Why are all the relationships in this show so unhealthy?
These two are in a codependent relationship. They can't function at all without the other. And Garnet had the nerve to blab to Pearl about being independent?
Then there's also Steven and Connie who are probably going to start dating before Connie made a friend her age other than Steven.
And if they push Lars and Sadie again, that will be one super toxic relationship.
>>83469826
What's the difference between an unhealthy co-dependent relationship and a healthy co-dependent relationship?
>>83469849
I don't think there is such a thing as a healthy codependent relationship by definition. It's the excessive emotional or psychological reliance of your partner.
An interdependent relationship is much healthier. As each person is more able to handle their issues on their own without the constant need of their partner.
>>83469849
A co-dependent relatiomship can't be healthy
>>83470044
I think you might misunderstand the situation here.
It would be unhealthy if one of them only relied on the other. But they always rely on each other and enjoy each other's company a lot.
And as Garnet they are objectively more functional than they are on their own.
Yeah, their affections are pretty annoying when they split, but so long as they don't have a situation where the relationship is severely lopsided, I don't see the problem.
I don't think there is such a thing as being pathologically in a loving relationship.
>>83469826
>>83469849
Sapphire and Ruby are in a completely different situation than Pearl and Rose were. For one, relationship Sapphire/Ruby has is equal and fully reciprocated. 99% of the time they exist as one person anyway. There's also little to suggest they couldn't live independently, as they once did.
Compare that to Rose and Pearl, unequal and unrequited (at least, they had different love for each other). A lot of Pearl episodes revolve around her moving on from Rose and accepting she wasn't Rose's special snowflake.
Sun shines, birds fly, and Pearl is shit at relationships. Rose aside, the way she projects onto Steven, almost brainwashed Connie, deceived Garnet and generally doesn't get along well with people indicates she might be just a little BPD. In these examples her behavior was portrayed as negative and hurtful.
So I disagree, OP. I think the show's relationships are pretty OK for the most part. Even Lars and Sadie I'd say isn't toxic, just has growing pains.
>>83470512
>There's also little to suggest they couldn't live independently, as they once did
They literally can't though. That's been established already with the most recent episode, they're obsessed with each other to the point where they almost lost a fucking game of baseball because of it and completely blew their cover. You can't call what they have healthy, it's a two-sided obsession.
>I think the show's relationships are pretty OK for the most part
No, that's not even remotely true. The relationships, and the drama that comes with it, is always the worst part about the show. The only relationship you can even remotely call healthy is Connie and Steven. Even Greg had to call Rose out on the fact that their relationship was nothing more than a shallow farce before they decided to take it seriously.
>Even Lars and Sadie I'd say isn't toxic, just has growing pains
HOW?! She kidnapped him and Steven and put them in danger just so she can rape him. I'd argue that what she did was actually worse than the Sardonyx incident.
>>83469826
If you don't like it, watch Spongebob.
>>83470795
Dramatic, aren't we?
Sadie maroon ingredients them on a tropical island was fucked up, but rape?
Come on. She was trying to make Lars finally commit to something and that pretty much worked.
And then she fought an invisible monster with a stick to defend her husbando.
I will agree that their relationship is a train wreck, but that's kinda just who they both are.
And they still work together every day, so it can't be that bad for either of them.
You act like relationships need to be this perfect thing of measured affections and permanent mutual agreement to work.
Have you never seen a French movie?
>>83470977
>She was trying to make Lars finally commit to something and that pretty much worked.
The ends cannot justify the means when the means and ends are both selfish. She put all their lives at risk just because she wanted him to change.
>so it can't be that bad for either of them.
Convenience for the sake of plot and, once again, ends before means. Just because what she did was depicted as working for her does not make it completely selfish and reckless.
>You act like relationships need to be this perfect thing of measured affections and permanent mutual agreement to work.
No, but there needs to be some sort of baseline of healthy behavior and effort towards it so that the bad things stand out better. Remember, this is a show for children, and they're romanticizing unhealthy relationship behavior and standards. There's a reason beyond cliche that people have complained about kids wanting "a Romeo and Juliet relationship". Kids often take what they see depicted in media as a standard for their lives, which has led to an entire generation disappointed that life isn't composed of convenient events and punctual life lessons.
