Anyone interested in discussing the social issues of DB?

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

Moderators: Kanzenshuu Staff, General Help

Locked
User avatar
ABED
Namekian Warrior
Posts: 17957
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 10:23 am
Location: VA
Contact:

Re: Anyone interested in discussing the social issues of DB?

Post by ABED » Thu May 12, 2016 9:05 pm

gogeta97 wrote:
ABED wrote:Which would bid up their wages. Another big issue that applies to this and anything that deals with statistics is the danger of looking at broad aggregates instead of the individual. Even assuming the numbers are actually correct, that tells you nothing about the choices of career, level of education, average age, etc. of the groups which have a big impact on the stats.
Sorry, I'm a little confused. Are you in the camp that does think the wage gap exists or doesn't?
Doesn't. Statistically maybe, but not because of sexism.

Rereboy, do you not see the inherent contradiction of your view? Trampling on someone's freedom to advocate bad ideas is by its nature dictatorial. Your cure is worse than the disease. People have a right to espouse whatever ideas they want, they aren't free to use force on anyone and they aren't free to call people to use force on someone else. By that last thing I mean you don't have the right to say "Burn that person's house down!" That's not free speech.
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
SingleFringe&Sparks
I'm pretty cozy, here...
Posts: 1642
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:55 pm
Location: Mt. Paozu/East District

Re: Anyone interested in discussing the social issues of DB?

Post by SingleFringe&Sparks » Thu May 12, 2016 9:34 pm

gogeta97 wrote:I wasn't arguing against that. I just interpreted your first post to mean that ONLY anti-PC people do that.
No. If you don't do that, then you're not in my issue. My issue is when people act just as hypocritical as the people they claim are censoring them. As in those who for example say "I'm not sexist, I like strong female characters" and then in the same argument accusing of actually seeing the newer ones that are well-received as "SJW propaganda" like with the Force Unleashed movie. Its easy to point out the hypocrisy in some radical PC arguments, while the people that claim the higher moral ground (Anti-PC) act as if they don't do exactly what they claim they're against. Selective free-speech and selective representation.
Also, I didn't want to get into anything too specific with Feminism debates because I feel like that goes beyond the relevance of the thread.
Last edited by SingleFringe&Sparks on Thu May 12, 2016 9:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Zephyr wrote:The fandom's collective fetishizing of "moments" is also ridiculous to me. No, not everyone needs a fucking "shine" moment. If that's all you want, then all you want is fanservice, rather than an actual coherent story. And of course those aren't mutually exclusive; you could have a coherent story with "shine" moments! But if a story is perfectly coherent (and I'm really not seeing any compelling arguments that this one is anything but, despite constantly recurring, really poorly reasoned, attempts to argue otherwise), and you're bemoaning the lack of "shine" moments as a reason for the story's poor quality, then you're letting your thirst for "shine" moments obfuscate your ability to detect basic storytelling when it's right in front of you.

gogeta97
Beyond Newbie
Posts: 137
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2015 4:10 pm

Re: Anyone interested in discussing the social issues of DB?

Post by gogeta97 » Thu May 12, 2016 9:51 pm

SingleFringe&Sparks wrote:
gogeta97 wrote:I wasn't arguing against that. I just interpreted your first post to mean that ONLY anti-PC people do that.
No. If you don't do that, then you're not in my issue. My issue is with people who are just as hypocritical as the people they claim are censoring them. As in those who for example say "I'm not sexist, I like strong female characters" and then in the same argument accusing of actually seeing the newer ones that are well-received as "SJW propaganda", or people that say people shouldn't be harassed for their opinion but then condone or dismiss those who do so as long as it advocates what they want. Yes this happens on both sides, but its easy to point out the hypocrisy in some radical PC arguments, while the people that claim the higher moral ground (Anti-PC) act as if they don't do it themselves, or in the worst case - lie about it.

Also, I didn't want to get into any specific Feminist social arguments, because I feel like that goes beyond the relevance of the thread. We should be just commenting on pop-culture. I'm interested in the opinions people have in relation to analyzing DB's potential cultural contrasts, or PC vs Anti-PC in general discussion but don't want this thread locked if we get to far off relevance.
Okay yeah I definitely misinterpreted some of your other posts, my bad. I completely agree with what your saying and it is rather annoying to see people be so hypocritical. I've seen some people call the new Star Wars movie "The SJW Awakens" and that pisses me off. Nothing about it is "feminist propaganda" it's just a fun movie that stars a woman and a black guy(who were great btw).
fadeddreams5 wrote:At this point, that time machine is symbolic to how fans feel about Super. We hope it gets better, but ultimately find ourselves going back in time to a better series.

