Does the sexualization of Bulma at the start of the series bother anyone?

Discussion regarding the entirety of the franchise in a general (meta) sense, including such aspects as: production, trends, merchandise, fan culture, and more.

Moderators: General Help, Kanzenshuu Staff

kemuri07
Advanced Regular
Posts: 1005
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2011 3:09 am

Re: Does the sexualization of Bulma at the start of the series bother anyone?

Post by kemuri07 » Wed May 16, 2018 12:08 pm

Oh boy. Let's not do the whole "oh,but she's mature for her age" because that's gonna lead us down a very, very dark path we don't want to go.

Lest you want the FBI breaking up this joint.



on the pervy humor of DB: I try to consider context and tone, and that's probably why it doesn't really bother me as much as modern manga, which you can pretty much play a guessing game of "Is this hentai or not?" and probably be surprise how much you guess wrong.

From what I recall from the manga, there really isn't that much in the way of tittilation in DB. Toriyama only uses sex as a way to make a gag. So even the infamous "show me your panties for a dragonball" scene from DB never felt sexy, because it was never drawn that way.

User avatar
Doctor.
Banned
Posts: 10558
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 10:02 am
Location: Portugal

Re: Does the sexualization of Bulma at the start of the series bother anyone?

Post by Doctor. » Wed May 16, 2018 1:48 pm

ABED wrote:Some people are mature for their age. That doesn't make them adults. I know people still mature into adulthood, but there's still a world of difference between a 16 and 18 year old.

It's not a relationship. As weird as that would be, it's Roshi perving on a teenager which is already skeevy. The age makes it worse.

I don't mind "sexualizing" a teenage character if their interactions are centered around characters their own age or reasonably close.
There's a world of difference between an 18 and a 20 year old, what's your point? I did a lot of dumb shit as an 18 year old that I wouldn't do now. And it's the same 2 year difference. Again, people's brains still mature into their early to mid 20s. Drawing an arbitrary line in the sand about where adulthood lies is necessary for society and we should abide by it, but acting as if taking one step beyond the line is "disgusting" is absolutely ridiculous to me. It's just an unconscious bias on your part originating from centuries of putting sex on a pedestal as a society and never questioning why one thing is inherently disgusting and one isn't beyond "it just doesn't feel right."

And because I feel the need to put this disclaimer here before someone freaks out: no, I am not advocating for people to go out and fuck 16-year olds.

I said relationship in a general sense. As in, if Bulma was in a relationship with an older male as a 16-year old, then plenty of readers wouldn't bat an eye to it. Roshi perving on Bulma is supposed to be bothersome because he's an old man harassing a woman, not because the woman happens to be 16. My argument here is that her being 16 is nothing more than a blip in the radar for Japanese and European audiences.
kemuri07 wrote: Oh boy. Let's not do the whole "oh,but she's mature for her age" because that's gonna lead us down a very, very dark path we don't want to go.

Lest you want the FBI breaking up this joint.
I don't see why it would lead down that path. Bulma is a fictional character that was written to be 16, and she just as easily could have filled the role of an 18-year old. Apparently the sexual harassment would be less bad in the latter situation for some reason? Despite the fact that she's a fictional character, who'd have the same personality, in a manga that borrows from cultures where the age of consent is lower than 18. The issue here is the sexual harassment, not Bulma's age. I once again use the example of blue-haired Lunch, because even though she's an adult, I imagine people would find it much more troubling or problematic for an innocent, oblivious woman to be perved on and groped than someone as sexually liberated as Bulma who usually offers herself up to begin with. Apparently Bulma is worse because she's 16.

I know that last line was humorous in nature, but it illustrates perfectly the kind of Americentrism in the discussion about sex that I'm arguing against - as if the laws and ethical standards of the United States were the end all be all of every discussion.

User avatar
ABED
Namekian Warrior
Posts: 20276
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 10:23 am
Location: Skippack, PA
Contact:

Re: Does the sexualization of Bulma at the start of the series bother anyone?

Post by ABED » Wed May 16, 2018 2:47 pm

This isn't at all about "putting sex on a pedestal". I do think it's important, but I'm not a prude by any stretch, nor am I a hedonist. I just think there's a line - perving on an underage person is one of them. Unconsentual touching is also awful no matter the age, but touching a young child is even worse. It's an even more egregious abuse of power.
Roshi perving on Bulma is supposed to be bothersome because he's an old man harassing a woman, not because the woman happens to be 16
It can be both.

You keep saying it's an arbitrary line, but at some point, there's a rational age that all of this is unacceptable regardless of consent. Reasonable people can disagree with whether it's between 16 and 18.
I know that last line was humorous in nature, but it illustrates perfectly the kind of Americentrism in the discussion about sex that I'm arguing against - as if the laws and ethical standards of the United States were the end all be all of every discussion.
I understand your point, but it's not an irrational standard.
There's a world of difference between an 18 and a 20 year old, what's your point? I did a lot of dumb shit as an 18 year old that I wouldn't do now. And it's the same 2 year difference. Again, people's brains still mature into their early to mid 20s. Drawing an arbitrary line in the sand about where adulthood lies is necessary for society and we should abide by it, but acting as if taking one step beyond the line is "disgusting" is absolutely ridiculous to me.
If it's arbitrary, why should we abide by it? Because society says so?
The biggest truths aren't original. The truth is ketchup. It's Jim Belushi. Its job isn't to blow our minds. It's to be within reach.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take - Wayne Gretzky" - Michael Scott
Happiness is climate, not weather.

User avatar
Doctor.
Banned
Posts: 10558
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 10:02 am
Location: Portugal

Re: Does the sexualization of Bulma at the start of the series bother anyone?

Post by Doctor. » Wed May 16, 2018 3:08 pm

ABED wrote:You keep saying it's an arbitrary line, but at some point, there's a rational age that all of this is unacceptable regardless of consent. Reasonable people can disagree with whether it's between 16 and 18.
Sure, but you're not actually providing any arguments as to why 18 is fine but 16 isn't. Is 17 fine? If so, what are the differences between 17 and 16 for one to be fine and the other not? If not, then what are the differences between 18 and 17 for one to be fine and the other not? In an ethical discussion (one about age of consent that I didn't want to get into but nonetheless here we are) you need something more to argue than just "my country draws the line here." That's fine in a legal sense, but from a legal perspective, Dragon Ball doesn't follow your country's rules; it follows Chinese and Japanese influences. So if you want to convince me that Bulma being 16 in these scenes is troublesome, then you need to make a convincing moral argument, not a legal one.
If it's arbitrary, why should we abide by it? Because society says so?
Most laws are arbitrary. They're made up rules for the sake of maintaining a society. One country dictates age of consent is 18 and another one says it's 16, which one is objectively right?

You should follow the laws your country has set, but that doesn't mean those laws are perfect.

User avatar
coola
I Live Here
Posts: 3360
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 7:33 am
Location: Poland

Re: Does the sexualization of Bulma at the start of the series bother anyone?

Post by coola » Wed May 16, 2018 3:34 pm

Like i said earlier, so far, every season i've watched, have at least one anime, where there are scenes like this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0j41sQ3dVM (1:20 Uma Musume is great show BTW, go all watch it :) ) and personally i don't mind it, as long as we all remember it is part of fiction

Some shows go even one step beyond, and feature lolies https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yNN9gY2IEY Ironically, under all this lolicon fanservice, it is pretty good Shoi anime, even have veteran seiyuu such as Mitsuko Horie, but i know quite few people that feel uncomfortable to watch it, because of lolies.
My Twitter: @kamil198811
Bulma fan
Thanks to Discotek:
Magic Knight Rayearth get DVD release in 2015 and Blu-Ray release on 2016
Saint Seiya: The Lost Canvas get DVD release in 2015

User avatar
ABED
Namekian Warrior
Posts: 20276
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 10:23 am
Location: Skippack, PA
Contact:

Re: Does the sexualization of Bulma at the start of the series bother anyone?

Post by ABED » Wed May 16, 2018 4:04 pm

Sure, but you're not actually providing any arguments as to why 18 is fine but 16 isn't. Is 17 fine?

Most laws are arbitrary. They're made up rules for the sake of maintaining a society. One country dictates age of consent is 18 and another one says it's 16, which one is objectively right?

You should follow the laws your country has set, but that doesn't mean those laws are perfect.
If the laws are arbitrary, how does that do a good job of maintaining society?