>>83470145
>I don't think there is such a thing as being pathologically in a loving relationship.
That's what society has conditioned you to think.
>>83469826
They are aliens, they have different states of mind than humans.
They literally spend all their time fused into a single being
>>83469826
>These two are in a codependent relationship. They can't function at all without the other.
Uh. Where did you get that idea? Just because they love being with each other doesn't mean they are in a codependent relationship.
Neither of them are hurting the other, even unintentionally.
>>83471602
>They are aliens, they have different states of mind than humans.
See, that answer might work if it wasn't FIRMLY established that what they're doing is completely out of the ordinary for their species.
>>83469826
Drama
Girls like drama.
Girls write drama.
Other girls watch and want drama.
In other words the contribution of the female staff leads to this kind of characterization, personal and romantic drama.
I like the show, but OP really has a point. And the sad thing is, I think the target audience will be more concerned with shipping and lesbian representation than the fact that the show is basically giving kids examples of how to be a horrible possessive partner and feel justified about it instead of showing them what is at stake if you act like a fool.
>>83470795
>They literally can't though. That's been established already with the most recent episode
Not really. Not at all, even.
> they're obsessed with each other to the point where they almost lost a fucking game of baseball because of it and completely blew their cover.
They had the attitude of a loving people pretending to not know each other and being really bad at it. The amount of time they are being separated while not being in a dispute must be extremly rare. Their attitude stem from inexperience, not an unhealthy obsession.
Not the same thing.
>Even Greg had to call Rose out on the fact that their relationship was nothing more than a shallow farce before they decided to take it seriously.
That's actually the sign of an healthy relationship and an actual normal shift for people who have started dating since a few mouths ago.
>HOW?! She kidnapped him and Steven and put them in danger just so she can rape him. I'd argue that what she did was actually worse than the Sardonyx incident.
I'll admit Lars and Sadie are completely unhealthy and it need to be adressed.
>>83471648
I like the idea that the relationships in the show aren't perfect, but it's a problem if the issues aren't acknowledged as such and just thrown in randomly from time to time as a plot device.
>>83469826
>wow I can't believe this show has conflict, why doesn't everyone just get along that would be very interesting to watch
>>83471535
>implying >>83470044 isn't what society has conditioned you to think.
>>83471710
Ruby and Sapphire's relationship doesn't have any blatant problem, though.
>>83471727
Not in most episodes, that is what I'm saying. Garnet is like a mary sue relationship except for when the plot calls for them to have some kind of issue. It would make more sense if even together they had some kind of shortcomings like the other fusions.
>>83471651
Being out of the ordinary doesn't make it wrong, the hatred of mixed caste fusions is purely cultural to the homeworld
>>83471759
>Garnet is like a mary sue relationship except for when the plot calls for them to have some kind of issue
So they aren't the mary sue of relationship.
>It would make more sense if even together they had some kind of shortcomings
Like the one you just mentioned?
>>83471789
You're intentionally being stubborn and missing the point. The relationship isn't supposed to be perfect except for the episodes where they are written to be completely different characters than they usually are.
>>83471716
Not the point.
The thing is that they're not really putting it in a bad light and they're basically just showing that it's okay to depend on someone so heavily out of love, and that you don't need to be independent.
>>83471806
>The relationship isn't supposed to be perfect except for the episodes
I think you are the one being stubborn. You actually point out that there has been imperfection in their relationship. Therefore it's not perfect. you seems to reject it because:
>where they are written to be completely different characters than they usually are.
Except that's completely wrong. Every of their actions and reactions have fit what we know of their characters so far. Nothing has been out of character.
>>83471812
>they're basically just showing that it's okay to depend on someone so heavily out of love
Except this is not what they have been doing. At all. Not a single time do they feature the relationship of Ruby and Sapphire this way.
>>83471812
Keystone Motel actually show that they can be independent and split when they are in disagreement. So no, they aren't really featuring what you are describing.
