguely related?\\
+I'm implying they need to touch grass because it's difficult to judge whether a movement exists or not based on social media posts.\\
+Though I'm //not// saying that //none// of the ‘aesthetics’ they describe don't exist as movements or subcultures or whatever (gyaru undeniably exist), just that I get the impression a lot of them //don't//.
+===== Trivilinks =====
+  * [[https://aesthetics.fandom.com/wiki/Aesthetics_Wiki|Aesthetics Wiki]]
+  * A good source of reference images but that's about it.