#tw vivziepop mention

[stewpid-soup]

VENT CW!! STAY SAFE!!

anyone else find it exhausting to just enjoy things?

I don’t want to support people or companies that are actively doing things that are bad (racism, homophobia, defending SA, etc etc). but it’s so mentally draining to look through all of this terrible shit and not be able to enjoy things bc of their creators or ppl associated with it

i mean, i don’t support dream. i’ve said it before and i’ll say it again. I don’t support dream or the dteam as a whole - but the dsmp was such a big comfort to me through quarantine, and even now i still love the storyline and the characters.

HP, well that’s self explanatory. JKR is just a shit person and i’m not gonna give her my money bc i enjoy the plot of HP. I just take fanon on its own for the most part. I own the books and the films already (my family loves HP and has for a long time, since before JKR was outed as a transphobe) so i don’t need to buy anything from her. HP was a huge part of my childhood and the thought of not interacting with any content related to it makes me so sad, because i still love it even now.

and as controversial as it may be, i’ve enjoyed hazbin and helluva boss for years now. it was another comfort during quarantine, and i watched it with friends and got to bond over it. i do not like vivziepop or support her, and it’s exhausting to see all this back and forth about her online bc it’s so confusing. I love these shows and it makes me so happy that I get to see hazbin come together after waiting so long, and the same goes for helluva boss. of course there can be improvements to the way vivziepop writes some characters, but i still love these shows so much. it hurts my heart to feel like i can’t enjoy the content because the creator is such a bad person.

and then the number of musicians i’ve had to stop listening to because they turned out to be shitty people. or actors i avoided watching content of because they’re bad people (especially when the list of ppl who support Israel came out- of course im not supporting anyone on there, but some of the ppl on there just rlly hurt my heart because ive enjoyed their content for so long)

i know there’s not really any way to avoid this, as people are complex and can be an asshole w/o you knowing. funding people like this isn’t something i want or care to do, so of course i actively avoid it. but I just don’t know what to do when it comes to this.

a friend told me that it’s sort’ve about picking and choosing things, because you never know what people are really like. they said that with the state of the world, it’s important to stay educated but don’t let shitty people get in the way of things you enjoy. i’m just at the point where i feel like i can’t enjoy anything because anytime i get stuck in a rabbit hole of content, i see people going back and forth about who should be cancelled and who actually isn’t a bad person. cancel culture is one of the worst things about the internet, and it just makes interacting with fandoms even more toxic than it already is.

ig this is just a rant talking about comforts i have that i feel like i can’t enjoy anymore because of cancel culture and just like..people being people? i’m just so tired of finding something i enjoy and then learning out that they are or possibly could be doing/supporting something bad and just— it makes me feel so guilty because i don’t want to indirectly/directly hurt anyone. i know what i believe in and what i do and don’t support, at least for the most part (still learning everyday atp), but it doesn’t make it any easier to part with things i hold so dearly in my heart.

does anyone else feel similarly? if so, what have you found that helps or at least is a comfortable middle ground?

idk bro, my life is so exhausting with everything i deal with in real life- so to feel like i can’t even find comfort in my silly little shows anymore is really depressing. my mental health is not doing well lmfaooo

[carto0ncritter]

One thing I noticed in this shitshow of an episode is how fucking ungrateful Stolas was for everything Blitzø did for him since he came to his place.

Him being a spoiled rich white asshole:

I hate his facial expressions so much, you have no idea

I can guarantee you care about these 'nice things' more than you care about your daughter btw

Oh, we also have, let's see here...

*insert the entire montage of Blitzø (Stolas' victim) trying to cheer his abuser up since he's now in love with him thanks to good ol' Stockholm Syndrome*

Seeing that cigarette reminds me of when Stolas uh... *checks notes* called Blitz an 'itty bitty imp (racist)' despite him clearly hating it, grabbed his cheek and used his horn to put out his cigarette (not to mention Blitzø's severe trauma being related to fucking fire)

Okay so anyway, I think Stolas said "Oh, when have you ever asked" bc Blitzø stole from him and his family 25 years ago. correct me if I'm wrong here but isn't it manipulative af to bring up smth that happened that long ago, also it's totally unrelated to the current situation. I swear it's like a grown ass man saying to another "Oh I still hate you because, uhm, remember that one time in 3rd grade when you stole my pencil..."