>>83471839
In the episodes that aren't centered around their relationship, Garnet is a mary sue. She can see into the future, has unyielding resolve and keeps her cool, etc. As if they are so perfect together that it justifies in another episode that they are two people who are unable to function around one another, or if they disagree on something, they split up.
>>83471874
>Garnet is a mary sue.
>I thought violence would be the answer
Wrong. Being competent and being a Mary Sue aren't the same thing.
>they are two people who are unable to function around one another
Not what we have seen. No what was shown.
>or if they disagree on something, they split up.
Yes and? Seeing how we know gem work, it make sense. We have seen Opal work on the same premise. If the two gems that form a fusion can't remain in tune with each other, they split up.
> As if they are so perfect together that it justifies in another episode that they are two people who are unable to function around one another
Not what happened. They are inexperienced with being around one an other. inexperienced is different than unhealthy.
>>83471703
>They had the attitude of a loving people pretending to not know each other and being really bad at it
Considering the stakes, you'd think they'd tone it down better. They still risked getting caught by homeworld because they couldn't help but do nothing but show P.D.A. It's like the balloon and porcupine from Gumball (whose names escape me so work with me here) but somehow even more obnoxious in the few times they do manage to show up. I'm just saying, from what we've seen, they've done nothing but think about the other. Until there's an episode showing they can actually function independently post-fusion, then I can't exactly call the relationship healthy. It can very easily be interpreted as co-dependant.
>That's actually the sign of an healthy relationship and an actual normal shift for people who have started dating since a few mouths ago
Never really said otherwise, just before they got to that point Pearl was spot-on, and probably would've ended just like she said had she not intervened.
>>83471535
Implying >>83470044 isn't the most societally pushed belief regarding relationships.
>>83471971
>Considering the stakes, you'd think they'd tone it down better
It fit, in a comedy show.
> I'm just saying, from what we've seen, they've done nothing but think about the other.
This isn't inherently wrong.
>Until there's an episode showing they can actually function independently post-fusion, then I can't exactly call the relationship healthy.
Lack of proof isn't proof of lack and you don't make this kind of judgement without solid proof. We'd have to actually see them goes into panic attacks for being apart for your statement to have some ground. And from what we have seen so far it's not the case. In Jailbreak, Sapphire was keeping her cool and while Ruby was acting worried for sapphire it was a justified fear, considering the situation. Later in Keystone, we can actually see them disagreeing and act independently and fully express disaccord with each other on how to handle a though situation.
The "I AM AN ETERNAL FLAME, BABY" is not something that would come out from someone suffering from co-dependency.
>just before they got to that point Pearl was spot-on
Idsagreeing. The whole point was actually that it was something serious for ROse, she just didn't want to admit it up to that point. Kind of putting a front. Her inexperience with a serious relationship didn't help. The thing is, it was serious, but it's only at this point that both truly acknowledged it.
>>83469826
>Then there's also Steven and Connie who are probably going to start dating before Connie made a friend her age other than Steven.
How do you know Connie hasn't made any other friends by now? Throwing in details like that for no other sake than to confirm it would disrupt the narrative.
This is some classic young person criticism right here. Instead of commenting on things like structure and dramatic tension and tone you're complaining about how it hasn't filled every gap you can think of. Despite the fact that some details are always beyond the scope of a work to address while still preserving the things that are actually important to storytelling.
If you want an actual case of unhealthy co-dependent relationship, rather look at Andy and Ollie Pesto from Bob's Burger.
These two's relationship will end up in something really ugly.
>>83472168
>How do you know Connie hasn't made any other friends by now?
Not him, but Connie actually stated she had no friends when meeting Steven first, because her father's job made them move a lot.
But I disagree with him on his opinion that it would result in a bad relationship with Steven.
>>83472170
>high functioning autistic kids are in a co-dependent relationship
>>83472204
Yeah that's my point. How do we know she hasn't made any by now? This shit doesn't have to matter. It's so My First Film Criticism.
>>83472222
I don't think they are autistic. They are just dumb.
>>83471919
>Wrong. Being competent and being a Mary Sue aren't the same thing.
I think the problem the anon who called her a Mary Sue is running into is that Garnet seems to be the ONLY consistently competent character on the show and it stands out.
