Nocontenttt - Reblogs

The Secret History set in the modern day and everything is the same except Francis has no less than four strawberry ice vapes on his person at all times

Rooted in my mind

A lot of pop psychology gets thrown around and since I already have a headache, here's preventing you lot from making it worse.

Love-bombing: A manipulation tactic of increasing affection and grand gestures before or after doing something abusive, specifically to weasel one's way out of consequences.

What it is not: A streak of affection and generosity towards friends/loved ones.

Trauma-bonding: Knowingly traumatizing someone to take advantage of their vulnerable state, to then act like the "hero" or the one who cheers them up.

What it is not: Bonding over similar traumas.

Gaslighting: *Knowingly* convincing someone they cannot trust their own perception of a situation in pursuit of one's own narrative.

What it is not: Misaligned perception of events.

Narcissist: Someone afflicted with Narcissistic Personality Disorder, a traumagenic cluster B disorder, that struggles with self-obsession, paranoia, craving validity from the public, delusions of grandeur, and social disconnection.

It is not: Your rubbish ex that cheated on you.

Thank you for coming to my TED Talk.

-Xanthe

The Secret History destroyed my life like what do you mean I can't drink wine and study classical literature and spend the nights in a countryside mansion with piano echoing through the dark halls and break through the confines of humanity in a bacchanal and commit a string of murders and try to escape but eventually kill myself in a blaze of glory, ultimately shattering the lives of the people around me? That I can't escape the cognitive mode of experience and transcend the accident of my moment of being? That I can't lose my self, lose it utterly? What do you mean I can't live without thinking?

I saw this image of Athena and Odysseus and it was too freaking funny🤣🤣

hi nevermore nation

I want to see you in my dreams but then forget

We're meant to be but not yet

Camilla, the infantilization and victimization from the fandom towards her character:

Firstly, Camilla is a victim, yes. She is the victim of her brother, and of the things that surround her, Bunny's sexism, Richard's creepy hiperfixiation, Francis' jelousy. She is a victim, but everyone in the book is a victim of something.

What makes her different is that she is a victim of her brother and the sexism towards her. However, the over infantilization and victimization does not suit me well. To not aknowdlege that she was as bad as Francis or Henry, is to look down at her.

She was fine with the fact that they killed someone, she was fine with Bunny's death, (moved, perhaps, giving that scene where she cried, however I've always suspected that was merely acting that Henry asked from her), the thing is: she was fine.

She's not an angel, and not the mastermind behind it, but she's an adult, she knew pretty well that what they were doing was wrong, and yet she didn't told Richard or anyone. The thing is: if she were to say something, everyone would have believed her because she's a girl and would be seen as a victim, but she was not interested on that. She had the opportunity to talk to the police and be seen as a clean victim, she did not because she did not care. She did not felt guilt.

People act as if Camilla is a little girl, a child that knows no bad or good. She knew. She's a complex character, and most people cannot see that the fact that she's a victim does not erase that she's not an angel or innocent.

When she was sent into a date, she did not even seem upset or anything. For her, it was just something she had to do to get their way. Just a simple task, she was not a tool. You can't be a tool, if you're aware and positive about the task. We must remember Richard was scandalized by the fact that Camilla was having fun. It's not that deep, she had fun on a date, playing around because it was just something she had to do, she did not feel bad or used about it, because most possibly, she was sent by Henry.

And we know that she could have declined anything, Henry did favoured her. She could have say no to the bacchanal, or to Bunny's death, she could have been not included, but the thing is: she's as evil and morally strange as Henry and Francis, this does not apply to Charles, since he's a different type, giving to his guilt.

Readers forget the most basic thing: They all are bad people. They are not good, they are victims, yes, but they are also sickly out-of-touch individuals.

Camilla is as bad as them, do not idolize her, do not look down on her.

“they killed bunny bc he was annoying” “they killed bunny bc he was sexist and homophobic” “they killed bunny-“ they killed bunny because he deadass wasn’t breaking his back to try and fit in with the others and their weird cultish aesthetic.

its like that scene in mean girls where regina sits down and karen + gretchen are like “you can’t sit with us because you’re wearing sweatpants, its monday” (or whatever day) “so thats against the rules and you can’t sit with us”

bunny was actually liked by the vast majority of people at hampden and the greek class didn’t like that, because it didn’t fit into their whole “aesthetic”.

bunny had a girlfriend that did an education degree and he was very public about it, and the greek class didn’t like that, because it didn’t fit into their whole “aesthetic”.

bunny ate a grilled cheese and milkshake, and the greek class didn’t like this. not because he was being greedy, but because it didn’t fit into their whole aesthetic.

why do you think richard got turned away when he first showed up to julian’s class? because he didn’t fit into the aesthetic.

i love the greek class as much as the next guy, but please. come on guys. lets just…open our eyes here.

Forgot to share this here LOL posting kissing is embarrassing,,,💦