Asura wrote:I'm not sure what direct emulation is supposed to mean, and google reveals no results, but I'm going to go out on a limb and assume you basically mean a copycat, in which case yes, there have been tons of people implying that to potentially be the case with kids supposedly learning that Roshi's antics are okay to do, and if they think it's okay to do and there's no problem with it, that it's a possibility they'll go out and do it too. If this is what you meant by direct emulation, then no I don't see how it's a strawman at all given there are a number of people in this thread who have claimed Roshi's antics can potentially leave an impression on children. If this isn't what you meant by direct emulation then you'll have to elaborate on that for me.
That is what I meant. If those posts are here, I've missed them, but I'll say that that's a bit too far a stance for me in general. It does not, however, mean I think the
DB gags are harmless.
And now you're falling right into my argument of "context". In the context of the show and the depiction of scenes, there is nothing wrong with Uncle Ruckus' racism. Regardless of whether the Boondocks is chiefly concerned with race, the point is that racism is used in a humorous way and both the show and the characters find very little to be wrong with it. Racism is a taboo subject along the likes of sexual assault and murder, is it not? Dragon Ball does not have to be chiefly concerned with any sort of subject to be able to portray those subjects in a humorous light. No form of media has to be chiefly concerned with anything to make jokes about it either. I don't believe Roshi normalizes predatory behavior for the reasons I've stated throughout the thread.
You don't see a difference between a character in a show centrally concerned with race relations being used ironically for commentary on race relations, and a character in a series that's definitely not about sexual politics being used for light jokes involving sexual harassment?
Like, really?
I can't take the space in this thread to explain context to you from square one, because that's where our starting point would be, but I'd implore you to think about what you typed here again.
It just means that everyone has a different sense of humor, but that the key word here is humor, because it's a joke in a cartoon show and as previously said is not meant to reflect, commentate, emulate, or normalize sexual assault in the real world.
It doesn't matter what it's
meant to do. What matters is what it does. Normalization isn't an agenda—it's just the result of glib attitudes toward a subject being reflected again and again.
If there's even more stuff out there that depicts and tells people how bad sexual assault is in todays day and age, wouldn't you logically assume that there would be even less of a chance of someone growing up today to find that sort of behavior acceptable?
I would absolutely assume that. But now you're seemingly agreeing with me, so I'm not sure where you're coming from.
If you believe today's media environment has (finally) broken through and turned a corner to the point where fewer people are likely to grow up thinking that kind of behavior is remotely acceptable, then you're acknowledging what should be a given—media
does help foster social attitudes. Wouldn't that mean, just as people have been observing for multiple pages now, that Kame-Sennin's gags would be a part of
Dragon Ball that has aged poorly, and may have helped reinforce some of the more harmful attitudes of its time? Something akin to, say, the terrible "red man" song in Disney's
Peter Pan, where we can still hold up the work as a whole, but look at one particular aspect and say, "Yikes. That was really not doing anyone good"?
rereboy wrote:Sure, but there is still a difference between both positions, imo. One criticizes the series from within the series itself, the other criticizes it from outside the series, with an almost political point of view.
I hate to burst your bubble on this, but the way fiction interacts with the world it's introduced to has not always been a part of discussion and criticism from the start, but a foundational, inherent part of how people respond to it.
Dragon Ball's a silly-ass series, but it doesn't exist in a vacuum, nor are people's reactions that draw from how it interacts with social ideas any less visceral or honest than thoughts like "This is fun!" or "This is dull."
Doctor. wrote:Rape and sexual assault are not the only damaging traumas a person can experience. Acting like they're the ultimate or most damaging trauma is not only arbitrary, but conceited beyond belief, as you're belittling other people's traumatic experiences because, in your own subjective view of the world, they're not as "damaging." You don't get to judge that.
They may not be the only forms of trauma, but they're some of the only ones societies have historically struggled to take seriously.