#not romanticizing lolita and humberts relationship

[carm3n-carm3n]

🝮 get down like your tutor taught you to and do it 🝮

[iluvuiloumi]

Nabokov's Lolita: My Ramblings

Ramblings, episode 2, because not a lot of my friends read classics and someone's gotta listen to me so why not all of Tumblr? Lolita, controversial, misunderstood Lolita, almost seems like Nabokov knew just how badly the book can be misinterpreted. Repeatedly, Nabokov acknowledges the reader within the book and guesses at their horror and reactions, and leaves — frankly — obvious signs that you are supposed to dislike Humbert Humbert, question a certain scene's validity, or worry for the safety of the 12 year old in the situation. Even so, many a person looked at me in horror when I said that is the book I was reading.

"Light of my life, fire of my loins...."

I'd like to begin by discussing just how much significance the writing style holds to understanding the book, and it lies in the writing style being distinctly hard to dissect.

Nabokov's book is intensely loving of the English language, and seems to bend it to his will to properly express either the disgusting nature of Humbert's sexual fantasies. In long twisting paragraphs, Nabokov often switches languages to express thoughts, and I think he does it often to make sure that the audience has to put conscious effort into properly understanding Humbert.

Either by having to manually translate those lines or read into subtext, the reader is forced to play closer attention to and feel Humbert's paranoia or fantasy, and the writing style imitates almost stream-of-consciousness writing in its constant and lengthy elaborations on certain select descriptions to show you just how much he's focused on that or by switching to French, something he does both audibly and in his mind.

This forces you to recognize with Humbert's thoughts, so even if you approach the book with the apprehensiveness or pre-concieved notion of who Humbert is as a person, you are forced to put yourself into his shoes — or thoughts, for lack of a better metaphor — to be able to fully and properly understand him and his motivations.

However, paradoxically, this kind of close examination or living the story through only Humbert's eyes because for better or for worse, he is the only narrator we have been given for the story, also makes the book seem deceptively simple. It's easy right? Focus on what Humbert says and you'll get the story.

Yes, if Humbert was a conscientious or even unbiased narrator. No, instead, you see how he will spend multiple paragraphs, sometimes pages describing how Lolita looks playing Tennis, or how the road curves, or his fantasies. But he glosses over any emotion he does not personally feel.

In a pivotal moment, the 12 year old runs from their shared house after screaming at Humbert that he had murdered her mother. This scene changes everything. They leave the town after this and go back on travel.

However, Lolita gets no dialogue. The fact that she accuses him of killing her mother gets no dialogue. Because Humbert controls the story. He knows and is well aware how that would make him look and how much it would reveal about how Lolita truly feels about their relationship. Humbert Humbert is not Lolita's lover. She hates him. If the dialogue was written out, if Humbert would allow himself to remember that day in full, he would never be able to recover.

So he doesn't, and he doesn't tell you. You have to read between the lines. So, the writing style both heavily helps you by forcing you to pay closer attention to the story, but the voice through which it is told is actively hindering you from it. It is a brilliant novel.

His genius bursts from the pages through which he balances how Humbert romanticizes the story while also laying out red flags to bright they should blind you if you read the way he intends you to (actively) for the reader to pick up on.

I have so much to say about this book that this barely grazes the first throught I had

Poor, poor Dolores Haze. Always cursed to be remembered as Humbert's Lolita and never by her actual name.

Nabokov was a genius.

[spoiledsummerdasies]

Usually I don’t respond to these kinds of things but I think this is a good opportunity for educating people on what an introject is as well as romanticism.

First let’s cover introjects. I’m an introject, which means an alter based on a pre-existing person or thing. An alter is an “alternate personality” a separate state of identity that shares a mind and body with someone else. It’s a part of having DID/OSDD or other plural based disorders/ states of being.

I am an alter BASED on Delores Hayze in a system of around 16 alters. I’m the youngest at 14, and the oldest is literally an ageless being. The body I front in is 21 in a few months. Despite myself being 14 and having the personality of a 14 year old, the brain and body is 21. Which means I am mature enough to understand that my source is controversial and a very complex story. I am fair from impressionable. You can’t control who you split into the system. I didn’t ASK to be Delores. No one in the system actively decided “let’s split the victim from a very controversial source”.

Next, let’s talk romanticism. Simply existing as an introject is not romanticising anything. I, and the rest of the system are very very anti-child exploitation. We are firmly against things like proshippers, the sexualisation of children, the romanticism of Lolita and stories like it etc. why wouldn’t we be? It’s common sense. And we’re a system for gods sakes, many many systems are created FROM traumatic events like being harassed as a child. I don’t like older men, no one in the system does. We’re all creeped the hell out by them, that’s why we HATE people like Humbert and communities like ‘teacher crush’ and all that shit. While it’s fairly normal for teenagers to think people like older celebrities are attractive, that’s just puberty and hormones, they shouldn’t be actively seeking out older men. Anyone with a brain cell knows that. I promise you the only people who romanticise Lolita are people with no media literacy or actual PDFs. The majority of coquettes like it because they can unfortunately relate to being a victim of an older man (weather it’s just creepy comments on the internet or full blown assault). It’s an unfortunate reality that most people raised AFAB have had older men be creepy to them in some way as a minor. Weather it be a catcall or something more extreme, we can all unfortunately relate to the feeling of disgust and vulnerability that comes with being a young victim. That’s why so many of us like Lolita as a story, we can relate to the tragedy of Delores loosing her innocence at such a young age.

Liking the fashion in the movies isn’t romanticising it. Literally thousands of of people in the 1940-50s dressed that way. Liking vintage Americana as an aesthetic isn’t romanticising anything, it was a real time period that millions of people lived through. Lolita isn’t the only movie set in that time. I personally like these things because I’m an introject of a person that lived in that time period. It’s nostalgic to me.

As for Lana del Rey, she’s not telling anyone to do anything. Her music is commentary on the American dream, the way life was back in the 50s and how people weren’t actually living this perfect life Hollywood made it out to be. That’s why she’s got songs like ultra violence (about abusive relationships), Carmen (about the horrors a 17 year old has to face as a street worker), born to die (feeling hopeless and lost), blue jeans (about a lover leaving you). Her image of a romantic 1950s America is commentary on how all the glitz and glamour was a thinly veiled cover for the hardships regular people faced at the time, how Hollywood is a major lie. Sure she has her happier and raunchier songs here and there, but the main image of the ‘Lana del Rey’ character is just that, a character. It’s telling a story. Most people understand that, and those who don’t are either too young to be listening to her or have no media literacy. So no, she’s not telling anyone to do anything and liking her music for the commentary and story it tells isn’t romanticising anything.