I'll give you this. You're correct, there are options in matters such as this. When legislatures put age limits on issues such as age of consent or driving ages or alcohol, I do think there's a rational range. Too young and it poses a threat to the child, too old and the law is no longer about protection, it's about control. So, I agree that 16 could be a suitable age of consent. Personally, I like 18 because it's not too old, but the teenager is most likely out of high school. This has been good food for thought, though.
The biggest truths aren't original. The truth is ketchup. It's Jim Belushi. Its job isn't to blow our minds. It's to be within reach.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take - Wayne Gretzky" - Michael Scott
Happiness is climate, not weather.

User avatar
Zephyr
I Live Here
Posts: 4021
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 9:20 pm

Re: Does the sexualization of Bulma at the start of the series bother anyone?

Post by Zephyr » Wed May 16, 2018 4:39 pm

Regarding laws in general, even if the precise placement of a line is ultimately arbitrary, in comparison to other possible precise placements, within a sensible range, it is still important, in the interest of maintaining order and structure, to have some line in place, even if it is not the exact singular best possible line, even if such a perfect place to draw it doesn't really exist.

User avatar
floofychan333
Advanced Regular
Posts: 1377
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2016 10:03 pm
Location: Ottawa, Canada

Re: Does the sexualization of Bulma at the start of the series bother anyone?

Post by floofychan333 » Wed May 16, 2018 6:42 pm

KBABZ wrote:Oh god, I just remembered Chi-Chi's DB outfit. Why the crap is a twelve year old in a Shonen manga wearing something worn in the first few panels of a hentai manga??
Yes, exactly! That's what bugs me the most about Dragon Ball.
"All of you. All of you must have KILL all the SEASONS!" -Dough (Tenshinhan), Speedy Dub of Movie 9.

"My opinion of Norihito's Sumitomo's new score is... well, very mixed. The stuff that's good is pretty darn good, but the stuff that's bad makes elevator music sound like Jerry freaking Goldsmith." -Kenisu

User avatar
Kunzait_83
I Live Here
Posts: 2974
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2004 5:19 pm

Re: Does the sexualization of Bulma at the start of the series bother anyone?

Post by Kunzait_83 » Thu May 17, 2018 12:42 am

Doctor. wrote:Because one is murder and the other is sexual harassment. This isn't an apt comparison because they are not comparable crimes. There is no rape scene in DB (and even if there was, I'd still argue that comparing it to murder isn't appropriate, as the latter is worse). A better example would be Goku slapping Chi-Chi through a house, a scene which was "lighthearted good fun", the same as the sexual violence. Toriyama isn't glorifying domestic abuse, and I'd find it hard to believe even you would argue that such scenes have unintentional ramifications in the way husband-wife relationships are perceived or they mirror the sociocultural context of Japan in the same way you argue for the sexual harassment in the series.
First of all: the scene of Goku slapping Chi Chi through a wall was portrayed as 100% accidental on Goku's part: he obviously intended it as a friendly pat on the shoulder, and the whole (silly) joke is that he didn't know his own strength at that point. Again: context is everything, and intent/motivations of the characters is a huge, huge factor.

In no way remotely is that scene even the tiniest bit comparable to anything that can even be passingly confused for "domestic abuse" in the slightest: there's not the faintest trace of maliciousness or intent to harm Chi Chi in Goku's actions. We know what Goku's intent in the scene was: an "Aw c'mon lighten up Chi Chi!" gesture of a simple pat on the back. That's a GIGANTIC world of difference between that and either a character who hurts a spouse or loved one with clear intent to do them harm (i.e. genuine domestic abuse, and not a dumb accident) or a character like Muten Roshi, whose intent in his various sex acts is also MUCH more deliberate and without the slightest hint of mistake or accident on his part.

THEN add on top of that the scene (of Goku knocking Chi Chi aside) being played comically and cartoonishly as a slapstick pratfall of a gag on top of the obvious difference in intent, with the whole thing just being another (in a long line of) "Goku's a lunkheaded idiot" gags... the entire comparison ends up being a false equivalence, bordering almost on a non-sequitur for even raising it as a point of comparison. What Goku does in that scene is no more an example of "domestic abuse" than something like me running to answer the phone and accidentally knocking my girlfriend over to the floor as I run by.

Muten Roshi, by contrast, knows PRECISELY what he is doing in his "questionable" scenes: the intent is clear and unmistakable. Even in the midst of the "lighthearted gag" nature of these scenes, Muten Roshi's whole purpose and motivation is to get his old, withered rocks off, using these girls as unwilling tools in that pursuit. Again: this type of character does NOT work in the tone and context in which these scenes in DB frame it as, which is that of an incorrigible old scamp simply having a bit of fun (in a way that's only mildly "inappropriate" as opposed to fucking inexcusably horrendous).

The only way that these scenes and Muten Roshi's actions within them WOULD work in a comedic sense is if they were played for pitch black humor: with the framework narrative somehow acknowledging and understanding that what this old man is doing with these girls is beyond the pale awful, but he (and whichever other choice characters conspiring with him in his escapades, like maybe Oolong) doesn't realize/recognize it, and the stark contrast between the awful reality of his actions and his own wildly out of touch point of view on them.

Obviously that's NOT how DB plays these scenes: the framing of both Muten Roshi as a character and the broader narrative paints what he's doing as "mildly rude, but still lovable"... and sorry, but that is COMPLETELY tone deaf. In ANY era, 80s, 90s, whenever. I fully get that there's something of a longstanding "cultural" issue in Japan with the sexual dynamics between older men and younger women... but yeah, even accounting for that, that STILL isn't an excuse, because those cultural sexual issues are obviously a real (and serious) problem that Japan has had trouble dealing with over the years: it doesn't act as a "free pass" for this type of thing to go on being encouraged in its media as if its no big deal.

To the second part of your point: obviously I agree that murder is worse than sexual harassment. Is murder worse than rape? Eh... yes, but that's a MUCH closer gulf between those two crimes than it is between murder and sexual harassment. I'd say that, even allowing for murder technically being worse of the two, rape and murder are STILL relatively comparable crimes, considering the degree of violence upon another person that both ultimately involve.

But that's obviously neither here nor there.

Sexual harassment isn't murder no (its also not quite rape either, but the line between the two can oftentimes get hazy at best - they both fall under the wider umbrella of "sexual assault" in general): but contrary to how you seem to be trying to frame it here, its also NOT a trivial crime either. The issue with DB is that its trying to take what is a very heavy and non-lighthearted action (sexual assault) and minimize it as something that is jovial and fun.

And its not even doing it in a way that actually MIGHT work in a comedic light (i.e. using it as dark humor, which is more the sort of framework where you can still use the topic of sexual assault for uneasy and uncomfortable laughs while still not being in abject willful denial as to the nature of what kind of topic you're ultimately dealing with here): the series is genuinely operating in its own warped sexual sensibility where this stuff is GENUINELY just... not that damaging or negative towards women. At worst, its a minor inconvenience and bad manners.

When the reality is - contrary to your implications here - that sexual assault (be it full on rape, or even various "lesser" forms of harassment, such as unwanted touching or groping) ARE unbelievably destructive to women on a psychological and emotional level: as pretty much damn near ANY woman who's undergone sexual assault or harassment of any sort will surely tell you themselves.

Touching ANY human being (regardless of gender) in a sexual manner without their consent or approval is among the worst forms of physical assault out there shy of violent beatings and straight ahead murder: psychologically, its been shown time after time after time after time across literal centuries now to have PROFOUNDLY negative effects on most people's mental and emotional sense of security and well being. People have had their entire lives literally uprooted and destroyed utterly from the emotional and psychological fallout of being touched inappropriately by someone at varying points in their life.

Whether or not you are someone who is capable of understanding that or empathizing with what the victims of such assaults go through (and there are indeed people out there with mental/emotional issues of their own who have legitimate trouble understanding precisely WHY these sorts of crimes are so serious for most people)... that's ultimately on you in the end. But whether you're someone who understands the severity of impact that this crime has on most people who are victims of it or you're not... that in the end has little bearing on the reality of it that the vast majority of most people innately and genuinely DO typically understand quite well and quite clearly.

The point here being: an action like sexual assault is simply NOT the sort of topic that its EASY to make jokes about cavalierly and without SOME degree of thought put into it first. You CANNOT joke about this shit (and expect to get away with it at least) in a way as if to act like we're all living in some kind of ahistorical vacuum and societal context isn't a thing that exists. That's not being edgy or freewheeling: that's just being a fucking dense, uninformed, socially inept moron.