So... if Stolas still holds this against Blitzø, let me ask: why was he ever "in love" with him in the first place? Answer? He wasn't. Stolas only used this imp for his sexual fantasies and for him to get to experience his "fairytale romance"

P.S. Imps are a race his privileged ass has always been racist towards and he hasn't ever attempted to, uh... try to understand them better? Understand how they live? I mean if you truly cared about your "boyfriend," Stolas, you'd have put in SOME effort to change your mindset/behavior and WOULDN'T HAVE EVER SEXUALLY COERCED HIM

He also 🍇d you blitz

And no he didn't do much, he's powerful af. Using those powers isn't rocket science heck he turned an imp to stone in s1 he can protect himself but is apparently the "bottom" in the stolitz "relationship". Also no, him leaving Octavia clearly isn't a huge deal to Stolas otherwise he'd have fought to earn her forgiveness and not just sulk like a wimpy loser. YOU ARE NOT ONLY A GROWN MAN STOLAS, BUT A FATHER. At least you were supposed to be

So was not thinking about your daughter until you lost everything, apparently

AGAIN WITH THIS SHIT??? WHY ARE WE TALKING ABOUT A TRANSACTION AGAIN

Alright I'm signing off until the next season drops, if that ever happens

This episode sucked, but kudos to our girl Via who was smart enough to see through her "father's" bs 👏

ALSO HAPPY HOLIDAYS TO THE CRITICAL COMMUNITY (and to non-toxic stans too)!

[vivziepopcriticalconfessions]

"i think everyone is bashing angel dust as a character for the wrong reason. hes not bad rep because he's hypersexual, hypersexuality in itself is a trauma response to sexual abuse. hes bad rep because the show doesnt actually take said sexual abuse seriously and makes him out to be a dirty whore for said coping mechanisms"

Submitted by @abagoflaysclassic

[wimpywompythethird]

I cannot stress enough how hypocritical Vivziepop and a large portion of both of her fandoms are when it comes to deciding who “deserves” to be recognized as a sexual assault survivor. Vivzie has publicly stated, “I support and respect all survivors,” yet she writes scenes where characters are sexually assaulted for laughs, only treating the issue seriously when it suits her narrative.

Vivziepop: “I support all survivors!”

Also Vivziepop: Creates an entire scene where a character is forcibly dragged into a room—presumably to be sexually assaulted while visibly struggling, clawing at the floor and repeatedly saying “no,” making it absolutely clear that he wants nothing to do with it. All of this is framed as comedy, serving no purpose other than to be a cheap, tasteless joke.

The number of people defending this with “it’s meant to be funny!” is absolutely appalling and then there’s the fandom’s go-to excuse:

“Well, Sir Pentious wasn’t actually raped, so—”

SO NOTHING! Attempted rape is sexual assault. He was dragged away against his will. Sexual assault isn’t just rape—it’s any non-consensual sexual act or advance and in this case, it was absolutely sexual assault. The way people in this fandom dismiss his experience just because “it didn’t go all the way” is horrifying. Do they even understand what survivors go through? Do they realize that sexual assault encompasses so much more than just rape? What about groping? What about coercion? What about sexual harassment? Or is it just easier for them to ignore the reality because the scene was “supposed to be funny”?

That is not support. That is not respect. That is minimizing sexual violence for the sake of a cheap laugh and it’s absolutely disgusting.

[feelingemotjons]

(Screenshot taken from this post)

Vivziepop, you have said absolutely nothing about the many different val cosplayers harassing people at conventions (including Micheal), nothing about the blackface alastor cosplayer, nothing about how minors are apparently showing up at cons dressed as angel dust, but someone wanting a VA to sign a critical analysis video that they made is a problem??

Vivziepop refuses to address the actual problems within her fandom. She doesn't say anything when people are running around causing actual harm, but someone doing the most harmless thing is a problem to her I guess

Also I very HIGHLY doubt limus wanted pentious's va to agree with their opinions on the show. Am sure she just wanted him to sign the picture and that's that.