User avatar
SingleFringe&Sparks
I'm pretty cozy, here...
Posts: 1642
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:55 pm
Location: Mt. Paozu/East District

Re: Anyone interested in discussing the social issues of DB?

Post by SingleFringe&Sparks » Thu May 12, 2016 10:01 pm

gogeta97 wrote:
Okay yeah I definitely misinterpreted some of your other posts, my bad. I completely agree with what your saying and it is rather annoying to see people be so hypocritical. I've seen some people call the new Star Wars movie "The SJW Awakens" and that pisses me off. Nothing about it is "feminist propaganda" it's just a fun movie that stars a woman and a black guy(who were great btw).
Exactly, its the covert prejudice against it because it did well. If it failed, they'd blame the new casting choices, and that such themes "destroy fiction" but when it did well, now its propaganda. Smh.
Zephyr wrote:The fandom's collective fetishizing of "moments" is also ridiculous to me. No, not everyone needs a fucking "shine" moment. If that's all you want, then all you want is fanservice, rather than an actual coherent story. And of course those aren't mutually exclusive; you could have a coherent story with "shine" moments! But if a story is perfectly coherent (and I'm really not seeing any compelling arguments that this one is anything but, despite constantly recurring, really poorly reasoned, attempts to argue otherwise), and you're bemoaning the lack of "shine" moments as a reason for the story's poor quality, then you're letting your thirst for "shine" moments obfuscate your ability to detect basic storytelling when it's right in front of you.

User avatar
Basaku
I'm pretty cozy, here...
Posts: 1775
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2014 3:00 pm
Location: Planet of the Apes

Re: Anyone interested in discussing the social issues of DB?

Post by Basaku » Fri May 13, 2016 7:19 am

gogeta97 wrote: I will admit that I mistakenly thought there were links to actual research in that forbes article. My bad. But what about the other two? Is my point invalid to you simply because of that one link. It sure doesn't make the wage gap any less of a myth. Also I could argue that going overboard was the biggest issue of feminism since day one(it certainly is now) but that also doesn't make it any less valid.
Except that it's not the feminists that got infamous very fast for sending death threats, doxing and harrasement. MRA activists did. Attempting to shut down the opposition by criminal intimidation tactics. It's why many roll their eyes and call BS when MRAers swear it's all about arguments, ethics and worldview and totally not a veil for sexist/racist attack outlet. Got no one to blame really but themselves, no one forced MRAers to go this far.
gogeta97 wrote:You still didn't answer my question about how those are pro-MRA articles by the way.
Why would I have to explain it? :eh: You obviously didn't post them because they line up to feminist POV, you posted them to back your claims of validity of MRA movement. I'm calling them the way you used them.

gogeta97
Beyond Newbie
Posts: 137
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2015 4:10 pm

Re: Anyone interested in discussing the social issues of DB?

Post by gogeta97 » Fri May 13, 2016 1:22 pm

Basaku wrote:Except that it's not the feminists that got infamous very fast for sending death threats, doxing and harrasement. MRA activists did. Attempting to shut down the opposition by criminal intimidation tactics. It's why many roll their eyes and call BS when MRAers swear it's all about arguments, ethics and worldview and totally not a veil for sexist/racist attack outlet. Got no one to blame really but themselves, no one forced MRAers to go this far.
Are you talking about Gamergate or MRAs because I have never heard of the latter doing that. It's probably happened sure, but people have pulled a lot of bullshit under the guise of feminism too(I can provide many links if you want). Guess that means that all feminists are evil man-haters right? :roll: Thinking that either group is a "veil for a sexist/racist outlet"or some sort of hatred is fine, but at the end of the day all you would be doing is looking at a few bad apples and saying "yep they're all like that".

EDIT: This includes Gamergaters as well. I know they are known for some bad shit but most of the people that support it are not bad.

Basaku wrote:Why would I have to explain it? :eh: You obviously didn't post them because they line up to feminist POV, you posted them to back your claims of validity of MRA movement. I'm calling them the way you used them.
What kind of a logic jump is this? No you did not "call them the way I used them". I used them to prove a point about people who don't want to hear the truth or at least a valid counter argument on the pro-PC side and can't stand opposition that isn't just some hateful rhetoric. So if the article doesn't go out of it's way to say "hey we're feminists guys!" does that automatically make it MRA? I was just posting proof to back up my argument that woman are not payed less then men for the same work not to validate the MRA movement. I'm not posting something that lines up with the feminist POV because these are not opinions, these are facts vs fiction and unfortunately the feminist POV on this issue continues to be fictitious.
Last edited by gogeta97 on Fri May 13, 2016 3:19 pm, edited 3 times in total.
fadeddreams5 wrote:At this point, that time machine is symbolic to how fans feel about Super. We hope it gets better, but ultimately find ourselves going back in time to a better series.

