How could you pick just one

can we talk about how garnet most likely got the story of the rebel hero rose quartz and the cruel pink diamond that created her from rose herself and how pink is described as a coward, cruel, wicked. and how rose told greg it's good he doesn't know anything about her. and how rose felt like she owed greg a list of everything shed ever done wrong. and how rose didn't tell pearl anything about what she did because she couldn't bear to lose that love. and how rose didn't think how her actions would effect pearl and in trying to destroy the part of herself that she felt did nothing but hurt and ruin everything and deserved to die, she hurt one of the people she loved the most. can we talk about the fact rose is a self fulfilling prophecy and destroyed herself twice. once asking pearl to kill pink diamond. and then by having steven. and how both times, it was out of love for change and hatred for herself. and wanting there to be someone better in her wake. and out of fear of what she'd done. and how at the end of the day her story is a tragedy because she believed everyone could change and become a better person. the only exception she had ever made on that was for herself. because she knew she used to be a horrible person and the one thing that scared her more than anything was the fact she didn't know how to fix it. so she didn't. she ended it all, and she prayed that the child in her wake would be a better person. because she, fundamentally, thinks she's irredeemable. and the only good thing she could do now was give her life to someone that deserved it.

can we talk about the fact that rose fucking quartz would rather die than try to confront the people she hurt because she thinks the only thing that'd do would hurt them more. and she can never learn to see the good she did as well. because all she thinks she does is hurt.

can we talk about the fact that rose isn't a twist villain, she's a fucking twist tragedy. oh my god. this fucking SHOW.

Rant time, but like, people who complain about the diamonds in Steven Universe getting "redeemed" and "facing no consequences" like, why did you ever think the diamonds getting destroyed was on the table as an option? Why did everyone think the show was going to end with Steven fighting and killing the diamonds, or the universe dolling out some Hayes Code Karma Violence like a giant rock falling on them at the last second? Like I guess I understand the criticism in theory that Steven Universe's metaphor for the diamonds as toxic family members falls apart when you consider they're crimes as space monarchs doing a colonialism, but Steven isn't The Avatar. At no point in the show does he even have the power to doll out the punishment you guys want.

Steven *does* try to fight the diamonds, and he gets his ass kicked. He gets smashed under his own shield and knocked out. His mom forms an entire army to fight them and LOSES and has almost all of her friends corrupted by them. The Diamonds are bigger, badder and stronger than The Crystal Gems (kind of like how adults are bigger and stronger than children.) So instead, he reveals his identity as Pink and the Diamonds immediately stop trying to kill him and the show instead pivots to be about political diplomacy. He doesn't like the diamonds, by the time Future rolls around we find out that he hates them and has private thoughts about killing them even now that that they don't pose any threat. But during the show he's powerless and so instead, talking to them and trying to change their mind is just a practical option because fighting hasn't worked. Because in the real world, there are times you will be outmatched and violence won't be the answer—even if the people hurting you probably do deserve violence.

And the diamonds aren't "redeemed," they just change their mind. They just decide that they want to keep Pink in their lives, so they begin to take accountability and undo the damage that they caused with their war, and presumably will spend the next thousands of years of their lives dismantling their own empire. And again, Steven Universe Future discusses the discomfort and the downside of this approach, that even if it's better and harm is actively being undone, the diamonds can't resolve all the harm they've done and Steven largely doesn't feel like he's gotten justice for what they did to him and his mother—much less the universe. So I don't get where anyone gets off saying this story is irresponsible or saying you should just forgive bad people. I don't see that anywhere in the story. The theme of Universe has always been the necessity of change, and so it makes sense that the villains aren't forgiven or revealed to be good people—but that they just change.

Alright, it’s less than a week since the Owl House finale aired and as expected I’ve already seen two direct comparisons to Steven Universe’s ending and several more vague-blogs, because one of this site’s hobbies is using other queer shows to put down Steven Universe. So let’s do this, then. Let’s compare the endings of Owl House and Steven Universe, and what each is ultimately trying to say.

Steven Universe and the Owl House are both shows that deal heavily with the clash of individualism and self-expression vs. socially-mandated conformity, and both shows’ final villains ultimately embody this conflict. One major difference, however, is that Owl House approaches this from the perspective of legal/societal structures, while Steven Universe approaches it from the perspective of family structures.