[66kenobi66]

Vivziepop Can't Write POC

TW/CW: Racism, S/A mention

Surprisingly Vivziepop's work actually has more POC characters than I first realized. And all of them are...less then splendid.

Valkyrie

Valkyrie...poor, poor Valkyrie...

Forever cursed to sit in the back, shut up, and only stand up and contribute when her white savior girlfriend either royally screws things up or needs moral support.

I've spoken about my strong feelings on Valkyrie many times before in previous posts so I'll only really give one new shred of criticism I've realized: Making your main POC female cast member a former genocidal murderer who spent supposed years killing her girlfriend's kind is...a choice.

Emily and Sera

My biggest issue with Emily and Sera (especially Emily) is that you can hardly even tell that they're meant to be Black. Their skin is a weird dark grayish brown, their features are stock and bland (both of them lacking proper noses), and their hair is some puzzling mix of straight and poofy.

And the writing of them both is also unimpressive. Emily is a carbon-copy, stock "Bubbly young girl" archetype who never really does much other than sing and move around. She acts more like a piece on a chessboard than a character, simply moving and doing what the scene needs her to do. Sera on the other hand, is a personality-less stick figure who just kind of does things because...the plot requires it. Also, great move Vivzie! Making one of the main villains a Black woman who endorses genocide and has to act like a babysitter/manager to the loud, obnoxious, hate-spewing white guy. How progressive!

Velvette (Kind of?)

I...actually have no real words to say about Velvette. Which sounded like a positive until I realized the reason I had nothing to say about her is because she does nothing. Like, ever.

She just kind of stands around being annoying and ignoring her fellow Vee's whining fits and sex crimes. Jeez, uh...that argument between her and Carmilla was stupid, I guess?

Velvette: She sure is one of the characters of all time!

Valentino

Not even worth mentioning, you already know he's terrible.

Alastor/Husk

Oh dear god, Alastor...

Words fail me at how much of an insane fail both of these characters are. One is a offensive caricature of Voodou that would make Dr. Facilier roll in his grave, who's also somehow whiter than snow despite being half Creloe. And the other is a constantly complaining douche and a hopeless alcoholic, who has a whole song devoted to calling a sex worker a loser for being abused/not having a proper coping mechanism. Oh, AND he's enslaved by the other "Black" guy! HOW PROGRESSIVE 😀

Oh and Carmilla is there too, but I've been awake for too long and also have nothing to say about her :/

[aspartameabuser69]

Weird how Viv made BPD and POC coded character then put him an abusive relationship and acted like it was healthy and the abuser was an “UwU soft gay boy.”

[petitprincess1]

And yet....Vivzie is the problem....

[velvette-hussle]

HAZBIN HOTEL’S MESSY HANDLING OF THE NATURE OF VICTIMHOOD & SEXUAL MISCONDUCT (a probably incredibly nitpick-y rant, but I don’t give a fuck)

⚠︎TW: Discussions of Sexual Assault & Sexual Harassment & making rudimentary comparisons between Angel Dust and Valentino. ⚠︎

I really wish that the show had allowed for more nuanced discussion when it comes to the topic of victims and victimhood.

Like, victims can also be wrong, they can be perpetrators of crimes and violence also. People are allowed to dislike a victim of something; no one should be obligated to tolerate someone else’s bad (or even just annoying) behavior because that person has also been hurt. Victims can be depicted and portrayed in a bad light and still have their victimhood acknowledged and empathized with while also still being “bad people” or having done something to victimize somebody else in their pain or trauma, and having that be acknowledged also. Neither of these ideas automatically cancel each other out, they more so exist in a forever winding feedback loop (at least that’s how I see it) until someone is able to “healthily” unpack their trauma.

Then, on top of the show just completely not treating victimhood like a scale, the narrative also can’t decide when it wants to treat abuse and/or sexual assault or harassment as a serious topic that it wants to respectfully address or if it wants to treat these things as something to laugh at and find funny or make brief gag jokes out of that diminishes the potential seriousness of a scene.

