hani_backup: (Blood siren)
[personal profile] hani_backup
It's basically finding your soulmate when you see them. It doesn't care for age differences. A 17 year can imprint with a 4 year old. The 17 year old just has to wait until the 4 year old grows up.

Or, in Jacob's case, a 17/18 year old can imprint on a newborn baby.

My shaking jerked to a stop; heat flooded through me, stronger than before, but it was a new kind of heat -- not a burning.

It was a glowing.

Everything inside me came undone as I stared at the tiny porcelain face of the half-vampire, half-human baby. All the lines that held me to my life were spliced apart in swift cuts, like clipping the strings to a bunch of balloons. Everything that made me who I was -- my love for the dead girl upstairs, my love for my father, my loyalty to my new pack, the love for my other brothers, my hatred for my enemies, my home, my name, my self -- disconnected from me in that second -- snip, snip snip -- and floated up into space.

I was not left drifting. A new string held me where I was.

Not one string, but a million. Not strings, but steel cables. A million steel cables all tying me to one thing -- to the very center of the universe.

I could see that now -- how the universe swirled around this one point. I'd never seen the symmetry of the universe before, but now it was plain.

The gravity of the earth no longer tied me to the place where I stood.

It was the baby girl in the blond vampire's arms that held me here now.

Renesmee.

How is losing your sense of self admirable? How can making your life revolve around one being someone you yearn for, in a partner?

No doubt Jacob will help raise Renesmee, but I suppose my mind is having a very, very hard time wrapping my mind around the fact that he'll have to go from a fatherly/brotherly type of love and support to a, well, romantic type of love and support. Because, ultimately, imprinting is suppose to procure werewolves/offspring/love sex joy joy. I don't understand this transition. I know a few friends who have had friends who've waited until someone is legal before anything physically starts (though emails/texts/chats have not really been non-sexual). That's when the person's still a teenager. This, and other examples, are when the other person is a baby, or a toddler. I just...I get squicked out, to use a phrase from the Internet.

It also bothers me that finding your soulmate, in this universe, means losing your sense of self. It means having the other person become the center of the universe, the gravity of the earth. That's suppose unhealthy and kind of creepy.

Growing up, I've read romance novels or young adult/teen books about romance. It really skewed my expectations for relationships, for males. It joined other factors like observing my parents or sisters or other forms of (mostly Western) media. This before my depression kicked in.

Reading these books and being exposed to the media and my parents hammered home the points:
  1. "If I fall for a rake, I can rescue him from his past ways. I'll be witty and funny and he'll see how much I love him and he'll obviously fall in love with me" mindset.

  2. Or "If I meet someone who is my love, we'll know instantly and we can communicate so well with just our body language really quickly after we meet."

  3. Or "Even if I meet someone and they or my attention gets distracted by others or if one person breaks up with the other, that doesn't matter! After all, we're really, really, really meant for each other and we'll find our way back!"

  4. Or "It's awesome when someone pursues you even if you're not attracted to them. It's desirable! It's what the books and movies show and that person must love you so much! It's also great when you pursue someone who tells you they don't want you! After all, you don't give up and surely you can make that person fall in love with you, too! You love enough for both of them and they'll see your devotion and have to fall in love with you, too!"

  5. Or "Men expect their women to be virgins until the wedding night, even if the men aren't. It's completely okay for a male, upon thinking his fiancee is longer a virgin and lied to him about it and made a fool of him, to angrily have sex with her to punish her. It's completely okay for the man to believe the lies a jealous woman told him and instead of asking his fiancee for the truth, just have sex with her. Yeah, it's also completely normal for the bewildered woman, not knowing why the man is so rough, to cry in pain upon having sex for the first time and so roughly and THEN ASK FOR THE MAN TO HOLD HER AND COMFORT HER. And it's completely okay for the woman to get angry at hearing why the man acted how he did, but eventually forgive him and go back into the marriage with him. For her to grovel to him to come back to her.


Holy fuck, I just thought of the book the fifth point refers to for the first time today in a long fucking time. I can't believe, as a kid, I gobbled up all the romance novels set in the 1500 or 1600's or whatever in Europe/London, you know, with Ton and everything. It was rape. I can't believe I read that book and was completely okay with it whereas I saw Jodie Foster in The Accused and that really stuck with me so much and besides my parents forbidding me to wear short skirts after I got my period (due to religious beliefs), that movie also scared off short skirts.

Was it because one was written and the other was visual? Was it because in one, it was his wife and I was expected to believe the male to have sexual power and knowledge and use it and in the other it was clearly strangers raping Jodie Foster's character? Oh, my God, did I condone what was essentially a rape in one book, by not reacting badly to it?

Even if the setting and time period in the book condones rape or males sexually assaulting their fiancee or wives, I wasn't raised in that period. That book was heavy on victim-blaming and the victim/female taking all the blame for all the fights in the relationship upon her shoulders. I shouldn't have been "okay, cool" and just gone on to the next book.

Oh, God. I feel so bad for reading that book and thinking it was completely okay. Oh, my God, I liked a book that endorses rape-culture.

Date: 2012-08-24 03:32 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] lilrongal.livejournal.com
Calm down!! You're beating up an Izzy from the past who didn't know what the Izzy of today knows! And that's not fair to her.

Date: 2012-08-25 04:43 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] hani.livejournal.com
Sorry... I just feel like I should've...I don't know...been alert to that even at that age, especially if The Accused which I saw at an even younger age freaked out so much. So, I knew about rape. I just didn't put what I read together with what I know.

Now it's making me feel bad about BDSM and wondering if all those stupid romance novels skewed my preferences somewhere in me. Oh, God, I feel Freud raising his misogynistic head...

Date: 2012-08-25 05:07 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] lilrongal.livejournal.com
You genuinely enjoy BDSM though, right? Then no, I don't think it was the novels that did it. Some people are just wired that way, you know?

The Accused is really in your face about it. A romance novel gives off the impression of "this is how it works with love" so your experience is already going to be colored by that, whereas with The Accused, you go in knowing what it's about. And that scene is triggering and scary (they showed it to us in Sociology class when I was in college. A LOT of girls got up and walked out) and very very visual and raw. Books are not necessarily like that. And it's probably something that not a lot of people even pick up on, especially people who aren't as in tune to these things as you and I are now. I know I can thank tumblr for some of that. :)

Date: 2012-08-27 03:27 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] hani.livejournal.com
Thank you so much for replying. I'm really grateful you did. *hugs* Your messages helped reassure me.

Date: 2012-08-29 07:59 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] paulliver.livejournal.com
I think it's perfectly normal to have your understanding of a book change over time. I've read "Jane Eyre" four times and noticed different sorts of things each time. My father reads "Gone with the Wind" and just sees racism, but I also see self-delusion practiced on a social level. I'm embarressed to admit that someone had to tell me that the "Eagles" song "Hotel California" was about a whore house. We all understand what we read through the lens of what we already know.

Date: 2012-08-30 10:44 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] hani.livejournal.com
Never read a Jane Austen book or Gone With the Wind. Are they worth it?

Huh, I'm not familiar with the entire lyrics for "Hotel California" but that's interesting!

Profile

hani_backup: (Default)
hani_backup

September 2012

S M T W T F S
      1
234 56 7 8
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
30      

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 23rd, 2017 02:35 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios