Sexual Assault: Fiction and Reality

[Doctor.]

I think the depiction of kid Goku's penis multiple times throughout the entire series should be far more troubling than Roshi's antics.

[ABED]

There's nothing sexual about Goku's penis being shown. If anything, it adds an interesting bit of characterization. He's not the slightest bit self conscious, not because he's proud of his unit, but because to him, it's just a body part used to pee. There's nothing sexual about it to him.

[WittyUsername]

Yeah. So? That stuff's no worse at all than a typical Betty Page spread from the 1950s. Again, you're making Timm's stuff sound WAY more racy, raunchy, and sexually "edgy" than it even REMOTELY actually is; certainly relative to a LOT of other stuff that's out there (and has BEEN out there for ages now).

The guy's into classic, vintage mid-20th century erotica pinup aesthetics: so are a whole LOT of other dudes (and women!) out there. That HARDLY makes any of them inherently "suspicious" of some sort of deep, dark sexual perversion against women. Having a hetero-male (or lesbian-female) sex drive in a broad general sense and having it even shine through in your art/creative output to whatever degree is in NO way any sort of an indicator of anything other than the person has a healthy, functioning sex drive and a working pulse.

Yes, there are indeed SOME folks out there putting out forms of "erotica" that are insidiously creepy and plenty worrisome (*cough*Moe/Loli*cough*): vintage 1950s pinup fetishism is SO beyond benign and SO far removed from that mark though (by like ZILLIONS of lightyears), its downright laughable. Again, these things have GOT to be taken in context and case by case, and using no small amount of common sense.

But seriously, this line of thinking you're putting forward here is starting to almost sidle up along the edges of "Anyone who even THINKS about sex is secretly a rapist!" Which is hysterically silly and dumb.

Regarding Bruce Timm, I’m not saying that the guy is a sexual predator, I’m saying that the guy’s work seems a bit more problematic than people like to admit. I’m no feminist, but it baffles me how anyone who is a feminist wouldn’t consider something like Harley Quinn to be blatantly misogynistic and self-indulgent. I obviously don’t know Bruce Timm or Paul Dini personally, but it baffles me how people can say that David Ayer’s Suicide Squad is sexist (which I’m not debating), while giving the works of Bruce Timm and Paul Dini a pass. Perhaps I went too far by saying that I was surprised that they haven’t been outed as sexual predators, but I don't see why everything else related to comics gets called sexist, but not the DCAU.

Yeah, this is where you've gone WAY off the rails here.

First of all, just for the general record: NONE of these sorts of conversations about sexual dynamics are the LEAST bit new in light of #MeToo. Plenty of people (myself and countless friends and acquaintances of mine included) have been aware/cognizant of these issues in modern society and discussing them (to one degree or another) going back years/decades now. What #MeToo has done is brought them MUCH more closely to the forefront of the zeitgeist, as well as introduced them to a younger generation (that has kept themselves ignorant about a lot of it for a very long time), as well as more importantly given a BADLY needed social media platform to women who have endured real, serious abuse and suffering as a result of these issues for decades and decades now.

Ok, that out of the way now:

If you think that teaching kids about sex is purely and specifically for the express purpose of "pissing off religious groups"... then you might need to do a whooooole LOT more reading and thinking about the history and reasoning for sex education in general. If you're doing ANYTHING in life purely and primarily out of spite/to piss off someone else, then you are almost assuredly doing that something for EXACTLY the wrong and stupidest possible reasons (hint hint towards those on the neo-reactionary right whose entire political philosophy primarily boils down to "whatever triggers the snowflake SJW libs").

Children should be educated about sex mainly and primarily because sex is an unavoidable and inherent part of life itself. Keeping kids ignorant about human sexuality is in many ways tantamount to keeping them ignorant on math, basic human biology, and general science: there's literally ZERO reason for it and absolutely NOTHING positive to be gained from it on the kids' end, and PLENTY to damage as a result.