Steven Universe has always been about family--and particularly the ways traumas and biases are passed down through a family--and it has always heavily used the language of metaphor to discuss these topics. The Diamonds are the ultimate extension of this theme, something a lot of bad-faith (or just bad) takes on the ending miss; they interpret the diamonds in their literal capacity as dictators, rather than the way Steven Universe always portrays them, which is as matriarchs, i.e. the heads of a family who dictate and control all the family’s other members. This metaphor becomes more and more blatant until it outright becomes text, with the Diamonds turning out to be Steven’s literal family members, with whom his part of the family is estranged because of their previous controlling behavior.

In accordance with this theme, we ultimately find out that the Diamonds’ toxic ideology, with its rigid standards of perfection, are not only something they enforce on the gems below them, but also on themselves. They are suffering from the system in their own ways, unable to live up to the standards they themselves created. And who among us hasn’t known someone like that? A parent or grandparent who grew up under a cruel, oppressive worldview, and instead of rebelling against it internalized it--who turned around and said “I dealt with this, and so can you”? And so the ending of Steven Universe is the Diamonds realizing exactly how toxic the rigid ideology they’ve spent their lives perpetuating really is, and confronting the fact that their adherence to this ideology is what destroyed their relationship with Pink, and that the only way they’re going to have a relationship with Steven is if they’re willing to commit to changing both themselves, and the family structure they’ve enforced for so long.

Emperor Belos, in contrast, is not suffering from the structures he created, because his rules were never meant to apply to him. He sees the witches (and demons, and so-on) as lesser beings, evil beings, who exist to be controlled, and ultimately, exterminated. And every element of the society he built--the schools, the government, the police force, the religion--he intentionally constructed to keep these lesser beings under his control. The real-world allegory isn’t hard to see, here. And because what Belos represents in the story is, in fact, a fascist leader, the story shows that he can’t be reasoned with in any way that matters, and instead he is ultimately ground into paste beneath the boots of the people he sought to destroy. Different themes, different endings.

Now the usual argument that comes up here is as follows: but the Steven Universe ending isn’t as realistic! Not everyone is going to change, not everyone is going to be able to be reasoned with. Not every older, conservative family member is eventually going to accept you for who you are. And while that is true, ultimately SU isn’t meant to be realistic; it’s meant to be a power fantasy. Rebecca Sugar has come out and said before that they wrote a world in which there was good in everyone, because that’s the way she wishes the world could be. That’s the world they want to be able to believe in. And I am never going to begrudge a person, much less a queer person, for finding healing in writing that kind of world.

But you know what else is unrealistic? What else is ultimately just a fantasy? Grinding your government’s fascist leader into paste under your boot, then taking over and remaking society into something that accepts everyone. Sadly, Trump is not likely to get his ass beat any time soon. And more generally, punching fascists, while ideologically sound, is something most people are not going to get to do, due to real-world consequences such as “getting beat up by the fascist’s angry friends” and “being arrested for assault”. And even if you did depose one leader, our very society is set up in a way that perpetuates all manner of injustices, and systemic change is a complex and lengthy process that almost certainly won’t be completed in our lifetimes. But it’s fun to imagine we could, isn’t it?

Both endings are power fantasies. Both show the way they want the world to be, rather than the way it is. They are very different power fantasies, which fill very different--and at times conflicting--needs. And in situations like that, internet culture really likes to pick one to be the right fantasy, the right way to look at the world. 

But the truth is, both fantasies are needed! Some people need stories about your queerphobic relatives finally realizing the error of their ways and taking the necessary steps to accept and reconcile with you. And some people need stories where you get to grind fascist bastards beneath the heel of your boot. It’s okay if you prefer one type of fantasy over the other! But in the end, both are valuable, and both are important. 

And isn’t it wonderful, for us to have such a diversity of great queer stories? That we can explore both of these deep, conflicting needs? Let’s appreciate each of these fantastic works for what it was meant to be, rather than trying to pit them against each other or make them conform to a single, “best” way to tell a story.

Haunting the Narrative Round 4

Haunting the narrative means that the character’s absence heavily impacts the plot. They’re not present or active in the story when their influence is most strongly felt, whether they’re alive or dead!

