Hazbin Hotel / Helluva Boss Thread - Now a Griefing Thread

  • ⚙️ Performance issue identified and being addressed.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account

Do you believe that this series will turn to shit?

  • Total voters
    3,163
The Fair Lady said:
No, there's a good chance St. Peter is though. Some people assume he and Abel are together but that's just speculation.

Edit: A late rating for clearing this up, lol okay.
Click to expand...
Admittedly with the way how spread it was, didn't think it was just some headcanon, my bad

Here's this dumb meme for thread tax

1765314248890.png
 
sex haver said:
Fan theory for a long while has been closeted gay because he gets frustrated by Blitz/Fizz constantly making sex jokes in "Oops".
Click to expand...
The one I've seen is that Striker is asexual because of that. Which I feel like it's not just an ace thing to get frustrated when you're threatening/hurting someone and they're getting horny from it.

And again, interesting how all the sub effeminate men also seem to be masochistic. Which I'm sure could be considered offensive/stereotypical, but what do I know.
 
InJailOutSoon said:
The one I've seen is that Striker is asexual because of that. Which I feel like it's not just an ace thing to get frustrated when you're threatening/hurting someone and they're getting horny from it.

And again, interesting how all the sub effeminate men also seem to be masochistic. Which I'm sure could be considered offensive/stereotypical, but what do I know.
Click to expand...
Personally, I feel like if they were just going to go with "he's ace" they would have just included him in the pride merch, like they did with Octavia. Why set up his frustration about sex jokes and leave it ambiguous if the answer is just going to be "none"?

Plus Viv writing a male character, so I am sure there will be a whole episode with him coming out of the closet or something. No idea what, I just know it's going to be really, really fucking gay. Make it a two for one and he hooks up with Crimson to resolve both "homophobic" characters as gay.

Or, I mentioned a while ago that I am surprised by the lack of trans stuff in the shows given how overwhelmingly gay everything is. Watch him be an FTM or some shit.
 
sex haver said:
Personally, I feel like if they were just going to go with "he's ace" they would have just included him in the pride merch, like they did with Octavia. Why set up his frustration about sex jokes and leave it ambiguous if the answer is just going to be "none"?

Plus Viv writing a male character, so I am sure there will be a whole episode with him coming out of the closet or something. No idea what, I just know it's going to be really, really fucking gay. Make it a two for one and he hooks up with Crimson to resolve both "homophobic" characters as gay.

Or, I mentioned a while ago that I am surprised by the lack of trans stuff in the shows given how overwhelmingly gay everything is. Watch him be an FTM or some shit.
Click to expand...
I doubt he would be trans since there would be a huge uproar in the fandom that he's not voiced by a trans person. Plus his horns are that of a male's imp, which is a huge indicator to tell when a imp is trans or not.

The thing is that if Striker is revealed to be part of the LGBT, it really shouldn't be that big of a deal. Because so many people in Hell are, and is open about it.
 
InJailOutSoon said:
I doubt he would be trans since there would be a huge uproar in the fandom that he's not voiced by a trans person. Plus his horns are that of a male's imp, which is a huge indicator to tell when a imp is trans or not.

The thing is that if Striker is revealed to be part of the LGBT, it really shouldn't be that big of a deal. Because so many people in Hell are, and is open about it.
Click to expand...
Inb4 hes a gay rape victim or smth and closeted ace or whatever because of it. This is the vivzieverse, after all
 
>Lilith is canon in the show. IRL she's apart of Jewish folklore/mystical texts
>In mystical Jewish texts (Book of Enoch, Enoch being one of two major biblical figures to be taken to heaven while still alive) heaven is describing as having 7 or 10 layers, as aspect of Hell which otherwise only exists only in fiction
>In canon Judaism hell is replaced with Sheol, a place where all the dead go indiscriminately but is separated into righteous and wicked (this means, in theory, the good and bad co-exist in the same place)
>In Islam, Muhammed was taken to heaven still alive, where he went is described as going through its seven layers - a description found otherwise in mystical Jewish sources.
>According to the show Hell is in fact what the Jews and Muslims perceived heaven to be, due to its supernatural nature or trickery from the devil himself

Damn, pretty fuckin' based, Vivienne!
I didn't know you were functioning on that wavelength.
InJailOutSoon said:
And again, interesting how all the sub effeminate men also seem to be masochistic. Which I'm sure could be considered offensive/stereotypical, but what do I know.
Click to expand...
There's an explanation for that, but how prominent it actually is in the mindset here is debatable.