I don’t doubt there’s people out there who romanticise these kinds of things, I’ve seen it. But simply liking an aesthetic/fashion and being unfortunate enough to be an introject from a controversial source doesn’t mean I’m I’m romanticising anything. If you actually looked at my whole blog you’d see many posts that are directing the book and highlighting the horror aspects of it, I very much understand it’s not a love story. That’s why I like it, it’s an unfiltered look at what abusers are actually like. Lying, manipulating, disgusting perverts. It’s a conversation that’s hard to have, but needs to be had.

TLDR: liking vintage Americana aesthetics/ fashion is not sexualising anything. Liking a horrific story doesn’t automatically mean romanticising it. Being an introject from a controversial source and having a connection to said source isn’t a bad thing, you literally can’t control who you split as.

In fact, the fact you saw a blog run by a 14 year old alter full of frilly socks and Coca Cola and immediately thought it was sexual, says more about you than it does me. And just a tip: coming into strangers blogs and coming off this aggressive won’t stop them from doing anything, it comes off as hate. If you genuinely want to stop kids from being in unsafe places, you need to be more gentle and compassionate. They’re kids, they don’t know any better.

[nadekosnake]

neglected manuscript - Do you have a favorite novel?

from this ancient ask meme

LMAO NO!!! PICKING THE ONE I WAS AFRAID OF 💀 I could make it easy and lie but y’know what? We’re gonna be honest about this 🫡 Gonna be LONG bc I have 1) not talked with about this in any capacity with another human being before and 2) a pretty complicated relationship with this book 🤕

Content warning for CSA 👇

This is difficult partly bc I do love a lot of books but partly bc I don’t like to reveal my actual favorite book… I genuinely worry people will perceive me in a very negative way LMAO. My favorite of all time is Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov 😶 It’s the book I’ve reread the most in my life so far and it is genuinely one of the best written books I have read 🤧 I think generally people are like 😰🤢 when you drop a bomb like that what’s typically supposed to be a light-hearted convo so I usually will say something else! Typically my safe answer is The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald (which genuinely was my favorite book at some point in time, we are not going to dive into this right now).

(A disclaimer as I talked about Lolita fashion before, I am aware that the fashion gets its name from the novel but that’s where the relation ends. I like Lolita fashion because I’m a loser that likes subculture fashion and not because it has the same name or any other connection to the book. That happens to be coincidental. I am staunchly against fetishization of the fashion ok thanks! 🙂‍↕️ back to the program!)

Brief summary for those who need it: Humbert (the narrator) is a scholar and a secret pedophile, who one day meets the Haze family for a home stay. He obsesses over the daughter, a 12 year-old girl named Dolores Haze, who he personally calls Lolita. Humbert marries Ms. Haze to be around the real object of his obsession. Through unfortunate events, he ends up Dolores’s sole caretaker. She lives with Humbert’s constant sexual abuse that spans a cross-country roadtrip, but eventually she runs away with the help of another pedophile. Unfortunately it is not a happy ending. Despite Dolores’s escape from both pedophiles, she dies before she can rebuild a normal life with her future family.

The first time I tried to read it, I was too young (around Dolores’s own age 🫥). It was recommended to me by another middle school girl! God knows what the fuck we were doing back then LMAO but the girl who recommended it to me said it was a love story. Older man girl our age whatever. Tbh when I started it I understood that it wasn’t a love story… and I couldn’t finish it because of how uncomfortable it made me. I reread it a handful of times between middle school and uni with varying degrees of success, and I only really started to grasp it when I reached uni. I do think I was entirely too young to read the book or even understand it, and thankfully it was not used as a tool to manipulate me. It was a dicey time tbh. When I was growing up, there weren’t communities of young women that centered around accepting Dolores Haze as a victim.

I think there’s a disclaimer for those you haven’t read it and think it glorifies CSA and pedophilia. It really does not. Nabokov himself was a victim of CSA and did not condone it. I think that the #1 thing that movie adaptations and pop culture struggle with is that people believe the narrator point blank. So the adaptations all have this horrible romanticization of the story at their cores. People even struggle with understanding the book because the narrator is an Educated & Scholarly Man who is like ✨I’m a poet I’m a sensitive soul and we poets just believe in love✨ like NO!!! The whole point of the story is that he is an unreliable narrator!!! The narrator is a murderer, rapist, kidnapper, and if you’re actually paying attention you see it all with your own damn eyes! And of course nobody really does pay attention! 😭

So like, why is this my favorite? This is also complicated LOL, but I think that there’s a couple of main reasons.

Ultimately, to me, the novel is a puzzle that Nabokov invites you to solve. You have an unreliable narrator, but he’s an excellent manipulator. I think a lot of people lose “the game,” so to speak, the first time they read the book because the narrator is so good at making you see only what he wants you to see (he loves her, he’s just a nice sensitive guy who lost his first love too early, he’s doesn’t mean to hurt “his” “Lolita,” she “seduced” him, she “makes” him do horrible things to her, etc). It is written so well, and since the character himself is a professor and an intellectual, I think it’s easier for folks to let their guard down and to literally be tricked. Genuinely speaking I struggled with what to believe too, especially as a child. The only reason I didn’t buy into the “love story” bit was because by some intuition, I was aware that something Bad was happening despite the narrator’s insistence that it was all good. Tho I could not pinpoint what it was at the time.

But once you break past the facade and you’re fully paying attention the novel, it is like two stories in one. One hand, poets romantics in the name of love blah blah blah, but on the other hand? Dolores is a girl from a broken home, who’s mother is murdered by a man that wants to rape her. She’s kidnapped and shows clear signs of abuse (triggered by paternal affection, cried herself to sleep every night since the abuse started, bouts of disassociation, extreme rebellion towards Humbert, etc). Some of this stuff is actually glossed over by the narrator, but signs of a whole other part of the story are literally right in front of you if you’re paying attention.

