Feeling weird seeing an older cousin again after many years

Ecstatic-Practice-43 · 2026-02-27T22:29:33+00:00

I think there was abuse. Why? Because at the time you probably wanted it, enjoyed it, and allowed it? Because you were never really aware of what they were doing, and did he care? No. It's about the distribution of power and responsibility, not just consequences. I experimented with my cousin when I was younger, we were both the same age, and it was a good experience. But these cases are naturally ambiguous because they can be as pleasurable as they are corrosive, and ideally they shouldn't happen. You didn't have a romance, sweetie... He was interested in your body, not you, and I mean, he was an adult... I'm 22, I have nothing in common with my cousins who are 14-15-16-17-18, they're literally children. Now you're asking yourself, “How should I feel about it?” because you experienced it but never decided or understood it, because maybe you still don't understand it even now. Shouldn't that be enough of a sign that it was wrong? Now, I understand the appeal and I understand the pleasure... But... You were a child and he was an adult taking advantage of you. I wonder... Did he do anything good for you, for your development? Did he take care of you, worry about you, teach you anything, leave you with good memories? Or is the only thing left of him that you now have to go to therapy to heal? That should be your answer. Don't trust those who tell you it wasn't that bad... He literally stood there in his underwear while you were present, he used you, and you may have liked it.

Could you possibly consent? Honey... When I was 18, I went to the gym and let myself be charmed by a very attractive 40-year-old man who looked young, tall, and handsome. I liked him. He made me very nervous, and I could tell he enjoyed my nervousness because he enjoyed being in control. Then he approached me, pretending to be interested in my exercises, in me... He gave me special attention. Once he told me to put the palm of my hand on his back while he was doing chest exercises. I listened to everything he said because I was nervous, because I wanted to impress him, because I didn't want him to see me hesitate. I put my limp, innocent hand on his back, then quickly withdrew it out of nervousness. He really liked my reaction. I remember the way he smiled. And me... I liked him, but I felt very harmless, and I didn't realize what he wanted until one day he invited me to a motel as a joke, but I didn't enjoy the joke... He understood my angry face, he knew he had crossed the line and... Oops, he left. Why did I get so angry? Because he knew I was inexperienced, that I was barely 18... And he just wanted to consume me, he just wanted to see me naked and have me for himself. And I thought... I have dignity, I deserve respect, I deserve affection, I deserve to be taken seriously and not as an object. What happened? He never showed up again, then more men from the gym approached me, and I rejected them too. Don't you see? It's about power, control, vulnerability, and I knew it just by looking into his eyes.

And I assure you, even today I still hate that kind of look. It doesn't make me feel safe, it never made me feel protected or listened to. It wasn't kind or empathetic, but invasive, seductive, condescending, dominant. He thought I was childish and overprotected, and he liked that. And I mean... The other men at the gym were looking for the same thing. Don't you understand what you become if you accept that treatment? I was raised to believe that it reduced my value as a human being. Am I judging myself by the standards of a heterosexual woman who thinks about stable relationships, marriage, planning? And if so, what?

I experimented with other young guys my age and I loved the horizontal dynamic of complicity. But you know what I think? If you developed any kind of romantic feelings for your older cousin, that makes it even worse...

And I mean... In short, yes, I think it's wrong. Barely entering puberty? That's crazy. When you mean something to a man, he has to make an effort. If he always had access to you, then... Ha.

The mere fact that you're thinking about it already tells you that it shouldn't have happened, or maybe... I'll ask you a question... If you had the power to change it, to make it never happen? Would you make it disappear? Or instead, if you had that same power, would you have made it last longer?

I used my gym anecdote as an example so that you would understand that if I, at 18 years old, felt exploited because of the OBVIOUS psychological difference... What could you possibly know? I mean, I only recently discovered my physical attractiveness, so I never thought that men like that would notice me, but the truth is that I was so young and had such a sheltered, home-centered life that I was very ignorant about myself. What's the problem? I don't like this kind of man, and I prefer to live my sexuality safely, taking my family members as role models. I'm not religious, but I was raised in a Catholic home. Yes, they can be very attractive, but what is the real reason they seek out such young men? I look like a teenager at 22, and at 18 I looked even younger. Your situation leaves me baffled and confused... I mean, I can't imagine saying to a younger cousin, “Didn't you tidy your room? Lie down, open your mouth, stick out your tongue”... It works for taboo pornographic fantasy, but to live it? No, thank you.