Mindset (1):
It's easier to chalk it up as her being a coomer and a massive fujo who is also constrained by political correctness. In BL/yaoi shit, the relationship commonly* and invariably begins with an act of sexual assault (groping, stolen kiss, molestation, or even full-blown penetrative rape) from the dominant on the submissive. So by making the submissive eager and reciprocal to the advances, no matter the context, you effectively make the issue a non-issue. This was attempted in Helluva Boss, where Stolas' coercive relationship with Blitzo (fuk 4 book) was mitigated by Blitzo's eagerness for the act itself. Of course the dynamic was flipped and Stolas' creepy dynamic was shifted to be pitiable and Blitzo was made to assume the role of "dominant" and the transaction was now, "fuk 4 affection" basically. Vivienne had to re-focus the show from the pilot and season 1 to season 2 of Helluva Boss just to slowly convert their fujo-dervived relationship into a typical one, which similarly mirrors typical fujo/yaoi stuff where the relationship transitions from exploitative and sexual to something more domestic and "wholesome".

I do have to play devil's advocate here for gays but given a lot of yaoi writers are women and lots of them weren't even aware of how gays go about sex (something to bring up later), I'm going to chalk a lot of that this down to being a woman/coomer-thing given how they'll also write straight relationships sometimes (Extremely desirable man throwing himself at the feet of a woman; an extremely desirable man dominating a woman (but in a protective/sexual way)' or a combination of both - see Twilight).

TLDR 1: Portraying the effeminate men (bottoms/submissive), who'd typically be at the receiving end of rape/coercion by their lover (tom/dominant) in a BL/Yaoi story, it's an attempt to remove the problematic element to the relationship alongside excising something that'd probably act as a genuine blocker to anything sincerely romantic developing between two people regardless of its composition, unless you're okay with the problematic implication of a rape victim falling in love with their rapist - something Game of Thrones did by having Daenerys be consenting but otherwise dominated by Khal Drogo during their first sex scene.

Mindset (2):
Another attitude is that by portraying homosexuals as being "normal", you're erasing their individual if not cultural identity, because to college/progressive-types, assimilation = erasure.

It's a very Critical Theory approach to looking at sexuality, which asserts attempts to reinforce a status quo or fight back against change is resistance from the elites of society as well as those in lockstep with them, which is done to prevent societal freedom, because freer people are detrimental to the powers that be.

However, the the status quo is constantly shifting, which effectively results in permanent discontent from those who subscribe to the theory, given any new status quo or threshold of acceptance is merely another means by which the powers that be can "oppress us". As the description implies, it has become heavily suffused in politics.

There exists a lot of "Critical [insert word here# Theories" out there which more or less argue for discontentment with the status quo acceptance of basically any facet of society that would otherwise stymie change or encourage contentment, except instead of it being a general rule, these Critical Theories will dissect how exactly the status quo oppresses them specifically.

In Critical Queer Theory, Critical Feminist Theory, Critical Gender Theory, of which there's great overlap, this includes:
(1) Sex/Gender (assigned at birth to cement gender identity, which filters people into assuming a specific "gender role" in society)
(2) Heterosexual/Straight/Monogamous (enforces a framework for relationships which keeps people confines to specific "roles" - man and woman, or "man" and "woman" (top/bottom) in a relationship)
(3) Lesbian/Homosexual/Bisexual (though not conforming to a man/woman dynamic, by limiting oneself to specifically one sex you're effectively just mirroring societal, heterosexual norms which continue to oppress you, and even if you sleep with both men and women you're still accepting a gender binary which keeps you mentally confined)

There's a bunch more little things but you can see the core which gave birth to terms like, "pansexual", "genderfluid", and "hetero-normative". Effectively everything we take for granted and being normal is effectively limiting your perspective and making you content with being oppressed. In Critical Theory undoing the normal is then meant to direct society towards proliferating freedom, eventually, somehow, but just results in a "I got mine" mindset. You see platitudes to goal of these theories but it's just lip service e.g. "The patriarchy and societal roles around masculinity hurt men too so we need to fight against them." or "The proliferation of women's rights will take high societal expectations off of men and allow responsibility to be distributed evenly."

