Your web-browser is very outdated, and as such, this website may not display properly. Please consider upgrading to a modern, faster and more secure browser. Click here to do so.
People are allowed to like a character but not like some of their traits. You don’t need to white knight fictional characters because someone doesn’t like something about them.
like if you seriously think rose/pearl is platonic like cool enjoy living your bland ass life
yeah fuck people with asexual headcanons right? Because relationships are worthless if its not based on sex or romance right?
Even though we know fusions aren’t sexually based or Stevonni would be HELLA AWKWARD.
um i’m not saying theres a sexual element to it, and i view romance to be very separate from sex so um you can still be ace and still have a romantic aspect to it??? like even little kids can experience forms of romance and closeness too so
i’m just frustrated that every time a same sex relationship is even hinted at of course even suggesting it is instantly seen as inherently sexual and not for children
Garnet is one of the most beloved characters in the show and held up as a measure of a good relationship by a lot of people, myself included. People with a problem about Pearl/Rose because of their sexuality are wrong, assholes. plain and simple. But the issue I’ve been seeing (and the issue I take) is Pearl’s behavior, not her attraction. She is a wonderfully complex character, but when Rose is in the equation a lot of bad qualities come out and those bad qualities hurt good people, however unintentionally.
Possessiveness in a relationship is not cute or positive. Jealousy is a natural emotion, but when you allow it to harm others, you are doing it wrong. Training a child–who trusts you to guide her–to consider herself worthless and expendable is not cute or positive. Treating Steven like he was his mother instead of himself is not cute or positive, to say nothing of what happened in Rose’s Scabbard or even Space Race.
If that is “not bland”, I will take “bland” any day. It’s pretty fucked up to insult a relationship like Garnet’s in favor of the destructive contest of ownership that is what we’ve seen of Pearl’s interactions with Rose.
Pearl will eventually grow and learn, it’s what the show is all about! But there have been so many negatives seen in that context again and again and again it can cast doubt on her character entirely. It took Amethyst one episode in Maximum Capacity to learn her way of expressing grief over Rose was wrong. Just one. And it angered a lot of viewers then, too, but her remorse was clear and she made amends. Rose took one conversation in We Need To Talk to realize she was doing wrong by Greg and begin to make it right. Amethyst then became better with herself in Reformed over the course of one episode. Garnet apologized to Steven at the end of Future Vision.
Pearl does great outside of Rose. But if Rose is the subject, you can’t
trust her to care about anything or anyone besides her image of Rose, and her character consistently steps backwards in that respect. She doesn’t give any indication of wanting to change. I have no idea why the writers have chosen to make her not only trapped in the past, but be this harmful to others in the process without showing any sign of actually processing the lessons given or even really apologizing. “You almost fell to your death, Steven, but let me tell you how you’re like Rose.” That really is not a good thing and should not just be hugged away, no matter how much you want to!
Peridot restarts horrific fusion experiments, gloats and gets away. Fandom reacts like “Aw, such a cute dork!”
Pearl twenty probable years ago acts like a snippy, jealous teenager and throws salt in Greg’s game. Fandom reacts like “Ugh, such a bitch. Get over yourself.”
Priorities, peoples. Learn them.
Pearl acted like someone super possessive and gross as hell when someone dares try to take whats hers and says some really gross shit to the point garnet is disgusted and more closely resembles a few people I’ve dealt with before.
For me its more like Umbridge and Voldemort. Yeah Voldemort definitely was worse doing all sorts of horrific stuff, but I grew up with an Umbridge in my life, so I react way more negatively about her.
Yeah Pearl is a complex character, blah blah blah, not all bad, but this isn’t the first post nor second or third I’ve seen like this.
ugh, seeing people demonize platonic relationships is so frustrating to me.
Prolly cause I identify as aromantic asexual I guess? Like…its very possible to care for someone very closely to a point you’d protect them no matter what minus sexual/romantic attraction.
Guess I’m just sick of being told relationships are only meaningful if sex or romance is involved. Like Platonic relationships are some HORRIBLE thing that’s not worth anyone’s time. Something I’ve had to grow up with, spending years thinking something was wrong with me because of it.
Ilu and I love being your squish, for all else there’s this:
Just don’t go throwing yourself in front of giant angry Homeworld Gem warriors, nerdlet, or we’re gonna scrap. >:U
ugh, seeing people demonize platonic relationships is so frustrating to me.
Prolly cause I identify as aromantic asexual I guess? Like…its very possible to care for someone very closely to a point you’d protect them no matter what minus sexual/romantic attraction.
Guess I’m just sick of being told relationships are only meaningful if sex or romance is involved. Like Platonic relationships are some HORRIBLE thing that’s not worth anyone’s time. Something I’ve had to grow up with, spending years thinking something was wrong with me because of it.