>>83471812
>muh messages
If you're so fucking retarded that you learn how to act from cartoons, you deserve whatever bad things happen as a result.
>>83471919
Lol
>>83469826
See the show is more successful than GirrLover9001's fanfiction because they already know this.
They come exceedingly close to simulating what would be an idealistic co dependant relationship. it's the idealized front of how someone in an unhealthy relationship perceives their own situation.
you should be asking how despite having 0 composition character wise, how everyone gets along and functions socially which is where the magic of the show is really at
>People on the most neckbeard board after r9k arguing about healthy relationships
how many of you assheads have even touched a girl?
>>83474917
sometimes, when I work in team with a girl uni in one of the lab, out hands touch accidentally.
It's soft....
>>83474917
Comic shops actually provide more ample opportunity for social interaction than torrenting or playing video games in your room.
I'd argue this is one of the higher up places for that kind of thing. Not as high as /fit/ or /cgl/, but right under /tg/
>>83469826
because they are degenerate lesbians
prove me wrong.
nope, you can't.
>>83469826
Well, Ruby and Sapphire ARENT Garnet, neither viceversa, so Garnet has a foot to stand on as far as independency goes, but yeah I agree that the grand majority of relationships, even casual friendly ones in this show, are super fucking unhealthy
>>83475071
>torrenting anime
Fucked up there.
>>83475155
No he said torrenting games
>>83474917
do it all the time
i work in the delivery room
>>83475071
I guess so, I know a lot of regulars to comic shops that are female. But games also have an abundance of female players now a days.
Steven Universe is the reason I have a gf way out of my league
(because I look like grownup steven)
>>83475071
>He thinks anyone on /co/ actually visits brick and mortar comic shops
>He thinks there are any women inside if they do
If you existed as a representation of you and your partner's love for each other for centuries on end, wouldn't you be thirsty as fuck too?
Do you think, if the plot called for it, Garnet would be able to separate in order to have pearl/sapphire and amethyst/ruby fuse? Without them having a meltdown.
>>83475116
>>83475403
Why would you reply then retard
>>83475214
sounds like a perfectly healthy relationship
>>83474917
But we're not /v/.
>>83474917
>/co/
>not /pol/
How new.
they are not human, they don't follow the same rules as insane lesbian human females
>>83469826
>function
they aren't functional being together or separated. It's a disaster.
>>83472170
>These two's relationship will end up in something really ugly.
It won't end.
It's bound in blood, not anything as petty as infatuation or shared interests.
>>83471971
>probably would've ended just like she said had she not intervened
I bet Pearl sometimes thinks this to herself.
>>83470795
That's their flaw.
Garnet's flaw is now not bein a '2 lesbian midgets in a trenchcoat' .
I would like to see garnet disagree with Ruby and sapphire on something anything.
Something
>>83469826
Because melodrama sells.
Lesbians can't have healthy relationships.
>>83474917
>most neckbeard board after /r9k/
>other boards call us /co/mblr
here's your (you)
>>83469826
>Applying minor human psychology issues to alien creatures whose relationships involve them literally fusing and becoming one creature.
>>83471654
Yep. This show is basically an animated soap opera.
>>83479151
I imagined a concept of story where Setven manage to do something Rose would have never been able to do, saving the day (including teamwork).
This lead Garnet to a sort of Breakdown: for the first time she realize, the team and her as a leader, can now manage themselves than without Rose.
It's heart breaking for her because so far, she had always relied on "what would have Rose do" to maintain the team together and manage it. And no she realize, they are doing better. she doesn't need this kind of mental reliance, that sort of connection she still had with her and break the dam.
She can't deal with it anymore and simply can't deal to be her for a time, thus switching back to Ruby and Sapphire, who for once can not have a full idea of the situation, because, unlike Garnet, they have never been in a leader position. It's truly a Garnet issue and despite having no conflict between them, Sapphire and Ruby can't fuse because Garnet refuse to be herself up until she has vented out.
Don't know if it's really what you wanted, but I too have tried to toy with an issue where Garnet is in conflict with her two Gems that compose her.