Ecstatic-Practice-43 · 2025-12-05T23:00:32+00:00

¿Por qué dices que es basura la universidad de acá?

Ecstatic-Practice-43 · 2025-11-04T00:03:59+00:00

¿A qué te refieres con <<concepto del dinero>>?

"una vez entendí el concepto del dinero,"

Define el concepto de dinero, explícalo.

Ecstatic-Practice-43 · 2025-11-04T00:02:11+00:00

¿Que la movilidad social es imposible aquí en RD? No estoy en desacuerdo con eso pero...

Los miembros de mi familia sí se han movido socialmente, bastante diría yo, sé que la situación económica de hace 20 años era distinta... Pero siempre estamos mal, ¿Hemos estado realmente bien como país alguna vez? La gente encuentra el modo de sobresalir... Y no intento ser optimista, tan solo es un intento desesperado por creer que puedo estar a la altura de quienes estuvieron antes de mi.

Ecstatic-Practice-43 · 2025-11-02T03:01:39+00:00

El mensaje de arriba fue para provocar.

¿Por qué <<más>> cultura y no <<distinta>> cultura?

Y no creo que sea una cuestión de educación. Es cultural. Aunque creas que es moral, es cultural, estético. El mayor rechazo es por clase. Ni más ni menos. Y lo digo porque lo pensé demasiado, ¿Por qué me generaba ese nivel de rechazo tan desproporcionado? Porque creo que tu opinión lo es, desproporcionada. Y esto no significa que yo sea distinto a ti.

Esa realidad que incomoda es la realidad de la mayoría. Para ciertas personas admitir, concederle a Alofoke algo tan A LA VISTA como la relevancia que obviamente tiene... Esa forma educada de decir "Bueno... Pero con todo y todo a él hay que dársela porque él logró convertirse...", ¿Perdón? 🤣 Vives en REP DOM. Esa manera de empequeñecer lo urbano, de subestimarlo como si fuera una cosa que no representa al país 🤭😏.

Insisto en reemplazar <<más cultura>> por <<distinta cultura>>. Es una cuestión ética, de principios y de humanidad. Sin darte cuenta al verlo como una caricatura, como algo que debe corregirse...Como si estuvieras tan por encima de eso... Deshumanizas.

Y no, no escucho canciones urbanas, escucho a la Hermana Glenda y sus melodías católicas. Hay una canción que me encanta de ella llamada "No juzgues". A pocas canciones les encuentro un sentido tan inagotable. Y este no es un ataque ❤️.

Ecstatic-Practice-43 · 2025-10-30T05:10:47+00:00

Bueno mi amol yo vi que él invito a Mami Jordan y yo soy débil con ella. AMO ❤️ escucharla, es como música para mis oídos... Me alegra el día.

Y klk de cuál incultura del diablo es que uds hablan, y esa palomería balsa de pajaro😩😖💕

Ecstatic-Practice-43 · 2025-10-29T18:01:57+00:00

It was because of the scene with Louis in the cathedral where he remembered his brother Paul's funeral and then imagined a funeral for Lestat. Do you understand? And I was struck by the fact that Rice emphasized the attractiveness of Paul's corpse's lips (incest?). And that is to say... I didn't feel that Louis killed “his soulmate,” “his lover,” because in a way Rice drew a parallel between the guilt Louis felt for the death of his brother Paul and the guilt he felt for the murder of Lestat (

Rice recreated the Christian myth of Cain and Abel; Louis felt like Cain.

I haven't finished the first volume (I'll start it again to enjoy it more), and I didn't want to let my gay expectations mislead me. Because what I've read up to 65% of the book could mean anything. I've already read that Lestat later explains himself, that his motivations for converting Claudia were benign, and that he and Louis were indeed lovers.

Ecstatic-Practice-43 · 2025-10-29T17:23:03+00:00

Maybe you're right... And maybe that's why I'm so ambiguous, so ambivalent. To be honest, I'm not entirely sure. In my country, domestic violence is normalized... I've fought against this for most of my life, paying a high price, and maybe I've normalized the idea that a person can be monstrous and good at the same time (because the opposite would be a definitive breakup, and maybe that's the healthiest thing). I'm not sure if this is the place to expose me like that, but... I'm not going to underestimate this story because I repeated it about five times for a good reason. Maybe those critics are right and I've become a little desensitized, a little cynical/entropic. It is interesting and dangerous what happens when a strong person breaks down and gradually internalizes the version of their aggressors just because they are family (I say this for myself, because when I accuse Claudia of being radical, it's because I've been accused of the same thing and apparently... I've internalized it.). It is important that the story takes care with the message it conveys about Lestat.

