Dragon Ball Super Gets Cancelled Overseas Over Sexual Harassment Claims

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

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

Re: Dragon Ball Super Gets Cancelled Overseas Over Sexual Harassment Claims

Post by Polyphase Avatron » Fri Sep 24, 2021 7:48 pm

MasenkoHA wrote: Thu Sep 23, 2021 7:25 pmAlso thinking consensual enjoyment of sex and sexual assault are on equal grounds is a huge fucking red flag.
It's characteristic of the conservative mindset in America. They base their ideas of morality mostly on Divine Command Theory - God (or whatever other authority they follow/believe in) says X is wrong, so it's wrong. All thought and consideration of the topic stops there. They never bother to try thinking about why it's wrong.

To a DCT believer, rape isn't wrong because it hurts someone, it's wrong because their holy book says so. And if their holy book just happens to say that consensual homosexual sex is also wrong, then, in their minds, both of those things are equally wrong, and anyone who objects to one but not the other is being a hypocrite. They never take things like consent or harm into account.

And of course if you try to point this out to them, they always go with the whole 'well, without Objective Morality™, you have no grounds to say that anything is right or wrong, because it's all just subjective in your view'. They literally need a hard and fast set of rules saying what is right and wrong, and believe that anyone who uses any more nuance to determine that has no moral grounding. It's a baffling way of thinking, but very common.
Cool stuff that I upload here because Youtube will copyright claim it: https://vimeo.com/user60967147

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

Re: Dragon Ball Super Gets Cancelled Overseas Over Sexual Harassment Claims

Post by Kunzait_83 » Fri Sep 24, 2021 9:50 pm

Polyphase Avatron wrote: Fri Sep 24, 2021 7:09 pmSeems you have your own peculiar definition of communism and ignore all of the other ways it's been conceived of and implemented throughout history. I see no evidence that a completely stateless, anarchist society would ever work on a large scale either.
This is less about this specific piece of the pages-long back and forth between yourself and Shaddy so much as the broader nature of the debate itself within the context from which it originally sprung from throughout this thread:

For all practical purposes, there's literally almost ZERO consequential constituency in the U.S. (apart from your usual smattering handful of fringe figures) for actual, full blown, full bore communism. Furthermore there is no one who is even the LEAST bit anywhere within a billion lightyears of being anything that's even approaching full blown communism within any corner of elected office, or who is even within remote striking distance of being elected to higher office of almost any sort. Nor will there likely be anytime in the remotely foreseeable future. So any worry or concern regarding actual communism overtaking the U.S. political arena is... WILDLY, hysterically batshit nuts, to put it mildly.

Lets set all the Fox News, Qanon, and American Conservative hyperbole and psychotic hysterics aside here: the furthest-furthest Left electoral coalition we have in American politics (AOC, Sanders, the Squad, etc) are generally considered fairly lukewarm moderates on the broader international stage. Because the American political axis/overton window is ludicrously, dementedly, lunatic-level skewed and tilted to the right relative to much of the rest of the first world. And that dynamic has unfortunately been VERY normalized for way, way too many Americans.

When one of my posts a whole bunch of pages back set off this whole back and forth between you and Shaddy: this was in large part what I was originally referring to. The political axis of the United States is SO absurdly thrown off to the far right, that what is "moderate" for us is actually still fairly far to the right of most other developed nations. And our "far, far Left" are actually moderates (center-left at most) on the international stage. An ACTUAL mainstream, normal Left politician from almost any European nation for example, would be seen as the reincarnation of Che Guevara or Lenin in the U.S.

(Though this is currently in flux as the political axis of plenty of other European and otherwise non-U.S. nations are likewise being dragged to the right, and for relatively similar-ish reasons overall as the U.S. - but even then a lot of these countries are a bit further behind that process from where we are currently)

So when I say "our current political situation requires a SHARP leftward turn" this is largely what I'm referring to: everything in politics regarding gauging what is "Left" vs "Right" is INCREDIBLY contingent upon the broader context of a given political landscape (especially when its in relation to and being compared against the broader political landscapes of other regions).

I mean... this isn't THAT hard to understand ultimately. This is basically the current political dynamic here in the U.S.

Image

When I drag Centrism and contest that its barely much better than the far right in the current climate (and in a great, great many cases Centrism within the current dynamic even flat out HELPS the far right in the long run): this is why. And its also why, when this is more or less representative of the current axis of political thought and debate, why I maintain that WITHIN THAT CONTEXT, WITHIN THAT FRAMEWORK, going sharply Leftward is the obvious and clear answer that isn't sociopathic and homicidal/suicidal.

As the axis changes, as the overton window moves further and further back leftward away from the extreme right in which it currently sits, THEN that actually opens up the debate back to something that halfway resembles sanity and normalcy once again, and we can adjust ourselves accordingly.

Here, I'll let another, much smarter person than myself round this out with what I think is a very solid explanation of how the political spectrum is much better viewed:
I want to address one very common point made, which is "we don't need Republicans, but we need a strong small-c conservative party."

We don't. Not right now. We need a VERY weak conservative party.

