I posted this already, but if the ending doesn't include this plus the heads of Alastor and Niffty, and TOTAL DHORKS VICTORY:
I'm more miffed at the fact there are still rabid Stolas/Stolitz defenders despite the growing distaste of both things. Like these people don't bother to hear the other side. They stay in their echo chambers and continue relying on their interpretation of Stolas' character as an absolute, not as a mere opinion. I did notice how anti-Stolas/Stolitz videos are gaining a lot more traction than pro-Stolas/Stolitz videos, though. A huge relief in my book. But it won't stop the circlejerks of HB Twitter and the HB subreddit. Not by a long shot.
You know what icked me? The fact that "Stolas is never wrong" angle, only to then tick on my head "OH! So this is the episode where Blitzø has to humiliate himself and then at the end the fucking gag is that appears the incubus by the name of "Better than Blitzø guy"". Fucking fucking fucking, is this supposed to be funny? If that was, I thought I had to laugh. "Look, an imp being humiliated for being right!" That's bullshit writing, I expect teenager to write crap like this, not adults. Of course, last time I appeared too MATI, but with a positive analysis: Stolas needs to sit down and evaluate his fucking life - he's a hypocrite using Octavia as a fucking shield against Stella. Where are his redeeming qualities? Being a homo? Really? Maybe being... caring for those he likes? Frugal perhaps? That's all I saw on a few essays, I know I'll get annoyed if I watch this show.
WASTED CONCEPT: You get a threatening antagonist, only to use it to further a retarded ship. They could use him to make him seem like a """villain""" where you say at first: "I WANT HIM DEAD!", only for you to softed up as time goes by! THAT'S HOW YOU MAKE GOOD CHARACTERS! Do I have to invoke Jaime fucking Lannister here? There are a thousand ones, like Zuko from Avatar: the Last Airbender (another animated series), yet you turned characters you wanted "gone" to become relatable as the story progressed. What a shame...
God, this reminds me so much about how little I've seen people actually dissect the issues Stella has suffered with. As in, actually bringing up the fact she's a queen forced into a marriage she never asked to be in and how she's just a mentally unstable tradwife. I've yet to see a YouTuber go in depth with Stella's character that doesn't just stay in certain lanes to appease a certain crowd.
Whoever made this did Vivzie a lot of favours drawing her like that rather than what she actually looks like.
It would be interesting. The amount of butthurt and a depth that would be given to her. Double whammy (or WHAAAAA-mmy I wonder).
You'd be impressed. There are people who do ASMR of characters like Valentino, Vox, Alastor and crap like that and they write shit like "OH THANK YOU DADDY I WILL GO NOW TO THE BASEMENT PLAP PLAP PLAP". Coombrained teenagers. And yes, I had to look it up to see it for myself. Only because they have what, a sexy/seductive voice or what?
Probably because they're basing the drawing on what she looked like before she got the amazon TV deal, threw everyone involved in the OG hazbin under the bus for new shiny hollywood/broadway people and rapidly animorphed into amy schumer as if some divine punishment was inflicted (or some hollywood demon skinwalker killed her and is now wearing her bloated corpse as a skin really either could have happened)
It's the Onceler effect. Vivzie's a Tumblr veteran, and Tumblr's userbase (especially the fujos of the era) got super into the Onceler, and in turn, anyone that resembled him. He's skinny, he's got a top hat, he's sleezy with a "broken side", etc, etc. To that point, people began shipping the Onceler with alternate versions of himself and everything. He basically created the template.
I never knew that, this is good to know. Seems like a proto-Jack Skelington. Not surprised to find Jeff the Killer in there. My honest reaction:
Darn you. Got me watching the entire video. Was an enjoyable watch.
I think it's quite likely he's highlighting the statement and does not actually believe it, but it's hard to tell.
Huh, could he be a SynthethicMan guy, only with more Irony and Sarcasm, only with less coombrain? LoL. Yeah, it is hard to tell.
He prefaces before listing the reasoning behind “de-objectifying“ vidya women that he “disagrees with the reasons for doing so” (18:5
. He’s just giving a description of the argument, which requires that biological essentialism is false because then there would be no point to the argument since male violence towards women then occurs as a result of biological tendencies and not because of cultural tendencies that have no basis in biological reality, and therefore can’t be fixed by removing scantily clad women from vidya.