I wouldn't say the two are equally comparable. In Damage, the two are both damaged and fuel and prey on each other. In Lolita, Humbert damages and uses a child who did not want any of that. Even in psychologically unhealthy portrayals, consent still makes a difference regardless of acceptability.

Reminds me of
better to have died standing than live on one's knees
. Better to (sexually) love, even excessively and dangerously and be damaged as a result than never had that love at all.
my vessel is magnificent and large and huge-ish

This message has been deleted.

Losing everything, including Anna, for a few stolen hours of forbidden sex, does not effect "peace of mind." Did you not watch Stephen curl up into a fetal crouch on the bed in his hotel room after watching Anna with his son? That was hardly "bliss." He had just "had" her himself. It was torment.

Stephen risked his life to engage in sexual bliss, because let's face it, sexual, passionate, bliss = peace of mind.
He had a socially acceptable life - beautiful wife, successful son, brilliant career. And he Damaged everything for that Bliss.

In no manner whatsoever, does obsession over anything ever bring "peace of mind." Stephen lost his marriage, his job, his son, his way of life. Does that sound "blissful" to you??