Setting aside the largely correct corollary that the Democratic Party IS that conservative party (which at least some faction of it is.) I think the idea of necessary conservative reveals dominant misapprehension about the nature of conservatism and progressivism. Conservatism and progressivism are often treated as naturally occurring identities—as if some are just conservative, and others just progressive.

And they're treated like two wings on the same bird, both necessary for flight.

I think they're strategies—*situational* strategies.

Conservatism and progressivism exist on a spectrum, but to reduce them to a binary for simplicity’s sake, let's say they are two ways of interacting with an existing order. Specifically, with whatever one currently exists.

(And here I mean "conservatism" in the way the commenters meant, as the small-c conservatism that we allegedly need to be strong in this moment, rather than the white supremacist, nationalist, fascist, authoritarian, kleptocratic thing the term presently signifies.)

Conservatism" is, in its essence, an ideology that desires to keep things as they are, and to make slow and calculated adjustment, or no adjustments, to that underlying order. Conservatism sits at the center of the spectrum. It is only as good as the order upon which it sits.

"Progressivism" is, in its essence, an ideology that desires to leave the existing order, in favor of an order that its practitioners see as better, even necessary. Progressivism pushes away from the center of the spectrum. It is only as good as its proposed destination.

For us to know whether we ‘need’ a strong conservatism at the present moment requires a judgment about the existing order—which requires some underlying value against which to judge it. For us to know whether we ‘need’ a strong progressivism also requires that judgment, and a judgment about the direction of any needed progress—which, again, requires some underlying value against which to compare.

This is why it is useless for us to say we ‘need’ both conservatives and progressives.

Conservatives conserving … what?

Progressives progressing toward … what?

If we are in a time where great change is desperately necessary for survival, then we would hope for a very strong progressive party with a beneficial direction, and a very weak conservative party. If we are in a time when everything is working great, we would want the opposite.

Right now we have looming climate disaster, and we have massive wealth inequality, and we have a global pandemic, and we have the very tenets of democracy under attack. And, as they say, so on.

I would argue that we need a VERY weak conservative party.

Our argument is not taking place on an axis of conservatism and progressivism at all. It’s taking place on axis of moral value. We’re contending over which value-set will undergird our moral order. I’ll name the struggle.

I’d say it’s a struggle between an axis of universal justice versus an axis of specific dominance. The distinction matters; it prevents us from seeing the real struggle. The people calling themselves "conservative" aren’t conservative at all. They’re progressives, of a kind. They have a direction. Not forward, but backward. Into mutually assured destruction. Regressives.

They yearn for a time when their way of being—in matters of religion, skin tone, gender, identity, sexuality, wealth—dominated all others. A time when there was a normal, and that was them. And there was an abnormal, and those kept quiet if they knew what was good for them. They call themselves ‘conservative,’ these regressives, because there was a time when their way of seeing things WAS the moral order. It was the axis. And in that old time, believing as you did, you WOULD be conservative.

But we’ve moved since. And we don't need them strong.

Today’s conservatives—the small-c conservatives—are those who keep us here, frozen, or moving too slowly for the danger. We don't need them strong, either. We need them very weak. Our current order balances too precariously. Too many people are in danger. All, really.

In some future day, when we have made a sustainable universal justice our axis, and we have moved our position as close to its center as we can, I would hope to be a conservative.

We’re not there now. Until we are, I will not be conservative.

We aren’t two wings, a right and a left. We’re a compass, deciding which direction to point. We're a navigator, deciding whether or not to journey. A compass can’t point in two directions. We can’t decide both to move AND to not move. We don't need both impulses to be strong. What we need is to minimize and destroy any influence held by a regressivism that would move us toward mutually assured destruction, in order to satisfy its own greed or ego.

And we need to make our conservative impulses as weak as possible, until they are appropriate again.
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
Polyphase Avatron
Born 'n Bred Here
Posts: 6643
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 10:48 am

Re: Dragon Ball Super Gets Cancelled Overseas Over Sexual Harassment Claims

Post by Polyphase Avatron » Fri Sep 24, 2021 10:12 pm

Kunzait_83 wrote: Fri Sep 24, 2021 9:50 pm
Polyphase Avatron wrote: Fri Sep 24, 2021 7:09 pmSeems you have your own peculiar definition of communism and ignore all of the other ways it's been conceived of and implemented throughout history. I see no evidence that a completely stateless, anarchist society would ever work on a large scale either.
This is less about this specific piece of the pages-long back and forth between yourself and Shaddy so much as the broader nature of the debate itself within the context from which it originally sprung from throughout this thread:

For all practical purposes, there's literally almost ZERO consequential constituency in the U.S. (apart from your usual smattering handful of fringe figures) for actual, full blown, full bore communism. Furthermore there is no one who is even the LEAST bit anywhere within a billion lightyears of being anything that's even approaching full blown communism within any corner of elected office, or who is even within remote striking distance of being elected to higher office of almost any sort.
Obviously I know that. I'm talking purely hypothetically and philosophically. The poster I was arguing with seems to favor some sort of anarchist communism and finds anything else too far to the right.
When one of my posts a whole bunch of pages back set off this whole back and forth between you and Shaddy: this was in large part what I was originally referring to. The political axis of the United States is SO absurdly thrown off to the far right, that what is "moderate" for us is actually still fairly far to the right of most other developed nations. And our "far, far Left" are actually moderates (center-left at most) on the international stage. An ACTUAL mainstream, normal Left politician from almost any European nation for example, would be seen as the reincarnation of Che Guevara or Lenin in the U.S.

