daydrinking75

[daydrinking75]

ok so my problem w mainstream booktok is as follows; if it wasnt obvious already, im classically inclined, that leads me to the gatekeepy side of the argument where people (cough men) criticize how the beauty of literature is being dumbed down by mainstream slop ala coleen hoover. now i agree, however these people conclude from this fact that we (the community idk) should maintain this elitist classist mindset and propagate the idea that unless you read classical literature dont read. here is where i find myself disagreeing. A for effort, i say, but you missed something: we should encourage people (readers of coleen hoover as an example) to not simply let them enjoy what they read in a dopamine receptor firing haze, but engage critically AND expand their awareness of literature. because people will grow stagnant, complacent, and wither and die, in this case intellectually. i dont want that, personally. not to bring up mrs hoover for a third time this paragraph but she writes some genuinely fascinating concepts, albeit poorly executed. like im sorry layla was insane, and im a slut for ghosts. that scene in ugly love where theyre fucking and hes calling her his dead step sisters name while shes crying and telling him to keep going? thats psychological horror. but its trapped in this stew of heterosexual happy endings and i hate it for what it could be and isnt. the potential! anyway learning is revolutionary so read bitch

[daydrinking75]

oh hello endless pain yeah no i missed you too mhm

[daydrinking75]

about this thing specifically?

I think one kinda weird thing about me that has been both a blessing and a curse in social situations is that I'm kind of incapable of being intimidated by people who are smart/competent/popular. I see someone like that* and go "wow! what a cool person! I want to gain their approval." and the easiest way to gain someone approval is to actually speak to them and have positive interactions and stuff so that's what I usually go for.

I have gathered that this is highly unusual and that a lot of people become less confident and more shy when they meet someone who they perceive as better than them, which I don't usually do - I only get shy/avoidant when I have a reason to believe a person will actively dislike me. I've even been accused of like, being a "social climber" for this behavior? when it's mostly that I subconsciously tend to be most interested in the most interesting person in a room which is like, so obvious to me that I can't really express it without resorting to tautology. if a person is cool or good at stuff or has a lot of friends because they are very friendly and good at people skills, I will want to talk to them more, because those are things I like about people.

is this a neurodivergence thing or is it just weird? I generally tend towards the introverted side of the scale and often prefer solitary activities for sensory/executive function reasons, but I do have decent social skills most of the time (when I have the energy).

*there are other traits that will definitely cause me to be avoidant but they're usually like, manipulativeness, emotional volatility, talking about others behind their backs, etc - like stuff that causes a genuine bad vibe that I've learned from experience usually lead to bad outcomes.

[daydrinking75]

i dont like to be alone because then no one is there to tell me who i need to be

[daydrinking75]

most people hate themselves, including me, so they feel embarrassed about being themselves or enjoying things. imo most ppl do this but are just unconscious of it, but i am, and i think thats called healing idek

I think one kinda weird thing about me that has been both a blessing and a curse in social situations is that I'm kind of incapable of being intimidated by people who are smart/competent/popular. I see someone like that* and go "wow! what a cool person! I want to gain their approval." and the easiest way to gain someone approval is to actually speak to them and have positive interactions and stuff so that's what I usually go for.

I have gathered that this is highly unusual and that a lot of people become less confident and more shy when they meet someone who they perceive as better than them, which I don't usually do - I only get shy/avoidant when I have a reason to believe a person will actively dislike me. I've even been accused of like, being a "social climber" for this behavior? when it's mostly that I subconsciously tend to be most interested in the most interesting person in a room which is like, so obvious to me that I can't really express it without resorting to tautology. if a person is cool or good at stuff or has a lot of friends because they are very friendly and good at people skills, I will want to talk to them more, because those are things I like about people.

is this a neurodivergence thing or is it just weird? I generally tend towards the introverted side of the scale and often prefer solitary activities for sensory/executive function reasons, but I do have decent social skills most of the time (when I have the energy).

