Talk:Smoky Quartz/@comment-26568124-20160818230040/@comment-25117782-20160904212133

Okay, I understand that logically and canonically Gems are gender neutral, but come on.

We humans identify them as females because all gems thus far have taken the physical form of a human female body.

I don't even think there's been a agender/male voice actor for any of the Gems thus far.

So isn't it reasonable to state that even though canonically and physically they are gender neutral, but in human context they are female?

Rose bore Greg a son for pete's sake. They have all the physical attributes of females, and to me, I identify more with them as females instead of agender 'things'. I've never been able to understand agenders, though I respect them, I'd also like to remind you that each and every person identifies with character different.

For example, I really truly identify more with Haku from Naruto, even though canonically and physically he is a male, when I identify him as a her, that their character makes more sense and also connects more with their interpersonal relationships.

It's okay to identify the gems as agender, but to some people it's easier to identify them as what they look like, act like, and think like.

Also, I'd just like to point out that any fusion with Steven is an allegory for Transgenders. Straight up.

Again, I'm not saying that you don't have the right to identify characters, but don't play grammar police either, especially with fictional characters. Just be benign and benevolence will reward you.