One correction to the article. The term “pedophile” should be applied to those who sexually abuse prepubescent children. While what Humbert Humbert does is bad (based on descriptions I have read, I’m not ever going to read the book), Lolita is presumably past puberty and at least somewhat able to cope with and recover from what happens to her.
A pedophile who assaults a prepubescent child, however, is orders of magnitude worse. The psychological damage to the child is much worse and longer lasting. It could also lead to the victim themselves becoming a future pedophile, if I’m not mistaken. Which means that one act or series of acts of brutality have consequences that, unchecked could last generations.
The younger a person is when abused, the greater the damage. The distinction is important.
The book doesn’t describe any sex acts. It’s all implied.
In other words, it wasn't "rape" rape, eh Whoopie?
Lolita was prepubescent when Humpbert began raping her. Girls started puberty much later a half century ago. He was done with her as she finished puberty at 15.