(Though this is currently in flux as the political axis of plenty of other European and otherwise non-U.S. nations are likewise being dragged to the right, and for relatively similar-ish reasons overall as the U.S. - but even then a lot of these countries are a bit further behind that process from where we are currently)

So when I say "our current political situation requires a SHARP leftward turn" this is largely what I'm referring to: everything in politics regarding gauging what is "Left" vs "Right" is INCREDIBLY contingent upon the broader context of a given political landscape (especially when its in relation to and being compared against the broader political landscapes of other regions).
Again, I'm aware of that. All I was saying is that it's certainly possible to go too far left - it's not an absolute scale where the farther left you go, the better your position is. If you're dying of thirst in 150+ degree weather in the desert, you certainly want it to be a lot cooler, but you should still recognize that it's possible to freeze to death if it gets too cold.

I'm certainly all for all kinds of social policy reform, but when (as some people on forums like these seem to want) you talk about completely dismantling the government, removing all traces of capitalism, and utterly restructuring every part of society, that's a bit too much. It's not that I don't appreciate why people would want to do this, or what they hope to achieve by it, but just looking at history says it's almost certainly going to end up being worse for basically everyone. Of course, though, I know that there is no realistic chance of such a thing happening in the current US political landscape, but that doesn't mean that I can't call it a bad idea when someone suggests it.
Cool stuff that I upload here because Youtube will copyright claim it: https://vimeo.com/user60967147

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

Re: Dragon Ball Super Gets Cancelled Overseas Over Sexual Harassment Claims

Post by Shaddy » Fri Sep 24, 2021 10:42 pm

Polyphase Avatron wrote: Fri Sep 24, 2021 7:09 pm Seems you have your own peculiar definition of communism and ignore all of the other ways it's been conceived of and implemented throughout history. I see no evidence that a completely stateless, anarchist society would ever work on a large scale either.
No, I have the definition. It's your problem if you listen to what fascist propagandists say the definition is over the people who are trying to have an actual discussion. You might as well condemn democracy because North Korea calls themselves "democratic".
Polyphase Avatron wrote: Fri Sep 24, 2021 10:12 pm Again, I'm aware of that. All I was saying is that it's certainly possible to go too far left - it's not an absolute scale where the farther left you go, the better your position is. If you're dying of thirst in 150+ degree weather in the desert, you certainly want it to be a lot cooler, but you should still recognize that it's possible to freeze to death if it gets too cold.
Even if this comparison were fair or accurate -- your bad argument still hinges on the idea that it could somehow be so cold that you burn to a crisp -- because your idea of "too far left" is just reactionary conservatism for groups less popular with conservatives, and that's complete bullshit.

User avatar
JulieYBM
Patreon Supporter
Posts: 16503
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2006 10:25 pm

Re: Dragon Ball Super Gets Cancelled Overseas Over Sexual Harassment Claims

Post by JulieYBM » Fri Sep 24, 2021 10:47 pm

I still don't think I've seen an actual example of being 'too far left' in this thread.
She/Her💕 💜 💙
progesterone princess, estradiol empress
Lucifer's bimbo daughter

WittyUsername
I Live Here
Posts: 4170
Joined: Sun Dec 22, 2013 12:09 am
Location: Houston, Texas

Re: Dragon Ball Super Gets Cancelled Overseas Over Sexual Harassment Claims

Post by WittyUsername » Fri Sep 24, 2021 11:53 pm

I always hear proponents of people like Bernie Sanders and AOC argue that they’d be considered “moderates” in other countries, but is that actually true? From my understanding, Medicare for All is a radical idea that goes beyond what other countries offer in terms of healthcare. I have trouble believing that these people would be considered moderates anywhere outside of places like Cuba.

User avatar
Kamiccolo9
Namekian Warrior
Posts: 10352
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2013 9:32 pm
Location: Regensburg, Germany

Re: Dragon Ball Super Gets Cancelled Overseas Over Sexual Harassment Claims

Post by Kamiccolo9 » Sat Sep 25, 2021 3:11 am

WittyUsername wrote: Fri Sep 24, 2021 11:53 pm I always hear proponents of people like Bernie Sanders and AOC argue that they’d be considered “moderates” in other countries, but is that actually true? From my understanding, Medicare for All is a radical idea that goes beyond what other countries offer in terms of healthcare. I have trouble believing that these people would be considered moderates anywhere outside of places like Cuba.
Sanders would be a fairly moderate left-winger in
Western Europe, which is what people are generally referring to here. He's actually much more to the left on immigration than most European leftists, but he's historically less restrictive on guns. He mostly advocates for nordic style social democratic policies.