>>83469826
>These two are in a codependent relationship
They were fucking kidnapped and forcibly separated.
>>83469826
>Why are all the relationships in this show so unhealthy?
>They can't function at all without the other. And Garnet had the nerve to blab to Pearl about being independent?
Sounds realistic to me. I do not know a single couple that I could describe as being in a healthy relationship.
well, except for a friend of mine who's got a qt3.14 underage gf but they're of a higher social status than most people I know without being rich snobs
>>83471671
That reminds me. http://xfirecorex.tumblr.com/post/144979712122/lapis-larsuli-xfirecorex-lapis-larsuli
(The OP doesn't even say they think lesbians are bad, butt they're getting attacked for it anyway)
>>83475479
>>83469826
THANK YOU!! Their relationship irritates me. It's cute and all, but I don't like how it's supposed to represent the "perfect" relationship. They act more like teens in puppy love than a stable, "married" couple (I mean they've been together for 100s of years so they might as well be married). They can't stand being apart and they don't ever have space for themselves. It unnerves me. Most people with relationships like that end up falling apart
>>83484289
see>>83471464
>>83471648
>>83471703
>>83471727
>>83471789
>>83471839
>>83471919
>>83472068
>>83472170
It is actually not a codependent relationship. Neither is it perfect. They actually got into dispute and need to talk things out.
> They act more like teens in puppy love than a stable, "married" couple (I mean they've been together for 100s of years so they might as well be married).
Like said earlier, they acted like a loving married couple that had to pretend they didn't knew each other and were meeting for the first time. Their reaction is on point when it came to play that out.
not to mention, the amount of times they got to be separated without being in a dispute must be quite fews. they look as an inexperienced couple because that's what they actually are. Blame Gem's physiology on that one rather than their relationship itself.
>They can't stand being apart and they don't ever have space for themselves
It has been shown In Jailbreak and Keystone that they can stand it very well and that there are actually times when they need to and act so.
>It unnerves me. Most people with relationships like that end up falling apart
You rally have no reason to be unnerved, as this isn't what their relationship is.
>>83484499
I guess you make some good points, I just personally never really liked relationships on tv where they are shown in constant, gooy love. Maybe I'm being too hard on it, I get why people like it though. I just don't like when people act like they're the best thing ever just cause they're lesbians (not saying you're doing that!! Just something I've seen)
>>83483673
It's tumblr, gay people are god there
>>83484668
>I just personally never really liked relationships on tv where they are shown in constant, gooy love.
I actually love this. To often, it's based on drama drama drama drama drama drama drama drama. I know you write better stories out of conflict, but once in a while I like to see a relationship that is actually going okay.
>I just don't like when people act like they're the best thing ever just cause they're lesbians
I don't think that's the actual justification for most people. They like it because Garnet is cool and they make a cute couple. No need to get on the defensive.
>>83484823
not being defensive, just saying what I've noticed. I just got excited to see op's post cause most people love them and I'm not that into it is all.
>>83483673
>>83484694
>(The OP doesn't even say they think lesbians are bad, butt they're getting attacked for it anyway)
Are we actually reading the same thing?
>>>OP express his opinion
>>gee its almost as if they……love each other
>OP's reply: >#stop trying to demonize lesbian relationships ok
Like what the fuck, the person that replied to him made no mention of gay or lesbian, but OP simply assumed that the other assumed that he didn't like them because gay.
OP make the gay assumption, not the person disagreeing with him. He is like "Oh, you are disagreeing with me BECAUSE YOU THINK I DON'T LIKE GAY?" when the person disagreeing with him made no mention of it, OP brought that up.
It's almost silly, really.
I don't understand why we're supposed to care about Ruby and Sapphire. They somehow accidentally fuse by bumping into each other, then spend a few days (or weeks at most) with each other, then they're an inseparable couple forever? They have barely any character beyond their relationship and they're dragging Garnet down with the constant fusion bullshit.
>>83484923
the stop trying to demonize lesbian relationships ok is a quote from the person they're replying to. On tumblr people often put crap in the tags they don't put in their actual post. It's kind of confusing but yeah op wasn't saying that
>>83484499
>They actually got into dispute and need to talk things out
No they fucking didn't, they only got over it in order to not make it seem like it wasn't Steven's fault, but they never really resolved it.