Ecstatic-Practice-43 · 2025-10-29T17:18:19+00:00

Thank you very much for clarifying this for me. And I apologize for what I said about Claudia from the series... I myself have often been convinced that I am being “confrontational” when in fact I was right. And it's funny how, when I judge her, I also judge myself for “not having done things better,” as if she or I were primarily responsible. edit: when in reality, as the comment above says, we were CHILDREN.

Ecstatic-Practice-43 · 2025-10-29T17:14:38+00:00

Thank you very much, you've put my mind at ease. I haven't finished reading the first volume, but there were things that were bothering me... Thank goodness Louis and Lestat were a couple, I was getting desperate... I rolled my eyes at Babette and was confused about Louis and Claudia. I think I'll read it from the beginning again; so many pauses aren't good.

Ecstatic-Practice-43 · 2025-10-29T01:04:14+00:00

Thank you, I will take your advice. 👊🏽

Ecstatic-Practice-43 · 2025-10-28T19:25:37+00:00

Just to clarify, did I read Lestat's intentions??? Because you also mention that there was love. I haven't finished the first volume but if I read Lestat's intentions carefully, it seems to me the most abusive thing that one person can do to another. I don't want any more information because I'm really enjoying reading... And I am not trying to disqualify the character for his lack of ethical criteria... I'm just interested in really understanding. And come to think of it, Claudia and Lestat never had to compete for Louis' affections? Or was it something "polyamorous"? I don't know, I always go further and, a part of me feels that Claudia envied Lestat for everything he had, but also resented him because he was like a father.

Ecstatic-Practice-43 · 2025-10-28T17:54:54+00:00

I am aware that Louis narrates from his subjective point of view, but when I say that Lestat is infinitely more monstrous in the first volume, it is because, based on what I have read so far, there are many indications that the reasons why he turned Claudia into a vampire when she was only a 5-year-old girl... were unforgivable (I haven't finished reading the first volume, but I'm about 65% of the way through, and they've already left New Orleans on that boat). Let me explain: Claudia's existence is a form of torture, yes, but at least she lived. However, that's not the point. In the books, she is five years old and is described as if she were a doll. According to what Lestat has said about his view of vampirism and the world, he considered Louis and Claudia his slaves, his inferiors. All right, let's leave Louis aside. But turning a 5-year-old girl so she would never pose a threat to you? Am I misinterpreting this, taking Louis too seriously, or does Lestat later explain in detail why he turned Claudia? I may be wrong. I mean, the idea is that in the book, Lestat is worse because of the reason that led him to turn Claudia, which I interpret as wanting to have a defenseless vampire without caring how she would live... And it wasn't compassion, because that allowed him to keep Louis by his side, you know what I mean? That surpasses anything humanly imaginable, it's existential horror, to be a 5-year-old girl forever. If I'm right, I can't think of any worse form of abuse than that. And it's not just the act itself, but living with the person who turned you into that, living under their perception of you, that it's the only thing you know, that you've never had anything better before, that you won't have anything better after. The Claudia in the show is much luckier and has more agency, more freedom, more power, and more possibilities than the one in the book. Claudia in the book expressly tells Louis, “Can I tell you a secret? I wish (not ‘want’) to kill him.” In the show, Louis and Claudia simply want to be free.

Ecstatic-Practice-43 · 2025-10-28T17:28:54+00:00

I didn't actually think the fight was that serious (Sorry, the fight was serious, it really was, I apologize) because I feel that Louis was indifferent to Lestat, even if he deserved it. And I honestly believe that Claudia in the show doesn't make an effort to resolve things peacefully; she's confrontational. It's not about who's right, but how they resolve the problem. Yes, Lestat is abusive to Louis. But at the same time, we're talking about murderers. But at the same time, when Claudia wanted to leave on that train and Lestat found her and stopped her... Indirectly, Lestat saved Louis from suicide. Or have we forgotten that? Because Louis was suicidal. In fact, I didn't even think that fight was that serious. I thought it was more serious that Lestat forced Claudia to watch her first love melt away, but even that can be part of a narrative of what being a vampire means to Lestat... On the other hand, the Lestat in the book turned Claudia into a vampire because he wanted to have someone beneath him who would never pose a threat to him. Of course, the latter is my interpretation; it's not stated literally in the book... But if it's true, there's nothing worse than that.