Like, Americans reeeaaallllyyy don't get how fuccking crazy our political system to the reat of the western world. Aside from Poland and Hungary (btw, look where CPAC is this year,), we are much more rightward leaning. Like, the extreme right and neo-nazi fringe parties on Europe spout GOP talking points. The far right strategy on Europe is to Americanize the election process.
Champion of the 1st Kanzenshuu Short Story Tenkaichi Budokai
Kamiccolo9's Kompendium of Short Stories
Cipher wrote:If Vegeta does not kill Gohan, I will stop illegally streaming the series.
Malik_DBNA wrote:
Scarz wrote:Malik, stop. People are asking me for lewd art of possessed Bra (with Vegeta).
"Achievement Unlocked: Rule 34"

User avatar
Adamant
I Live Here
Posts: 3322
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2004 1:02 pm
Location: Viking Land

Re: Dragon Ball Super Gets Cancelled Overseas Over Sexual Harassment Claims

Post by Adamant » Sat Sep 25, 2021 3:39 am

super michael wrote: Fri Sep 03, 2021 8:26 am Pokémon got some episode that got banned, but that didn't cause the whole Pokémon anime to get cancelled.
The Pokemon anime got taken off the air for four months and would've been at a pretty high risk of outright cancellation if not for the ultra-popular IP it was tied to. Not the best example.
Satan wrote:Lortedrøm! Bøh slog min datter ihjel! Hvad bilder du dig ind, Bøh?! Nu kommer Super-Satan og rydder op!

User avatar
Aim
Banned
Posts: 761
Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2020 8:06 am
Contact:

Re: Dragon Ball Super Gets Cancelled Overseas Over Sexual Harassment Claims

Post by Aim » Sat Sep 25, 2021 4:48 am

Polyphase Avatron wrote: Fri Sep 24, 2021 7:09 pm
Shaddy wrote: Wed Sep 22, 2021 12:18 am
Polyphase Avatron wrote: Tue Sep 21, 2021 7:23 pm Not the same, just prone to similarly bad points of extremism.
A false equivalence is a false equivalence.
Polyphase Avatron wrote: Tue Sep 21, 2021 7:23 pm And if those posts don't represent what you're saying, then maybe you're just a bad communicator.
So I should blame myself for your dishonesty? How very rational and big-brained of you.
Polyphase Avatron wrote: Tue Sep 21, 2021 7:23 pm You did say that the USSR and China were right-wing and that communism could work if 'done properly', didn't you?
If I'm such a bad communicator, maybe you couldn't tell what I said.
Polyphase Avatron wrote: Tue Sep 21, 2021 7:33 pm And of course some people will go and say 'no, no, no, that's not real communism', but that is what we got when they tried to create communist states.
You can't create a "communist state". It is by-definition stateless. Anyone who calls themselves a communist and then builds a government is a liar.

But I guess no matter how many times I go over that, you'll continue spouting red-scare propaganda, as if capitalism doesn't cause more deaths every year than the black book of communism reports, even when it buffs its numbers with nazis killed in World War 2 as "victims of communism".
Seems you have your own peculiar definition of communism and ignore all of the other ways it's been conceived of and implemented throughout history. I see no evidence that a completely stateless, anarchist society would ever work on a large scale either.
There seems to be an issue people have where failed socialist societies that have become government dictated are now referred to as socialist/communist.

To put things simply, capitalism is characterised by private ownership of the means of production, to put EXTREMELY SIMPLY.
Socialism is characterised by common ownership of the means of production.

Let’s take a look why the examples you give do not adhere to any kind of socialist or communist society.

The USSR was state controlled, their “collectivisation” was putting a government authority in control of the farms, they also put a quota in place in which people were killed for not reaching the quota, any extra grain would be tossed away, this doesn’t even fall in line with capitalism or communism, it’s incredibly stupid.
The “people” essentially were under a dictatorship, not to mention anyone who was considered to be out of line, including other communists, were killed. Did you know Stalin almost sided with Hitler? The only reason this didn’t happen was because Stalin was greedy and wanted more than what Hitler was willing to give.

China has private property, workers are treated like shit, just like in the USSR, there is nothing remotely socialist about these countries, unfortunately back then I don’t think the technology was developed enough to reach socialism, like it is today.

There is a distinct difference in “far left” and far right, in that the far right seeks to regress humanity and the left in general wants progression. You cannot deny this from all the writings of prominent people on the left, up to this very day the left is built upon a need for humanity to progress and overall make life happier for everyone.

As to evidence, you won’t find any evidence because you need a technological advanced society to form socialism, otherwise you end up with problems like people using labour vouchers as actual currency which under a modern socialist society it wouldn’t be possible since it’d be done through virtual exchange.

Saying that countries who tried “socialism” is wrong in the way that’s it’s far more nuanced than that, the USSR and China have failed completely and have become capitalist, there was so little freedom in the USSR that men had to get razors through the black market. It’s not that socialism doesn’t work, it’s that society isn’t in a stage that it can progress to that yet (like imagine going from feudalism to the capitalism we have right now, before the loom and steam engine was created), or that capitalist countries destabilise them because socialism is a progression, ridding the society of the profit motive and more democracy (like worker co ops for start).

Hopefully this takes some strain off of Shaddy, and hopefully you understand this now.