For example, there’s a single line about Dolores’s mother, Charlotte, where she reveals in a letter to Humber that both her first husband and her youngest child (Dolores’s baby brother) died. And the narrator does NOT give a rat’s ass about this woman or her woes so it’s never talked about again. It’s whittled down to one single dismissive sentence, and I missed it tons of times. But knowing that, it makes sense why Charlotte acts as she does, why Charlotte and Dolores’s relationship is fraught. And why Dolores acts as she does at the beginning of the novel. Literally the Haze family is going through extreme grief with barely the emotional resources to process a double death in their immediate family. Without that context though, you’re just going along with whatever Humbert wants you to believe. You don’t see who Charlotte or Dolores are as individuals. You miss a chunk of the truth. And that’s literally just one of the smallest instances I can think of. There’s so much to dig through both directly and in between the lines. Nabokov is so deliberate with his writing and so extremely detailed that there’s a LOT of things that are easily missed unless you read it multiple times. This shit is so detailed, there’s scholars dedicated both to Nabokov and to Lolita the novel.

I think the last big reason I keep coming back to it is because I think it’s something so deeply rooted in society, you never really live without Lolita. The book has been bastardized to hell and back because most people, especially those in power once again, Do Not Understand how to read this book. So we’re left with not necessarily Dolores Haze, but this enigmatic “Lolita” the abstract figure of Humbert’s delusions. She is so influential, we all live our lives with her whether or not we’re aware of it. Coquette aesthetic? Lolita. Lana Del Rey? Katy Perry? The Police? Lolita. Marc Jacobs? Carven? Lolita. Vladimir? Excavation? My Dark Vanessa? Lolita. Heart-shaped sunglasses? Lolita. Butterflies??? Yes, Lolita. You can even go so wild with the connections to the point of bringing up the goddamn Lion King (animated 1994 version, Scar is voiced by Jeremy Irons who played Humbert Humbert in Adrian Lyne’s 1997 adaptation).

And it’s this constant reminder, every day. You pass by her on the Internet or in an ad while you’re out and about. She lives in the shadow of your acquaintance or your loved one. She haunts everything in a very real and literal sense. I think that’s what keeps me coming back to the book… even if I wanted to forget about her, I don’t think I ever really could.

[macabrefemme]

You can be my Daddy - a Lolita analysis

Lolita was originally a novel written by Russian American author, Vladimir Nabokov in 1955. The book was later developed into two film adaptations, one in 1962 and one in 1997. This story has been at the center of misdirected critique, misunderstanding, and praise (Invernizzi, 2020). Many critiques come from consumers that misunderstood the message Nabokov was portraying, many thinking he was promoting the sexual deviation he described in his novel and refusing to read it. Others read it and romanticized the dynamic portrayed, that of a pedophile and his victim. While watching this film, I fail to understand how one deeply misunderstands the message Nabokov was intending.  This film is one of the best portrayals of the male gaze, or the objectifying gaze, and I will be analyzing the way Humbert uses this to tell his story. Humbert objectifies Lolita in many ways, from the clothes he puts her in, the positions he imagines her in, the actions he imagines she does to him, and even how her body is broken up in the cinematography throughout the film. Of course, this film also does a great job of distorting reality from Humbert’s fantasies, some instances being more obvious than others. I will also be analyzing the ways in which Humbert simply looks at Lolita rather than seeing her as a person and a child.

The film begins with Humbert Humbert, our main character and narrator, talking about his childhood love. He goes on to explain that the girl he loved died and he says, “The child I loved was gone but I kept looking for her long after I had left my own childhood behind.” This is the clearest motivation we hear from Humbert. He explains why he did what he did at the beginning of the film. He considered Annabel, his first love, the first nymphet. When he meets Dolores, or Lolita, she is in the backyard laying under a sprinkler. Her clothes are soaked and her underwear is visible while she’s reading. Humbert quite literally freezes and becomes speechless when he lays eyes on her. It is at this point, we see that Humbert’s attraction towards Dolores is sexual. It is evident in the way the camera, or Humbert, breaks up Lolita’s body and pans across. When Humbert first sees Lolita, her face is hidden by the branches and only her body is visible. The camera begins at her feet, pans to her face where her expression seems content and focused on the magazine she’s flipping through, then we see her face Humbert and give a smile, revealing her retainers. Humbert has found his new nymphet in Lolita.

Through the months that Humbert lives with Charlotte and Lolita, Charlotte becomes increasingly crueler and snide towards Lolita. She makes disgusted faces when Lolita spends time with Humbert, most notably on the porch swing. Lolita is very close with Humbert and constantly leans on him and giggles, which Charlotte hates and tries to get Lolita to go inside and leave them alone. Humbert sees Lolita doing childish things and finds it endearing. There’s a scene where she’s in the bathroom and he’s watching her and chuckles to himself. Lolita eventually gets taken to summer camp, albeit forcefully by Charlotte. Before she leaves, however, she runs back inside all the way to Humbert’s room and jumps on him. The camera focuses on her legs wrapping around Humbert’s waist and his arms around hers. The camera then pans up to their faces and we see Lolita give Humbert a passionate and sloppy goodbye kiss that definitely goes on for too long. She giggles before getting off him and running back to the car. It’s not clear in the film whether Lolita actually kissed Humbert or if he imagined this. This action seems to solidify Humbert’s attraction to Lolita, therefore setting off the string of events that take place throughout the film.

Charlotte and Humbert get married while Lolita is at camp. Humbert is clearly very miserable in the relationship, he never engages in intimacy with Charlotte and instead drugs her with sleeping pills. Many viewers have determined that Humbert married Charlotte simply to get closer to Lolita and he sees her not as a wife but as a barrier trying to prevent his and Lolita’s relationship. Others who have analyzed this particular version of the film have pointed out the ethical dilemma in Lolita and Humbert’s relationship based on the sham marriage between Charlotte and Humbert (Zeng, 2019). Charlotte’s death is something that came as a shock. She found Humbert’s journal that he writes his thoughts about her and Lolita in and she is very distressed by what she found, so distressed in fact that she runs out of the house and gets hit by a car and consequently dies. The barrier that Humbert needed to overcome, or get rid of, has been removed from he and Lolita’s lives. This means he can pursue his fantasy without any worry, which of course will backfire.

A scene that caught my attention was when Humbert was hurriedly packing to leave to get Lolita from camp. He seemingly throws everything into suitcases but when he gets to packing Lolita’s clothes, he seems to take more consideration into what clothes he packs for her. Many of the clothes he packs are cropped sleeveless tops with lots of frills and ruffles and shorts or skirts. Though Lolita is 14, her dress seems to resemble a baby or a little girl. This scene caught my attention because of how careful Humbert picks Lolita’s clothes. I couldn’t help but attribute Lolita to a doll due to the way Humbert took his time choosing what to dress her in. He enjoys looking at her rather than seeing her as an actual person. This was Humbert’s way of keeping her as childlike as he possibly could but not too childlike. He wanted to keep his nymphet as she was. He lusts after Lolita’s beauty, innocence, and her youth, not simply just her body (Zeng, 2019).

