Board Thread:Off-topic/@comment-15675979-20160324132829/@comment-27304481-20160328135849

Perlen297 wrote: Aptos wrote: I will not try again, either their is an effect from one on the other, or there is no correlation.

Can't be a platonic relationship. And why can't ruby and sapphire care for each other platonically but have slow intimacy development that eventually turns, soon after the end of the answer, into a romance, that then continues to bloom for centuries?

Why are,you saying that I get it? I got it the whole time. Now you understand what I am saying. Sl now we are in understanding on that. But they could be friends that eventually will bloom to romance. It would be easier to explain with a chart.

Whether they will or will not, whether they do or do not, that is the question. Eh, it's better for you to not know that yet. Just wait and see.

I think it's more of a platonic relationship (like duh, they just met or they don't know each other), but due to the events, like them fusing, it sparked feelings of love that they never felt before. Feelings of love, hence the soundtrack after they escaped (coincidentally, it's exactly what I am listening as I write this, not preplanned). But what are those feelings of love? That became more clear, when it happened, the love at first sight of each other's eyes. Blushing as they gaze upon each other's eyes. It felt like the time slowed down. They fell in love with each other, but they have no idea what those feelings are. They explored Earth's wonders. They sang. They star gaze. Then it happened, undoubtly a romantic moment, they danced, and formed Garnet once again. They fell. (prolly a symbolism of falling in love? nah~) Rose came. Garnet questioned. Love is the Answer.

Love is the Answer, Garnet said it herself, and we all know it's romance.

It was basically a "Falling In Love Montage". A real trope, finally.

Lol really? I can't tell, because it's like you're saying all the time that it's solely platonic, never romantic. Yeah seriously.

Questions will not be entertained until the end of the discussion. I think you mean feelings lf intimacy. Feelings of romantic love happen after they have romantic love, which hasn't happenned yet.

It still might not be romance.

Well, why can't it be platonic? They aren't just spices that can mix. If they are romantic, then the situations are romantic. If not, they are platonic. Its not just a little of this, a little of this, and then out comes the situation, especially if they don't have a little of the this that is romance.

Questions will not be entertained? Really? So there is no questioning of reasoning or results until it is resolved, at which point infallibility will no doubt be claimed to avoid loss in case of potentially faulty reasoning? That would be disagreeable