🔶🤎 aren’t I a fool to have (happily) drifted away

Wow I love the story of an individual from a “perfect” society that has a distant (or disdainful) view of humans, until they find themselves in a situation involving humans and the human world. Said situation leads to a realization, possibly an extidtential crisis, about their role in their society and the enticing thought of choosing their own destiny.

They start falling in love with the idiosyncrasies of humanity and championing the innate, yet complicated, goodness within humankind. They love the little things that humans do subconsciously or without noticing, and the small annoyances that humans bemoan, such as burning oneself on TV dinners or making doctors appointments.

Eventually, they find themselves with the opportunity to experience (or bring a new being to experience) humankind for themselves, and take it after reflecting on the human condition and what it means to be human. While funny, the story is an unexpectedly poignant reflection on humankind.

AND NOW FOR SOME META THATS NOT KH

i was looking through promotional art on the su wiki, and i came across the SDCC 2016 signing card

and i noticed that only four people in the pic have flowers

steven, greg, and pearl have roses, which of course represent rose quartz

while jasper has a hibiscus for some reason?

so i was thinking about why jasper would have that particular flower, esp when almost everyone else in the pic doesnt have one at all

and then i realized

... oh

2016 comic con, huh

I choose No;Older Sibling cause it just be like that sometimes. Spinel was right to mad about it though.

Edit: My genuine thought is that this is her attempt to grow up not just because she was given a planet, but because she doesn't want to be the Diamond who throws tantrums that hurt her loved ones after her accident with Pink Pearl. So she decides to distance herself from Spinel in an attempt to not hurt anyone else, to grow up so that she doesn't crack anyone else again(a value she carries with her for the rest of her life).

Her flaw was not considering Spinel's wants and needs. Cuz she gonna follow her instructions literally and no matter how nice that garden was Spinel needs social interaction. I just dislike the notion that Pink Diamond didn't care at all or just forgot about Spinel. She is very caring but doesn't know how to care for the people/gems she loves.

Spicy take I just realized while drawing my comic:

He covered it in breaking points

How much would your AU change if instead of "shattering" pink diamond, pearl straight up ate the fake gem in front of the diamonds like some kind of raccoon who found a particularly appetizing morsel?

I feel like you guys collectively decided that since I entertain you by making comics, you should return the favor by sending these gems to my inbox to entertain me.

me making an AU where Sadie dies instead of Lars?? more likely than you think

I know it probably wasn't meant to be a trans allegory but GOD does Steven's time with the diamonds resonate as a trans allegory to me. Like. Everyone disregarding his name. Being forced to wear uncomfortable clothing. People regarding his name as a funny joke. Being told he's just being childish. "I just want you to be yourself!" The ripping the fucking gem out SCREAMS of it. The purity talk. And just the. God. The scene where it showed Pink, then Rose, then Steven got me so hard as a trans person because it just. Reminds me SO much of just. Trans. So much trans. Because it just reminds me of looking at the past versions of me before I figured myself out. They're still a part of me, they still made up a lot of my life, but I am not them anymore. And that's what that scene resonates to me so much as. That gem is not Pink or Rose anymore. Reminds me of that one thing that goes "my parents were right, I DID kill their son." Pink is gone, Rose is gone, Steven is neither of them Steven is MORE Steven is alive and he is not that girl, he is not that girl, he doesn't want her name or her dresses or her life or her room, this is HIS body now, this is how HE sounds, he's not pretending to be someone else. This is who he is. He is not Pink or Rose. He is Steven. She's gone.

And god the scene where he hugs pink Steven just. It reminds me so much of accepting my gender or gender euphoria or just the realization of that's what I am, I am me, I am not broken, I am whole and i am not that girl. I don't need to be that girl because it doesn't make me happy. It's okay that I'm not that girl.

And just the. I am a child. What's your excuse? And the absolute "so what?" of that. Yeah, I'm a kid. This is still me. Why do you care so much about my body? Why does me being happy upset you so much? The girl you knew is gone, and maybe she never existed. It's your fault she's gone, and now I'm left, and it's my gem. It's my body. And this is who I've ALWAYS been.