Leaving children ignorant on the subject sex and human sexuality comes with a DIZZYING array of drawbacks so numerous I don't even know where to begin. Most obvious up front, you leave them VERY open and vulnerable to child-sex predators, who have a MUCH easier time coercing kids who are 100% ignorant and naive about the existence of sexual dynamics than kids who are armed with the knowledge of what to look out for and be wary of when interacting with other adults.

Secondly, it is literally flat-out IMPOSSIBLE to keep ANY kid 100% shielded from ANY contact with ANYTHING remotely related to sex, as sex like I said is SUCH a fundamental and ingrained part of life. Kids also eventually hit puberty, and they'll begin to have sexual thoughts and urges on their own, whether you've explained it to them or not: and when that happens, they are MUCH better off going into those pubescent changes as knowledgeable about what is happening to them as possible, as far in advance as possible. Puberty can otherwise be a horrifyingly frightening experience for any kid who's been kept 100% innocent and oblivious to the fundamental workings of human sexuality, and all of a sudden has it sprung on them by mother nature out of the clear blue one day.

What also often ends up happening with kids who are completely shielded from ever talking or thinking about sex their whole lives is that it in many cases can potentially lead to ALL KINDS of negative and destructive thoughts and ideas in how they view sex going into adulthood. Kids who've been kept uneducated and in the dark about sex their entire lives and are left to just suddenly deal with sexual urges without ANY adult guidance or wisdom as they go into puberty, can often then develop all kinds of negative ideas and attitudes about sex that help contribute to things like "rape culture", "toxic masculinity" and what have you.

Plenty of sex predators are often (though certainly not necessarily ALWAYS of course: nothing is ever 100%) people who as kids were kept totally in the dark about sex or had not had any real adult guidance in encouraging serious critical thought or discussion about sex throughout their adolescence: there is often a recurring theme of sexual repression in the backgrounds of a LOT of sex offenders out there: often stemming from various forms of religious upbringings (so no, the "religious crazies" have NEVER "had a point on this all along"). Not teaching a kid about sexuality at all means also not teaching kids about sexual morality as well: and obviously, it is ESSENTIAL for kids to be raised with a sound and sane moral compass of SOME sort or other. In ALL areas of life, up to and including sex.

I would argue that the problems that have lead to #MeToo would be GREATLY HELPED rather than worsened by having MORE young kids be MORE deeply and thoroughly educated even EARLIER on in life about sex, and moreover sexual ethics. Sex should be thoroughly demystified and destigmatized as early in a kids' development as possible and shown to be exactly what it is: an essential and fundamental part of being human; one that can be greatly positive OR negative, depending ENTIRELY on the context and how its used.

Hiding it away from kids entirely for most of their most critical developmental years only serves to lend it a "forbidden fruit" aura later on in their lives (once puberty has worked its biological magic) that will in many cases cause all kinds of psychological harm, which they then may well possibly pass on to someone else via some manner of sexual abuse.

Basically: don't let your sudden awareness that rape culture is a thing that exists freak you out so much that you zip over to the OTHER opposite reactionary extreme of sexual repression. Sexual repression in children's understanding of their own human biology - which again, often stems culturally from religious dogmatism and puritanism - is a LOT of what's lurking behind a LOT of these #MeToo predators' psychology (alongside a whole HOST of other issues). If you want to fight this problem effectively, then as with most things, its best fought with MORE knowledge and education and transparent openness, not less.

I still don’t see why children need to have sexual assault be played for laughs like it is in Dragon Ball. If anything, doesn’t that sort of contribute to the belief that sexual assault is funny and shouldn’t be taken seriously?

[ABED]

Regarding Bruce Timm, I’m not saying that the guy is a sexual predator, I’m saying that the guy’s work seems a bit more problematic than people like to admit. I’m no feminist, but it baffles me how anyone who is a feminist wouldn’t consider something like Harley Quinn to be blatantly misogynistic and self-indulgent. I obviously don’t know Bruce Timm or Paul Dini personally, but it baffles me how people can say that David Ayer’s Suicide Squad is sexist (which I’m not debating), while giving the works of Bruce Timm and Paul Dini a pass. Perhaps I went too far by saying that I was surprised that they haven’t been outed as sexual predators, but I don't see why everything else related to comics gets called sexist, but not the DCAU.