Brodes
Beyond Newbie
Posts: 216
Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 4:41 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Dragon Ball Super Gets Cancelled Overseas Over Sexual Harassment Claims

Post by Brodes » Sat Sep 25, 2021 9:16 am

Yuji wrote: Fri Sep 24, 2021 7:33 am
PurestEvil wrote: Fri Sep 24, 2021 7:09 am
Yuji wrote: Fri Sep 24, 2021 6:34 am Concerning amounts of ace erasure going on in this thread.
Care to explain?
Ace people, or even just generally straight and queer people, who are not comfortable with sexuality being paraded around in media and advertisement are not necessarily "prudish conservative weirdos." I speak from experience talking to A and Q people on the left who share the same sentiment. It's not because it's "normal" or "not the first time" that it makes these people feel more comfortable. My asexual's girlfriend tolerance to sexuality in any kind of media ranges from tolerable (when it comes to media she agrees to consume, such as voluntarily clicking on a YouTube video or watching a movie) to absolute, visceral disgust (when it comes to non-consensual viewings of sexuality such as advertisement or radio), for example. I remember her first experience of WAP was the latter because she caught it on TV.

WAP and other music videos or art with the same inclination being so prevalent is fine, express yourself how you want to, but to ignore how someone left of Trump may have some legitimate grievances with the popularization of such an interpersonal thing - sexuality - shows narrow-mindedness.

I may have misinterpreted Kunzait's points, but in my experience he (and others) consistently jumps the gun and makes broad generalizations when it comes to aligning certain attitudes with a certain political side.
This is interesting because my Ace husband has no visceral reaction to any kind of sex portrayed in media (well outside of his irritation and disgust at the normalisation of sexual assault in a ton of media or the belief that being ace in some way is often presented as a negative). He is just not interested in sex himself. Same with my ace best friend who reads tons of porny fanfiction (admittedly they both identify as asexual but homoromantic/biromantic respectively). I would imagine this is, based purely on anecdotal evidence an issue your girlfriend has herself rather than based on her ace sexuality.

User avatar
Yuji
Advanced Regular
Posts: 1107
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2020 6:20 pm

Re: Dragon Ball Super Gets Cancelled Overseas Over Sexual Harassment Claims

Post by Yuji » Sat Sep 25, 2021 9:20 am

Brodes wrote: Sat Sep 25, 2021 9:16 am
Yuji wrote: Fri Sep 24, 2021 7:33 am
PurestEvil wrote: Fri Sep 24, 2021 7:09 am

Care to explain?
Ace people, or even just generally straight and queer people, who are not comfortable with sexuality being paraded around in media and advertisement are not necessarily "prudish conservative weirdos." I speak from experience talking to A and Q people on the left who share the same sentiment. It's not because it's "normal" or "not the first time" that it makes these people feel more comfortable. My asexual's girlfriend tolerance to sexuality in any kind of media ranges from tolerable (when it comes to media she agrees to consume, such as voluntarily clicking on a YouTube video or watching a movie) to absolute, visceral disgust (when it comes to non-consensual viewings of sexuality such as advertisement or radio), for example. I remember her first experience of WAP was the latter because she caught it on TV.

WAP and other music videos or art with the same inclination being so prevalent is fine, express yourself how you want to, but to ignore how someone left of Trump may have some legitimate grievances with the popularization of such an interpersonal thing - sexuality - shows narrow-mindedness.

I may have misinterpreted Kunzait's points, but in my experience he (and others) consistently jumps the gun and makes broad generalizations when it comes to aligning certain attitudes with a certain political side.
This is interesting because my Ace husband has no visceral reaction to any kind of sex portrayed in media (well outside of his irritation and disgust at the normalisation of sexual assault in a ton of media or the belief that being ace in some way is often presented as a negative). He is just not interested in sex himself. Same with my ace best friend who reads tons of porny fanfiction (admittedly they both identify as asexual but homoromantic/biromantic respectively). I would imagine this is, based purely on anecdotal evidence an issue your girlfriend has herself rather than based on her ace sexuality.
There are differing levels of tolerance to outward sexual demonstrations. Some ace folks are sex-repulsed.

And I would argue you don't even need to be ace and/or sex-repulsed to find outward sexual behavior uncomfortable. You're intruding into someone's private and intimate moments, or they're intruding on your comfort to deal with such things.

User avatar
FPSSJ4_Goku
Regular
Posts: 537
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2020 1:33 pm
Location: New York, US
Contact:

Re: Dragon Ball Super Gets Cancelled Overseas Over Sexual Harassment Claims

Post by FPSSJ4_Goku » Sat Sep 25, 2021 9:32 am

Kunzait_83 wrote: Fri Sep 24, 2021 9:50 pm
Polyphase Avatron wrote: Fri Sep 24, 2021 7:09 pmSeems you have your own peculiar definition of communism and ignore all of the other ways it's been conceived of and implemented throughout history. I see no evidence that a completely stateless, anarchist society would ever work on a large scale either.
This is less about this specific piece of the pages-long back and forth between yourself and Shaddy so much as the broader nature of the debate itself within the context from which it originally sprung from throughout this thread:

For all practical purposes, there's literally almost ZERO consequential constituency in the U.S. (apart from your usual smattering handful of fringe figures) for actual, full blown, full bore communism. Furthermore there is no one who is even the LEAST bit anywhere within a billion lightyears of being anything that's even approaching full blown communism within any corner of elected office, or who is even within remote striking distance of being elected to higher office of almost any sort. Nor will there likely be anytime in the remotely foreseeable future. So any worry or concern regarding actual communism overtaking the U.S. political arena is... WILDLY, hysterically batshit nuts, to put it mildly.