>It has been shown In Jailbreak and Keystone that they can stand it very well and that there are actually times when they need to and act so
Did we watch the same episodes? Because Ruby was literally breaking down during Jailbreak and hardly gave Steven any thought until they were together again, and in Keystone they were still doing nothing but thinking about each other.
>>83471535
>this is what incels actually believe
>>83487071
Gay
>>83484975
What's hilarious is that their backstory actively contradicts the Love Letters episode. Their relationship didn't take time or effort, they just fused one day and decided they were madly in love. Ruby literally had the "love at first sight eyes" when she first saw Sapphire. Christ, the Answer was such an awful episode.
>>83489132
Presumably they got better at the relationship thing over the many thousands of years they were together
>>83470044
All humans are to one degree or another dependent on one another. Isn't drawing a line in the sand saying one level of dependency is healthy and another isn't rather arbitrary?
>>83469826
In the end as much as these gems are made to be so "perfect" unlike them we humans have went thru far worse in our lives then just what they call problems.I mean try killing a saber tooth with a rock and a stick and have on magic healing or powers lol.A problem for Ruby and sapphire is being in a different room with out fusing for 2 days.After these two came in I dropped garnet as a liked character because it star going south.Then their ep The answer was sooo bad i mean who wants to be woken up at 12am on a back of a truck in a barn to be told a lesbian story about how i got with someone by accident?
>>83489230
Yeah, when they had a falling out at the Keystone Motel that was the only time we really saw them interact. And I can totally see that they have disagreements while fused but don't separate over them like Opal does every two minutes.
With Garnet being a constant dialogue, I would say that she can absolutely say that having a relationship requires effort to maintain.
Whenever she seems to just stand around that's probably a discourse we don't see.
As all the difficult things, Garnet looks easy to be after 6k years of doing it.
She's pretty much a professional at keeping up a relationship. Or at least that one relationship.
Honestly seems like earth is just a place to go hog wild for the gems and their "relationships" because homeworld doesnt allow it or something.I mean do you all think they still "protect" earth if rose didnt say too?
>>83489345
Have you tried being coherent?
I heard that works better for most people.
>>83489546
I dont have to be anything when im being constantly reminded that a few rock people is the best thing to happen to the one planet we got.
>>83469826
You didn't even mention Rose and Pearl; all those you mentioned are arguable, but Rose and Pearl was definitely unhealthy
>>83489230
Apparently not, since they show little to no sign of anything outside of thinking about each other.
>>83482897
>>83471654
Which isn't any different from cape shit. The only difference between your grandma's soaps and cape is that one doesn't (usually) have super powers.
>>83489132
So their backstory is equivlent to those people who marry their high school sweet heart and stay together until the grave. Rare, but it happens.
And given that fusing is way more intimate, it is easy to see why the two became super close quickly.
>>83490648
Agree but the ep was streach to like few days.Seems more like a disney love story then a normal one.
>>83489230
>"Love takes work, Jamie!"
>shows them being together for thousands of the years without any conflict between each other
>>83492345
To be fair we haven't see them for 1000 years, though we haven't seen any conflict between them except the Pearl situation.
>>83469826
Eh the answer showed me alot about how awful they act.Sapphire would just die because she"saw" it happen and thats her only reason.And ruby is the type to try to save sapphire from something like if she was in a jail cell and its a trap with so many hints and would just charge in because she cant be apart from her that long.So these two would screw over any plans steven would come up with to keep em alive.
>>83469826
You wanna know another show with all unhealthy ships?EEnE
>>83493509
Eh with generaly everyone hates them because of eddy.And i give it to those three they stick together like brothers.Sometimes ofcourse
>>83475384
Garnet is perfectly willing to fuse as Garnet, which means Ruby and Sapphire are already part of the fusion. I think they already confirmed that fusion order doesn't matter, it'll produce the same result. So Sugilite isn't Garnet + Amethyst, it's Ruby + Sapphire + Amethyst. I imagine Sapphire and Ruby would be perfectly willing to fuse separate of each other without any issue.