Because in the original, Harley isn't that sexual, if at all in the original cartoon. She doesn't have a habit of wearing skimpy outfits. Her costume is a jester outfit. What was sexist about her character. You've completely lost me.

[Kunzait_83]

I still don’t see why children need to have sexual assault be played for laughs like it is in Dragon Ball. If anything, doesn’t that sort of contribute to the belief that sexual assault is funny and shouldn’t be taken seriously?

....

I've literally posted DOZENS of pages worth of posts on this forum saying more or less EXACTLY this. And I've even given heaps of praise to an earlier post saying exactly this within this very thread.

From just a few pages back:

The problem with this kind of humor as it's usually played out (i.e. the way it's always played out in DB) is that regardless of whether or not Master Roshi always gets a slap in the face, implying that the women still have the power to stop it and that Roshi will always receive some kind of repercussion for doing it, it's still played off as being a relatively endearing character trait; the context suggests that while the girls are annoyed by it, it's framed as being innocent/without lasting impact and it's just something that they are forced to deal with. They'd better get used to it, they can't get rid of him or actually get him to stop, and he never suffers any true punishment nor does he learn over time that what he's doing is wrong.

That's not a good implication. There's no inherent humorous undertone to it that can be subtly played off of, so as a comedy device it's useless. Sexual assault is a hugely damaging phenomenon and to even casually suggest that a guy can keep getting away with it as long as he's a huge goof is probably one of the worse things we implicitly suggest to girls.

Excellent, EXCELLENT post. Word for word. 10,000% PERFECTLY summed up. Flawless Victory.

THIS RIGHT HERE is the heart and crux of the issues with Muten Roshi's pervert shtick in Dragon Ball. Hell, its not even the fact that he's depicted as a hyper-sexualized old man on a kids' show that's even the issue here: you can STILL have Muten Roshi be characterized as a girl-crazy dude with a raging libido on a show that's primarily made for kids and at the same time TOTALLY AVOID the above horrific undertones and implications of the jokes surrounding his sexuality. Its honestly NOT that difficult at all to pull off or an especially tall order to ask for.

Going to the OTHER extreme of "No one EVER mentions anything VAGUELY sexual around anyone who isn't 21 or over!" is a ludicrously absurd over-the-top overreaction to what is a fairly nuanced, but still easy to pinpoint issue.

a hugely damaging phenomenon and to even casually suggest that a guy can keep getting away with it as long as he's a huge goof is probably one of the worse things we implicitly suggest to girls.

Not just girls.

Also very true.

What I wrote to you had literally NOTHING to do with the Muten Roshi issue: it was in response to your hysterical overreaction that more or less amounted to "sexual assault is a problem in the world, ergo sex should be COMPLETELY hidden away from children until they're 36" and what have you.

Believe it or not, it's possible for me to both dump on the Muten Roshi sex material for being badly thought out AND say that your "hide EVERYTHING from the children!" reaction is WAY too over the top of a panicky extreme.

[WittyUsername]

I got what you were saying. I was just trying to contribute to the topic at hand.

[KBABZ]

How many people here watch South Park or Family Guy? Those shows are intentionally dirty and theres a huge audience for it. Anything on Dragonball is VERY tame compared to those shows. Some people are just too sensitive and want to find something to complain about. In the age of social media, everyone has a platform to complain just for the sake of complaining.

I think the difference is that South Park is inherently a parodistic show, whereas Dragon Ball hasn't been that way since Goku destroyed Pilaf's castle, and is supposed to be more wholesome than South Park. They also have very different target audiences.

I could make the argument that Dragonball Super outside of Japan has a similar target audience as Family Guy and South park. It's on Adult Swim, and last year had a brief stint on primetime 8:00 on cartoon network which is usually reserved for similar shows like family guy. I think Toei knows its overseas market is a bunch of twenty and thirty somethings who grew up with the show and are now adults. As for Japan, it's a much different culture over there and is marketed for kids.

I guess, but for me at the end of the day Dragon Ball was made for a magazine called Shonen Jump, and Shonen by its very definition is "action stories aimed at boys 12-18 years of age". Early on Dragon Ball skewed more to the younger side of the bracket, then later on to the older side, but it works across the entire bracket. That isn't to say that it can't work outside of this bracket as well (any work for younger audiences that's good enough can do this, just look at Avatar and Steven Universe) but at the end of the day they also have to keep in mind what demographic it's being made for in the first place.

Dragon Ball being on [adult_swim] to me says that Anime is by and large still considered "not cartoons" by the people who run US television, which to me is a shame because anime is really just a stylistic difference from cartoons at the end of the day, at least to me. Back when I was a kid, coming home after school meant that there was a block of cartoons on cable channels TV2 and TV3 from 3:00 to 5:30 that also included anime. Dragon Ball Z, Pokemon, Yu-Gi-Oh!, Digimon, and even less mainstream works like Shinzo aired in this timeslot, and right alongside them were western cartoons like SpongeBob and anything that might also have appeared on Cartoon Network. Similar thing on Saturday mornings: programming block shows like Squirt! and What Now? would very often mix shows like Sailor Moon and Hamtaro with Western stuff like Gargoyles, TMNT and more.

Older fans enjoying works created for a younger demographic is something that's only been normalized as part of the, well, normalization of nerd culture. A decade and a half ago, it was generally not socially okay to be open about still liking comic books, Disney movies, video games, cartoons and anime.

[MasenkoHA]

I think the depiction of kid Goku's penis multiple times throughout the entire series should be far more troubling than Roshi's antics.

While I’m definitely a-okay with not seeing kid penis even in a cartoon, like Abed said it’s not portrayed in a sexualized manner. We’re not suppose to be aroused by Kid Goku rocking his Gotens out it’s just haha this kid was raised in seclusion and doesn’t understand social norms like modesty. There’s nothing really damaging about the way that’s portrayed the same way Roshi’s sexual harrassment is portrayed as light comedy

[KBABZ]

I think the depiction of kid Goku's penis multiple times throughout the entire series should be far more troubling than Roshi's antics.

While I’m definitely a-okay with not seeing kid penis even in a cartoon, like Abed said it’s not portrayed in a sexualized manner. We’re not suppose to be aroused by Kid Goku rocking his Gotens out it’s just haha this kid was raised in seclusion and doesn’t understand social norms like modesty. There’s nothing really damaging about the way that’s portrayed the same way Roshi’s sexual harrassment is portrayed as light comedy

Agreed. I mean that's pretty much implied by the way it's drawn in any version: it's literally a u and a U. Gotenk's is a little more detailed in the post-Buu Z episode by nature of the art style, but it's still not detailed in any way, not on the same level as, say, Goku's hands when charging a Kamehameha, or his gi.

[Kunzait_83]

Dragon Ball being on [adult_swim] to me says that Anime is by and large still considered "not cartoons" by the people who run US television, which to me is a shame because anime is really just a stylistic difference from cartoons at the end of the day, at least to me.

I've maintained this same stance from pretty much the very beginning of Adult Swim's life: either they should ditch ALL of the Shonen material and stick solely to Seinen titles for anime, or they should just call themselves by a different name entirely. Either way, you don't get to have the word "Adult" in your title AND also have on shows like Innuyasha, Bleach, My Hero Academia, and Dragon Ball (all written for and aimed at elementary school children) as mainstays. Its one or the other, not both.

Older fans enjoying works created for a younger demographic is something that's only been normalized as part of the, well, normalization of nerd culture. A decade and a half ago, it was generally not socially okay to be open about still liking comic books, Disney movies, video games, cartoons and anime.