EX: Valentino licking Charlie in “greeting” during their first meeting is played as a funny gag joke (like the music beat doesn’t turn sinister until he looks back at Angel because Val technically wasn’t on the defensive yet since he didn’t know who Charlie was there for) BUT how Valentino purposely decides to touch Angel Dust on his chest after he explicitly says not to touch him is treated as disrespectful and disgusting as it is.

Like, these are the same fucking disrespectful behaviors. But anytime Valentino does some fuck shit to anyone other than Angel it’s played for a joke (outside of when Angel was worried for Nifty, kind of), despite the fact that when Val does it to Angel nearly the exact same thing is played seriously.

PART ONE: STATIC VICTIMHOOD

When Valentino first meets Charlie and licks her arm he’s pushing a boundary for his own amusement - and, given the theory(?) that his saliva produces some sort of aphrodisiac, probably attempting to “mellow her out” so to say as well. He can’t kill Charlie, he’s smart enough to know that at least, but apparently everyone knows that she’s a pushover and so he can assert a level of dominance over Charlie by licking her to make her uncomfortable, and to lord over the fact that he was able take some tiny bit of her autonomy away like that, then verbally flustering her (further knocking her off kilter so she’s easier to manipulate) by propositioning her.

There is a direct parallel in this type of boundary pushing behavior (specifically of a sexual nature) that Angel does as well, it’s just not born of the same thing that Valentino’s is. Where Val makes people uncomfortable and domineers them as a way to disarm them and make them easier to manipulate for his own satisfaction, Angel does it as a form of deflection so that he feels like he has more power than he actually does. It’s a defense mechanism, but an incredibly unhealthy one (which is normal).

The show had an opportunity with this parallel to comment on how both versions (albeit to different levels) are bad, but it didn’t. Now, you can certainly infer that Angel was being incredibly rude and inconsiderate when he was constantly coming onto Husk despite the other’s clear dislike for it and how uncomfortable it made him by how once they become friends in “Masquerade” that harassment just stops, but forcing an audience to infer character development and story messages is not good writing the way it’s done in the show. Angel just stops entirely without any discussion or hint at the unfavorable parallel which means that there is no lesson to be learned from its existence. The emphasis on “this is a bad action too, despite Angel being a victim” is not there, it’s only treated like incredibly unacknowledged character development that’s only actually considered as legitimate because the fans are over-analyzers. How quickly his behavior is brushed aside without proper (or any) acknowledgment is ignoring an actual issue instead of addressing it and then acting as if the issue was never there in the first place.

We know why Angel stopped harassing Husk but not why his harassment was bad in the first place. The audience knowing about a topic that’s briefly touched and filling in blanks does not mean that the show was written well. The harassment is played like a joke until it disappears, not played like a joke (specifically when Angel is the harasser) until someone calls him out on it fully and he apologizes and then he stops.

As far as the show is concerned, the problem isn’t that Angel purposely makes people uncomfortable (in a similar, but still more understated, manner to Valentino) as a form of deflection and posturing, it’s that he’s fake. There’s a difference there. What the show actually does is erase that bad behavior instead of objecting to it, which I’d be willing to bet has led to some - especially younger - fic writers copying Angels unhealthy behavior within the framework that it’s just “flirting” and not a direct crossing of other characters’ boundaries.

You have to make shit like that explicit in a show where you’re claiming to be seriously and respectfully tackling these subjects. No one should be allowed to get a pass for things that on another character would be viewed as morally reprehensible just because they’re a main character/a part of the core Hotel cast, this confuses the storytelling and messages. Just because a few people in the audience know an action is wrong and then will apply further insight onto it themselves does not mean that the show itself accomplished that same amount of introspection, and in Hazbin’s case that’s exactly what happened. The show is being praised for something that it did not do. If parts of the audience did not already know that Angel harassing Husk was bad (despite the fact that it’s played for laughs every time, and once during “Masquerade” in a way that’s supposed to make the audience feel bad for Angel alone) then they’d come out of season one not thinking twice about the way Angel harassed Husk; Husk who eventually gets so fed up with Angel’s constant barrage of unwanted advances that he began dreading anytime Angel would say something even remotely suggestive and so tried to anticipate his innuendos so that he could cut Angel off before he could even start. The people who couldn’t understand past what the show was telling them (through its framing of characters and their actions) was “right” and what was “wrong” wouldn’t’ve picked up on the fact that Angel is being a problem when he harasses Husk because he’s sexually harassing him and that it’s not cute or proper flirting or just “wrong” because it’s a negative coping mechanism for Angel to have or any of that shit.