Humbert picks up Lolita from camp and lies to her, telling her that Charlotte was in the hospital instead of dead. Humbert drives to a hotel to stay with Lolita for the night. There, their relationship is more or less solidified, in terms of their dynamic. Humbert checks in for the room and introduces Lolita as his stepdaughter. Lolita looks around and becomes distracted by a dog on a leash. She’s wearing a cropped top and a skirt. Lolita gets on her knees and arches her back as she begins to play with the dog. She’s knelt down at the feet of another man, who we later find out is playwright Clare Quilty. Lolita’s position in both Humbert’s perspective and Quilty’s perspective is no doubt suggestive. Humbert looks over when he sees Lolita is not by his side and gets a look at her backside and up her skirt. Quilty is looking at her from above. Although he’s sitting on a couch, the angle at which his body is shot is showing a dominant view. His face is hidden but the focus is on his hands and his legs. The audience has this idea that Quilty is a dominant character just from this shot alone. Lolita is looking up at him but not changing her position. Her torso is flush to the floor and her bottom is up in the air. Whether this is alluding to a sexual position or it’s foreshadowing of what’s to come later that night, it’s clear both men view her as a sexual object. That night, Humbert meets Quilty, though he doesn’t know it’s the playwright. Quilty makes accusatory, and true, statements towards Humbert and when he’s confronted or asked to repeat the statements, Quilty rephrases it. The first thing he asked Humbert was, “Where the devil did you get her?” Humbert dismisses him as a drunk but is still wary of the interaction. This scene, to me, was the very definition of “it takes one to know one.” Lolita and Humbert have been able to pass as a stepfather and daughter dynamic to most people but Quilty saw through their act and knew what was going on because he also is a pedophile, albeit a more dangerous one as compared to Humbert.  

During their first night together, Humbert recalls that Lolita is the one who initiated the sex. She is portrayed as talking about her and a boy at camp and the “game” they played. Humbert questions the game, after showing obvious jealousy of the boy, and Lolita asks him if she should show him. This is another instance where it is unclear whether this actually happened or not. At this point, we realize that Humbert is an unreliable narrator.

During their travels and their nights together, Lolita calls Humbert “dad.” We can see that the use of this word causes Humbert some discomfort and his fantasy of Lolita breaks. He sees her as a child when she calls him dad but the effect doesn’t last for long. Humbert’s fantasy of Lolita takes over again after a while. In these instances, the audience sees what can be assumed to be an internal conflict for Humbert. He does love her as a child but he also loves her because she is a child. Lolita does childish things and she is an annoying and bratty girl, yet Humbert loves her for that. There’s a scene where Lolita is rolling a jawbreaker around in her mouth and Humbert becomes annoyed by it. He reaches over, forces his fingers in her mouth and takes out the jawbreaker. This action should have been quick and unpleasant, but the camera cuts between Lolita and Humbert’s faces. Lolita has clear disgust on her face and Humbert seemingly enjoys the mere act of having his fingers in her mouth. This act is blatantly sexual. The forcefulness, the fingers in the mouth, the expression on Humbert’s face is displaying his dominance over Lolita. It also shows how quick he is to reinforce his fantasy of the nymphet after being brought back to the reality that Lolita is a child.

Throughout the rest of the film, Lolita and Humbert travel and stay at various Motels. During the night, Humbert usually has sex with Lolita. Though there is only one explicit sex scene, the rest are heavily implied. Lolita exhibits symptoms of post traumatic stress disorder due to the continued sexual abuse by Humbert. She begins to hoard the money Humbert gives her as a reward for having sex with him and lies to him. Child victims of sex abuse typically come from neglectful homes, like Lolita. Her attachment and tolerance to Humbert’s actions likely result from her childhood with her mother. She accepts whatever attention she can get because she never received it from her mother, at least positive attention (Invernizzi, 2020). With Humbert, Lolita gets whatever she wants and because of that, she tolerates the sex and the traveling. Lolita is resilient. She has found ways to adapt to Humbert’s abuse and she has found motivation and a hopeful way out. Quilty eventually manages to take Lolita away from Humbert but he realizes that this girl is not what he wants. Lolita explains that she told Quilty that she doesn’t want to do anything with the other kids Quilty had, instead she wants him. Quilty kicks Lolita out of his house for this statement. Lolita is so traumatized by Humbert that she attaches herself to Quilty and tries to do what she knows and that is have sex with the older men. This can be another trauma response due to how she was raised. The absence of a father in her home and the neglect and verbal abuse from her mom has no doubt been a causal factor of Lolita’s unhealthy attachment.

This film is one of the best depictions of the male gaze in media. Lolita is a child and yet her body is used to drive the plot of the film. Humbert is attracted to her body and not her as a person. Though she is fourteen, Humbert objectifies her due to his own childhood trauma and his longing to find another nymphet after losing his first one as a boy. He simply uses her as something pretty to look at, shown in the gazes he steals while driving, instead of seeing her as a person with ambitions, dreams, and feelings. When Humbert confronts Quilty, it is unclear whether he chooses to confront him from the perspective of a father or a lover to Lolita. Though the two are essentially the same, Humbert finds himself disgusted with Quilty and what he did with Lolita. Regardless, I believe Nabokov’s original novel and the two films are meant to be consumed with previous knowledge of what it is portraying. Many young and impressionable readers and viewers go into the film or novel and end up romanticizing Lolita and Humbert’s relationship. This is a cautionary tale and it should be talked about as such. I think it is an important novel to read and film to watch from a psychological standpoint as it gives an insight into the mind of a fictional pedophile.

[akiipockii]

something I’m thinking about after I watched one too many video essays on Lolita. The fact that the “nymphette” and “Lolita” hashtags still live on after the tag was DELETED is insane to me. They’ve come up with new versions.

——————

TRIGGER WARNING: MENTIONS OF: SEXUAL ABUSE / PEDOPHILIA / DISCUSSION OF GROOMING /EDs / ABUSE

For those of you unaware, Lolita is a book written by Vladimir Nabokov in 1955 about a man named Humbert Humbert who falls in love (is obsessed and infatuated) with a 12 year old (and his step-daughter!) Dolores Haze. He calls her a “nymphet” (later changed by tumblr/pale grunge tumblr as nymphette, much like coquette) and is obsessed with her.