The "I've always been me" line resonates so much. "I've always been this. I just needed to figure it out." Not how being trans works for everyone, ofc, everyone's relationship with their gender is different, this is just the vibes I get from this specific thing.

I do also like to dabble in reading Rose as a trans allegory too. Because I am self indulgent shh. And that ones less "I always was this" and more so "being the person I used to be made me miserable and I hated my own body, I hated my own life. So I grew into this new body that I love, and chose a new name, and a new identity that makes me happy." Which,, am I overanalyzing. I dunno man I like hitting my favorite characters with the transgender beam.

You can also read it with the lense of "I killed that old version of me and I am a woman now. This is who I am. That person is dead." Which. Once again. Am I overanalyzing. This feels too easy to read as trans. I am probably overanalyzing.

Anyways the way gender works for different people is really interesting, I like Steven Universe, I like making my favorites stories trans allegory-ified, and I cannot be stopped. Peace ✌️

Revisiting Pearl's Plurality in A Single Pale Rose: Separating Canon and Headcanon

Apparently the issue with my previous Pearl posts is that I presented my first post as being canon. And after thinking it over, yeah. That's fair. I did do that. So I just wanted to go over this and look at what's actually canon and what's not.

Definition: Before beginning, my own definition of plurality is that plurality is multiple self-conscious and autonomous agents sharing the same body. Self-conscious means they have at least a rudimentary sense of self and are able to identify themselves as themselves.

Canon: Pearl has multiple Pearls inside her head.

Canon: The first Pearl in her head, the one I've dubbed Keeper Pearl, has a clear 1st person perspective, referring to her phone being taken by an "other me."

Canon: The Pearl who took the phone acted outside of the control or even knowledge of the others, demonstrating agency.

Headcanon: I refer to her Plurals. The use of the term "plural" in reference to Pearl obviously doesn't appear in the show.

Canon: Many of the inner Pearls were locked at some sort of traumatic moment in her history.

Canon: Neither the front Pearl nor Keeper Pearl have knowledge of what happened to the phone. The Pearl who took it was able to act outside of their knowledge or awareness.

Headcanon: The memory separation as "dissociative barriers." This is not described as "dissociative barriers" in the show, but I used them in reference to one headmate not remembering what was done by another headmate. While it's canon that some of the Pearls don't remember actions taken by other Pearls, it's not technically confirmed that the barriers are dissociative.

Supporting Subtext: I think it's likely that Keeper Pearl saying "I am very good at compartmentalizing everything" was in reference to dissociative compartmentalization. The writers clearly had a solid understanding of PTSD and trauma as we see in Steven Universe Future, and Pearl's line having a double meaning referring to the way these different Pearls inside are dissociated from each other makes sense.

Canon: The inner War Pearl has a different view on the fight at the Strawberry Battlefield than front Pearl in Rose's Scabbard. In Rose's Scabbard, Pearl sees the result of the battle as a glorious victory, while War Pearl is traumatized by the loss after it was over.

Headcanon: This is evidence of "emotional amnesia." That is, Pearl dissociated from and buried the memory of the loss. The front Pearl is only focused on the victory and fighting beside Rose against Homeworld, but doesn't connect with the memory of the aftermath. The War Pearl is still in there and remembers, but she's buried deep down.

Conclusion: It's canon that there are multiple Pearls in Pearl's head with their own autonomy and self-awareness. It's canon that these Pearls can act outside of the awareness of other Pearls. I maintain that the internal experience depicted in the canon fits my personal definition of plurality. I also believe that the memory barriers are dissociative in nature, but this isn't actually confirmed and it could technically just as easily be a result of the unique tech/magic of the gems that allows these separate Pearls to take actions in the inner world without the other Pearls knowing about it.

Remember when Ian Jones Quartey squashed the “Rose Quartz is Pink Diamond” theorists by replying to someone’s tweet, claiming that gems couldn’t rotate or change their gem orientation with shape shifting? He was so real for that. The theorists basically had that theory set in stone, and they were all completely flattened because they forgot about the concept of lying for funsies.

Haunting the Narrative Round 2 Side B

Haunting the narrative means that the character’s absence heavily impacts the plot. They’re not present or active in the story when their influence is most strongly felt, whether they’re alive or dead!