Also, the overall issue is framed as if Angel’s actions are only self destructive and that’s why they’re bad: Angel acting “fake” as a defense mechanism in order to give himself some semblance of power and autonomy back over to himself because of how thoroughly he frequently gets it stripped away by Valentino. That self destruction is only shown through the lens of pity though, there is no mild scolding involved outside of telling Angel he’s got issues. Him harassing Husk and Alastor is never framed as a problem specifically because you’re meant to laugh every time it happens and because Alastor shoots him down immediately afterwards. The narrative never scolds Angel for harassing Husk because it’s not written well enough to be able to handle both issues, so it just erases the bad thing that doesn’t fit within its narrative that “every victim is a good person” and only focuses on the ways in which Angel’s unhealthy behavior impacts him and puts him in danger and is unhealthy and unfair to him.

Acknowledging the fact that self destructive behavior isn’t good or healthy, especially while also still validating whatever circumstances led the person to such behavior, is great! Now just also acknowledge that that self destruction is not without its risks to the people around the victim as well. If Husk wasn’t the way he was, and the show wasn’t the way it was, he could’ve come out of his interactions with Angel having been victimized by Angel, and he wouldn’t be fucking wrong in not wanting anything to do with Angel after he’s become Angel’s sounding board to lash out at and sexually harass to make himself (ie: Angel) feel better.

This is coming from someone who has experienced both sexual harassment and assault and who has non-“good victim” tendencies as a result of those experiences and a few other things too, by the way. In my experience, verbal (sexual) harassment is not given the same weight as physical harassment and sexual assault or rape. It just isn’t. Most people can’t even see verbal abuse as anything but a mild inconvenience and, while they will scold and be disapproving of the perpetrator, the majority of the weight of ending or not “encouraging” the harassment is still put on the person on the receiving end to be able to “rise above” and ignore and “get over” everything, or to “stop enticing” their harasser. Excuses for the perpetrator often sound like: “It’s just a harmless catcall they didn’t even touch you” or “well they’re going through something bad too so just give them a break” or “it’s just flirting” or “they just like you”. The mental damage that someone takes from their being verbally sexual harassed not being taken seriously at all, but them still feeling horrible about it, can cause people to feel weak for having those feelings at all and tends to lead to them staying silent and just learning to deal with the harassment; harassment that often leads to assault. An instance of verbal harassment cannot then repeatedly be played for a joke in a show that is claiming credibility and claiming that it is handling sexual assault and abuse properly and with respect. As a result people will overlook one form of harassment to focus in and condemn another, leaving the other - seemingly lesser - thing to be left up to interpretation or not internalized as also a problem as well, because that’s what the show did.

There could’ve been discussion about how even as a victim people’s unhealthy coping mechanisms can still pose a problem to others. Being a victim of something or someone cannot excuse that person themselves’ bad behavior, and that’s a dangerous mindset to not dissuade and to subconsciously push. We can empathize with Angel (since this is an adult show all of us should have the ability to understand this duality) and still acknowledge, with the same weight that we do his abuse, Angel’s own messy behavior. You can’t just be allowed unchecked to show sexual assault as bad and then leave the clear sexual (albeit verbal) harassment that’s being shown without a moral, because then the issue just gets dropped and you’re ignoring another (even more common) form of abuse.

My first time watching “Masquerade” I found myself empathizing with Angel even though I hadn’t (and still haven’t) attached to his character in any significant way; I’d also long since grown uncomfortable (and felt stupid) about not feeling good when knee jerk reacting to Angel harassing Husk by laughing at my tv though, and neither of those feelings cancel out the other. Around the time that you could tell that Husk was genuinely bothered when they were doing the trust fall exercise is when the joke fully stopped being funny for me. I know that Husk cutting off Angel to say: “I swear to fuck, if you say dicks…”, wasn’t meant to be Husk feeling uneasy around Angel (it was just to show him being fed up with Angel’s hyper sexuality in a “funny” way) but that in no way stopped the reaction from pinging uncomfortably in my mind regardless. It stuck with me so well, even, that when Vaggie told Husk that he had to be the one to deal with Angel after Angel’s outburst/breakdown I instantly objected; as far as I was concerned after Husk (even after repeatedly being harassed after expressing his dislike for said harassment) asked Angel if he wanted to talk and then Angel not only went to harrass Husk again but then also lashed out at him after Husk rightly rejected him Angel was no longer his problem anymore.

That’s not to say that I don’t think Angel deserved to be given some leeway or deserved not to be forgiven or that someone shouldn’t have gone to make sure he was okay in general, but even now I still don’t think it should’ve been Husk that had to go run after him and cheer him up. Especially considering the fact that Husk isn’t the one sponsoring Angel, and Charlie actively says that she’s to blame for Angel’s sensitivity at that moment; Charlie’s a big girl I don’t see why, even with her feelings being a little hurt, she couldn’t have gone and made an actual effort to make amends then, and when I first watched the episode that’s what I though was going to happen. Husk did not provoke Angel there on purpose or with malicious intent after he realized Angel wasn’t doing well, Angel just did not want that kindness at the moment in the way that it was being offered (which does happen) and maybe he didn’t trust the kindness due to trust issues he has from Valentino either, but that does not excuse his behavior and only serves to explain it. Forcing Husk to then go deal with and cheer up the dude that’s been repeatedly harassing him and not taking him up on his offers to connect didn’t rub me the right way. Yes, people shouldn’t give up on their friends or loved ones too quickly when they’re lashing out after having gone through a rough event, but 1.) Husk and Angel aren’t friends and Husk is in fact only at the Hotel at all because he’s being forced to stay in the first place, and 2.) other people are not obligated to put up with someone else lashing out at them regardless of if that someone else is hurting, period.

If we were to be given backstory on Valentino that shows that he was a sex slave worse than Angel is when he was human - no freedom from his “work” ever, had to sleep in a cage, was treated like an animal, and was constantly literally shackled and shit - none of that would suddenly erase what he’s done to Angel or spontaneously make it “okay” because Valentino’s only acting out due to trauma, no matter how much you might feel for him after learning that. That’s not how that should work, where because you’ve been a victim once you can now never be held accountable for any wrong actions you perpetrate again or some shit.

Like, Angel Dust is still a bad person, he is just also a victim of abuse and rape. He fully, alongside Vaggie, was more than prepared to murder Sir Pentious despite the fact that he was no longer a threat by the time that he’d been found out as a mole and they all saw him be left for dead and then begin to cry, and despite what the Hotel was even made for. This is a character trait of Angel’s (ie: how easily he’ll kill & the few hints of his past in the mob) that’s presented pretty neutrally though, and is never really something that Charlie or the show paints as bad within the context of the show’s morals (or even as something the characters should stop doing in order to be able to repent).

All of which just kind of add to the show’s (and all Vivziepop properties in general) tendency to mix messages. When Angel does something bad it’s funny because the narrative said so, but when a one off character does something similar to what he did (because that character isn’t supposed to be liked) now all of a sudden that same action from earlier will be framed as horrible. This back and forth then directly leads into the show framing rape and sexual harassment and abuse as bad only until they can be framed as funny.

PART TWO: ARE RAPE JOKES FUNNY OR NOT?

My - and other people’s - anger and/or disappointment is not rooted in the assumption that we all missed Angel and Husk’s relationship development; and also if a lot of people/the show’s creators are claiming that a show has good representation (no matter what type) people are going to test that out for themselves, and Hazbin does come up lacking in regards to the back and forth way that it both treats SA seriously and then turns around seconds later to turn SA into a gag joke and not treat it seriously.

The issue is not that Angel was harassing people in general, but that it was not treated narratively like an issue in regards to how he continually sexually harassed Husk and the show never treated it as anything but a funny recurring joke. We know why Angel acts like that, yes, but the reasoning doesn’t excuse his behavior, it only explains it, and at no point does his harassment get properly addressed.