>>83469826
I give it to steven for keeping his cool.Gets punched in the face and gets capture and still can act.These two get apart for a hour and its the end of the world for them :/
>>83472268
She resorts to violence half the time, the Crystal Gems have fucked up/been not useful as a unit before and she nearly pushed Steven to fall off a roof. In fact, she mentally fucked with him more than either of the other two gems in that episode. She's not always competent, she's just moreso than Amethyst and Pearl. Because considering what those two characters are like, she kind of has to be to explain why the whole group hasn't completely imploded.
>>83484289
In what universe do you think it was meant to represent the perfect relationship? They both are explicitly designed to have major issues and the writers have even stated it as such. Those flaws were evident from the first time we saw them apart. They're just super duper in love so they can stay together. It's not the perfect relationship.
In fact, I think I'd argue that 'no relationships are perfect' is a major theme in Steven Universe.
>>83469826
Why do all the people refer to the gems as lesbians when they're essentially genderless? They just HAPPEN to look like women. That's all.
>>83499420
Yea but sometimes in this show they remind how gem relationships/living/and whatever else you can think of is better then human way of life.Not saying it isnt good but perfect is not a word for it.
>>83484975
>>83489132
Eh, to be fair we have no clue how things progressed after they joined Pearl and Rose. I don't know why people think they were just Garnet 5ever from that moment on and that there were no issues along the way.
I also don't think it was supposed to be saying that they were instantly fully in love at the end of The Answer, though people love to call Garnet out on her "hypocrisy" or whatever. I'm sure it took time after that. She just said it was love because that was the start of something that did indeed turn into love. Garnet can say in retrospect that it was love because that's what it became.
>>83492345
We never saw anything between the end of The Answer up to how they looked in the 80s. You have no idea whether or not conflict was in their early relationship. There probably was, since the two can still have conflict even thousands of years later.
>>83470795
I agree with you anon, nobody else will, but I do.
>>83499479
female appearance, so it's easier to just say they're lesbians than say they're feminine light projections of sentient alien rocks using fusion as a means of intimacy
>>83499479
gemkind has one gender
therefore all gem on gem romance is romance between two people of the same gender
therefore all gems are gay
>>83470145
This guys got it right here
No relationship is flawless and magical. That's what makes the writing of this show so engaging, because it's real. The couples bicker, or the love is unrequited, or someone is dead or the two involved are too young to really understand how their actions effect the other.
>>83499791
>>83499739
They don't have 1 gender, because the whole concept of gender is based on the idea that there is more than one.
Therefore they aren't gay or hetero, they're just lovers.
JUST SAY THEY'RE IN LOVE NOT LESBIANS.
Goddamnit this triggers my autism so much.
>>83499479
>Social Justice Warrior
I don't even know what this means anymore.
I think it started off simple; but now it feels like an ignorant mess of over dramatic "triggered" angry crybabies. And if anyone tries to acknowledge it they just yell at them.
>>83500050
>the whole concept of gender is based on the idea that there is more than one.
not inherently so
>>83500227
So then explain if they dont have a gender how they have a gender.
>>83500360
forgot pic
>>83500050
Eh honsetly im not worried about lesbians.Because every male character in this show is so bleh.And the fact greg got rose is cool but he was ok back then now he is carl from ATHF.
>>83471464
Actually I just realized Sadie was doing the same thing to Lars that Barb does to her. He expressed a tiny bit of interest once and now she just won't fucking let it go
>>83484975
>then they're an inseparable couple forever?
Uh, anon, jumping to conclusion. We don't know hw much time happened before they started being a perma-fusion. If Love Letter is any indication, they spent time knowing each other before it went more serious.
>>83501735
What happen with them is just as the same with rose and homeworld.Came to earth with a team or some shit.Saw how nice it was or whatever.Then seen a bunny or some shit thought it was toooo cute.Random jasper steps on it with out knowing while picking its nose trying to find brain or something.
>>83486810
>No they fucking didn't, they only got over it in order to not make it seem like it wasn't Steven's fault
Wrong Steven was the cathalist, it's what allowed them to get over it and talk it out. but they didn't do it for Steven.