Therein lies the danger that comes with trying to make humor out of controversial and "sensitive" topics like this (and why its considered "risky" in the first place), and its what so many young people on the internet and in geek communities like this one seem to have so much trouble understanding when they go on and on about "PC culture" this or that: being "edgy" and "offensive" with humor is something that requires actual care and intelligence to do properly, as like with anything else, there's a "right" way and a "wrong" way of going about it. Do it right, and you can make blisteringly eviscerating points and effective, impactful art that makes a ton of noise. Do it wrong, and it blows up in your face and you get ostracized as a total fucking fool and a jackass (or if you play your cards right, you get elected President of the United States, but that's neither here nor there).

Obviously Dragon Ball is in NO remote danger of the latter (as it has tons and tons and tons of other virtues to its credit overriding most everything else, and the offputting Muten Roshi-related sex jokes are a relatively tiny, tiny part of it ultimately): but nonetheless, these jokes are (understandably and rightly so) consistent points of contention that both critics and fans of the series alike have raised going all the way back to its very beginnings. And they're not wrong to bring them up as sore points in an otherwise fairly well loved series, for all the reasons stated.

And once again to reiterate this point: I'm not suggesting that its in any which way somehow IMPOSSIBLE to make good or effective humor out of even something as heavy and taboo as sexual assault (being it unwanted groping, full-on rape, what have you), nor that its in any way inherently off-limits (I don't believe much of ANYTHING really is off-limits artistically). I've laughed my ass off at my fair share of such hideous jokes my whole life, and my sense of humor in general can be aptly described as gallows humor of the blackest kind.

I'm simply saying that jokes of this nature are TRICKY and not at all easy to do well, and Dragon Ball's attempts mostly fail miserably in their execution: and that's largely because it is hopelessly tone deaf as to the magnitude of the crime itself and the impact that its had on society in general throughout the years (on women in particular), and a LOT of that comes from Japan's own broader cultural/societal hangups on the matter.

Again, my issues all boil down to the ethical framework and context behind the jokes' execution (stemming from a larger problem within Japanese culture), not that such sexually taboo jokes are attempted in and of themselves.

Its sorta like making a racially-charged joke: you can do it, but you better make DAMN sure that its A) really, REALLY fucking clever and funny and pointed, and B) that you tread VERY carefully and think it through first before you drop it. Just throwing around racial slurs and stereotypes cavalierly isn't witty or edgy: its just being a garden-variety asshole, and you shouldn't be surprised when few (if any) people are laughing with you and instead are just staring daggers through you in awkward, uncomfortable silence.

And again: its not like Toriyama HASN'T made plenty of dirty, filthy, wildly off-color sex jokes in DB (and other gag manga of his) that I found plenty clever, fitting, and genuinely funny... really, in the context of DB at least, its JUST the "Muten Roshi/Oolong touching women's boobs and butts without their permission is somehow endearing" shit that raises an eyebrow and elicits a response of "Yeah dude... not cool, and also not even all that FUNNY to boot."
Doctor. wrote:Now, I'm aware you make the argument later that there is a difference between characters getting thrown through mountains and characters getting stabbed, and it's that difference that dictates whether we turn a blind eye to the violence or feel some emotion from it. I'd argue that it's a pointless distinction to make, at least the way you make it - in that it's the quality of "unbelievable" or "unrealistic" versus "grounded" or "relatable" that distinguishes the two situations. It's all about execution and context, yes, but it's the fact that those scenes where characters get blasted through rocks get treated as so matter-of-factly that makes you ignore the implications of the violence. In the same vein, something "unrealistic" like a planet being blown up, let's say planet Vegeta, can incite some sort of emotion, awe and horror of Freeza's power in this case.
I think that the planet-scale destruction caused by Freeza and his men actually CAN be something that's (sort of, in a sense) relateable in reality, and hence have some sense of added dramatic weight to them (the sort of "shock and awe" effect that you allude to here): specifically with large scale WMD-like bombs and similar such mass destructive artillery (Nukes, Hydrogen bombs, etc).

Its not for nothing that you find a LOT of such massively destructive, apocalyptic imagery across a whole TON of Japanese media (including countless tons of anime and manga): that's in NO way incidental or accidental, as theirs is one of the ONLY civilizations in human history to have actually suffered under the receiving end of that level of widespread destructive capability... and that mass, cultural/societal trauma shines through across a LOT of their art and media over the decades since.

Hell, even just looking through DB/Z itself, you'll find no shortage of mushroom cloud imagery whenever characters (particularly villainous ones, such as Freeza and his men) start throwing around city-destroying Ki attacks. Again: this is NOT coincidental that this type of thing came out of a society with a history with such devastation like Japan. Critics and scholars have been writing about the very tangible connections between such distinct imagery and ideas throughout anime and manga and Japan's own history with the devastation of nuclear war for a good number of decades now.

I think that the resonance of that trauma (on SOME level, however subliminal) more than shines through and has an effect on just about anyone, regardless if they're Japanese or not: all of us, on some level or another, are fully aware of the level of destructive horror that humanity in the 20th century and onward has been capable of. And any reminders of that, even when they come wrapped in an outer layer of fantasy or sci fi packaging, is going to strike a deep-seated nerve in most.

Conversely, its a LOT harder to get that same resonance out of something like say... Goku flying through a sun unharmed or something along those lines. Its a REALLY cool and striking type of image for sure, don't get me wrong; but not one that's going to register with QUITE the same level of raw visceralness as something that we can connect to our own reality and relateability, be it on an overt (i.e. someone getting shot or stabbed with realistic impact) or covert level (the aforementioned "nuclear apocalypse"-type imagery and suchlike).
Doctor. wrote:Dragon Ball's sexual humor gets treated in the same matter-of-factly way as characters hitting pavement or Goku slapping Chi-Chi. It's an unusual, ridiculous situation played out for laughs, "lighthearted good fun" as you call it. The intent isn't to be dramatic and make some big statement about the nature of Japan's sexual dynamics and I don't think it's fair to judge the series because it doesn't have that large a scope. You laugh if you find it funny, you read with indifference if you don't; either way, you move on. To suggest such easily digestible, almost throwaway scenes will influence anyone's thoughts on women is ridiculous; to suggest it reflects the nature of Japan's society is a more nuanced concern, but one that ultimately doesn't matter in this discussion. We're talking about sexual harassment in Dragon Ball, not sexual harassment in Japan, and whether or not Dragon Ball has those scenes, it would in no way influence Japanese society. Japan's views of women are far too ingrained into society for Dragon Ball to make any kind of impactful statement (be it positive or negative) about it.
There's SO MUCH for me to take apart in here, I almost don't even know where to begin.

To the first part of the point then: like I said earlier, some topics and situations CAN work with a lighter touch... others just can't. Like so much else, you have to take these things on a case by case.

To go to a WAY extreme end of the spectrum to help illustrate my point: there's simply NO way to make a comic, book, show, whatever out of something like say... the Holocaust, and treat it in a silly, lighthearted, whimsical manner. IF you were to take such an approach, then the ONLY POSSIBLE way to make it even have a snowball's chance in hell of working in any fashion is to aim for a sort of demented, warped, darkly twisted sort of whimsy... doing so entails ACKNOWLEDGING the severity of your topic.

You, as an author, make it crystal clear in the tone and framing of your work that you FULLY UNDERSTAND AND GRASP that the Holocaust is as dire, unfunny, and DEEPLY heavy event in human history as it gets... and yet you are STILL taking that knowledge and understanding and electing to step over a (very, VERY volatile) line with it: presumably in order to make some sort of broader point in the process.

Almost ANYTHING SHORT OF THAT and you end up with something that is a COLOSSAL fucking trainwreck of wrongness, and something that is all but guaranteed to deeply, deeply hurt and upset a whole TON of people needlessly.

Now obviously general sexual assault is in NO WAY WHATSOEVER even vaguely comparable to the Holocaust: but the general idea going into the creative process is roughly similar. Sexual assault is the sort of volatile and serious topic that just DOESN'T lend itself to (conventional and straightforward) whimsy and lightness of almost ANY sort. Not unless you understand that fully going into it, and make that stark contrast a PART OF THE JOKE in the first place.

Toriyama DOES NOT DO THAT. Muten Roshi's shenanigans are treated by the narrative as if they're genuinely not that big of a deal and are chuckleworthy in and of themselves. No contrast, no tonal dissonance of any sort that would genuinely actually JUSTIFY this stuff as a source of (again, VERY dark) humor: just an innate, built-in cultural bias that sees the trauma that women (or really, anyone) undergoes when they are physically violated in a sexual manner as something that is inherently dismissive.

And no matter WHAT kind of fantasy world Dragon Ball exists in... that's STILL a bridge of disconnect that is MUCH too far for most anyone (shy of people who already have their own issues with sexuality to begin with) to make, because that kind of levity is something that just DOES NOT mix with that sort of topic inherently.