*there are other traits that will definitely cause me to be avoidant but they're usually like, manipulativeness, emotional volatility, talking about others behind their backs, etc - like stuff that causes a genuine bad vibe that I've learned from experience usually lead to bad outcomes.

[daydrinking75]

is it really worth suffering for beauty? yes, because i like how it hurts. the pain reminds me of what it means to live

[daydrinking75]

every porn ad is always 'hot milfs in your area', 'big boob woman in your city', etc etc, and never 'intelligent minds’ or ‘hot souls in your zone'

[daydrinking75]

these days i wonder why people dont run around screaming and singing their hearts out

[daydrinking75]

Is this anything

[daydrinking75]

love is an inversion of ego; an inverse mitosis

[daydrinking75]

i like therapy but they rly just point things out to you and when you look back you're like "fuck they didnt rly tell me shit i didnt know---i couldve figured that out on my own why tf am i wasting my time here"

[daydrinking75]

the mnt lion theory doesnt hold much factual weight but the implications are existentially nauseating (in a good way); the shit these people did was out of pure delusion--the irony! if its the case then they're a bunch of idiots and half/most of the book is based on a lie (meaningless).

as far as francis goes? personal theory; ik hes gay but he's still a man and the roots of objectification run deeep (i.e. gay men opposing abortion in modern day). i assume francis to be anxious about his sexuality (it was the 80s) so its not farfetched to say he'd preform heterosexuality to compensate. he's kissed camilla before, as he recounts, both drunk before charles started swinging. plus, camilla's pretty, im sure that richard isnt the only one who puts her on an aesthetic pedestal; the psychology of sexuality is a mix of nature and nurture that i wont get into out of fear of digression but nonetheless: francis is shitty for treating his friend like that

genuinely don't know how to feel about the bacchanal.

i mean the only info we get about it is what was told to richard 8 years before he tells the story, and richard is unreliable. even with that, we can tell it was very traumatic for camilla, given she couldn't talk for days after and had trouble remembering it. we can get a pretty good handle on what henry felt about it, what with it being his idea and his description that we hear.

charles and francis, though, i'm not sure about.

charles is the one described with the most physical injuries, so i'm wondering about that. like what happened there? did he at one point split off from the group or was he just unlucky?

while everything from the text suggests it was a gang rape (the fact they had sex while that inebriated calls all of their consent into question, but then there's camilla's trauma and the deer thing), i just don't see how francis would fit into that. not saying he's a pioneer of women's rights, just that i would assume he would be interacting with the other boys and not camilla.

on the other hand, i've seen it described as basically a party run by people who were too pretentious to just admit to going to parties, what with the alcohol, drugs, and sex. but gone wrong obviously.

and then there's the mountain lion theory. personally, i don't believe it. i fully think they killed that guy and mutilated his body. there's no other way they could've all got blood all over themselves. honestly, i can understand the desire to soften what they did, i love these characters and i sometimes wish they weren't such bad people, but i think to ignore it doesn't do justice to the story.

i guess it was tartt's intention to have the bacchanal be this mystical, confusing thing, and at the end of the day we'll never truly know because of the layers of lies and unreliability, but it makes it hard to think about without all these questions.

[daydrinking75]

why did no one tell me the bible was written originally in ancient greek

[daydrinking75]

1. im a bitch

2. with a tiny waist

3. and a big brain

[daydrinking75]

gender and sexuality based on reinforcement of selfhood

[daydrinking75]

Richard is the worst person in the book

[daydrinking75]

i dont want to fix him i want to sit down next to him and say "do you understand? can you feel it? can you feel how insane this is? this accursed existence we are forced to idealize simply because there is no better option? does not goodness and virtue deserve better? is that why the people call for a heaven? but why doesnt god answer? i dont believe he doesnt exist i believe he is evil. he wants us to suffer. and evil and suffering are deeply human. and so all that god is a reflection of our faces in the mirror of existence; we are the universe experiencing--torturing--ourselves"