He never apologizes for harassing Husk or lashing out at him when Husk was not the actual source of his pain; the show decided to just forget this and have Angel not do it again - I suppose since he became more comfortable with everyone at the Hotel and no longer felt the need to act anymore - and also have Husk comfort Angel without bringing up how actively uncomfortable we saw Angel make him multiple times for reasons that we as the audience can only infer, which is where people’s problems lie. We’re supposed to laugh at Husk getting uncomfortable by Angel’s pushing unlike when we are shown Angel getting uncomfortable when around Valentino.

Similarly things like Pentious being bodily dragged away after impulsively announcing that he’d have sex with everybody - clearly regretting that choice because he didn’t mean it and as such not giving real consent - are treated like a funny gag for the audience to laugh at instead of the horrible scenario it is too.

Compare that to how seriously Angel’s possible SA at the hands of Valentino is portrayed with a fairly high level of seriousness and then wires do cross. The show does go back and forth on when it wants to take SA and SH seriously and when it doesn’t. Also, Medrano has curated a Fandom of over analyzers fairly purposefully considering all the hidden details and messages/hints Vivziepop shows tend to have in the background of their animated scenes and how often characters vocally tease the audience; just because you don’t want to think about the show that hard or that seriously doesn’t necessarily mean that everyone else is being ridiculous. Plus, the show is handling serious topics, so as such the conversation around those topics are going to be just as serious.

You can say that the target audience for the show should already know that how Angel acted towards Husk before “Masquerade” wasn’t okay, but I’d argue that Angel’s SH of Husk is a much harder thing for a lot of people to wrap their heads around as an actual problem in real life than Valentino clearly maliciously hitting, threatening, and abusing Angel is. Most everybody can clock extreme forms of abuse like that, the things that people will deny and make the most readily accepted excuses for are smaller instances like making others uncomfortable with constant advancements, unwelcome sexual comments, or catcalling and reconciling with the fact that people can renege on their consent even in the middle of a sexual act or that if someone has to wear someone down/pressure them into sex that the sex cannot then be counted as fully consensual.

Physical and parental abuse often work the same way; people can identify when watching tv shows that the over the top smashing bottles and calling kids names and running after them to beat them and break their bones is abuse, but some of those same people won’t count locking a child in a dark room as punishment as abuse or just hitting their child when ‘they really deserve it’ as abuse - or even heavily teasing them or not allowing their child any privacy as abuse. Which is then why depicting these smaller (or less conventional and readily identifiable) acts of abuse and sexual harassment and assault with just as much care as the bigger more obvious examples is so important.

TL; DR: Eight episodes or not it would’ve taken two short lines for the show to properly address Angel’s SH of Husk as a problem (then have Husk forgive Angel in the face of his regret because Husk is understanding enough about his situation, and have Angel own up to his own faults while also not treating victimhood like a ‘get out of jail free card’ to excuse any victim’s bad actions) and they could’ve easily done away with Sir Pentious getting dragged away to have non consensual sex as a joke entirely; then the show wouldn’t be being criticized for having a tonal problem when it comes to how wishy washy it is about which characters SA and SH is taken seriously and which ones aren’t and are treated like a joke, and could then accurately claim to have delved into sexual assault, rape, and rape culture respectfully even as a show focused on comedy.

Anyway, I started and finished this thing in March and April of last year so keep that in mind, I guess. Also, mind my repetitiveness; I just wanted to keep the length and not edit any more than I already had fr.

[carto0ncritter]

People are so desperate for LGBT representation, (specifically gay and lesbian couples), that they're willing to accept literally any homosexual ship regardless of the concerning elements.