Unless the broader, personal gravity of sexual assault (in whatever of its various forms) is something that genuinely eludes you, then this is the sort of concept that SHOULD NOT be all that difficult to innately grasp. And I'm on a Dragon Ball forum, so I hope that I don't have to go into a sex ed spiel on this issue for the benefit of those in here who's educational systems and parental/home lives have utterly failed them in this regard.

Now as to the second half of you're point: you must have missed the repeated number of times in my earlier posts where I stressed that Dragon Ball is but one (incredibly lightweight) lone individual work, and in and of itself is just a drop in the broader ocean of media that's out there. In NO WAY did I even COME CLOSE to claiming that Dragon Ball, all by its lonesome, somehow has the power and capability if singlehandedly transforming or influencing all of Japanese society's cultural norms regarding sex. Hell, NO SINGLE WORK - no matter how brilliantly layered, dense, laid out, or thought through on any such subject (and DB, much as we all love it, is hardly anything of the sort) - has the power to do that. Some can make a HELLUVA dent, provided their cultural timing and such, but still...

At NO POINT did I put the weight of all of Japanese society's sexual issues onto Dragon Ball's lone, dogi-clad shoulders. I went out of my way NUMEROUS TIMES to insist quite the opposite.

What I said was at the root of such ingrained cultural problems wasn't ANY ONE PARTICULAR WORK of any kind: that it was a CUMULATIVE effect brought on by a LOT of factors working and acting together simultaneously, up to and including (but IN NO WAY exclusive to) a society's ENTIRE BREADTH AND BODY of art and creative media. These are things that, again working in tandem with all sorts of cultural norms and signifiers, help to "normalize" certain behaviors and customs, putting people (relatively) at ease with actions that SHOULD be taken as severe transgressions and minimizing them as "no big deal really".

Sexual assault (in many, many different forms) is a massive, MASSIVE example of this, and this is indeed where the true, "proper" origins of the term "rape culture" comes from: a concerted pool of societal and cultural factors (both big AND small) that, when added up together in their totality, culminate in the "normalization" of various practices, habits, and actions (hell, even commonly held thoughts and beliefs) that either qualify as rape (in the most extreme of cases), or otherwise skew VERY closely in the same neighborhood/ballpark as rape, or at a bare minimum help to facilitate in the continued allowance and tolerating of such behaviors to go on with much less or minimal societal resistance.

For example: the idea that "if a woman wears a skimpy dress or revealing clothing, then on some level she herself is partially at fault for anything that happens to her sexually from another man". This whole idea, on its very face, it completely and utterly INSANE and nonsensical from just about every possible angle. But for a VERY long time (and STILL in many parts of the world) its been accepted as "conventional wisdom" and has stacked the broader societal deck against women who are victims of various sexual crimes: it takes the onus off of the actual perpetrator of the crime, and blames the victim for it (thus the term "victim blaming"). It is, in every sense of the phrase, backwards thinking.

The proliferation of such otherwise absurd and insane ideas as "normal" and to be taken as a societal given... THIS is what the definition of "rape culture" ultimately is.

Various Japanese ideas about the sexual dynamics between older men and younger women - many of them stemming from an innate, ingrained belief that older men are somehow inherently entitled to use the bodies of young girls in whichever way they like (the history behind this notion relative to Japan in particular is a VERY long, in-depth, and fascinating story in and of itself that is otherwise irrelevant to the root of the topic at hand) - these cultural ideas too form as another part (of very many, many parts) of rape culture in a broader sense: cultural norms and beliefs who's overt or covert purpose is to help normalize sexually victimizing others: namely and most often, broadly speaking, younger girls (and yes, I know what a "loaded term" rape culture has become in most corners of the internet, so I'll refrain from using it from here on out).

So... does all of this mean that Dragon Ball, a silly, dumb, fluffy, children's martial arts fantasy serial, is by some raw force of magical thinking somehow singlehandedly responsible and at fault for all the issues regarding sex that plague Japanese society, and thus bears ALL the weight and burden of it on the strength of its most silly, meager, and throwaway jokes?

Once again, for the dozenth time (across three different encyclopedia-sized posts now): no no no no no, absolutely NOT.

BUT... just because Dragon Ball in and of itself, in the grand scheme of aaaaaaall Japanese anime/manga and broader media (because really, Dragon Ball is a relatively BENIGN example of this type of shit in anime/manga in general, and I've once again made my stance on that very, very clear throughout) is fairly inconsequential on its own... that DOESN'T therefore mean that its somehow exempt from being one of the many, many, many, many, many, maaaaaaaaaaaaaaany, many, many countless gazillions of small, little, tiny, singularly insignificant things (among many more great, great BIG things) that overall CONTRIBUTES to the problem (by way of normalization and societal reinforcement) when taken in total.

These sorts of broad, deeply ingrained societal problems are generally a case of "death by a thousand cuts": it isn't any one particular specific cut that's any greatly worse than all the others, its ALL of the cuts added up together that tallies up the total damage in a larger sense.

What I ultimately ask for when I say that something like Dragon Ball should strive to do better going forward (and really, I only have to even say this because its now been "reactivated" as a franchise as of BoG, RoF, and Super: prior to that, this would all be totally 100% moot) is to simply not be one of the bazillions of other little things that in total helps contribute to the broader problem at large.

That's all that ANY OF US can ultimately do when it comes to these massive, big issues that plague the entire world or vast swathes of society: when you're but one lone voice in a cacophony of zillions, all you can really do is you're own little part to help make your own little corner of the world even just a SHADE less suckier. Its the same "death by a thousand cuts" principal endemic to these problems themselves: it isn't any ONE little thing that does it, but ALL the little things together that, over time, helps turn the tides the other way.

Because when all's said and done, I very, very much VISCERALLY disagree with the notion you seem to be putting forth that "its only one thing, it doesn't really matter or have much impact". On its own, by itself, no it doesn't have much impact, you're right about that: but the only way you're ever gonna see anything change at all is to rack up the little victories and little tweaks one small, seemingly inconsequential little thing at a time, until they all eventually add up.

All the more so when its something that's as popular and widespread as Dragon Ball is: as dumb as it seems, even these silly, poppy little piffles of media fluff actually can sometimes end up having much larger impact (sometimes seemingly disproportionately so) and end up leading by example. I don't in ANY WAY expect that out of Dragon Ball, no, given the realities of both Toei itself and much of the key creators behind it currently (Toriyama himself included, to whatever minimal extent he's even still involved): but that doesn't mean that, as a fan who is still (for the time being at least) however "active" within the fanbase currently to the limited extent that I am, I'm still not gonna raise my thoughts on the issue and discuss them freely as I see them. Doesn't mean I'm gonna just sit back and shut up and not speak my mind about it just because it ultimately probably won't have any bearing whatsoever.

Its all you can ultimately do as a lone, powerless individual: just raise the conversations and awareness and have them out as you go along, and hope (but don't expect obviously) that something somehow, at some point and in some way, manages to stick later on down the line. That's ultimately the way that virtually almost close to ALL positive change throughout history has gone down.

One thing I've learned for sure in life: the surest way to make absolutely 100% sure that nothing gets done and nothing ever changes is to simply shut up and say or do nothing because you buy into the self-defeating notion that "its only one thing and I'm only one person, so what's the use?"
Doctor. wrote:Not to mention we're talking about the series that lets criminal transgressions fly. Characters like Vegeta get away with genocide, so it's no wonder Roshi gets nothing more than a slap on the wrist. I know you'll argue that the fundamental difference between the two lies in realism - sexual harassment is much more grounded and believable than genocide, so it's worthier of concern.
Honestly... even Vegeta's murderous past, relative to Muten Roshi's metaphorical sex offense rap sheet, gets comparatively WAY more serious treatment by the story. The story recognizes Vegeta's past as being "problematic" enough that it takes the time to give him a whole redemption story arc that takes up much of his time across the whole (original, pre-Super) series.

If Vegeta were given a similarly dismissive "slap on the wrist" as you put it, his ENTIRE character arc across the WHOLE series would be MILES different. As it stands, he's NOT exactly welcome into the group with open arms right away. He's regarded with disdain and mistrust by some, and he constantly has major moments and milestones throughout the series where he "turns a corner" as a character towards something more resembling heroism and nobility, which is many times contrasted with his selfish, sadistic past.

He also backslides, as in the Boo arc: and even then, the story makes it clear that these are indeed "serious" and not at all jokey or harmless actions he's taking. No, the series obviously doesn't dive down that particular rabbit hole to anywhere NEAR the degree it obviously could've if it wanted to... but it also doesn't outright IGNORE it completely either, and certainly at a bare-most minimum ACKNOWLEDGES the disparity of Vegeta's character.