Generally a lot of these concepts aren't echoed 1:1 in people, and they just filter down in some misshapen or half-understood form, but they'll otherwise encourage a line of thinking or specific mode of action like we see in the show and elsewhere.

Essentially, personal identity and your attributes need to be constantly asserted verbally or physically (see: infamous gay lisp or even anal sex (less than 37.2% of gay/bisexual men), or "transgender woman" over just "woman", or the bright unsightly haircuts of feminist/gender-fluid types i.e. "danger hair") otherwise they're at threat of being assimilated into normalcy, which the people at the top of society want because it makes you easier to control. "Gay marriage? Just a way to reinforce homosexual/lesbian identities into being 'normal' thus easier to control. Being limited to just 1 partner is what the powers that be want and will keep one person in the couple subconsciously confined under the dominance of the other." (This is why open marriages/relationships are encouraged, since they act as a means of subverting monogamy and thus subverting the powers that be).

This identity reinforcement of the Critical Theorists usually gain a lot in popularity amongst lefty-college types but specific "Critical X Theories" take root stronger in the associated group than being universally accepted, because some of the Theories contradict each other, most famously Critical Feminist Theory and Critical Gender Theory, where one side argues that gender/sex are themselves a means of oppression and aren't real, which the Feminists** take issue with because it means their struggles as a woman (something they see as real) are effectively self-caused and because distinctions between female and male are similarly made up, people can willingly move in and out of being apart of this oppressed class and so deserving of the concessions this class receives.

Regardless, the Critical Theory mindset is observable in a lot of progressives even if they don't take every single concept on board (likely because they're unaware of them) and likely have internalised a mish-mash of different theories into one contradicting whole. This typically happens through osmosis, or regurgitated to them in an incomplete state by some influencer or e-celeb.

TLDR 2: If Blitzo, as a bisexual, didn't constantly assert his perversions every chance he got, then how would you know his sexuality? The fact he's having constant sexual relations with another man? No, that's not enough! Keeping your sexuality confined to the bedroom and private is so heteronormative. He'd just be like them otherwise, and his unique identity/culture as a homosexual would be erased, which is to the benefit of those in power. It's also why his leering and sexual remarks are mostly if not only directed towards men, because otherwise you might mistake him for a heterosexual, or deeply unvirtuous beyond redemption given sexual unwanted remarks towards women are creepy and wrong instead of funny... What's a bisexual?

Alternatively she will use mindset (2) to act as a cover for (1) - which I suspect is common for a lot of perverts. Essentially the application of metaphysics and philosophy to justify real world action.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go masturbate out in public - Diogenes said this is the only way I can be truly free.

*I can't claim this to be a universal descriptor so "commonly" is strictly applied here, I'm sure there's myriad exceptions. 50 Shades of Grey doesn't encompass all romantic fiction in the same way Pride and Prejudice doesn't.

**Critical Feminist Theory emerged in the 60s and then effectively subverted the original definition and aims of the feminist movement, probably because the ideas were largely proliferated in colleges and universities. Critical Queer/Gender Theories emerged in the 90s and was similarly quick in suffusing and re-defining formerly accepted rhetoric and ideas. "Sexual preference" replaced "orientation" because a preference does not belie absolutism when it comes to your choice of sexual partner. They're hoping to do away with the concept of you being born a specific sexuality altogether, opting for the "development" idea, which may be more realistic than the liberal idea of people having no say in the matter, also argues that sexual development begins from infancy and so "assigning gender" and then raising/educating them as a girl/boy is pushing them towards a specific sexual orientation - this was heavily influenced by Sigmund Freud, who thought sexuality developed from as early as infancy and not later on such as during puberty.

Freud similarly influenced the field of sexology, which John Money was apart of. His infamous child experiment, which became the basis on which all transgenders assert they are "female", was just as much an attempt to prove you could induce a boy into being homosexual via his upbringing as it was attempting to prove gender/sex was all mental - him having the kids imitate sex acts with one another was to see if the one raised as a "girl" would become "straight" (have sex with men) thereby proving he mentally saw himself as a girl now, thus proving sex/gender was mental. If he remained mentally a boy, then the simulated sex acts ought to push him towards being a homosexual. The only bittersweet element to this story is Money was utterly wrong and the boy retained his identity as a boy and was also straight, ditto for his brother.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom