- Registrado
- 19 de Ago, 2024
Hazbin Hotel / Helluva Boss Thread - Now a Griefing Thread
- Iniciador del tema XtrmGamr719
- Fecha de inicio
-
🇵🇦 Nuestro primer dominio localizado está en español en kiwifarms.pa. Our first localized domain is on Spanish on kiwifarms.pa.
-
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
- Registrado
- 1 de Ago, 2022
A question for all you kiwis. I wanted to know your opinion on this:
Would you say these statements are the same or different? And why?
Would you say these statements are the same or different? And why?
- Registrado
- 28 de Dic, 2014
This is the thing. If you have a show with a ton of characters, some of them are going to be gay. It gets ridiculous when every single one, other than an obvious villain, is gay. Obviously I'm talking about Chadam.
- Registrado
- 19 de Ago, 2024
Similar but very different statements.
Left is for giving a chance for being better, while the Right declares a statement.
Sleazy Car Salesman
Believe me when I say that I will take your money
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 27 de Mayo, 2021
Similar and related, but not the same, since the two are not mutually exclusive; You can claim that you believe anyone can (as opposed to will or should) be redeemed, as well as believing that everyone deserves the chance (framed as a privilege as opposed to the right) to be redeemed.
On their own they're very different though, the first statement is a conditional and the second statement is an absolute.
ETA: Actually, I'm wrong. They are both absolute statements in isolation from each other. By claiming that "Everyone deserves the chance" you're claiming that "the chance" is an innate right that is held by everyone as opposed to something to be earned by the few or the privileged. And by claiming that "I believe that anyone can be redeemed" you're making the statement that redemption is something that can be given or achieved regardless of any other quality the person may (or may not) possess.
HOWEVER!
By putting the two statements together the first statement serves as a qualifier to the second statement, which makes the new compound statement a conditional:
"I believe that anyone can be redeemed, and that everyone deserves the chance to prove they can be better"
If you make the statement above you're making a conditional statement that so long as someone takes or is given the chance to prove that they can be better, that they can be redeemed. But the act of being redeemed is conditional upon the chance to be better.
HOWEVER!
By putting the two statements together the first statement serves as a qualifier to the second statement, which makes the new compound statement a conditional:
"I believe that anyone can be redeemed, and that everyone deserves the chance to prove they can be better"
If you make the statement above you're making a conditional statement that so long as someone takes or is given the chance to prove that they can be better, that they can be redeemed. But the act of being redeemed is conditional upon the chance to be better.
Sorry for the wall of autism, arguing semantics in language is one of those things that I find actually interesting.
Última edición:
- Registrado
- 28 de Oct, 2014
The left is at least leaving leeway for agency and leaving the choice up to the Sinners to do right, where as the right is... insanely naive.
- Registrado
- 16 de Mar, 2025
That, or...
Domain Expansion: Puffy-Wuffy Clouds
It's designed to drive the most heartless of sinners insane from pure cuteness.
- Registrado
- 12 de Jun, 2019
They're noble sentiments especially for someone from hell to have...but if this show wanted to have one momment where it could be the adult cartoon it claims to be, it would have Charlie learn her sentiments aren't always 100 percent true.
Say what you want about bojack horseman, but the episode where herb claims he can never forgive bojack for the backstabbing he did and that life doesn't "reset" with everyone laughing just before the credits role like it did on horsin around, handled Charlie's sentiments far better than he own show ever did.
- Registrado
- 16 de Mar, 2025
BoJack in general had a solid handling of redemption. While BoJack himself is in a better place mentally by the end of the series, there are tons of people who can't forgive him, including his own sister. As much as he can change, he can't undo all the pain he's caused other people through.
- Registrado
- 1 de Ago, 2022
Something that I don't think anyone on the writing staff realized that they did is that Charlie did refuse Sinners to stay at the hotel that weren't interested in redemption. She basically tells all those people in the hotel in the first episode of season 2 that if they're not here for the hotel's actual purpose to leave.
A good writer would have had that been an arc for Charlie; her starting out just accepting any sinner who came to to door no matter the reason, and maybe even trying to bring them in the hotel herself. But then she grows to learn that no matter how much she wants someone to better themselves, it's not ultimately her choice to make. She can't force the Sinner to change; that has to come from the Sinner themselves.
A good writer would have had that been an arc for Charlie; her starting out just accepting any sinner who came to to door no matter the reason, and maybe even trying to bring them in the hotel herself. But then she grows to learn that no matter how much she wants someone to better themselves, it's not ultimately her choice to make. She can't force the Sinner to change; that has to come from the Sinner themselves.
Sleazy Car Salesman
Believe me when I say that I will take your money
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 27 de Mayo, 2021
Which is unironically a Jesus parallel. Not that the writers would know that.
- Registrado
- 17 de Abr, 2018
You forgot the best one so far:
- Registrado
- 10 de Nov, 2021
I wonder would the angels ever work with dorks
- Registrado
- 6 de Abr, 2022
Porn lolololololol xxx lolololololol
- Registrado
- 18 de Ene, 2024
it really depends on what you define as redeemed, i would say they are the same statement however the show has a very ambiguous definition of redemption atleast from the characters perspective. if you take it from the perspective of the audience whom knows that redemption is a change of character then they are the same statement. however from charlies perspective and all of the characters perspective (because for some reason even angels dont know what redemption means) it could mean something arbitrary since especially with charlie her idea of what redemption is stems from a 2d idea that its just something that happens after enough good deeds (which much like in the actual bible is not what redemption is). all in all i would say they are two different statements since charlie is just reffering to her idea of redemption which is far off from just proving people can be better which is shown with that horrendous angel dust episode in which charlie thinks if she can make angel do enough good deeds that he will just be redeemed even tho he is not a good person.
- Registrado
- 12 de Jun, 2019
- Registrado
- 15 de Jul, 2019
the charlie on the left seems to have way more of a grasp on the reality of what she is doing. She thinks people deserve a chance to change no matter what they did. Believing people no matter how far gone can eventually learn and change. A very christian perspective tbh.
The charlie on the right seems to think anyone and everyone can be saved. While this is technically true (not for souls in hell but humans on earth) it comes across as a deceleration of redemption. Like if she just says the right combination of words she can save anyone and that is simply not the case. Tons of people will reject redemption under every circumstance and nothing will change that.
I think there is tone here that adds to the statements. One is a very naive christian girl who just wants to give people an option to improve. The other thinks that she can convince anyone to change if she just tries hard enough.
giving someone the option vs declaring they can be
- Registrado
- 3 de Ago, 2021
If I thought the show were being written by someone who cares, it could be a good set up for Charlie's ego to grow, now that Pentious made it to Heaven, she basically has a proof of concept, it can be done. So now that its been done, just have Charlie become more gung-ho and simultaneously start to overestimate her ability to get the damned out of Hell more and more.
And then she runs into the brick wall, that some people just don't want to change. I said it way back in the thread, but I think you could have a great moment where Charlie or a similarly motivated character manages to escape Hell themselves, and initially is looking back to maybe bring others with them, before finally having the epiphany that, some people just don't want to change, and leaving the denizens of Hell to their petty infighting and misery.
“We would rather be ruined than changed
We would rather die in our dread
Than climb the cross of the moment
And let our illusions die.”
-W.H. Auden
Beggamania
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 13 de Jul, 2025
I know it may be old news, but...
WHAT????
I mean, first rape fetish, and now THIS???
- Registrado
- 29 de Nov, 2020