If this were in ANY WAY comparable to Muten Roshi, then virtually EVERY plot development involving Vegeta from the latter Freeza arc onward would have absolutely ZERO weight or consequence to them whatsoever. "Oh look, Vegeta just murdered a ton of innocent people... hahahaha! Oh, that's just Vegeta for you! Will he ever learn?" That's in NO WAY anything RESEMBLING the tone or framing that the series places on Vegeta's actions, and this is a thuddingly fucking obvious distinction that clearly separates it as something that isn't even the same fucking species as something like the running "Muten Roshi is a serial harasser" joke.

Because the latter is a running joke that the series NEVER so much as pretends to take seriously on ANY level: while the former is a constant source of deathly serious drama and earnest gravitas. Honestly, this is so on-its-face obvious, I feel incredibly weird even having to explain it in this much detail

Vegeta's murderous history and actions is NEVER played for laughs, or anything resembling laughs. Not for one millisecond. Ever. Vegeta wasting an innocent person is ALWAYS reacted to by other characters throughout the series with EXACTLY the response you would expect: abject horror and disgust. Yes, the main cast inevitably ends up forgiving him and accepting him into the group in the end... but that's after he makes it VERY clear that he's not an immediate threat to anyone, and even then he's hardly welcomed with open arms or is treated with casual niceties until MUCH later on after he undergoes a TON of development and changes.

This is LIGHTYEARS away from how Muten Roshi's antics are treated: at EVERY POINT the characters treat his sexual acts as "Oh boy, here we go again! Will that rascal ever learn?" *rimshot* Its NEVER anything else but pure, raw comedic shtick. That's NEVER Vegeta's role in the story in ANY way, and certainly not regarding him being a mass murderer.

Again, the fact that I even have to take this apart in this much depth is something I frankly find to be absurd in itself; because I think that you're clearly a smart enough person to find this stuff VERY much self-evident (its not like we're breaking down L'Age d'Or here). All of these various comparisons you've been throwing at the Muten Roshi joke so far are on their face ridiculous false equivalences, and blindingly obviously so.
Doctor. wrote:I've already highlighted the flaw in this line of thinking above, but not only do I think this is highly reductive, I think it's a byproduct of a characteristically Puritan influence still lingering in American society to hold sexual violence as the be all end all of crime. I mean, look at it this way. Take a school shooting joke, a VERY real and VERY pressing issue in your country RIGHT NOW. I don't have any concrete examples in mind, but I'm sure either Family Guy, the Simpsons or South Park has made a joke in the name of "lighthearted good fun" much like Dragon Ball has. Yet you may even find the joke funny. Does this mean you feel like school shootings have been normalized or that you don't understand the implications of the scene? No, it means you found something funny. Are those scenes inherently bad because they poke fun at a real and pressing issue that haunts American society right now? No, not everything is political in nature.
Ok...

1) I think you have the first part of your statements here EXACTLY BACKWARDS. The Puritan influence on American society can in NO way be overstated, I agree... but in the case of sex, specifically sexual violence (and more specifically, sexual violence against women), the Puritanical mores of American culture have had the REVERSE effect of what you're stating.

While Puritanism does indeed regard sex in and of itself as this horribly forbidden, filthy, disgusting act - that we nonetheless all need to engage in for the survival of our species and conversely also treat as a holy and sacred sacrament of marriage in religious ceremonies: figure out THAT confused mixed messaging ("let me engage with you, my dearest love, in an act that we've spent our lives being raised to regard as vile, putrid, dirty, and abhorrent unto itself... all as part of a holy and sacred bond to consummate our pure, everlasting love for one another") - when it comes to sexual violence against women specifically, it is Puritanical religious thinking that historically is partly responsible for helping to MINIMIZE that act.

Because Puritanism, like with many primitive religious ideologies (see also: extremist forms of Islamic dogma), regards women as "lesser than man". I.e. As not "real" or "full" people. Women are "othered" and not seen in the same and more favorable light as men: while a woman's virginity is considered this sacred symbol of purity (itself a completely irrational and insane bit of nonsense that we as humans completely invented), the onus was almost ALWAYS on her to "protect" it... and losing it in ANY context, even one where she's totally not at fault (such as rape)... its the WOMAN who was considered the one who had done wrong. The man who did the raping, by contrast, would get off MUCH more lightly in comparison.

Because Puratinism sees men's sexual lust as this 100% uncontrolable thing that's in men's nature: because Puratinism, again like so many other primitive religious beliefs, was constructed from the point of view and framing of MEN. So the men at the top of the societal hierarchy are the ones who allow themselves off the hook for committing a sex crime (relatively speaking here), while the woman would be the one to suffer the lion's share of the punishment and shaming for "allowing" it to happen by somehow "tempting" the man (even if just by virtue of having a BIT more skin than normal exposed somehow).

"Its not the MAN'S fault that he raped that woman: he's a man! He can't help but get horny! Its in man's nature to fuck everything with uncontrollable lust at the sight of the slightest exposed skin! Its the WOMAN who bears the responsibility to clothe and protect 'her virtue' and not do something that might even SLIGHTLY 'tempt' the man's lust!"

Seeing the change that's taken place in Western society over the centuries - where we now regard women as full, complete, and equal human beings same as men, and thus no longer put the ethical and moral onus of being the victim of a sex crime onto them - as somehow a BYPRODUCT of Puritanism... that is 1000% COMPLETELY BACKWARDS THINKING and the EXACT REVERSE of the arc of cultural history and progress AWAY from such religious-tinged thinking.

If we MINIMIZED sexual assault today as "not that big of a deal" when men engage in it (since men can't be expected to control their urges at the slightest sight of a woman's skin)... THAT would set us back more to the Puritan days. Of course this has little to do with Japan's end, since obviously that culture doesn't share our Puritan/Christian connections: the Japanese end of their sexual dynamics is VASTLY different and again, a whole tangent unto itself. But nonetheless, that similarly backwards onus is still readily present in their own society (for very different reasons than ours natch), and is reflected in something like DB with Muten Roshi (who's actions are seen as totally not that big a deal, because of course, he's a lonely horny old man! What else do you expect him to do when he sees a pretty young girl: him to NOT try and grope a piece?).

Again: its THIS backward onus where "Of course a guy is going to go sexually out of control and not restrain himself when he sees a young girl's exposed breasts: its not HIS fault, that dirty slut should just cover up!" that is closer to Puritan days and thinking: NOT where we are today (and have been for some time now), where if you grab at a girl without her wanting it... that's TOTALLY ON YOU.

There's NOTHING the LEAST bit Puritanical about the idea that "every person, man or woman, is entitled to their own bodies and violating their ownership of their bodies is a serious offense". Puritanical was where we thought "The people of this gender over here are fully entitled to ownership of the bodies of the people of THAT gender over there whether they like it or not." Which is, as it so happens (and irrespective of the Puritanical roots), is more or less the similar kind of retrograde framework that Muten Roshi's sexual pervert jokes tend to generally be coming from.

And 2) The Family Guy school shooting joke example you give is, once again, COMPLETELY at odds with EVERYTHING I've been talking about and shows that my deeper point wasn't understood.

As I've said many, many, many, MANY times during ALL of this: dark humor is PERFECTLY FINE. So long as the gravity of the subject is clearly understood when making the joke. In other words, step over all of the moral lines of good taste and decency that you like... just so long as you acknowledge that the lines are indeed there in the first place.

I'm hardly that big of a Family Guy fan in the first place, so I mildly resent the fact that you're making me go out of my way to defend it here. :P But nonetheless, Family Guy is a PERFECT example of what I've been talking about all along in here: YES Family Guy makes lighthearted jokes about serious, awful things. It gets away with it however, because the show's tone and framework (very explicitly and obviously) makes it readily apparent that IT KNOWS AND UNDERSTANDS THE SEVERITY OF THESE ISSUES AND IS DELIBERATELY CUTTING THE KNEES OUT FROM UNDER THEM to make some sort of broader satirical point.

South Park also does this (and to usually much, much better and more thoughtful effect IMO): but even with a somewhat lesser example like Family Guy, it understands the basic rules of dark comedy: if Family Guy were to make a school shooting joke, it'd be making it under the innate (and explicit) understanding that school shootings are a SERIOUS issue and its about to step onto people's sensitivities as it goes about taking the subject into the realm of comic absurdity.

This is INCREDIBLY BASIC Dark Comedy 101 here: know and understand the gravity of the serious topic you're about to skewer before you start lacing into it.

