this is the blog i use to yell at idiots

https://www.npr.org/2020/07/17/892277592/federal-officers-use-unmarked-vehicles-to-grab-protesters-in-portland

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/protesters-portland-oregon-clash-police-federal-officers-during-chaotic-night-n1234160

https://www.tampabay.com/news/nation-world/2020/07/17/oregon-officials-decry-portland-arrests-by-federal-agents-dressed-in-camouflage/

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/07/17/reports-federal-officers-detain-portland-protesters-unmarked-vans/5457471002/

The obvious answer is because of the horrible things she did.

But the other diamonds did horrible things too…worse things even.

Pink abandoned Spinel, which is wrong, but Spinel was planning to kill every living thing on Earth to spite the son of a person who was no longer even alive. Yet, no one talks about what a monster Spinel is.

So many Steven Universe characters have hurt people, but we forgive them and are happy to see them redeemed.

So why not Rose?

Then, it hit me: because Rose’s redemption arc is told to us in reverse.

The first time we see Rose is toward the end of her life when she is pregnant with Steven. We see her appreciation for life and how full of love she is for Greg and her future child. She’s willingly sacrificing herself to bring a new life into the world.

But then, we start learning who Rose used to be, all her mistakes, all the people she hurt.

The loving mother in Steven’s video becomes a distant memory.

For those of you who hate Rose, imagine her backstory unfolded a little differently for us.

We’re introduced to Pink Diamond: she’s spoiled, bratty, immature, irresponsible, and inconsiderate.

She throws temper tantrums when she doesn’t get her way.

Not exactly an endearing character, right?

But one day, her tantrum injure Pink Pearl, her best friend. From that day on, she keeps everything to herself. Now we see her dealing with a consequence of her bad behavior.

Then we see how she’s abused by the other diamonds. We start to sympathize with her.

We see her try to save Earth. We see her trying to do the right thing for once.

But it backfires horribly.

She spends the rest of her life trying to fix it, but she can’t.

She meets Greg. Here is where Rose has the most emotional growth as a character. She learns what is truly means to be a “real person.”

Finally, she grows such an appreciation for human life, that she decides to sacrifice her form to bring her son into the world.

The reason Rose is so much more controversial than other characters who have done problematic things is because her story is told in reverse, her redemption comes across as a fall from grace.

But there are plenty of characters who have a fall from grace who are still not as controversial as Rose. The reason why many people are less sympathetic to Rose is because we never see how Rose reacts to her mistakes. We never get much insight into how Rose feels about herself and the things she’s done. We get small hints:

1. Before we start to learn about the real, fallible Rose Quartz/ Pink Diamond, Rose is built up so much by Greg and the Crystal Gems memories and Steven’s hopes. Rose is really inflated to impossible heights before we get to know her.

These books were about an indigenous woman (with a brain injury in book 3) living in poverty overthrowing a corrupt white government.

She was demisexual, had stomach hair, was not even remotely romantically driven (and canonically didn’t even find romance until after she had finished a revolution.)

And Peeta was disabled and physically abused as a child and they both suffered from mental health problems and the parallel between the Capitol and the ruling rich was so very transparent.

And I’m seeing fun coloured makeup in stores labeled “Capitol colours from the Hunger Games”!

These books were about the revolution of the most oppressed taking over the extravagance and elitism and decadence of the ruling class while citizens starved.

These books were a parallel to our current social dynamics, they were a call to arms. They were a battle cry for the impeding ruin of the rich white ruling class.

When Katniss thinks about running away in the second book it is the memory of Rue that makes her decide to stay and “cause all kinds of trouble.”

That is an indigenous woman deciding that the death of a Black child is so horrific and unacceptable that she needs to start an entire uprising about it. That is WOC solidarity.

Then again, when Katniss is talking with Peeta about not leaving he literally, canonically and verbally SAYS it’s because of Rue.

The movies did not lend enough weight to the injustice and violence that Black women face; they didn’t waste any time in deciding the rebellion came from their White Katniss’s determination to overthrow the Capitol.

The movies purposely and aggressively erased all of the racial oppression and power and dynamics that were so apparent in the books.

They made Katniss white, they made Gale white, they erased Peeta’s amputation, they seriously diminished the PTSD both of them faced (which was actually one of the more accuract accounts of PTSD I had ever read in the books), they drastically lessened the weight and importance of Rue’s death.

>be in jail for horrible crimes

>beat up unpopular guy

but when one of my classmates speaks arabic in public to her family, she gets strange and disgusted looks. no one asks to be taught arabic. no one says its cool that shes bilingual

“Intersectional erasures are not exclusive to black women. People of color within LGBTQ movements; girls of color in the fight against the school-to-prison pipeline; women within immigration movements; trans women within feminist movements; and people with disabilities fighting police abuse — all face vulnerabilities that reflect the intersections of racism, sexism, class oppression, transphobia, able-ism and more.” - Kimberlé Crenshsw, 2015, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/in-theory/wp/2015/09/24/why-intersectionality-cant-wait/

And I AM a Christian you fool.

Not in Exodus.

“Do not mistreat or oppress a foreigner, for you were foreigners in Egypt.”

Not in Deuteronomy.

“And you are to love those who are foreigners, for you yourselves were foreigners in Egypt.”

Not in Hebrews.

“Do not forget to show hospitality to strangers, for by so doing some people have shown hospitality to angels without knowing it.”

Not in Leviticus.

“‘When you reap the harvest of your land, do not reap to the very edges of your field or gather the gleanings of your harvest. Leave them for the poor and for the foreigner residing among you. I am the Lord your God.’”

“You are to have the same law for the foreigner and the native-born. I am the Lord your God.’” 

“‘When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them.

The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt.”

Not in Psalms.

“The Lord watches over the foreigner    and sustains the fatherless and the widow,    but he frustrates the ways of the wicked.”

Not in Zechariah.

“This is what the Lord Almighty said: ‘Administer true justice; show mercy and compassion to one another.

Do not oppress the widow or the fatherless, the foreigner or the poor. Do not plot evil against each other.’”

Man, and Jesus, himself, definitely didn’t mention it whatsoever in Luke 10:29-37. How dare OP suggest something so preposterous? I don’t consider myself a Christian, but I do believe in God. I believe They dictated that we’re to love one another–especially the persecuted. But please, continue to use that BS cartoon I see everywhere “Christians” want to use the Bible to discredit things they don’t personally believe in, all the while not bothering to read the book at all. American “Christianity” isn’t a worship of God. It’s worshiping America. I believe the Bible would call that…hmm…an idol? And the Ten Commandments say the worshiping of idols is a big no-no.