Let's see, we have ass ships like

1)Stolitz - Stolas is an abuser, a r*pist, a racist man who has so many powers yet is emotionally fragile, passive and wimpy, a man who victimizes himself over and over, a man who emotionally neglects the child who desperately needs him for his sexual fantasies with his victim, a man who is the creator's pet, a man whose actions aren't wrong according to the writers, a man who can just blame everyone else around him but himself with no consequences

2) Catradora - Catra is an abuser too, but was treated like a cute kitty cat in s5 despite having done atrocious things, she was instantly forgiven with no consequences, and she ended up dating her sister and the biggest victim of her abuse

3) Huskerdust - I haven't talked about this one so far, but Angel sexually harassed Husk and never apologized, Husk himself sang "Loser, Baby" and as a SA survivor I felt like he was trying to say this to Angel: "Oh, you've hit rock bottom because of SA? It's your fault lol, accept that you're a whiny bitch and a loser even tho the problem is extremely serious and out of your control and just suck it up, I'm a loser too despite not going through the same thing you have, you're not alone in being a loser BUT YOU ARE STILL A LOSER BABYYY A LOOOSER" Like, ik the message was supposed to be how we're not alone in our struggles and how there's always someone who will understand and make us feel less alone, but the way this was handled rubbed me the wrong way. Also, I'm not sure whether or not to mention this as well (screw it, I will), but Husk is described as "the old bartender," his voice sounds like it belongs to an old dude too, and he apparently died when he was like, 70, while Angel died in his 30's. I'm not gonna calculate their ages based on how it works in Hell because personally I feel like it doesn't matter. What matters is how old they were when they were alive. But however you decide to look at their ages, it's not just the implied enormous age gap that bothers me, no... it's more so the difference in maturity between Husk and Angel. Husk is described as a dude who has seen and experienced a lot of stuff. On the other hand, Angel is clearly immature and there is this weird... emotional imbalance between them? It's like a mentor dating his apprentice, at least that's how I see it. I'm not saying dating someone who's 40 years older than you is morally wrong (if you're both adults) but IT IS WEIRD imo, especially since Angel & Husk are not on the same page when it comes to life experience and maturity. Oh yeah, I also don't think Angel should be in any kind of romantic relationship... for his own good

[vivziepopcriticalconfessions]

"I find it ironic that Vivziepop won’t stop talking about how Valentino isn’t real and how there’s nothing wrong with sexualizing his abusive behavior but pretty much put a target on Stella fans and engaged in the harassment whenever anyone came in defense of hers. She loves it when people worship her male villains but can’t handle it when people also do the same for her female villains. I also think fans should know that her constantly getting into fights with sexual abuse survivors and talking down to them is not normal. Well adjusted cartoon creators don’t do weird shit like this."

Submitted by anonymous

[a-little-ray-of-fantasy]

Some Stolas haters: "Stolas was a much better character in the pilot episode, when he acted like a villain who tried to force himself into Blitz!"

So, you wanted him to be like the version that had behavioural resemblances to Valentino?

Considering just how much discourse there is around Val and people liking him KNOWING FULL WELL HE'S AN IRREDEEMABLE VILLAIN AND DO NOT CONDONE HIS ACTIONS, so much so that his own voice actor got harassed for PLAYING a villain...

No, you guys would handle Stolas even LESS if he was written like he was in the pilot...

[starlattethesqueakwal]

I literally dare the "fiction doesn't affect reality" people/proshits (or whatever tf they want to call themselves) to say that shit to the girl who nearly died because her friends thought Slenderman was real.

This too! 👆🏾

[66kenobi66]

"Helluva Boss/Hazbin Hotel cares about male victims!"

Mhm...sure yep totally! They CLEARLY do! /j

Sure...😒

[aspartameabuser69]

The way HH portrays oppression is honestly weird if not harmful, the only thing Heaven does is commit an annual genocide. That’s bad but actual oppressive regimes don’t act like that, it’s obviously written from the point of view of a rich person. The main character is a rich white woman. It’s about a rich white woman civilising the poor, the sex workers, the alcoholics, the violent.

Even redemption, it’s wallowing in pity. It’s not changing and bettering yourself. Angel Dust does not apologise for sexually harassing Husker instead it’s all of his actions being justified by the narrative. His punishment is sexual abuse. Yes he’s not a perfect victim, I’m not. I don’t think anyone is. But in the eyes of the narrative his actions that hurt people are okay because he’s been sexually abused.

Hazbin Hotel feels like there was little foresight for how honest to god awful the themes of the story are.

[2347cat]

We got another Vivziepop video LETS FUCKING GO!!!!!!!!! (please reblog!)