Both the creators and the audience, are going in the with both the explicit and implicit understanding that "Yes, we all understand how fucked up and wrong this is: now we're about to make light of it and drive at some sort of deeper satirical point in the process".

Dragon Ball with the Muten Roshi jokes, again, IS NOT DOING THIS. At all. It is operating, as so many pieces of Japanese media in these kinds of sexual matters do, from a TOTALLY BROKEN FRAMEWORK that thinks that all of us (creators and audience alike) are operating under the assumed perspective that sexual assault is perfectly harmless and not at all a serious crime whatsoever: at worst its just a mild social faux pas, and at best it can actually be a term of perfectly acceptable endearment for a girl that you like. Sexual assault is played under almost this totally "innocent" veneer that is TOTALLY at odds with ANY sane, functional adult's understanding of sex, sexual dynamics, and how these things inherently are supposed to work between men and women in a healthy, civilized society.

THIS HAS NOTHING WHATSOEVER TO DO WITH ANYTHING EVEN VAGUELY RESEMBLING THE (VERY DELIBERATE, INTENTIONAL, AND THOUGHT OUT) COMEDIC UNDERPINNINGS OF A SHOW LIKE FAMILY GUY WHEN IT MAKES "EDGY" JOKES ABOUT TOPICAL ISSUES.

Same goes with South Park, The Simpsons, or ANY such shows across a GIANT spectrum of darker, "edgier" comedy (at least among more mainstream animated shows in question here). Remember my extreme Holocaust example from way earlier? Same principal. There is an EXPLICIT understanding that the intent in these jokes is subversiveness: Dragon Ball, as with MANY other (and again, FAR, FAR worse in this regard: DB is but a MILD example in this particular realm) anime and manga out there, acts as if it is COMPLETELY ignorant of the very idea of subversiveness (at least when it comes to this particular subject), and plays the idea that "sexual assault is 100% cute and innocent" COMPLETELY STRAIGHT AS AN ARROW.

At this point I'm simply repeating points I made previously using different wording: if you cannot understand what the root of my issue here is and still think that I am drawing a hypocritically faulty line in the sand with DB while letting other things off the hook for supposedly doing something similar, than I just don't know what to tell you.
Doctor. wrote:And I don't buy the hypothesis that Toriyama doesn't understand or isn't aware of the implications of his sexual harassment jokes, as you've said elsewhere in your post. We're talking about the man that wrote a story of a woman getting raped and turning to prostitution because she liked the money. Now whatever your opinion of Lady Red may be, even you would be hard-pressed to argue that Toriyama doesn't understand how serious rape is or that he seriously thinks rape should be treated with a slap on the wrist despite the way he portrays rape in Lady Red. He understands just fine, he just doesn't share your concerns or he may be even poking fun at the ridiculous nature of the society he lives in.
Lady Red is a WHOOOOOOLE other barrel of monkeys unto itself, so I'm not even TOUCHING that one here. I'm exhausting my keyboard enough as it is. :P

That being said though, I can only speculate as to whatever's going on inside Toriyama's head ultimately. Do I think that Toriyama genuinely thinks that rape (as in full-on rape) is ok? No, of course I don't. BUT... that being said, there's a massive, massive gulf of a difference between explicit, conscious understanding that something as stark and extreme as full blown, penetrative rape is bad versus a more implicit, unconscious idly ingrained notion that "Well... maybe just a little poke poke or pafu pafu when she's not looking can't hurt THAT much or be all THAT bad, right...?".

Even if its not something he would ever actually do in real life... the fact is that, like so many modern Japanese men culturally, he seems to hold onto that idea as a constant go-to recurring fantasy scenario. And that's something which is, of course as I said previously, a WHOLE other tangled-ass tangent of a topic unto itself.

People, unfortunately, rationalize deep in their minds (however unconsciously even) all sorts of shitty things that, once you say them out loud in plain, uncertain terms (and sometimes, for some people, not even then), you find are just plain indefensible. I don't know for sure that this is what Toriyama thinks or that this is the thought process that he's underwent throughout the years he's worked, nor have I ever claimed that I did. All I can ultimately go by is A) what's there in the finished work and B) context taken from the culture and society he lives in, works in, and comes from, and how much of that context clearly ties into some of what's seen in the finished work. The rest is just speculation, and I make no secret of it being anything else but that.

No, I don't think that Toriyama believes that out and out rape-rape is somehow ok. But given some of his previous work and the culture he comes from, I would NOT be at all surprised if he held onto all sorts of otherwise still iffy and not-at-all-ok ingrained, unconscious thoughts, biases, and notions about sexual personal space between older men and younger girls.

I don't know that for sure, and I fully acknowledge he very well may not (or if he did at one point, he very well might've "evolved past it" over time): I'm just saying that it wouldn't in the least bit surprise me if it were so, given some of what he's both drawn/written in his work as well as said offhandedly in other interviews over the years.
Doctor. wrote:Now don't get me wrong here, I'm no sexual deviant like Jacob (no offense meant). In fact, I'd go as far and say I'm an extreme prude, despite my defense of some questionable sexual practices in this thread and elsewhere. I agree that, most of the time, excuses lile Jacob's of "it's just fiction" and "EVERYONE has these desires" are projections. But I don't see how providing unhealthy individuals with an outlet for their sexual fantasies is a negative thing. Far from encouraging them to act upon their desires, it gives them a way to express their repressed desires. Unless you have a ridiculously naive and idealistic view that these unhealthy psychological conditions will go away, be it via therapy or by stopping the production of ecchi anime that portray women this way, then providing these people with an outlet should actually prevent them from going outside and harassing someone.
So this is a VERY big and complicated as all fuck topic unto itself. There's a LOT to unpack about it in general (it ties into all manner of incredibly, fundamentally difficult issues relating to things like pedophilia and the like)... but I'm already wearing this place down with word count even by my usual standards, so I'll try to keep it succinct as best I can.

I partly agree and disagree with what you're saying here: but more so agree. Yes, I 100% agree that people with these unhealthy desires generally DO NEED some sort of outlet for them to help keep them in check. No, I in NO way believe that they're the sort of thing that'll just somehow magically "go away" over time: quite the contrary, decades upon decades upon decades of psychological study of people with deep-seated rape/pedophilic urges may well have to deal with them fro their entire lives.

Absolutely, there should be SOME manner of outlet available for them to help them reign in and keep those urges in check in something as relatively close to a non-repressive manner as possible (since obviously full-bore non-repression would be to just... allow them to rape and molest kids freely), since as you said here - and I 1000% agree - repression generally gives way to acting out uncontrollably in a much more unhealthy way. I've said and alluded to as much in my earlier posts her.

So far we're in 100% alignment on this.

Here's where we diverge and I disagree with how you're framing it here: the issue, at least in terms of Japanese media and things like anime and manga and their assorted fan cultures, is that these fetishes and urges are way, WAY too "normalized" and have been allowed to more or less hijack much of the whole damn anime industry.

I'm fine with some sort of outlet for these particular fetishes existing as an as-needed niche, to be used for people with EXTREME disorders and a genuine need for such outlets to help themselves maintain their urges day to day: I'm not at all fine with those types of fetishes (which again, generally tend to stem largely from an unhealthy place psychologically and psycho-sexually: often times, though not always, some sort of repressed sexual trauma from childhood; its not uncommon for people who later become pedophiles to have been victims of sexual abuse as kids themselves) being given SO much relatively "mainstream" sway across Japanese media that the culture helps collectively reinforce the idea that its just a harmless little fetish like any other and it be given the tremendous degree of pop cultural dominance that it currently enjoys.

Having fetish material for this kind of thing be available as an outlet to severely damaged and genuinely sick people who need it (presumably while they're also regularly getting help from and being looked in on by doctors) is a HUUUUUUUUUUGE chasm removed from having that sort of fetish material worm its way across such a swath of a culture's mainstream media that it's taken up such a prominent place of residence within an ENTIRE GODDAMN MEDIUM. The former I'm 100% with you on: the latter is WAY TOO much of an out of control extreme that ABSOLUTELY needs to be reigned waaaaaaaaaaay the fuck in.

Again, I'm someone who does NOT have almost ANY lines whatsoever of "what's too far" to be shown in mass media, even for the viewing of young children (you'll likely find me INFINITELY more liberal on such matters than just about any other person who posts here): something like this is one of the PAINFULLY few "this is a bridge too far" lines that I hold as non-negotiable and refuse to step over.