Later within the book he kidnaps her and sexually abuses her shortly after becoming her stepfather to gain closeness to Dolores. He calls her “Lolita”, a Spanish nickname for Dolores.

His unusual obsession with “nymphets” is due to his childhood lover, Annabel Leigh’s, death from typhus, causing Humbert Humbert to become sexually obsessed with girls 9-14, as he dubs, “nymphets”.

He meets Dolores’ mother, a widow named Charlotte, quickly sees Lolita and decides to move in, as Dolores is a “perfect nymphet”.

——-

. I’m not going to spoil the rest, but read the book if you can. Humbert Humbert is an unreliable narrator and a horrible person. It’s a very interesting novel.

However, due to the film adaptations (Lolita; Stanley Kubrick (1962) and Lolita; Adrian Lyne (1997)) of this book, Dolores has been aged up and made to be something of attainment within some social circles, typically by teenage girls.

Within this falls a Lana Del Rey obsession, as she frequently mentions Lolita within her songs, and having age gap relationships.

Age gap relationships are not inherently bad, date whoever you want when you are fully grown, but these girls (I will not call them women they are teenagers) romanticize these age gaps, (such as 19-25, even further in age, etc.) making it a goal.

The reason why I’m so upset by the resurgence of these hashtags, like:

#lolit4 #nyphett3 #nympette

Etc..

Is because it misses the whole point of the book and can glorify pedophilia and the grooming of young girls, preteens and teenagers, and can lead to the exploitation of these children. It can also lead to an increased chance in being abused by a partner or being assaulted, in search of the “Lolita aesthetic”.

sometimes the internet worries me.

Lolita and increased need to be perfect within an aesthetic can lead to EDs, and other severely damaging consequences to something that seems harmless.

Vladimir Nabokov rolls in his grave when he hears you glorify the book oh my god. Please I am begging you, PLEASE just.. do anything else

[bittersweetsweetheart]

Does the Lolita 1997 film romanticize Humbert and Lolita’s relationship? I heard it does that and portrays Lolita as some sort of seductress even though she’s 12 and I found out a lot of the Lolita aesthetic comes from that movie and i used to really like the aesthetic but if it’s romanticizing that movie then idk (I haven’t seen the film or anything so please correct me if I’m mistaken)

The actual story of Lolita does not romanticize the relationship. I have mixed feeling about the movie in general, but I wouldn't say it portrays her as a seductress as much as it shows us Lo through the eyes of Humbert- who sees her as a seductress.

That being said, please don't let me (or anyone on the internet)tell you how to feel about a film or book. Watch it and form your own opinions.

and if you like something, then enjoy it. You can find fault with everything, nothing is perfect or 100% unproblematic because human beings aren't perfect. You can enjoy and participate in things while recognizing any flaws it or the community around it may have. If dressing a certain way or embracing a a particular aesthetic makes you happy, do it.

Coquette style takes inspiration from the outfits Dolores wears in the movie, but is not just about Lolita, so if you watch the movie and for whatever reason decide it's not for you, there's still so many other facets of the subculture you can enjoy.

Check out @teendeaths, @coquette-club, @pompettepink, @suicidesiren , @lovesickbrat for some other really lovely coquette blogs where you can find inspiration from!

[anawkwardlady]

The fact that people actually listened to The Lolita Podcast where people who participated in the communities everyone called "romanticizers" were finally analyzed with nuance and understanding and how liking Dolores and her aesthetic wasn't "romanticizing" her relationship to Humbert but trying to see her past her victim status, trying to have control on their own girlhood/boyhood again, being a messy individual like she was and such. While also acknowledging the issues it brought and the fact that some people were irresponsible and all. Only to have the same dried takes repeated to death where the only acceptable way to appreciate that character is to say 'It's very wrong and it's very bad', trying to engage in any other way like fashion and community is just *gasp* how dare you! its about a victim now she can't be liked for anything else!

its disappointing.

[daniellavalencia]

Playlist Assignment

Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov

https://www.sparknotes.com/lit/lolita/

"Young and Beautiful" by Lana Del Rey could be interpreted as a song that reminds you of Lolita: The song's lyrics describe the fleeting nature of youth and beauty, which could relate to Lolita's character and her relationship with Humbert. Humbert becomes obsessed with Lolita's youth and beauty, and his desire for her is largely based on these physical qualities. However, as Lolita grows older, she becomes less attractive to Humbert, and their relationship becomes more strained. Here is a passage from the book that could relate to the song's lyrics: "I was consumed by a hell furnace of localized lust for every passing nymphet whom as a law-abiding poltroon I never dared approach" (Chapter 1). This passage shows how Humbert's attraction to young girls is based on their physical appearance, rather than any emotional connection or intellectual compatibility. Overall, the song "Young and Beautiful" could be interpreted as a reference to Lolita's youth and beauty, which are the qualities that initially attract Humbert to her. However, as the book progresses, it becomes clear that their relationship is based on superficial qualities and cannot last.

"ghostin" by Ariana Grande The song's lyrics describe a relationship that is haunted by the memory of a past love, which could relate to Humbert's relationship with Lolita. Throughout the book, Humbert is haunted by the memory of his first love, Annabel, and his desire for Lolita is largely based on his desire to recapture the feelings he had with Annabel. Some passages from the book that could relate to the song's lyrics: "My apology was sincere enough, but it was not for Lolita. It was for the poor clown Humbert Humbert, that dark fanatical fool" (Chapter 29). This passage shows how Humbert is aware of the harm he has caused Lolita, but he is more concerned with his own reputation and image. “I had her, I lost her, and now I have her again" (Chapter 29). This passage shows how Humbert's desire for Lolita is based on his desire to recapture the feelings he had with Annabel, rather than any genuine feelings for Lolita.  Overall, the song "ghostin" could be interpreted as a reference to the way Humbert's relationship with Lolita is haunted by the memory of his past love, Annabel. Humbert is unable to let go of his past and move on, which ultimately leads to the tragic end of their relationship. Similarly, the narrator of "ghostin" is haunted by the memory of a past love, which makes it difficult for her to fully commit to her current partner.