A decade and a half ago was 2004: the "normalization of nerd culture" was already WELL long underway for quite some years by then. Lets break these down one by one:

Comic books were more or less "mainstreamed" WELL long before 2004. The direct market, which overwhelmingly catered largely to adult readers, came into fruition back in the early-most 1980s, and by the end of the 80s/beginning of the 90s, it was NOT at all a particularly uncommon sight to see grown men (and women) in more populated urban areas reading titles like Watchmen, Sandman, The Dark Knight Returns, or Hellblazer. That would only DRAMATICALLY increase even that much further by the time you get to 2004, where you couldn't set foot on any college campus just about anywhere without seeing oceans of copies of comics/manga like Invincible, The Authority, Transmetropolitan, Hellboy, Gantz, Hellsing, etc.

For video games... I don't know in which reality where its EVER been TRULY "socially unacceptable" to be seen playing video games. I mean being SUPER deep nerdy into video games held somewhat of a stigma for awhile, sure... but people of ALL ages and ALL social strata have played and enjoyed video games to one degree or another without very much in the way of social stigma since more or less forever and ever ago.

Its gone through various phases and cycles: Nintendo-centric games were always (more or less rightly) seen as being primarily for children, whereas arcades were generally home to teenagers and 20-somethings mostly. Adults at VERY upper ages have pretty much ALWAYS been playing PC games (even in professional office environments), and non-Nintendo console gaming went from being largely popular primarily among the same teen to 20-something demo as arcades in the Sega era, to being pretty much UBIQUITOUS across all ages and social boundaries from around the PS2/Xbox-era onward. I mean, I've literally walked into political offices circa 2002/2003 and seen State Representatives and Senate staff huddled intently around 4 player Halo matches for crying out loud.

Anime on the other hand, I would argue has largely REGRESSED and tremendously so in this area over time: while it was super-super niche in its earliest U.S. infancy (1970s and early-most 1980s), once Akira in particular had blown up in the late 80s, anime was overwhelmingly seen for quite awhile throughout the 90s in the West as incredibly bohemian, counter-cultural, and hip, and certainly for a largely and overwhelmingly adult audience overall.

Pokemon, DBZ, Cartoon Network, and the popularity explosion of Shonen titles overall at the turn of the millennium have all helped to DRAMATICALLY sweep ALL of that away over time, and its only gotten worse and worse throughout the years up through to today, where we've been at a point for quite awhile now where anime is primarily seen in the U.S. as increasingly the domain primarily of either children of socially alienated and painfully awkward manchildren, often with creepy sexual fetishes (and nowadays, Neo-Nazi political ideology as well: way to go millennial Western Otakus! ).

There's still some visible pockets of genuine normalcy throughout to be fair, but overall I would say that if anything anime has hugely BACK-PEDDLED on being seen as "socially acceptable" overall from roughly around the late 2000s to now in comparison to where it was in the 80s, 90s, and early 2000s. And the fandom overall largely has no one to blame but themselves for it.

Disney Movies and children's cartoons overall, meanwhile... that's a WHOLE other story. Without getting into my own... HIGHLY contentious views on the matter (and I think its beyond stupid as all hell that my thoughts on this even ARE contentious in the first place, but that's neither here nor there), I would say that the mid-2000s were the earliest point where those things were JUUUUUST starting to become seen as more and more increasingly "socially acceptable" among adults.

At almost ANY point prior to 15 years ago, a grown adult (particularly one who is childless) going apeshit and fanboying out over the newest Disney movie or Cartoon Network/Nickelodeon TV show would (very rightly and justifiably) get them exceedingly awkward sideways glares from most people around them, at a bare minimum. Today however, that's pretty much a regular part of everyday adult life among millennials, and has been since around the latter half of the 2000s or thereabouts. Joy.

[MasenkoHA]

[l



I've maintained this same stance from pretty much the very beginning of Adult Swim's life: either they should ditch ALL of the Shonen material and stick solely to Seinen titles for anime, or they should just call themselves by a different name entirely. Either way, you don't get to have the word "Adult" in your title AND also have on shows like Innuyasha, Bleach, My Hero Academia, and Dragon Ball (all written for and aimed at elementary school children) as mainstays. Its one or the other, not both.