User avatar
SonEric84
Banned
Posts: 2076
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 3:42 pm

Re: Anyone interested in discussing the social issues of DB?

Post by SonEric84 » Fri May 13, 2016 3:05 pm

Sheesh, it sounds Basaku's post is conflating groups of people together that don't necessarily have anything to do with each other. You can find terrible people within any group or movement, so labeling the entirety of a group of people as bad for the awful behaviors of some is almost never a good idea. In fact, it's mindsets like that which lead to bigotry and hatred. Sometimes people get so caught up in these "battles" that they end up becoming no better than the people they're speaking out against. Discuss things in a civil manner, it's okay to disagree but just remember that regardless of what you think of these opinions, they're just that, opinions. It won't hurt you to hear something you disagree with and if a person is being hateful, you can just ignore them, or if they're openly harassing someone then they'll end up getting banned anyway.

We're all individuals with our own thoughts and views, and we'd all do well to remember that we have to take people on an individual basis. Just because they say something that might "sound like" something that comes from a group you look at in a negative light (which means you're probably looking at the worst of the bunch or simply buying into biased media narratives, I implore you to seek out individuals for yourself and have actual discussions. Empathy is a great tool for overcoming prejudice and personal bias) it doesn't mean that person necessarily identifies as such or even agrees with everything that group does or says.

Far too often I see people get way too overzealous in their commentary and the moment someone says something regarding a social issue it's "you're an SJW", but on the flip side, when someone brings up a good point to counter a social issue, it's "you're an MRA/gamergater". It's laughable and just shows you don't really know what you're talking about and that you've taken things to the same extreme you believe others have. Sometimes it's best to sit back and do a little self-reflection.
Trans rights, now!

User avatar
Basaku
I'm pretty cozy, here...
Posts: 1775
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2014 3:00 pm
Location: Planet of the Apes

Re: Anyone interested in discussing the social issues of DB?

Post by Basaku » Fri May 13, 2016 5:15 pm

gogeta97 wrote:at the end of the day all you would be doing is looking at a few bad apples and saying "yep they're all like that".
The problem is that these 'few bad apples' are utilizing disgusting tactics on a scale to a degree that haven't been seen before. And it keeps going over and over again.
SonEric84 wrote:...
Great post, would you mind posting it in one of the usual gathering palces where anti-PC/feminist crowd prepares doxing/harrasement campaign or is posting personal info online of people they don't like, or their families? I'm not the you need to lecture on empathy. And as much as one would like to remain fair and open about the other side's POV, it gets secondary when one of the 'sides' is overwhelmingly responsible for most of attack tactics of this kind. That's the #1 issue that needs to be discussed/dealt with right now.

User avatar
ABED
Namekian Warrior
Posts: 17957
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 10:23 am
Location: VA
Contact:

Re: Anyone interested in discussing the social issues of DB?

Post by ABED » Fri May 13, 2016 5:44 pm

It's not so much whether it's a few bad apples or not, it's the core ideas of any movement that are important.
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
MrWalnut4
Beyond Newbie
Posts: 188
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 12:09 am
Location: Frieza Planet 419

Re: Anyone interested in discussing the social issues of DB?

Post by MrWalnut4 » Fri May 13, 2016 5:51 pm

Are we really bringing ideologies and social movements into a discussion about Dragon Ball? I don't mean to sound condescending here (or mini mod), but this isn't the place really to discuss politics. There are places for discussing PC culture, GamerGate, feminism, MRA's, the wage gap, etc, but I don't think this is it. I think this discussion would be better served by coming back to the original topic at hand. And to that point, here is my response.

I don't think that Dragon Ball is any of the things that the OP claimed it is. At Dragon Ball's worst, it has 30 year-old stereotypes of homosexuals written by someone uninterested in defying that stereotype for the sake of a gag. At it's best it had strong female leads who defied stereotypes and were completely independent characters of their own. As for racism, I don't see it. There weren't very many black characters, but the skin tones of characters varied plenty for its time. That is not enough to call it racist in my book.

As to those who reject the proposition that media has to be judged in the time-frame it was born, I disagree. You can't hold something made in the past to the moral or cultural standards of today. Media are a product of their time and it is silly to judge it from any other perspective than its own time. You wouldn't call Odysseus a psychopathic murderer for slaying hundreds of people for little reason along his journey in the Odyssey. He would have been called a hero in his time even though his actions would be monstrous by today's standards. I think the same can be said for Dragon Ball to a lesser degree or any other piece of media from the past.
Last edited by MrWalnut4 on Fri May 13, 2016 6:19 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Zephyr
I Live Here
Posts: 3568
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 9:20 pm

Re: Anyone interested in discussing the social issues of DB?

Post by Zephyr » Fri May 13, 2016 5:58 pm

Basaku wrote:And as much as one would like to remain fair and open about the other side's POV, it gets secondary when one of the 'sides' is overwhelmingly responsible for most of attack tactics of this kind. That's the #1 issue that needs to be discussed/dealt with right now.
I think the #1 issue is that people are being lumped into groups unnecessarily, discussing them as if they're homogeneous groups, and refusing to have actual level-headed conversations about these things with actual members of the other groups. It's easy, and ironic, to just scapegoat an entire ideology/value system just because some people who may or may not have allegiance to it did some bad shit.

How do we know that one "side" is "overwhelmingly responsible" for anything? What makes someone part of a "side"? What is each "side" characterized by? What about the people who undoubtedly agree with both "sides" on different things? Where do they fall? How do we know what the attackers believe in? Are they conversing about it? Do we have reasons to believe that what they're saying they believe is sincere? Do we know that people doing the attacking are indeed those with a certain ideology? How do we test and control for potential false flagging? Can we test and measure to verify the percentage of people on each "side" doing the attacking? What counts as "attacking"?

If one group is saying "it's about ethics", and some people are doing some unethical shit, then their claim of allegiance to "that group which is self-proclaimed to be for ethics" would appear dubious to me. "Aha! it's not about ethics at all, is it!?" is far from the reasonable conclusion to draw from that, I think. You would have to dig, prod, and come to understand what the actual values of the movement/ideology are, before you can even consider labeling bad actions as characteristic of it.

This has the same pitfalls of blaming "the Christian side" for the actions of the WBC, or "the Muslim side" for any violent acts of militant Islamism. It's intellectually lazy, and only exacerbates intergroup animosity and hostility.

That being said, people being attacked is indeed a problem. People shouldn't attack other people. The more empathetic people are, the less likely they are to attack one another. One of the best ways to empathize with someone with whom you disagree is to understand their reasoning, their values, and why they're doing what they're doing. The better you understand someone, the more like a rational and moral agent they appear. And if you're at odds with a party of rational and moral people, then you're more likely to identify with them, the more similar you'll see them as being to you, and thus the less likely you are to attack them in spite of disagreements. Lumping people under a single banner, demonizing their position as just plain characteristically "evil", and treating them as thus irrational only serves to diminish empathy. That's why people need to be conversing about these things, so that the two sides are seen by one another as perfectly rational and human.

MrWalnut4 is right though. Not exactly Dragon Ball territory anymore. Sorry for continuing to derail.

gogeta97
Beyond Newbie
Posts: 137
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2015 4:10 pm

Re: Anyone interested in discussing the social issues of DB?

Post by gogeta97 » Fri May 13, 2016 6:13 pm

Basaku wrote:
gogeta97 wrote:at the end of the day all you would be doing is looking at a few bad apples and saying "yep they're all like that".
The problem is that these 'few bad apples' are utilizing disgusting tactics on a scale to a degree that haven't been seen before. And it keeps going over and over again.
SonEric84 wrote:...
Great post, would you mind posting it in one of the usual gathering palces where anti-PC/feminist crowd prepares doxing/harrasement campaign or is posting personal info online of people they don't like, or their families? I'm not the you need to lecture on empathy. And as much as one would like to remain fair and open about the other side's POV, it gets secondary when one of the 'sides' is overwhelmingly responsible for most of attack tactics of this kind. That's the #1 issue that needs to be discussed/dealt with right now.
I have never heard any instances of MRAs doing this. I have seen videos of MRA conferences that were invaded by feminists who pulled the fire alarm in the building to make them leave, or an MRA conference that ended quickly because someone called in a bomb threat. How about the fact that people have been arrested for "manspreading"(when a man sits with his legs spread on the subway) a cause heralded and pushed by feminists. What about the #KillAllMen or #YesAllMen hastags that I think were actually trending on Twitter a while back? What about when a bunch of people bullied on artist on tumblr, who they did doxx and harrass, to point where she attempted suicide because she drew some "problematic fanart". When you talk about people being doxxed and harassed I'm assuming you're mostly referring to people like Anita Sarkeesian and Brianna Wu? I don't know about Wu but it was proven that Sarkeesian fabricated quite a few of the death threats she recieved. Also if you look up "feminists doxxing people" you get a bunch of results, the first one literally called "Why I'm Okay With Doxxing". And don't even get me started on all of the "evil white cis males" and "male/white tears" posts I've seen before(although I know some of the one's people spread around are satire). Maybe you should lecture the pro-PC side about empathy? You could say that THEY are the ones worth talking about seeing as a feminist's word holds more clout than an MRA's or anti-SJW. Also I've been to some of these anti-PC "gathering places"and the only one that comes close to as bad as you suggest is 4chan, but all of the others actively discourage doxxing and harassment and put effort into saying that most of them do NOT support any form of harrassment. Yet even after all of these I am still able to be fair with the feminist, pro-PC side. I don't agree with the direction they seem to be going in but I have seen many perfectly sane supporters of social justice issues and feminist who are genuinely good people. You're welcome to your thoughts and opinions but at the end of the day I frankly can't take it very seriously due to how uneducated and narrow it is.

EDIT: This is my last post on this issue. I apologize for sort of derailing this thread and I agree we should get back to talking about Dragonball. If anyone wants to continue talking to me about MRAs, feminists, etc. feel free to PM me.
fadeddreams5 wrote:At this point, that time machine is symbolic to how fans feel about Super. We hope it gets better, but ultimately find ourselves going back in time to a better series.

User avatar
SonEric84
Banned
Posts: 2076
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 3:42 pm

Re: Anyone interested in discussing the social issues of DB?

Post by SonEric84 » Fri May 13, 2016 10:29 pm

Basaku wrote:Great post, would you mind posting it in one of the usual gathering palces where anti-PC/feminist crowd prepares doxing/harrasement campaign or is posting personal info online of people they don't like, or their families? I'm not the you need to lecture on empathy. And as much as one would like to remain fair and open about the other side's POV, it gets secondary when one of the 'sides' is overwhelmingly responsible for most of attack tactics of this kind. That's the #1 issue that needs to be discussed/dealt with right now.
Forgive me because sometimes tone is lost on internet forums, but if you're being sincere about that, then thanks. I know you have absolutely no way of knowing this, but I have said the very same thing to people within those "communities", and for that, a lot of people on all "sides" can't stand me, because I tend to follow my own instincts and opinions rather than fall in with mob mentalities. My post wasn't intended to be a lecture solely for you, your post was simply a springboard for me to convey my thoughts on these topics off of. You can't really prove that one "side" is more responsible for those types of so-called attacks, though. On the internet, literally anyone can be guilty of those behaviors and a lot of times people have a bad habit of cherry picking those instances and conflating them with "groups" that they dislike. I am not denying that some people who identify by those labels haven't ever done anything like that, because I'm sure they have, but it shouldn't represent the majority and to try and present it that way is dishonest at best. Personally, I think that it gets to a point where people start using these labels and the idea of "community" to push their own biased agendas on a wide scale. This is why I don't see the value in labeling or joining ANY of these "movements".

I am also of the opinion that none of this is conducive to a discussion about Dragon Ball, but at the same time, it truly gets tiring to see people lump others into these internet groups and then check them off as "the bad guys" just because they personally dislike their opinions. If anything, it just shows you're an intellectually dishonest person willing to generalize people on a large scale as long as it suits the narrative you're trying to spin. A good rule of thumb for making generalizations is to replace it with a group you support. If it's not okay to make that statement about the group you support because it "sounds bigoted", then you probably shouldn't be saying it about one you disagree with. I'm actually quite surprised to see any mention of "feminism", "gamergaters", "SJWs", or "MRAs" on this forum and it's slightly obnoxious to be quite honest. I suppose it just goes to show how widespread all of this stupidity has become.

On topic, people should absolutely be able to discuss whatever they want regarding their favorite series, but I don't really think one should expect a series (especially one that's 30 years old) to mirror their political views or "represent" any kind of group or person. A series only represents the story an author decides to tell, nothing more, nothing less. Sometimes there are political aspects, sometimes there aren't. It's really not as big of a deal as some people make it out to be. At the end of the day, it's fictional and if you are truly bothered that much by something in a book, video game, movie, or t.v. show, you have the option not to consume it. There are so many options. You're free to criticize it, but you're also free to find something that aligns with your worldview, or even step up and create something of your own that sends the message you'd like to see.
Trans rights, now!

Hero
Beyond Newbie
Posts: 151
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2015 7:30 pm

Re: Anyone interested in discussing the social issues of DB?

Post by Hero » Sat May 14, 2016 12:47 pm

I actually loved how different races were handled in Dragon Ball, and this is coming from a "colored person."

My parents who are immigrants from India loved Nam particularly since it reminded them of home. I've heard some people before call Nam a stereotype, but in parts of India many people sound like that and wear turbans.

I also loved how Black in the RRA was the smart one out of Commander Red and he and ended up being much more than just a butler by the end of the arc. Yeah, Mr. Popo may have links to old Minstrel shows, but nothing in Dragon Ball feels like it comes from any sort of malice and that's why it doesn't feel racist at all to me. Same with General Blue, his possible homosexuality doesn't define him and is only used for a gag.

I am sad that Videl ended up as a housewife since she is my favorite female from the show, but I actually believe that happened from her spirit breaking from seeing everyone else fly and be able to fight universal threats. She knew she'd always be an ant compared to them and so she just quit like Yamcha.

User avatar
SingleFringe&Sparks
I'm pretty cozy, here...
Posts: 1642
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:55 pm
Location: Mt. Paozu/East District

Re: Anyone interested in discussing the social issues of DB?

Post by SingleFringe&Sparks » Sat May 14, 2016 2:38 pm

Hero wrote:I actually loved how different races were handled in Dragon Ball, and this is coming from a "colored person."
My parents who are immigrants from India loved Nam particularly since it reminded them of home. I've heard some people before call Nam a stereotype, but in parts of India many people sound like that and wear turbans.
I still want to know why Toriyama designed Popo that way though.
Zephyr wrote:That being said, people being attacked is indeed a problem. People shouldn't attack other people. The more empathetic people are, the less likely they are to attack one another. One of the best ways to empathize with someone with whom you disagree is to understand their reasoning, their values, and why they're doing what they're doing. The better you understand someone, the more like a rational and moral agent they appear. And if you're at odds with a party of rational and moral people, then you're more likely to identify with them, the more similar you'll see them as being to you, and thus the less likely you are to attack them in spite of disagreements. Lumping people under a single banner, demonizing their position as just plain characteristically "evil", and treating them as thus irrational only serves to diminish empathy. That's why people need to be conversing about these things, so that the two sides are seen by one another as perfectly rational and human.
Well said. People often use the cause as a platform to project a unanimous bias about a group they have issue with rather than stay directly on the issue they want to discuss itself. While those who hate activist groups are often no different and indeed do take the extreme cases to try an justify their own return of bigotry itself. Then people look for justification to keep these social inequities as they are - as if changes to them are what causes the radicalism, rather than it just being mutually provocative ignorance. I hate it when people use radical individuals or dishonest exaggerations of a radical individual to dismantle an ideology as if they represent the ideology despite the clear diverges from it that makes these individuals radicalists.

Thus, even if you were rational and wanted to uphold the original ideology of a group, you can't because the definition of the movement has been distorted by caricatures and red herrings that mask it in order to shut it down, and you bringing it up automatically makes you the same as the radical. Its very hypocritical logic used by people who use it as justification to attack people and covertly validate intolerant dogma. Its why I cant stand it when people think "diversity" automatically means, "anti-white". Even though there hasn't been any real case of radicalization of that, people who overreact to ideas of it, radicalize the ideologies themselves and claim they as radical in their context. Its a strawman in sheeps-clothing. We have people who are using a caricature of a radical they are using to deface an ideology based on someone that projects their own biases to misrepresent it.
SonEric84 wrote: Far too often I see people get way too overzealous in their commentary and the moment someone says something regarding a social issue it's "you're an SJW", but on the flip side, when someone brings up a good point to counter a social issue, it's "you're an MRA/gamergater". It's laughable and just shows you don't really know what you're talking about and that you've taken things to the same extreme you believe others have. Sometimes it's best to sit back and do a little self-reflection.
The divergence has gotten so bad that people are just looking for any excuse to provoke the already falling impartiality that people are losing. Then again, with all these activist groups, it doesn't help when the bandwagon haters from bothsides fan the flames with obviously investigative statements and false equivalences to extremes, in order to create the red herrings they need to circularize the entire point of the subject. I think thats the problem with modern activism today, because though many have ideologies that are based on inequalities that do exist, a lot of their narratives get so diluted with abstract goals, abstract targets and thus allow themselves to be manipulated by people who misinterpret the context of what they actually are intending. Then we have the anti-groups that respond to it dishonestly rather than pointing this out with no intention to hold a standard of impartiality.
Zephyr wrote:The fandom's collective fetishizing of "moments" is also ridiculous to me. No, not everyone needs a fucking "shine" moment. If that's all you want, then all you want is fanservice, rather than an actual coherent story. And of course those aren't mutually exclusive; you could have a coherent story with "shine" moments! But if a story is perfectly coherent (and I'm really not seeing any compelling arguments that this one is anything but, despite constantly recurring, really poorly reasoned, attempts to argue otherwise), and you're bemoaning the lack of "shine" moments as a reason for the story's poor quality, then you're letting your thirst for "shine" moments obfuscate your ability to detect basic storytelling when it's right in front of you.

Hero
Beyond Newbie
Posts: 151
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2015 7:30 pm

Re: Anyone interested in discussing the social issues of DB?

Post by Hero » Sat May 14, 2016 3:41 pm

SingleFringe&Sparks wrote:
Hero wrote:I actually loved how different races were handled in Dragon Ball, and this is coming from a "colored person."
My parents who are immigrants from India loved Nam particularly since it reminded them of home. I've heard some people before call Nam a stereotype, but in parts of India many people sound like that and wear turbans.
I still want to know why Toriyama designed Popo that way though.
It could simply be because he found it funny/ gag-like to have a black butler-type person for Kami. As long as it doesn't come from malice, I can't call it racism. In my parents' homeland (Punjab) many men wear turbans, have beards and aren't that educated since they're mostly farmers. As a result, many times the comedy in that region has characters that are dumb as rocks and sport giant turbans and beards. And this comedy is made by the very people it mocks!

Is it insulting, yes. Does it come from any sort of malice; I'd like to believe not.

User avatar
MaxZ
Beyond-the-Beyond Newbie
Posts: 331
Joined: Sat May 14, 2016 2:52 am
Location: Saskatchewan
Contact:

Re: Anyone interested in discussing the social issues of DB?

Post by MaxZ » Mon May 16, 2016 9:11 pm

Cipher wrote:I think I've actually made a thread talking about this kind of stuff before, ABED, so it totally flies here, and I wouldn't want to be part of a community where it couldn't. Anyway, I think Dragon Ball pre-2013 managed by and large to be quite good with its female characters. They're strong, idiosyncratic, written like real people. It's easy to see that in Dr. Slump as well. When I watched through the series with a significant other, this was actually something she pointed out again and again.

But -- Kame-Sennin-styled pervert gags are truly something I wish weren't in the series. Not that the situational humor resulting from them isn't sometimes (sometimes) funny. It's just kind of off-putting, and Toei's later approach of shoehorning a grope/retaliation in as a gag itself is just the worst. It's those elements, like, uh, some of the less nuanced depictions of non-Japanese/white-appearing characters, that require you to realize it was 1980s Japan, hope for better, and move on.

What's been done with Videl and #18 since the series' revival strikes me as upsetting and out-of-touch with one of the series' previous strengths though. And then we don't even get a female fighter at the Universe 6 tournament. It's not great, and it's not as good as it's been in the past.
DBZAOTA482 wrote:I don't think Toriyama is sexist but Toei sure is if they're portrayal of Bulma on Namek or Chi-Chi's portrayal in most of the movies and a lot of the anime filler is anything to go by.
Toei was an anime studio in the 1980s and '90s. You can bet your ass they were sexist. They probably still are now.
I see what you mean about 18 and Videl. It seems they've kinda lost their personalities in Super, having become not much more than 'Krillin's wife' and 'Gohan's wife'. I hope they can change that in the future of the series.

User avatar
MrWalnut4
Beyond Newbie
Posts: 188
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 12:09 am
Location: Frieza Planet 419

Re: Anyone interested in discussing the social issues of DB?

Post by MrWalnut4 » Tue May 17, 2016 5:20 pm

MaxZ wrote:
Cipher wrote:I think I've actually made a thread talking about this kind of stuff before, ABED, so it totally flies here, and I wouldn't want to be part of a community where it couldn't. Anyway, I think Dragon Ball pre-2013 managed by and large to be quite good with its female characters. They're strong, idiosyncratic, written like real people. It's easy to see that in Dr. Slump as well. When I watched through the series with a significant other, this was actually something she pointed out again and again.

