Talk:Ruby Rose/@comment-125.239.6.119-20180420060459/@comment-26258854-20180420065230

Just because you havent witnessed  a certain character or person show any romantic interest towards anyone else, doesnt necessarily mean that theyre *insert assumed sexuality here*. I remember reading abt it somewhere stating that the writers made Ruby's character the type who (not saying all of em are) tends to focus on the real problems theyre currently facing head on since they dont really have the time to be worrying abt whether or not their crush likes them back, especially after the Fall of Beacon. But if a character can somehow incorporate their feelings with their mindset during their time in the battlefield, I dont see how Ruby (or any other character for that matter) being any of the sexualities that people assume them to be is wrong. Similar to how Nora and Ren incorporate their strong bond that they share together into their fights, like it's priority for the two to keep the other safe whilst fighting against the malevolent forces the world throws at them. So as of now, we just wait and see if the writers may change their mind on the matter (on making Ruby ignorant to romantic topics other than romanticizing the idea of being a huntress in early volume 1) in future volumes.