Even their non-anime shows tend to be in that middle school/early high school low-brow humor category like Harvey Birdman, Family Guy, Futurama, that show with the talking fast food that I never saw the appeal of

I think the word “adult” is just to entice middle schoolers to watch their network instead of VH1. I don’t know.

For video games... I don't know in which reality where its EVER been TRULY "socially unacceptable" to be seen playing video games. I mean being SUPER deep nerdy into video games held somewhat of a stigma for awhile, sure... but people of ALL ages and ALL social strata have played and enjoyed video games to one degree or another without very much in the way of social stigma since more or less forever and ever ago.

Its gone through various phases and cycles: Nintendo-centric games were always (more or less rightly) seen as being primarily for children, whereas arcades were generally home to teenagers and 20-somethings mostly. Adults at VERY upper ages have pretty much ALWAYS been playing PC games (even in professional office environments), and non-Nintendo console gaming went from being largely popular primarily among the same teen to 20-something demo as arcades in the Sega era, to being pretty much UBIQUITOUS across all ages and social boundaries from around the PS2/Xbox-era onward. I mean, I've literally walked into political offices circa 2002/2003 and seen State Representatives and Senate staff huddled intently around 4 player Halo matches for crying out loud.

I think media often being 15 years behind the times often tried to portrayed gamers solely as a nerd stereotype. It’s one of those things that never reflected reality and media is only slowly starting to catch up.

, often with creepy sexual fetishes (and nowadays, Neo-Nazi political ideology as well: way to go millennial Western Otakus!

I legitimately would like to see research done in why there seem to be so much crossover between alt-righters in the Millennial generation and anime fans. Go on Twitter and if you see a twitter with an anime “waifu” as the profile pic or some animeesque furry and I guarantee you 8 times out of 10 that person is going to hold some seriously questionable social and political views.

[Cursed Lemon]

I legitimately would like to see research done in why there seem to be so much crossover between alt-righters in the Millennial generation and anime fans.

Basement dwellers + aimless millennial resentment + medium in which women are often depicted as servile objects = your answer.

[Doctor.]

I legitimately would like to see research done in why there seem to be so much crossover between alt-righters in the Millennial generation and anime fans. Go on Twitter and if you see a twitter with an anime “waifu” as the profile pic or some animeesque furry and I guarantee you 8 times out of 10 that person is going to hold some seriously questionable social and political views.

Anime appeals to the young outcasts, who are pushing back against the social climate the older millennials have established throughout the last ten years, resorting to extremism and reactionary world views to make their voices heard.

[Cipher]

I'll say the same thing I always say when these threads come up: Kame-sennin's central gag is one of my least favorite elements of the series, and stands out as a significant blemish excusable only through the filter of its era (which doesn't mean it was ever okay; just that it represents keeping in step with what fell within the realm of (privileged majority-imposed) social norms of the time rather than Toriyama or the series going out of their way to be transgressively mean-spirited).

The extent to which any gags involving him remain funny owes solely to Toriyama's skills as a comedic artist and his overall timing with jokes. It's a shame the same skills couldn't have been put toward something else in place of those scenes though.

People will complain, as they always do, that as a piece of fiction and as a (usual) subject of comeuppance in the form of comedic pratfalls, Kame-sennin neither had nor has any significance beyond the page or screen for anyone to take issue with. And, as always, they will willfully miss the point that social norms are constructed and reinforced through and against a backdrop of media, art, fiction, jokes, molding what we do and don't lend weight, and that gags like Kame-sennin's only served to be part of the background noise furthering the treatment of sexual harassment and assault as something of no real consequence. They will, somehow, miss the idea that fiction has weight in shaping opinions and outlooks even as they dedicate daily time to its discussion on an online message board and talk willingly about its positive influences upon their lives.