I don't say that about almost ANYTHING else generally: but this shit is genuinely different, because I do think that this is the sort of thing that, when you're too careless and irresponsible with it - as Japan has been for decades now - can potentially help contribute (not be singlehandedly responsible for by any stretch: but contribute) to doing real damage and cause real hurt to people.

Again, doesn't mean I don't want this type of thing to be available for those who really need it to deal with real psychological conditions and sexual disorders: but that's miles upon miiiiiiiiles removed from having it take front and center stage across an entire prominent medium of pop culture to be "normalized" and minimized as something that's "harmless" or "endearing" when its obviously in NO WAY anything close to either of those things.

Its not for nothing that Japan HAS over the years had many a political/cultural debate over the degree to how widespread and "normalized" this type of stuff should be allowed to seep into the culture.
Doctor. wrote:You may argue that porn already exists for that, but porn is equally mysoginistic, especially if they use the same scenarios these ecchi anime you're complaining about use to portray women as weak and defenseless.
Porn in and of itself is in NO WAY inherently misogynistic. It CAN be sure, depending on how its made: but there's nothing about regular, old fashioned consensual pornography between consenting adults that's in any way innately misogynistic. Sex work (for both men AND women) in general can be just as healthy and normal a line of work as any other, provided everything is kept safe, regulated, and above board with conventional health and safety standards like in any other workplace.

Again, there's certainly a long HISTORY of misogyny in the porn industry: but a LOT of that tends to trace its roots back to when many forms of pornography were illegal and thus kept underground and on a black market of sorts and thus without any real nominal safety standards for those involved. The porn industry has made HUGE improvements over the years obviously in terms of both safety (as well as general respect) for its female performers. Its still far from perfect and there's always room for further improvement: but we're a LONG ways away from the days when this stuff was largely mafia-funded and rampant abuse, spreading of diseases, and drug addiction were the norm within the industry.

And that's all with regards to the behind the scenes making of it. As far as the contents of the actual material goes, again porn is as varied in that regard as any other form of media. A lot of its perfectly fine, a bunch of it has a ton of assorted "iffyness" going on in its presentation and so on. Its all case by case; but I'd hardly call anywhere near all of it innately misogynistic. Most of it is simply a means to an end: a stimulation tool for sexual activity. Doesn't mean there can't also be "art" in some of it as well (where a lot of the distinction between basic porn and "erotica" comes in), but whether it be artful and creative, or just raw and functional "something to use to get people off when needed", nothing about porn in and of itself is innately or inherently misogynistic.

Again, its all about the context, framing, and presentation. I have NOTHING AT ALL against the idea of Hentai or anime porn in and of itself: I've watched and enjoyed (hell even own some) hentai as much as I have any other form of porn or erotica, like millions if not billions of other breathing, sentient human beings. That's a LONG way far removed from having hentai largely consist of catering primarily to a particular and overwhelmingly dominant fetish (i.e. child porn/rape) which unlike most other fetishes and kinks is in itself psychologically damaging and coming from a repressive and unhealthy mindset.

I mean I do agree with this much: MUCH better it be just drawings on paper than actual real life kids when all's said and done. I mean obviously. And again, I'm all in favor of having that kind of drawn child porn exist and be available for the benefit of people with serious problems who actually need it: but having it take up so much ridiculous amounts of real estate across a whole culture's worth of a whole creative medium... I'm just not seeing the upsides to that. I see a whole bunch of downsides to it instead.
Doctor. wrote:This isn't an accusation or a smartass comment, more-so just a genuine question. What about the sexualization of men? Which, though not as prevalent, is still out at large demand in the anime industry. Be it the buff, topless men fighting, which are the equivalent of the skimpily-clad women in Shounen battle manga, or the feminine "traps", which teach weaker and smaller men that embracing their femininity as their only personality trait is the only way they will ever be loved (a recent controversy on 4chan's /r9k/ board comes to mind, one that made the news, involving a group of individuals coercing mentally ill otaku who jerk off to these "traps" to undergo hormone treatment and become "traps" themselves). I'm aware the subject of the thread is the portrayal of female characters, but you seem to be implying that women are the sole targets of objectification in anime, or media in general. They're not, and maybe you don't notice it because you are (presumably) a straight male, so any objectification of women, be it intentional or not, offensive or fine, will stick out more. But I still you as a bi male that men are, too, targets of sexual jokes in various occasions, in much more normalizing ways.
I don't disagree with what you're saying here: and I DO notice the reverse whenever it comes up. I just see it as something of a false equivalence in the grand scheme (and there are certainly some guys in more MRA-ish circles who'll gleefully use these sorts of real issues as they pertain to men as a convenient "what about-ism" to try and derail ANY kind of focus away from when these sorts of issues pertain to women; which make no mistake, I'm certainly not claiming that you're doing here of course).

Clearly in the overall big picture, its overwhelmingly predominantly (and historically) always been women who've taken the lion's share of this sort of gross cultural framing. Doesn't mean that it doesn't also exist for men too, and it doesn't mean that I don't take it seriously as a problem whenever it comes up and when its applicable: but yeah, I'm not really touching on that so much here because its... more or less totally divorced from the issue at hand, which is squarely female objectification.

And frankly, I've had my hands full enough as it is with this particular set of posts. :P

(Also just stating the obvious: /r9k/ continues to reliably prove itself as one of the worst, most godawfully disturbed little corners of the internet)
Last edited by Kunzait_83 on Thu May 17, 2018 2:02 am, edited 2 times in total.
http://80s90sdragonballart.tumblr.com/

Kunzait's Wuxia Thread
Journey to the West, chapter 26 wrote:The strong man will meet someone stronger still:
Come to naught at last he surely will!
Zephyr wrote:And that's to say nothing of how pretty much impossible it is to capture what made the original run of the series so great. I'm in the generation of fans that started with Toonami, so I totally empathize with the feeling of having "missed the party", experiencing disappointment, and wanting to experience it myself. But I can't, that's how life is. Time is a bitch. The party is over. Kageyama, Kikuchi, and Maeda are off the sauce now; Yanami almost OD'd; Yamamoto got arrested; Toriyama's not going to light trash cans on fire and hang from the chandelier anymore. We can't get the band back together, and even if we could, everyone's either old, in poor health, or calmed way the fuck down. Best we're going to get, and are getting, is a party that's almost entirely devoid of the magic that made the original one so awesome that we even want more.
Kamiccolo9 wrote:It grinds my gears that people get "outraged" over any of this stuff. It's a fucking cartoon. If you are that determined to be angry about something, get off the internet and make a stand for something that actually matters.
Rocketman wrote:"Shonen" basically means "stupid sentimental shit" anyway, so it's ok to be anti-shonen.

User avatar
Cure Dragon 255
Born 'n Bred Here
Posts: 5103
Joined: Thu May 03, 2012 5:23 pm

Re: Does the sexualization of Bulma at the start of the series bother anyone?

Post by Cure Dragon 255 » Thu May 17, 2018 1:24 am

That MUST be the biggest post I've seen Kunzait made yet!
Marz wrote: Wed Jul 21, 2021 11:27 pm "Well, the chapter was good, the story was good and so were the fights. But a new transformation, in Dragon Ball? And one that's ugly? This is where we draw the line!!! Jump the Shark moment!!"

This forum is so over-dramatic that it's not even funny.
90sDBZ wrote: Mon Jul 01, 2019 2:44 pm19 years ago I was rushing home from school to watch DBZ on Cartoon Network, and today I've rushed home from work to watch DBS on Pop. I guess it's true the more things change the more they stay the same. :lol:

User avatar
Asura
I'm, pretty, cozy, here...
Posts: 1919
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 8:53 pm

Re: Does the sexualization of Bulma at the start of the series bother anyone?

Post by Asura » Thu May 17, 2018 3:13 am

It's a children's show, you're not meant to think about this kind of stuff. I don't care for it much as an adult, but it was fine for when I was a kid.

kemuri07
Advanced Regular
Posts: 1005
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2011 3:09 am

Re: Does the sexualization of Bulma at the start of the series bother anyone?

Post by kemuri07 » Thu May 17, 2018 5:30 am

I think Doctor just got told.

Image

User avatar
Cure Dragon 255
Born 'n Bred Here
Posts: 5103
Joined: Thu May 03, 2012 5:23 pm

Re: Does the sexualization of Bulma at the start of the series bother anyone?

Post by Cure Dragon 255 » Thu May 17, 2018 5:40 am

OH SNAP!

Sorry couldnt resist!
Marz wrote: Wed Jul 21, 2021 11:27 pm "Well, the chapter was good, the story was good and so were the fights. But a new transformation, in Dragon Ball? And one that's ugly? This is where we draw the line!!! Jump the Shark moment!!"