“Lolita" by Lana Del Rey is a song that is inspired by the novel of the same name by Vladimir Nabokov. The song describes a relationship between a young girl and an older man, and the lyrics are very similar to the themes in the book. Here are some examples of how the song's lyrics relate to the book “One, one, one, one, one... Bite me, chew me, love me, swallow me" (Verse 1). This passage could be seen as a reference to the way Humbert views Lolita as an object to be consumed and possessed. Throughout the book, Humbert is obsessed with Lolita's physical appearance and views her as a possession that he can control. “I know what the boys want, I'm not gonna play" (Chorus). This passage could be seen as a reference to the way Lolita is sexualized and objectified by the men in the book. Humbert is not the only character who views Lolita in this way; other characters in the book also sexualize her and treat her as an object. “Lolita" by Lana Del Rey could be seen as a song that romanticizes the relationship between the protagonist and Lolita. The lyrics focus on the physical aspects of the relationship and ignore the power dynamics at play.

The song "Supermodel" by SZA and the novel "Lolita" both explore themes of self-identity, insecurity, and the search for validation. In "Supermodel," SZA sings about feeling hurt and betrayed by a former lover, and how she has struggled with self-doubt and insecurity as a result. Similarly, in "Lolita," the protagonist is consumed by his obsession with Lolita, and his search for validation through her love leads him down a destructive path. Both works explore the idea of seeking validation and self-worth through others, and how this can lead to emotional pain and suffering. Additionally, both works touch on themes of power dynamics and the ways in which people can manipulate and exploit others for their own gain. Overall, while the two works are different in many ways, they share common themes and ideas that make them relevant to one another.

"I Put a Spell on You" is a classic song that has been covered by many artists over the years. The song is about a person who has been jilted by their lover and decides to put a spell on them to make them come back. Here are some passages from "Lolita" that could relate to the song “I knew I had fallen in love with Lolita forever; but I also knew she would not be forever Lolita" (Chapter 13). This passage could relate to the idea of putting a spell on someone to make them stay with you. Humbert is obsessed with Lolita and wants to keep her with him forever, but he knows that their relationship is temporary. He is desperate to hold onto her and keep her under his control. "I was a daisy fresh girl and look what you've done to me" (Chapter 1). This passage could relate to the idea of being jilted by a lover. Lolita is a young girl who is taken advantage of by an older man, and her innocence is destroyed as a result. She is not able to live a normal life because of what has been done to her, and she is forever changed by her experiences. Overall, "Lolita" by Vladimir Nabokov is a complex and nuanced novel that deals with themes of obsession, control, and power. The passages I have highlighted could relate to the song "I Put a Spell on You" in various ways, depending on how you interpret the lyrics.

"I Will Always Love You" by Dolly Parton. The song is about a woman who is saying goodbye to a man that she loves, but knows that she cannot be with. Similarly, the novel "Lolita" explores the themes of love and obsession, as the protagonist becomes fixated on a young girl and is unable to control his feelings for her. Both works examine the theme of unrequited love and the pain that can come from loving someone who is unattainable. While the subject matter of "I Will Always Love You" is less controversial than that of "Lolita", both works share a common theme of the difficulties of love and the ways in which it can lead to emotional turmoil.

“Lolita" is a novel that explores the themes of obsession, desire, and the corruption of innocence. Similarly, "Creep" by Radiohead is a song that explores the theme of unrequited love and the feelings of inadequacy and self-loathing that can come with it. The song has been interpreted as a commentary on the way that people can become obsessed with others, even when it's not healthy for them to do so. In both cases, the themes are related to the darker side of human emotions and the dangers of becoming too attached to someone else.

"Toxic" by Britney Spears is not directly related to the novel "Lolita". However, both explore the themes of obsession and addiction. In "Lolita", the protagonist is obsessed with a young girl, while in "Toxic", the protagonist is addicted to a toxic relationship with a man who is bad for her. Both explore the darker side of human emotions and the dangers of becoming too attached to someone else.

"Criminal" by Apple. The song is about a woman who is in love with a man who is bad for her. The lyrics describe the woman's feelings of being addicted to the man, even though she knows that he is causing her harm. The song has been interpreted as a commentary on the way that people can become addicted to others, even when they know that the relationship is unhealthy for them. Similarly, the novel "Lolita" explores the themes of obsession and addiction, as the protagonist becomes obsessed with a young girl and is unable to control his feelings for her. Both "Criminal" and "Lolita" deal with the darker side of human emotions and the dangers of becoming too attached to someone else.

“Somebody That I Used to Know" by Gotye. The song is about a man who is struggling to come to terms with the end of a relationship. Similarly, the novel "Lolita" explores the themes of love and loss, as the protagonist becomes obsessed with a young girl and is unable to move on from his feelings for her. Both works explore the complex emotions that can arise from romantic relationships and the difficulty of letting go of someone that you once loved. While the subject matter of "Somebody That I Used to Know" is less controversial than that of "Lolita", both works share a common theme of heartbreak and the pain of losing someone that you care about.

"Love Will Tear Us Apart" by Joy Division. The song is about the difficulties of maintaining a relationship and the pain that can come from falling out of love. Similarly, the novel "Lolita" explores the themes of love and obsession, as the protagonist becomes fixated on a young girl and is unable to control his feelings for her. Both works examine the darker side of romantic relationships and the ways in which love can lead to pain and heartbreak. While the subject matter of "Love Will Tear Us Apart" is less controversial than that of "Lolita", both works share a common theme of the difficulties of love and the ways in which it can lead to emotional turmoil.

"Every Breath You Take" by The Police. The song is about a man who is obsessed with a woman and is constantly watching her every move. Similarly, the novel "Lolita" explores the themes of love and obsession, as the protagonist becomes fixated on a young girl and is unable to control his feelings for her. Both works examine the theme of obsession and the ways in which it can lead to unhealthy and dangerous behavior. While the subject matter of "Every Breath You Take" is less controversial than that of "Lolita", both works share a common theme of the dangers of obsession and the ways in which it can lead to emotional and psychological harm.

More quotes - - "I knew I had fallen in love with Lolita forever; but I also knew she would not be forever Lolita." This quote shows how the protagonist is unable to control his feelings for Lolita and is consumed by his obsession with her. - "I looked and looked at her, and I knew as clearly as I know I am to die, that I loved her more than anything I had ever seen or imagined on earth, or hoped for anywhere else." This quote demonstrates the intensity of the protagonist's feelings for Lolita, and how they have become all-consuming. - "I was a daisy fresh girl and look what you've done to me." This quote is spoken by Lolita, and shows how the protagonist's obsession with her has had a negative impact on her life and well-being. - "I had been in love with her, and that was that. I was a different person before and after Lolita." This quote shows how the protagonist's obsession with Lolita has fundamentally changed him, and how he is unable to move on from his feelings for her. Overall, these quotes demonstrate how "Lolita" explores the theme of obsession and the ways in which it can lead to emotional and psychological harm.