Lets set all the Fox News, Qanon, and American Conservative hyperbole and psychotic hysterics aside here: the furthest-furthest Left electoral coalition we have in American politics (AOC, Sanders, the Squad, etc) are generally considered fairly lukewarm moderates on the broader international stage. Because the American political axis/overton window is ludicrously, dementedly, lunatic-level skewed and tilted to the right relative to much of the rest of the first world. And that dynamic has unfortunately been VERY normalized for way, way too many Americans.

When one of my posts a whole bunch of pages back set off this whole back and forth between you and Shaddy: this was in large part what I was originally referring to. The political axis of the United States is SO absurdly thrown off to the far right, that what is "moderate" for us is actually still fairly far to the right of most other developed nations. And our "far, far Left" are actually moderates (center-left at most) on the international stage. An ACTUAL mainstream, normal Left politician from almost any European nation for example, would be seen as the reincarnation of Che Guevara or Lenin in the U.S.

(Though this is currently in flux as the political axis of plenty of other European and otherwise non-U.S. nations are likewise being dragged to the right, and for relatively similar-ish reasons overall as the U.S. - but even then a lot of these countries are a bit further behind that process from where we are currently)

So when I say "our current political situation requires a SHARP leftward turn" this is largely what I'm referring to: everything in politics regarding gauging what is "Left" vs "Right" is INCREDIBLY contingent upon the broader context of a given political landscape (especially when its in relation to and being compared against the broader political landscapes of other regions).

I mean... this isn't THAT hard to understand ultimately. This is basically the current political dynamic here in the U.S.

Image

When I drag Centrism and contest that its barely much better than the far right in the current climate (and in a great, great many cases Centrism within the current dynamic even flat out HELPS the far right in the long run): this is why. And its also why, when this is more or less representative of the current axis of political thought and debate, why I maintain that WITHIN THAT CONTEXT, WITHIN THAT FRAMEWORK, going sharply Leftward is the obvious and clear answer that isn't sociopathic and homicidal/suicidal.

As the axis changes, as the overton window moves further and further back leftward away from the extreme right in which it currently sits, THEN that actually opens up the debate back to something that halfway resembles sanity and normalcy once again, and we can adjust ourselves accordingly.

Here, I'll let another, much smarter person than myself round this out with what I think is a very solid explanation of how the political spectrum is much better viewed:
I want to address one very common point made, which is "we don't need Republicans, but we need a strong small-c conservative party."

We don't. Not right now. We need a VERY weak conservative party.

Setting aside the largely correct corollary that the Democratic Party IS that conservative party (which at least some faction of it is.) I think the idea of necessary conservative reveals dominant misapprehension about the nature of conservatism and progressivism. Conservatism and progressivism are often treated as naturally occurring identities—as if some are just conservative, and others just progressive.

And they're treated like two wings on the same bird, both necessary for flight.

I think they're strategies—*situational* strategies.

Conservatism and progressivism exist on a spectrum, but to reduce them to a binary for simplicity’s sake, let's say they are two ways of interacting with an existing order. Specifically, with whatever one currently exists.

(And here I mean "conservatism" in the way the commenters meant, as the small-c conservatism that we allegedly need to be strong in this moment, rather than the white supremacist, nationalist, fascist, authoritarian, kleptocratic thing the term presently signifies.)

Conservatism" is, in its essence, an ideology that desires to keep things as they are, and to make slow and calculated adjustment, or no adjustments, to that underlying order. Conservatism sits at the center of the spectrum. It is only as good as the order upon which it sits.

"Progressivism" is, in its essence, an ideology that desires to leave the existing order, in favor of an order that its practitioners see as better, even necessary. Progressivism pushes away from the center of the spectrum. It is only as good as its proposed destination.

For us to know whether we ‘need’ a strong conservatism at the present moment requires a judgment about the existing order—which requires some underlying value against which to judge it. For us to know whether we ‘need’ a strong progressivism also requires that judgment, and a judgment about the direction of any needed progress—which, again, requires some underlying value against which to compare.

This is why it is useless for us to say we ‘need’ both conservatives and progressives.

Conservatives conserving … what?

Progressives progressing toward … what?

If we are in a time where great change is desperately necessary for survival, then we would hope for a very strong progressive party with a beneficial direction, and a very weak conservative party. If we are in a time when everything is working great, we would want the opposite.

Right now we have looming climate disaster, and we have massive wealth inequality, and we have a global pandemic, and we have the very tenets of democracy under attack. And, as they say, so on.

I would argue that we need a VERY weak conservative party.

Our argument is not taking place on an axis of conservatism and progressivism at all. It’s taking place on axis of moral value. We’re contending over which value-set will undergird our moral order. I’ll name the struggle.