This forum is so over-dramatic that it's not even funny.
90sDBZ wrote: Mon Jul 01, 2019 2:44 pm19 years ago I was rushing home from school to watch DBZ on Cartoon Network, and today I've rushed home from work to watch DBS on Pop. I guess it's true the more things change the more they stay the same. :lol:

User avatar
Shaddy
I'm, pretty, cozy, here...
Posts: 1612
Joined: Sat Aug 01, 2015 7:38 pm
Contact:

Re: Does the sexualization of Bulma at the start of the series bother anyone?

Post by Shaddy » Thu May 17, 2018 4:16 pm

I was gonna post here the other day but didn't because I knew it would be overshadowed by the murder that took place. I didn't expect the same thing to happen twice.

I think my bottom line is that the sexual assault as comedy involving Bulma simply has no reason to be here. It's sexual humor that is neither sexy nor humorous, that doesn't move the story forward or teach us anything about the characters that's relevant or even really the way anyone wants them to be portrayed. After all, they already had plenty of ways to portray Roshi as a perverted old loser without sexually assaulting anyone. The guy owns mounds of porn, gets off to exercise videos and solicited Bulma for cooch-vision just to give her a relic that he didn't even know what it was (which I only excuse because she definitively chose to do that, and did so as a means to her self-motivated goals). He still makes inappropriate comments and such, and still continues with all this aforementioned stuff throughout most of the series. It's not like you really need him to also be a sex offender to understand any of this. So what does it add? It's not funny, it's not sexy, it's not informative, it's misleading and certainly somewhat offensive.

I think the idea that context is integral is specific to Dragon Ball and it's demographic, though. If these sort of antics occurred in a series that was intended for adults only, I think it wouldn't necessarily garner that sort of attention because the context is all internal. We don't need "it's only ok if the series makes sure you know it's wrong" when an adult should already know this sort of behavior is wrong. It makes a definite statement on the way the author wants to portray this sort of behavior, for sure, but I don't think any attitude toward anything in media for adults only should be off-limits, even if it definitely is worth discussion and apprehension.

That said, Dragon Ball is a series originally published for young men, so kunzait is still totally correct here. It's not necessarily harmless when it's being marketed to men going through puberty in an already male-dominated society.

User avatar
KBABZ
Born 'n Bred Here
Posts: 5180
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2017 9:38 pm
Location: The tallest tower in West City

Re: Does the sexualization of Bulma at the start of the series bother anyone?

Post by KBABZ » Thu May 17, 2018 6:54 pm


User avatar
Gyt Kaliba
Kicks it Old-School
Posts: 8861
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 1:38 am
Location: Arkansas
Contact:

Re: Does the sexualization of Bulma at the start of the series bother anyone?

Post by Gyt Kaliba » Thu May 17, 2018 9:14 pm

I would say no, definitely not. For one thing, I'd admit to enjoying my fair bit of fan service as a fan of anime and manga. I'd also say it mostly comes down to the facts that 1) it's fictional, therefore it in no way represents actual indecency on the part of Toriyama, Toei, or anyone else); 2) the fact that Bulma is almost always the one in control of her own actions - she's the one sexualizing herself; and 3) the characters who usually serve as our token perverts the most often (ie Roshi and Oolong) never prosper for acting the way they do, they always get their comeuppance in one way or another, usually at the hands of the woman they're perving on, and nobody else in the scene (save for Oolong if Roshi's the one being the perv, or vice versa) acts like what's going on is particularly okay either.

My opinion isn't going to 100% match with anyone else's of course though, and we're all entitled to them. Again for what it's worth too though, I enjoy pervy antics in a series if it's done well enough. Hell, though a bit off topic, I'm probably one of the few people out there who actually like Mineta in My Hero Academia.
AniManga Travelogue - Currently Reviewing: Dragon Ball (Z)
Twitter
Switch Friend Code: SW-0745-6427-7791 (let's play some Dragon Ball: The Breakers!)

User avatar
Polyphase Avatron
Born 'n Bred Here
Posts: 6643
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 10:48 am

Re: Does the sexualization of Bulma at the start of the series bother anyone?

Post by Polyphase Avatron » Fri May 18, 2018 1:46 am

Just a tangent about mushroom clouds: Any large enough explosion in the atmosphere will create them. So having them result from large ki blasts isn't necessarily some kind of cultural reference or commentary, but just being accurate/realistic.
Cool stuff that I upload here because Youtube will copyright claim it: https://vimeo.com/user60967147

User avatar
KBABZ
Born 'n Bred Here
Posts: 5180
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2017 9:38 pm
Location: The tallest tower in West City

Re: Does the sexualization of Bulma at the start of the series bother anyone?

Post by KBABZ » Fri May 18, 2018 6:56 am

Polyphase Avatron wrote:Just a tangent about mushroom clouds: Any large enough explosion in the atmosphere will create them. So having them result from large ki blasts isn't necessarily some kind of cultural reference or commentary, but just being accurate/realistic.
I disagree, as a kid mushroom clouds were 100% associated solely towards explosions of nuclear origin/nature. There also aren't THAT many mushroom clouds in DBZ, with generic smoke plumes being more common. However the comparison is still apt because plenty of characters have caused city-wide destruction, such as Piccolo Daimao and Nappa.

User avatar
dragondyle
OMG CRAZY REGEN
Posts: 935
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2006 2:37 am
Location: Arizona

Re: Does the sexualization of Bulma at the start of the series bother anyone?

Post by dragondyle » Mon May 21, 2018 12:00 am

Here's how I think about it. Growing up as a kid going through puberty, it was awesome. Now that I'm over 18, it's really weird looking at 16 year old Bulma's cleavage. It's one of those things you got to keep in mind that it was a manga made in the '80's for young boys.
Founder of The Dragonball: Evolution Archive.
You must have faith in who you are.

User avatar
Brettjr25
Beyond Newbie
Posts: 228
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2015 6:54 pm

Re: Does the sexualization of Bulma at the start of the series bother anyone?

Post by Brettjr25 » Wed May 23, 2018 6:46 am

Does it bother anyone? Well obviously you, so I guess you answered your own question. If you aren't just looking for people to agree with you I can sincerely say, it doesn't bother me in the slightest, well besides the part where oolong was going to drug and molest her. That was kinda creepy but Oolong was initially introduced as a creepy character who we initially are led to believe kidnap young girls and take them to his possible sex dungeon and his reward was becoming a diarrhea slave.


It's ok to be bothered by it but only if you realize that people that do enjoy the humor behind it all shouldn't care that you do. I got news for you, young girls aren't going to the mall and school in short shorts with their butt cheeks sticking out and in razor thin leggings with thongs because of Bulma. The sexualization of women are a deeper societal issues whose root cause isn't manga. It's like when there was complaints against some sort of anime in Japan and the Japanese women protested the protestor holding signs saying "3D womens rights over 2D". Fighting for Bulma's rights won't change a thing at all, if anything it's just self serving and childish.

I'll admit if you were a girl that escaped that norm and went into manga and saw Bulma and thought, "oh wow what a cute blue haired smart girl" and immediately want to dot on her, it's going to be a sad and rude awakening when you find out how hella of sexualized and comic relief her character becomes. What do I say to that? Well "tough luck". There are millions of people in this world and all media shouldn't conform to one method to please one person. To say dragonball fans should never of gotten Roshi as we know and love because of someone elses hang up is wrong. If you're that person with that issue then I say put down the manga and read something else. Hell Ami or whatever her real name from Sailormoon, fits that role nicely as your make believe role model. You know, perhaps some weak guy dreamt of being a hero and then read dragon ball and found that everyone was a muscle freak. Should dragon ball be changed to make every problem solved with a math equation?

Also quick note, all you're showing is your societal norms by mentioning she's 16 and I'm not quite sure where you hail from since age of consent is about 15+ in a lot of places including some in US where it's 16 in some states and majority is at 17 with few set to 18. I also think it's kinda silly how you mention his age and point out how he's like OMG 100s, and?? You're point is? Are you saying it would be okay if Roshi was 28? That's immature. Do you even know why you feel that way? It's a shame because I know it first hand and from the other way around. People care about age difference only because of what they personally feel is visually appealing to them not the person in the relationship but what they feel is disgusting. Trust me if you were 10 years older than someone (and I was ) and dated someone but where attractive and looked as what people decide is visually pleasing and "young" no one, not her mom dad brother or sister would give a damn. But you know Roshi is bald and have a beard, him looking at her privates is look totalling disgusting but it would be like totally legit cool if Yamcha did it, am I right?

Post Reply