But -- Kame-Sennin-styled pervert gags are truly something I wish weren't in the series. Not that the situational humor resulting from them isn't sometimes (sometimes) funny. It's just kind of off-putting, and Toei's later approach of shoehorning a grope/retaliation in as a gag itself is just the worst. It's those elements, like, uh, some of the less nuanced depictions of non-Japanese/white-appearing characters, that require you to realize it was 1980s Japan, hope for better, and move on.

What's been done with Videl and #18 since the series' revival strikes me as upsetting and out-of-touch with one of the series' previous strengths though. And then we don't even get a female fighter at the Universe 6 tournament. It's not great, and it's not as good as it's been in the past.
DBZAOTA482 wrote:I don't think Toriyama is sexist but Toei sure is if they're portrayal of Bulma on Namek or Chi-Chi's portrayal in most of the movies and a lot of the anime filler is anything to go by.
Toei was an anime studio in the 1980s and '90s. You can bet your ass they were sexist. They probably still are now.
I see what you mean about 18 and Videl. It seems they've kinda lost their personalities in Super, having become not much more than 'Krillin's wife' and 'Gohan's wife'. I hope they can change that in the future of the series.
It is unfortunate but I think it is a result of Toriyama's writing style as well as picking up a story after 30 years of absence. It isn't the first time one of Toriyama's characters lost some of their personality and became more of background decoration than an agent in the current story. Take Yamcha, Tenshinhan, Roshi: they all aren't the characters they used to be due to their roles as "part of the gang" rather than being major actors in the conflict of the story like Vegeta and Goku are. Their arcs are over just as 18 and Videl's are (minus some possible moments with Pan in the future). I personally think it has nothing to do with sexism, but rather the unfortunate consequence of how Toriyama writes main characters that fade into one dimensional side characters as the story progresses.

User avatar
Zenkai
Beyond-the-Beyond Newbie
Posts: 339
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2008 4:17 pm
Location: Somewhere

Re: Anyone interested in discussing the social issues of DB?

Post by Zenkai » Wed May 18, 2016 12:22 am

As far as sexism is concerned, Dragon Ball is not nearly as offensive as many modern anime. Lots of modern anime sexualize female characters and have a lot of so-called "fan-service". Dragon ball did some of this early-on, but then mostly dropped it.

As far as racism, it does appear that Mr. Popo is based on blackface actors, which is indeed offensive. At least Mr. Popo doesn't act like how the blackface actors did. And it's never stated if Mr. Popo is even human. I doubt Toriyama is racist.

In terms of homosexuality, I'm glad it's not in Dragon Ball much; only Blue and Otokosuki come to mind, and they weren't around much.

I really dislike how the homosexual agenda is being pushed into all types of modern media so much.

Please leave sexual perversions out of DB.
One man
One woman

User avatar
MaxZ
Beyond-the-Beyond Newbie
Posts: 331
Joined: Sat May 14, 2016 2:52 am
Location: Saskatchewan
Contact:

Re: Anyone interested in discussing the social issues of DB?

Post by MaxZ » Wed May 18, 2016 5:28 am

MrWalnut4 wrote: It is unfortunate but I think it is a result of Toriyama's writing style as well as picking up a story after 30 years of absence. It isn't the first time one of Toriyama's characters lost some of their personality and became more of background decoration than an agent in the current story. Take Yamcha, Tenshinhan, Roshi: they all aren't the characters they used to be due to their roles as "part of the gang" rather than being major actors in the conflict of the story like Vegeta and Goku are. Their arcs are over just as 18 and Videl's are (minus some possible moments with Pan in the future). I personally think it has nothing to do with sexism, but rather the unfortunate consequence of how Toriyama writes main characters that fade into one dimensional side characters as the story progresses.
I dunno, I think Tien, Roshi, and Yamcha still have their personalities at least. They may not matter much anymore, but they're still the same characters.

Videl and 18 in specific just seem like they're only there to kiss their husbands before they fly off to battle in Super (despite 18 being like 100x stronger than Krillin)

Both of these characters had strong willed fiery personalities, but in Super they just seem to stand around and smile. Which is weird for 18 because she almost never smiled in the Buu Arc, and her characteristic sarcasm is completely absent as well. And Videl seems to have no trace of her former tomboyishness left at all, nor her aggressive attitude.

I don't think this is necessarily sexism on Toriyama's part, but I find it a little disappointing.

Locked