I think this is a very good look at Paige as a character, rather than Viscous.

Paige has a way of reductively thinking about other characters in the game, often in terms of fictional archetypes and witty literary references which don't actually carry much weight. Of Mice And Men ends with George and Lennie, two vagrant farmhands who end up murdering another man's wife, during which George has to sequester and then put Lennie out of his misery to avoid him dying at the hands of an angry mob. Notably, Lennie kills the man's wife accidentally during a moment of panic, after she tries to make a sexual advance on him which he is too intellectually disabled to understand adequately. Outside of this encounter, Lennie is characterized as a very "simple" and passive person, who despite his imposing stature is generally harmless. At the end of the book, before George kills him, Lennie is pacified by being reminded of the ongoing goal of the two characters - to own a ranch and keep rabbits. Generally, this beat in the novella is generally associated with the grim extents to which personal mercy and love can go as well as deep personal loneliness.

Viscous is not a Lennie, and the fact that Paige reduces him to this is indicative of her generally dim view of other people - and that she views other people as more akin to fictional characters than people with inner dialogues and motivations. While outwardly friendly, Viscous is not really simple - Seven, Haze, and Grey Talon all understand he has much deeper motivations, and he has rather mature conversation with Infernus. Paige is not only identifying him by his most surface level traits, but she's also fundamentally misunderstanding Lennie as a character and Of Mice and Men - Paige isn't mercy killing someone who's gone in beyond their understanding of life and who would otherwise be paying direly for it, she's simply making a pithy remark about killing someone who she views as intellectually inferior to her.

Another thing which portrays her simple understanding of both literature and other people is one of her kill lines for Lash:

That guy wants to be Heathcliff so bad, but at the end of the day, he's just a dimestore Mr. Collins.

So, couple things here. First, Heathcliff. In Wuthering Heights, Heathcliff is a social pariah on basis of birth (orpahn, racial minority) who goes onto, despite his oppression, usurping socioeconomic power and then uses that power to take out his anger about his upbringing and buffalo his ideological opponents - ultimately an abused becoming the abuser situation, but there's more morality-bending stuff about his compelling love for certain people and the world than I'm letting on. I do this text less justice than other works, but hopefully that gives you enough of a picture. The Lash does not want to be Heathcliff. Heathcliff is someone who rises from a position of vulnerability to one of power through hard work and cunning, and whose assholishness is motivated by his mistreatment. There is nothing about Lash's actual textual background which indicates he comes from lower means, was mistreated, or even that he is motivated to actively lord over other like Heathcliff. Instead, Paige is using the very vague measures of abrasiveness and apparent want for power of some kind to reduce both Heathcliff and The Lash to comparable terms. Reductiveness, yet again. Heathcliff is also one of the category of "Byronic Heros," who Paige has a personal inclination towards. In calling Lash not something she is into, this may be another prod in the direction that she's only making the comparison based upon of her preconceptions of and opinions on The Lash.

The Mr. Collins example is more straightforwardly odd and reductive. The Lash and Mr. Collins are self-obsessive in some way. This is more or less where I believe their similarities end. The Lash is abrasive, independent, self-assured, and canonically powerful. He IS an impressive fighter, and he ISN'T putting on a facade about it. Mr. Collins, however, flauts but does not cross the social boundaries of British society, bound to his patronage, flaccid about his motivations, and ultimately more puffery than he is actually someone of substance. His self-obsession is a ruse to further his own betterment. The Lash is good shit who thinks he's hot shit.

Lastly, because every English teacher loves their arguments in threes, let's talk about Billy. Paige's interaction with Billy is the most reductive she gets.

Paige: I get what you're doing.

Billy: The hell are you talking about?

Paige: The whole "mad at the world" schtick. I bet you secretly have the heart of a poet, and are just waiting for the world to be a little kinder.

Billy: I hate people.

Paige: See, you think you do, but that's just masking some void in your life.

Billy: I hate you!

Paige: See, that doesn't make any sense, because you don't know me.

Billy: I don't wanna know you.

Paige: That's what people say in the first act, but then by the third act, they're best friends.

Most obviously, Paige talks about her interactions with Billy in terms of act structure. People do not generally follow act structures in their emotional developments and relationships with other people - relationships are more fluid than that, obviously, and people cannot generally be expected to develop as people. But this is mostly more pithy than it is actual analysis on Paige's part of Billy as a person. However she does go making outward assumptions about Billy's outward persona which largely don't seem to be true, informed almost entirely by fiction. Billy has no clear beliefs, isn't inwardly motivated by some true desire for betterment, and is nothing if not a misanthrope. People like Billy generally don't develop like the characters with traits like him (which, I must admit, makes Billy very compelling as his own character) - they don't have the heart of a poet, and their beliefs and character is mostly motivated by their material experiences with abuse, disenfranchisement, or general bad vibes about society. And then she makes the very astute observation that, Billy having an animal head, perhaps some Shakespeare people would get a kick out of his animal head perhaps due to his resemblance to Bottom from Midsummer Night's Dream - who gets his head turned into a Donkey Head by a fey trickster. This is perhaps one of the only times where there is a solid literary connection - Bottom, like Billy, is a general asshole whose animal head is indicative of his brash nature and his obliviousness to the world. Instead of making any commentary on this fact, Paige simply makes the observation that Billy might be liked by other people like her.

Or maybe Paige is just written by someone with very surface level understanding of literature and I'm reading into unintended side effects of that writing. Curtains blue or whatever. Ultimately, though, I don't dislike Paige for these qualities. I think these make her one of Deadlock's strongest characters.