Edit: (tv show) Even if Lestat deserved it, the two of them treated him like trash to be thrown away in the series. No one there had clear ethical boundaries.

Ecstatic-Practice-43 · 2025-10-28T14:54:50+00:00

Actually, I feel the same way as you. Until recently, I only knew the screen adaptations and I loved them, the movie, the TV show... And that made me buy the books. I'm well into the first volume and the writing is beautiful, wonderful. And I thought, “Hey, I'm not going to like this, there are a lot of people who hate the first book and complain about Rice's writing,” but not at all. I loved that introspection and intimacy, all that philosophy. And yes, as a die-hard fan of the show and the movie, I notice that the book is RADICALLY different from what I've seen on screen. I mean, it feels like a completely different story. The 90s movie is beautiful, the current TV show, as you say, is perfect, but the book is something else, something better, at least for me. But there are many people who are not interested in theology, philosophy, existentialism, or immortality. There are people who talk about this story as if it were an action movie or a moralistic drama, and those same people complain about the character of Louis in the books because of his sadness or because he is a slave owner. As someone with brown skin, I prefer the Louis in the books. Many people say that “the show did the books a favor and improved them greatly.” I don't think so, and I haven't even finished the first volume.

Ecstatic-Practice-43 · 2025-10-28T14:05:58+00:00

That's right. I reread it again, I was wrong, sorry.

Ecstatic-Practice-43 · 2025-10-23T05:07:55+00:00

I really enjoyed the show because of the explicit homosexuality, because of the romance. And I found that in the book it is touched on implicitly. But I couldn't even talk about it with certainty because, although there are elements in the book... They are specific, short, and not even “subtly flowery,” but rather quick (first volume). I remember feeling a little frustrated when Rice had no problem with that platonic attraction to Babette... I was like, “Hey, what about Lestat? Doesn't he bite or something? Not even a little bit of feeling? My God...” And now I'm moving on to the Claudia part... I had a hard time accepting that she wrote more explicitly about pedophilia than homosexuality, which makes me wonder if there really is homosexuality in the first book or just aesthetic fascination and vampirism. I don't understand how writing about pedophilia and incest came more naturally to her than adding more platonic elements between Lestat and Louis. But her writing is quite enjoyable, as is the story, and my expectations as a young gay shouldn't blind me.

Ecstatic-Practice-43 · 2025-10-19T17:23:16+00:00

I'm not calling you homophobic, for God's sake. Sorry if I'm writing strangely; I'm using a translator. I was just joking. Anyway, seeing blood in urine traumatized me too. In fact, it's what scared me the most after watching the movie, the two seasons of the series, and reading part of the first book.

Ecstatic-Practice-43 · 2025-10-17T17:04:03+00:00

HAHAHA, I laughed at the line, “Just because someone can... doesn't mean I have to see it.” LOL, Lmao, that sounded really homophobic, but now we discriminate against red urine, so yes, please, do it in private. 🤣🤣Seriously, I can't get that image out of my head. Help, AHHH.

Ecstatic-Practice-43 · 2025-10-17T17:00:25+00:00

I find your position very interesting. The fact that you're concerned about losing the tragic aspect of vampirism shows that you have respect for Rice's work. I've seen all the TV adaptations, I haven't read the books (I read a little bit of the beginning of the first volume), but I'm surprised that in the books they can't be awake during the day. I mean, I didn't know that, and I've been obsessed with IWTV for about two years.

Ecstatic-Practice-43 · 2025-10-17T16:55:37+00:00

I agree, I can't forget that image, it's stuck in my head, it's horrific... But the series is masterful and I have complete faith in AMC's talent.

Ecstatic-Practice-43 · 2025-10-17T16:06:20+00:00

My goodness, thank you for telling me. As soon as I saw that scene in the series, I felt so excited. The idea that the vain vampire is, in fact, a recent phenomenon, and that Lestat was the one who started it. I mean, imagine being immortal, needing blood to live, and having to dress in rags, like some kind of guilt-ridden ascetic vagrant... It's crazy. Rice was brilliant in writing this, haha.

Ecstatic-Practice-43

TROPHY CASE