[coffincoitus]

re: lana del rey. that post is basically calling her creepy. she also uses the opening line of lolita in 'off to the races' which is about an relationship that's unhealthy but sympathetic. i think there's a number of instances where she casts herself as this type of - don't know how else to call it - coquette figure which draws inspiration from lolita and the bizarre interpretations of it as a tragic love story. to what extent that she's actually 'romanticizing' it and to what extent it's a critique - i have no idea and don't have nearly enough knowledge of or interest in ldl as a person to say.

thanks!! I suspected it was something like that... I remember now seeing that exact criticism irt her "coquette brand" back then. I wasn't ever into her music enough to be bothered by it either, but I totally get ppl who were involved being mad with or tired of her flippant take on lolita– her being a child and a victim is obviously a crucial part of the character.

I do think it's a bit much to equate her to humbert bc of that? even if her bad interpretations of lolita are tasteless, I feel like one needs to cross some very specific lines before earning that title! idk, it's just a general dislike of mine for the idea that a woman being 30 and void of critical thinking is enough to call her a pedophile! but yup, above all, I don't know or care enough about her or her music lol

[strscrossed]

If you’re reading Lolita and is disgusted, that means you’re comprehending the story just as the author wanted.

The amount of people I see on tiktok romanticizing the book and calling Humbert and Dolores’ relationship romantic irks me so much 😭

honestly i got so annoyed with humbert's "woe is me i'm a horrible person" yes you are. like i saw through it pretty immediately. it's not supposed to read like a love story. my heart hurt for dolores and how her story ended.

but it's one of my favorites because of the writing and all that. it's disturbing but it's meant to be.

[eternalgirlh00d]

I’m doing a coquette zine:) I really like @lovesickbrat posts (they are tagged “brat mag” on her blog) and I got inspired by her.

Second part is here: https://whatever-pngs.tumblr.com/post/677372417729085440/these-are-the-next-pages-of-pink-velvet-my-little 

By the way, this is already available on wattpad, my name is @motel_barbie.

Disclaimer: Some of these movies deal with serious issues such as pedophilia, mental illnesses, etc I didn’t put these movies here just for “the aesthetic”, I think it’s important to watch them to think deeply about these issues and educate ourselves. For example, I put Lolita here because I want people to stop romanticizing Humbert’s and Lolita’s relationship and see how cruel it is. 

[just-antithings]

just curious, what are your thoughts on people who romanticize lolita/humbert and dolores’ relationship in the book? this is something i’ve been wondering about for a while (/gen)

It's fiction and therefore doesn't matter how people interpret it. Sometimes a dynamic just appeals to you for whatever reason.

I haven't read Lolita but I'm sure there are other books, movies, shows, and anime with similar dynamics. The one that comes to mine based on my limited knowledge is the Yuri Loli anime where the abuser(?) is killed by the girl she took advantage of when the girl pushed them both out the window.

[adaption2022spring]

A Tale of Two Adaptations: Male Gaze, Girlhood & Representation

Lolita is a film that I initially thought was just romanticizing pedophila since they always described it as Humbert as being obsessed with Lolita and being sexually attracted to her. I thought that it was just that but it seems to be more to the story as well. I still think about the relationship between the two but after discussing the readings and watching the film again I feel essentially that it's just about desire and how it can destroy you like it did to Humbert. I'm able to view some other points made by people. I found one line in the film to be quite ironic. At one point Humbert says to Lolita, “ Lo, at your age, people are going to take advantage of you” which is quite literally what he does. It's like he is aware of this innocentence that she has which anyone would notice yet he's so obsessed with her he can't seem to correct his behavior and wants to justify it. There is a power dynamic in the relationship that Humbert has and he uses that to his advantage. Mulvey’s writing discusses the concept of the gaze in hollywood. Mulvey states that in Hollywood women are often typically on display and are viewed as objects since the control of the gaze (camera) is usually always from a heterosexual male perspective. Paired with that is Trilling’s review of the text Lolita which explores the idea of sexual desire as a taboo and explores the western hypocrisy of sexual mores and the crystallization of the teenage girl. 

Lolita (1962)

[rapunzelita]

3, 9, 17 and 20 for the blogger questions post ❤️

Omg, I am just getting around to answering these now love <3 I really apologize but thank you so much for sending me these questions, they were so interesting to answer! <3

3 - How old are you?

I answered this one here <3 I'm in the roaring twenties decade of my life! ♡ 23 to be exact! ♡

9 - Favourite food or drink?

I love apple pie & cherry pie! 🥧

I'm also a big fan of angel cake with coffee cream icing 🍰 , tiramisu, and I adore going out for Vietnamese food! Rice paper rolls, vegan lemongrass chicken...yum ♡ I like the combination of fresh and hot that you find so often in Vietnamese food!

Ultimately...I am a huge foodie so these are just a few of my fave foods tbh! 😋

17 - Favourite scent?

I have so many - I'm obsessed with fragrances and have a lot of faves. Here are some that I organized by season !

I'm also obsessed with candles...so there's a lot of scents I adore. To name just a few, I love the scent of fresh linen, lavender, rosewater and soft incense, Petrichor (the scent of the earth after it rains), baked goods🥧, and a garden during Spring/Summer and how wonderfully fragrant it is!🌷

I'm also gonna be weird and say that I adore how my pet kitten smells! She smells good and has such a cozy familiar scent and is super cuddly and soft ^^ Actually, she's sitting on my lap right now, purring contently, as I write this lol 🐱

20- Favourite book?

Lolita, when I first read the book, I was in a relationship with an older man whilst I was very young, and I read Lolita expecting it to be some great romance... but the book was so sad and wasn't romantic at all ...but honestly, how could it be?

My mind was that distorted from the glamorization of age-gaps and the way the music I was surrounded with romanticized Lolita, that I believed that it would be some grand romance. In reality, Lolita is horror, not romance at all. At least, that's how I see it and how it should be. Humbert is an unreliable narrator and I really felt for Dolores aka 'Lolita' , who never had the chance to have a childhood because of Humbert's depravities. Of course, this whole idea was completely lost on me when I was young though.

Also, Nabokov has to be one of my favourite writers ever...the lyrical way in which he writes is so mesmerizing, the way he plays with words and honestly, the pure poetry in the way he tells a story that is anything but 'pure' left me awestruck...and that's why Lolita will forever be one of my favourite novels.