And as ever, they will be completely wrong, while a number of reasonable fans will continue to talk over and around them about an element of the series, which we all very much love, which very much belongs in its corner of widely acknowledged historical shames along with Mr. Popo's design and gags like Otokosuki.

[saiyanhajime]

I think the depiction of kid Goku's penis multiple times throughout the entire series should be far more troubling than Roshi's antics.

You think the human body is troubling?

...

I've come to realise that culturally America has a really, really.... Weird relationship with nudity. Like, all nudity = sex. And here in the UK, we're already kinda prude, but ain't got nothing on the States. In mainland Europe they're way less prude... The amount of nudity just, everywhere in Denmark blew my mind. Boob jokes. Everywhere. Look at this theme park. And whilst I don't want to speak for Japanese culture because I haven't lived it, they aren't necessarily less prude, but they're... Er, a different kind of open / prude?


For the Record, some of Roshi's scenes really do make me cringe, especially in Super... I guess, cuz Super is new? I feel like we should be doing better now? Context matters? Also, Super is definitely aimed at a younger audience now... So, yeah. I'm not ok with some depictions of Roshi's behavior. Whilst other gags are absolutely fine. It's not a one shoe fits all opinion here.


As for the other discussion in this thread about normalisation of nerd culture and sticking with child-focused media into adulthood, I think that's actually just gradually increased as people have less expectation to be adults. My grandfather is 90 and has lived a VERY different life to my father who has lived a very different life to me. They had to be older, younger. But more importantly, there is more and more media out there. My parents didn't have TVs when they were kids. If you weren't exposed, then how do you become a fan? My dad sort of likes Star Wars - he's in his early 60s, because it was maybe just a lil too old to get properly hooked. But the bracket below him, like 40-50 year olds, is much more densely populated with people who LOVE Star Wars, right? And the age bracket below that is packed with people who love the shit they were exposed to in the Goldilocks ages... I think, honestly, that's all it is.

I'm 30, and there's plenty of people my age who are both very historically "normal" in terms of having families, being married, having successful careers, but they dig Dragon Ball too.

[Doctor.]

just that it represents keeping in step with what fell within the realm of (privileged-majority-imposed) social norms of the time rather than Toriyama or the series going out of their way to be transgressively mean-spirited

I disagree. He wouldn't have made an entire comic like Lady Red if they were only social norms finding their way into his work, nor would he still continue to make jokes at the expense of women's sex appeal or promiscuity today. I feel like it's more than accurate to say they represent Toriyama's own personal views on women. I think it's perfectly reasonable to accept Toriyama, as an old Japanese man, is or was sexist to a degree. There's no need to whiteknight Toriyama, the man, when you already agree that Toriyama's work contains sexist elements.

You think the human body is troubling?

...

I've come to realise that culturally America has a really, really.... Weird relationship with nudity.

The people who've replied to post have all missed the point. I said "it should be more troubling" meaning I don't think it's the case. The point was: the people who are concerned over the depiction of sexuality in Dragon Ball should be more concerned with the depiction of kid Goku's penis. I, personally, don't care either way.

Also, I'm not American.

[Cipher]

I disagree. He wouldn't have made an entire comic like Lady Red if they were only social norms finding their way into his work, nor would he still continue to make jokes at the expense of women's sex appeal or promiscuity today. I feel like it's more than accurate to say they represent Toriyama's own personal views on women. I think it's perfectly reasonable to accept Toriyama, as an old Japanese man, is or was sexist to a degree. There's no need to whiteknight Toriyama, the man, when you already agree that Toriyama's work contains sexist elements.

Not denying that at all. I think you could definitely say Toriyama is sexist to a degree (at the very least demonstrably to the degree that it never occurred to him during the height of his career that women's very real discomfort may not be ripe for raunch comedy). I'm not separating the artist from that context any more than the series itself. I was just noting that it should (or just "can"?) be viewed as unfortunate failure to examine the world he grew up in rather than something transgressive/intentionally hateful even within that context, which would leave me with very different views on the series.

