MAP Forum

Coming back to this thread again.

I figured i would leave these here to give more context to some of the very awful takes surrounding Lolita i was talking about.

I don't mean to come off as misogynistic so i apologize if i do.

I'm not sure why... but a lot of the people who have bad takes on Lolita seem to be women especially women who are far left politically speaking but that really isn't surprising considering this is the Twitter crowd pushing their modern pc views onto a book that is 70-years old.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcJfMSeSZNs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_FhTcaCvFQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KK-FfPukV-o

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38Ju_pVaUa4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPANXxV1iFo

In almost all of these videos they all seem to say the same thing as if it is some kind of circle-jerk.

Humbert bad Lolita is a victim Humbert completely unreliable because pedophile and male therefore not trustworthy Nabokov was a victim of CSA (Even though there is no real evidence) Nabokov hates pedophiles and wrote Lolita to expose predators (Completely ignoring his other work LOL) No girls allowed on book covers (Even though he is on video showing that he owned a few copies with girls on the front cover and praised them on camera) Lolita movies bad because they romanticize abuse (No you are just watching the movies wrong LOL) and of course some bullshit about #MeToo and the patriarchy,

You get the idea.

There is also. The Lolita Podcast by Jamie Loftus and if you listen to it not only does she leave out a lot of context surrounding Lolita and Nabokov but judging by the way she carries herself and speaks you can tell she hates men.

This all pretty much backs up my point that they can't seem to engage with anything beyond a surface acceptable position and looking at something old with a modern day PC lens.

The problem though is that when looking at media like Lolita with only a surface acceptable position you are basically removing the book of all of it's nuance and simplifying it.

Taken on face value Lolita had other older men lovers outside of Humbert so she wasn’t some completely innocent little girl. She adored Quilty and didn’t cast bad light on him despite some of his terrible qualities. But Humbert is entirely blamed for ruining her. Lolita was a bit of a minx and just as manipulative in lots of ways. Humbert’s downfall was being too infatuated with her and she could use it against him. Quilty was more attractive to her because he was more comfortable and confident in his attraction to nymphets.

LittlePrincessLover wrote: Wed Apr 30, 2025 10:30 pm Taken on face value Lolita had other older men lovers outside of Humbert so she wasn’t some completely innocent little girl. She adored Quilty and didn’t cast bad light on him despite some of his terrible qualities. But Humbert is entirely blamed for ruining her. Lolita was a bit of a minx and just as manipulative in lots of ways. Humbert’s downfall was being too infatuated with her and she could use it against him. Quilty was more attractive to her because he was more comfortable and confident in his attraction to nymphets.

Very true but Dolores also, had a fascination and interest in Hollywood movies and the entertainment industry and she wanted to be apart of that world.

Quilty was a playwriter or television producer if you follow the Kubrick continuity so he had connections to that world that Lolita aspired to be apart of.

So when she ran off with him to get away from Humbert she only wanted to be with him but in reality she meant nothing to him and he just wanted to use her for CP and when she refused to participate in it he kicked her out and threw her out on the street which shows that despite Humbert's messed up moral code and being a POS himself too he did actually love her and he still somewhat had a sense of humanity within him.