Honestly, I do wish to forewarn everyone though... that it is disturbing and I'm not sure if I would even read it now, say if I had never read it back then. The only reason I cite it as a favourite book is simply because of the way it has made an impact on my life and because of the influence it has had on me. It's certainly not a book I 'enjoy' and can take comfort in and tbh I'm looking for that sort of book. Specifically, one with writing that I adore just as much as Lolita but one in which the content of the book is just as beautiful as the writing. A novel I can curl up with on a rainy day. I've been searching for a book like that for the longest time.

If anyone has any recommendations, I would love to hear them 💌

P.s: check out my goodreads for books reviews, recs, and to take a look inside my reading nook, which is a list that contains some of my other favorite novels (The Great Gatsby, Rebecca, Coraline...just to name a few!) :

♡ Goodreads: @Syrena ♡

Also, I'm currently reading Circe by Madeline Miller and it's very beautiful, so far <3 I'm also planning on reading The Virgin Suicides and My Year of Rest and Relaxation after I have finished with Circe ♡ It's one of my news year resolutions...to challenge myself to read more!

Once again, if any of you lovely angels reading this happen to have any recommendations for me, feel free to send them through here ♡

📚 🗝🌿 🧸☕

Thank you so much for sending me these lovely questions darling! xo

[carcassontheshore]

Nana Analysis: How the ambiguous portrayal of Shin and Reira’s relationship tricks us into thinking it’s a love story while it’s undertones tells a cautionary tale.

Disclaimer: Talks about sex, pedoplhiles, prostitution and suicide. None of the topics are too explicit. Viewers under 10 shouldn’t read. But this meta is cautionary. So, minors can read.

First of all, for all the anime watchers here, I am going to limit this meta only upto the anime because I want to warn and I don’t want minors to skip this just so they don’t get spoilers about the manga. This is important, trust me.

This meta is not to attack Ai sensei regarding her writing style. I think her style is beautifully mysterious. Not gonna lie, when I first saw the anime, I thought Shin x Reira was lovely. But I was horribly wrong.

I will mention the inspirations for this meta to properly portray the psychology behind the characters. First comes the book, Lolita. This book is famous for the portrayal of a pedophile’s mindset. In the book/movie, Humbert, the protagonist and pedophile, thinks that Lolita, the young girl and his step-daughter, is in love with him as well as sexually interested in him. The horrifying part is that, we never get to know about the girl’s point of view, how subconsciously or consciously horrified she is. Thus, we get to see the horror story as a love story instead. Humbert has no idea about the girl's thoughts and therefore, he romanticizes everything she does.

The second inspiration is Lana Del Ray’s controversial song of the same name, Lolita. While people think she romanticized pedophilic relationships in the song, I personally think she fills the gap of the book, which is Dolores or Lolita’s point of view. In the song, it is strongly hinted that she is trying to justify her actions. She is trying to make herself think that whatever she and Humbert has is ‘LOVE’. Mark the word ‘trying’. That’s how our brain works. It tricks us into thinking a certain way so that our conscience and body can survive. Most of the time, this way of thinking is produced through subliminal messages sent from our subconscious mind.

Let me include a personal experience in the brackets, skip if you want to. (I don’t consider myself as a sexual abuse victim. But I will try to portray my mindset about my experiences as an early bloomer to make you understand better. When I was 10, I already had a rather mature body, like a woman. But somehow, it was always obvious that I was a child. But that didn’t stop men from harassing me or seniors from showing interest in me. It disturbed me so much that sometimes, I wished to die. However, by the time I was 11, I had convinced myself that it was normal for a girl ‘like me’ to face that. When my conscience got the best of me, I blamed my body. But idk what I meant by a girl ‘like me’. Maybe I thought of myself as mature or dirty. But whatever I thought, it prevented me from dying or killing myself. This is what Dolores tries to do.)

MAIN META STARTS HERE:

Shin is a prostitute who was very much deprived of love as a child. He is only 15. Ryoko got him into prostitution. He is hinted to search for love through sex. It’s complicated. He doesn’t think of sex as anything but a game or business. For him, he gets in bed only after being paid and he can get others in bed if he pays. But his way of proposing to Reira was as messed up. He thought it was  true love just because money wasn’t involved. On the other hand, while explaining to Nobu why he continued being a prostitute, he hinted that he wanted to help lonely women to cope. It is to be noticed that Shin talks in a rather philosophical way almost all the time. While it is beautiful to us, it’s a way for him to convince himself that the things he does are justified. If you notice, he was trying to convince himself that he wanted to help those women. The same can be noticed in the car scene with Reira. He said, “What a teenager boy like me wants is not very different from what we already do (sex)”. Same as before, he was trying to convince himself that since he was a teenager, he wanted sex. It is obvious that he wasn’t sure cuz otherwise, he would have stated what he, as an individual, wanted. It is to be noticed that this happens after Reira refuses to talk to him about her situation and problems. Shin clearly stated that ‘he’ wanted to talk to her wholeheartedly. This is something he said in first person unlike the other sentence. Shin think he is in love with Reira which could be true but that isn’t the problem. The problem is all the things he does to cope with reality. His true feeling are rather a mystery considering his point of view is always indirect that is written in such a way that it makes us feel that what he says, he feels as well. Just like the song, Lolita.

Now, let us come to Reira’s point of view. It is to be noticed that she indeed had problems with Shin and her age gaps, 7 years, and Shin being a minor. This is expressed in the car scene as well. However, she mistook their age gap being 8 years until Shin corrects her. She, through Shin’s words, tries to justify this. She basically thought to herself that it’s almost ok to be in this relationship since it is 1 year less than what she initially thought. (This is something everyone does regarding any matter that includes numbers). Even she tries to convince herself that she loves Shin. Because she is unable to absorb the fact that Shin is just a replacement for Takumi. She knows this. Because she, herself, wasn’t ok with being a discardable person at first. ( The manga takes a different route. She is ok with being unimportant later on unlike anime.) On the other hand, in the car scene, she was ok with doing it with Shin cuz she didn’t knew what Shin was thinking. Just like Humbert in the book where he doesn’t know what Dolores is thinking. Both of them think that the minors are enjoying the time as much as they are. While both of the minors try to convince themselves that what they are doing are normal for people ‘like them’.

This is it. Even though unlike Humbert, Reira had a moral compass, this doesn’t justify anything at all. Just like, just because Shin is a prostitute, unlike Dolores, it neither justifies his actions nor does it make him any less of a victim.