But that's precisely why it would have better to have not contributed to that thoughtlessness himself; that's how it goes. There are definitely boys who grew up reading about Kame-sennin and other characters like him and never learned to shift sexual harassment fully outside the realm of gag fodder as a result. It's a shitty part of the series and a shitty part of Toriyama's work.

Look around and you'll catch me saying here and there that Toriyama's work, which I love on the whole, is very much a "but" proposition for me.

As an aside, I'll point out that Toyotaro's work is mostly free of this. (I think there might be one or two Kame-sennin gags snuck into Super as a nod to the character's shtick, but I honestly can't remember them off the top of my head and am pretty sure they were far, far more minor lipservice than what either the original run or Super anime would have done.) You can easily include Kame-sennin in stories without it.

[saiyanhajime]

You think the human body is troubling?

...

I've come to realise that culturally America has a really, really.... Weird relationship with nudity.

The people who've replied to post have all missed the point. I said "it should be more troubling" meaning I don't think it's the case. The point was: the people who are concerned over the depiction of sexuality in Dragon Ball should be more concerned with the depiction of kid Goku's penis. I, personally, don't care either way.

Also, I'm not American.

Apologies for assuming, especially since you had it right there! And for attributing your thoughts about others onto you. However...

Why do you think people should be concerned about the cartoon depiction of a childs penis in a discussion about sexuality?

I don't understand.

[Doctor.]

You think the human body is troubling?

...

I've come to realise that culturally America has a really, really.... Weird relationship with nudity.

The people who've replied to post have all missed the point. I said "it should be more troubling" meaning I don't think it's the case. The point was: the people who are concerned over the depiction of sexuality in Dragon Ball should be more concerned with the depiction of kid Goku's penis. I, personally, don't care either way.

Also, I'm not American.

Apologies for assuming, especially since you had it right there! And for attributing your thoughts about others onto you. However...

Why do you think people should be concerned about the cartoon depiction of a childs penis in a discussion about sexuality?

I don't understand.

Because if we are to assume that the depiction of sexual harassment as gags will have real-world repercussions, then the depiction of child nudity (which, following the logic of the people who unilaterally refuse to accept gags that mock sexual assault, could be interpreted as the depiction of child pornography) is a far more problematic issue in a country where grown men have repeatedly been busted with child pornography, and in an industry where a 'lolicon' is a widely accepted customer. Goku's penis is depicted far more frequently, for far longer time, than any Roshi gag, and whether or not it is drawn with malice is completely irrelevant; for Roshi's antics are also not drawn with malice, but the argument still remains that they are an issue because of the impression they have on the public.

But again, I'm playing devil's advocate here. I don't really care for either 'issue'. Let authors do what they want with their own works and let the public decide if they want to consume them or not.

which would leave me with very different views on the series.

But why? Have you ever read anything by Goethe? He was an expressed antisemite, exceptionally hateful even within the context of 18th and 19th century Germany, yet he is considered one of the greatest writers of the German language. Or perhaps a better example would be Richard Wagner and his compositions. If you were to say their works didn't contain any explicit antisemitic elements, then how about Lovecraft or Dickens, who have actually injected their own prejudiced views (even in the context of their time) into their work? If you say you don't really like any of their works (or any author who fits the mold, in case you haven't read these) because of their problematic elements, then fair enough, but I don't think that's a very fair way to look at art.

[MasenkoHA]

The people who've replied to post have all missed the point. I said "it should be more troubling" meaning I don't think it's the case. The point was: the people who are concerned over the depiction of sexuality in Dragon Ball should be more concerned with the depiction of kid Goku's penis. I, personally, don't care either way.

Also, I'm not American.

Again depictions of Goku’s cartoonish penis in a non-sexualize manner that makes sense in context (he doesn’t understand social norms being raised in seclusion) is not even slightly comparable to Roshi trying to grope Bulma and Lunch without their consent or Oolong drugging Bulma to feel her up.

You’re trying to fit a large square peg into a very very small round hole