I’d say it’s a struggle between an axis of universal justice versus an axis of specific dominance. The distinction matters; it prevents us from seeing the real struggle. The people calling themselves "conservative" aren’t conservative at all. They’re progressives, of a kind. They have a direction. Not forward, but backward. Into mutually assured destruction. Regressives.

They yearn for a time when their way of being—in matters of religion, skin tone, gender, identity, sexuality, wealth—dominated all others. A time when there was a normal, and that was them. And there was an abnormal, and those kept quiet if they knew what was good for them. They call themselves ‘conservative,’ these regressives, because there was a time when their way of seeing things WAS the moral order. It was the axis. And in that old time, believing as you did, you WOULD be conservative.

But we’ve moved since. And we don't need them strong.

Today’s conservatives—the small-c conservatives—are those who keep us here, frozen, or moving too slowly for the danger. We don't need them strong, either. We need them very weak. Our current order balances too precariously. Too many people are in danger. All, really.

In some future day, when we have made a sustainable universal justice our axis, and we have moved our position as close to its center as we can, I would hope to be a conservative.

We’re not there now. Until we are, I will not be conservative.

We aren’t two wings, a right and a left. We’re a compass, deciding which direction to point. We're a navigator, deciding whether or not to journey. A compass can’t point in two directions. We can’t decide both to move AND to not move. We don't need both impulses to be strong. What we need is to minimize and destroy any influence held by a regressivism that would move us toward mutually assured destruction, in order to satisfy its own greed or ego.

And we need to make our conservative impulses as weak as possible, until they are appropriate again.
Say, Kunzait, where's you get your second sig from?
So, you decided to read my signature, eh?

If you'd like, check out my YouTube channel, and maybe subscribe?

User avatar
JulieYBM
Patreon Supporter
Posts: 16503
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2006 10:25 pm

Re: Dragon Ball Super Gets Cancelled Overseas Over Sexual Harassment Claims

Post by JulieYBM » Sat Sep 25, 2021 11:32 am

Since we're on the subject of outward displays of sexuality: there is actually a long history of public sex in the queer community that is super fascinating to read about. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.dailyd ... btq/%3famp

As someone who isn't particularly big on being openly sexual (mixture of trauma, dysphoria and my bi cycle) I honestly don't mind open displays of sexuality because it's a a form of liberation and I understand the need to take back agency. Just don't involve me by trying to play footsies with me while you're masturbating in the stall next to me (yes, this happened to me before).
She/Her💕 💜 💙
progesterone princess, estradiol empress
Lucifer's bimbo daughter

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

Re: Dragon Ball Super Gets Cancelled Overseas Over Sexual Harassment Claims

Post by Kunzait_83 » Sat Sep 25, 2021 11:47 am

Brodes wrote: Sat Sep 25, 2021 9:16 amThis is interesting because my Ace husband has no visceral reaction to any kind of sex portrayed in media (well outside of his irritation and disgust at the normalisation of sexual assault in a ton of media or the belief that being ace in some way is often presented as a negative). He is just not interested in sex himself. Same with my ace best friend who reads tons of porny fanfiction (admittedly they both identify as asexual but homoromantic/biromantic respectively). I would imagine this is, based purely on anecdotal evidence an issue your girlfriend has herself rather than based on her ace sexuality.
To add further to this: I actually once briefly dated an Ace girl in college many, many years ago. And this description about perfectly lines up with her as well. I've also known a handful of other Ace individuals as well, and this seems to track with them as well.

Obviously this is anecdotal, but I'm just saying that I'm largely at a loss as to where Yuji's earlier description of Ace people is coming from, since I've almost NEVER heard of that kind of visceral disgust/repulsion toward sexuality displayed near them being used to describe any significant subset of the Ace community (however relatively minuscule it already is) whatsoever.

Most Ace people typically, from what I've gathered over the years, are just wholly apathetic toward and disinterested in sex. Which isn't at all the same thing as the level of deep revulsion that Yuji is describing there.

FPSSJ4_Goku wrote: Sat Sep 25, 2021 9:32 amSay, Kunzait, where's you get your second sig from?
You didn't have to quote my ENTIRE post there just to ask me that simple little question. :lol:

Anyway, here it is.
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
CaroKami
Newbie
Posts: 13
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 8:22 pm
Location: North Carolina

Re: Dragon Ball Super Gets Cancelled Overseas Over Sexual Harassment Claims

Post by CaroKami » Sat Sep 25, 2021 1:06 pm

About the topic, I will never understand people getting so riled up about shit that happens in fiction. Like, it's not real.

As long as the writer isn't trying to send some kind of message to the audience that whatever immoral thing that happens in the story is completely okay, then let it be. People should be allowed to write whatever they want, and the audience should be allowed to choose whether or not they like it and if they want to continue to support it.

User avatar
FPSSJ4_Goku
Regular
Posts: 537
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2020 1:33 pm
Location: New York, US
Contact:

Re: Dragon Ball Super Gets Cancelled Overseas Over Sexual Harassment Claims

Post by FPSSJ4_Goku » Sat Sep 25, 2021 1:19 pm

CaroKami wrote: Sat Sep 25, 2021 1:06 pm About the topic, I will never understand people getting so riled up about shit that happens in fiction. Like, it's not real.

