>>42322157
I only really started this conversation because you talked about the "flaws she worked through and learned from" as reasons to like her. Yet, when I pressed you on exactly that, asking what flaws she worked through, you pivot and started saying her flaws are what maker her interesting, or said they don't count as flaws in the first place. It's fine if you like Rarity, but making stuff up and then shifting the goal post afterward when contrary evidence is pointed out only makes you look in denial. You can't just say she grew past her flaws while simultaneously saying half her flaws don't count.