>Because Ruby was literally breaking down during Jailbreak
uh? No, she wasn't. She was angry and worried about Sapphire, and seeing the circumstance, this is justified. I mean, if she was acting like she didn't care about Sapphire, now that would have been weird. They had just been captured and jailed. But she didn't break down.
>and in Keystone they were still doing nothing but thinking about each other.
Wrong. They actually weren't thinking of each other, they were thinking about how angry they were at Pearl, not thinking about each other. I do have the feeling you din't watch that episode. Nothing in Keystone motel indicate they were obseesesd with each other. Quite on the contrary, it was clear they needed time apart and they did. The point is, when they have their difference, they can spend time appart and that separate time itself doesn't cause issues on its own.
You are really trying to project issues where there isn't, there, anon.
>>83490004
Wrong. The whole of Keystone Hotel show them being separated and not being obsessed about each other.
>>83489345
>.Then their ep The answer was sooo bad i mean who wants to be woken up at 12am on a back of a truck in a barn to be told a lesbian story about how i got with someone by accident?
Steven Apparently.
>>83489799
unrequited love always turn ugly.
>>83489669
Well, earth would be dead without them, so there is that.
>>83499479
>Why do all the people refer to the gems as lesbians when they're essentially genderless?
For the same reason people refer to Optimus as a truck. He isn't really a truck, he just took the appearance of a truck, but it's easier to refer to him as a truck and he doesn't mind. same for the Gem. They get to be born with a female shape and they naturally assumed the female pronoun when interacting with earth. It's just more practical.
>>83501818
I dont think jasper has a nose.But that was funny bout the bunny thing.
>>83469826
>tfw the relationship in porn of the show is less toxic than the actual show relationship
>>83471654
and because women don't know how to have healthy relationships.
>>83471671
I disagree wholeheartedly. As a whole, the characters learn their lessons from relationship missteps, and Steven is there to help the 'possessive' become more selfless.
if anything, I think showing kids the wrong way of doing things, having the character fail, and then learn is the /best/ way to teach.
>>83500050
You are thinking of sex, which requires the other sex.
Gender is a collection of mannerisms, conventions and duties assigned to you mainly based on your sex. Leaving out exotic definitions and culture-specific identities you have male and female genders that correspond to an underlying sex in humans but don't change if sex in the biological sense is removed. Even a castrated guy would be able to perform his gender role, for example.
So while the Gems clearly don't have sexual reproduction, they do absolutely perform within female gender roles. And they demonstrably did so even without human interaction.
>>83501950
Did we watch the same episode? Steven tried to make small talk to Ruby but she only ranted about Sapphire during the entire pool debacle.
Undeniably, both Ruby & Sapphire were too consumed by their hissy fit to put it aside their anger when addressing Steven.
>>83503314
HNNNNG THAT SKINNY THIN WHITE GIRL ASS UNF
>>83501935
>They actually weren't thinking of each other,
I disagree considering just about every line of dialogue they had was about the other
>>83469826
In a way, the extreme awkwardness of Steven Universe relationships and characters is what makes the gems feel inhuman. It makes me cringe a bit too much at times, but I like that shit, it's different.
`spoiler] can't stand Steven that much or most of the human cast [/spoiler]
>>83470512
Lars and Sadie's relationship is definitely toxic, it's just also not portrayed as healthy. Hell, the island episode's revelation was them realizing they're really not good for each other.
>>83469826
It won't last forever and she'll have to confront her problem eventually.
THE QUESTION MARK MEANS ROSE IS BOTH ALIVE AND DEAD, AND THAT'S WHERE STEVEN'S HOUSE WAS BUILT. IT'S SYMBOLIC. I CAN'T BELIEVE I HAVE TO EXPLAIN THIS.
>>83470145
Garnet is more functional because she is literally sex magic fusion dance, Ruby and Sophie are fuck up people that can't control gemselfs
>>83469826
Cause the shows made for teenagers, and toxic relationships are part of being a teenager
>>83506893
>thinking Ruby is gonna die
Please be joking