As long as the writer isn't trying to send some kind of message to the audience that whatever immoral thing that happens in the story is completely okay, then let it be. People should be allowed to write whatever they want, and the audience should be allowed to choose whether or not they like it and if they want to continue to support it.
It's simple - society got woke and realized that some of the stuff they tolerated in the past actually wasn't too acceptable, then they began to crack down on everything.
So, you decided to read my signature, eh?

If you'd like, check out my YouTube channel, and maybe subscribe?

WittyUsername
I Live Here
Posts: 4170
Joined: Sun Dec 22, 2013 12:09 am
Location: Houston, Texas

Re: Dragon Ball Super Gets Cancelled Overseas Over Sexual Harassment Claims

Post by WittyUsername » Sat Sep 25, 2021 1:21 pm

Kamiccolo9 wrote: Sat Sep 25, 2021 3:11 am
WittyUsername wrote: Fri Sep 24, 2021 11:53 pm I always hear proponents of people like Bernie Sanders and AOC argue that they’d be considered “moderates” in other countries, but is that actually true? From my understanding, Medicare for All is a radical idea that goes beyond what other countries offer in terms of healthcare. I have trouble believing that these people would be considered moderates anywhere outside of places like Cuba.
Sanders would be a fairly moderate left-winger in
Western Europe, which is what people are generally referring to here. He's actually much more to the left on immigration than most European leftists, but he's historically less restrictive on guns. He mostly advocates for nordic style social democratic policies.

Like, Americans reeeaaallllyyy don't get how fuccking crazy our political system to the reat of the western world. Aside from Poland and Hungary (btw, look where CPAC is this year,), we are much more rightward leaning. Like, the extreme right and neo-nazi fringe parties on Europe spout GOP talking points. The far right strategy on Europe is to Americanize the election process.
Bernie Sanders used to be firmly against immigration, which is probably why he’s had a decent following among the anti-SJW crowd. Of course, now that I think about it, Europe seems pretty behind America when it comes to immigration. Immigrants generally seem more well integrated in the United States compared to most European countries. Honestly, my general observation of European countries on average is that they are indeed to the left of America when it comes to economic issues (namely healthcare), but socially speaking, they’re not that great.

To try and cycle things back to the topic, what have European countries had to say about the Roshi scene in DBS?

User avatar
Yuji
Advanced Regular
Posts: 1107
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2020 6:20 pm

Re: Dragon Ball Super Gets Cancelled Overseas Over Sexual Harassment Claims

Post by Yuji » Sat Sep 25, 2021 1:35 pm

Kunzait_83 wrote: Sat Sep 25, 2021 11:47 am
Brodes wrote: Sat Sep 25, 2021 9:16 amThis is interesting because my Ace husband has no visceral reaction to any kind of sex portrayed in media (well outside of his irritation and disgust at the normalisation of sexual assault in a ton of media or the belief that being ace in some way is often presented as a negative). He is just not interested in sex himself. Same with my ace best friend who reads tons of porny fanfiction (admittedly they both identify as asexual but homoromantic/biromantic respectively). I would imagine this is, based purely on anecdotal evidence an issue your girlfriend has herself rather than based on her ace sexuality.
To add further to this: I actually once briefly dated an Ace girl in college many, many years ago. And this description about perfectly lines up with her as well. I've also known a handful of other Ace individuals as well, and this seems to track with them as well.

Obviously this is anecdotal, but I'm just saying that I'm largely at a loss as to where Yuji's earlier description of Ace people is coming from, since I've almost NEVER heard of that kind of visceral disgust/repulsion toward sexuality displayed near them being used to describe any significant subset of the Ace community (however relatively minuscule it already is) whatsoever.

Most Ace people typically, from what I've gathered over the years, are just wholly apathetic toward and disinterested in sex. Which isn't at all the same thing as the level of deep revulsion that Yuji is describing there.

FPSSJ4_Goku wrote: Sat Sep 25, 2021 9:32 amSay, Kunzait, where's you get your second sig from?
You didn't have to quote my ENTIRE post there just to ask me that simple little question. :lol:

Anyway, here it is.
I hope you're not implying sex repulsion or aversion doesn't exist based on anecdotal evidence. You can just Google sex repulsion to see my folks aren't exactly unique.

As to why they hav such a visceral reaction to sex, I can't relate but I'd imagine it's a similar reason why most people feel such a visceral reaction to gore.

User avatar
JulieYBM
Patreon Supporter
Posts: 16503
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2006 10:25 pm

Re: Dragon Ball Super Gets Cancelled Overseas Over Sexual Harassment Claims

Post by JulieYBM » Sat Sep 25, 2021 1:36 pm

CaroKami wrote: Sat Sep 25, 2021 1:06 pm As long as the writer isn't trying to send some kind of message to the audience that whatever immoral thing that happens in the story is completely okay, then let it be.
This is what happened. People complained and the work was removed from easy access to children.
She/Her💕 💜 💙
progesterone princess, estradiol empress
Lucifer's bimbo daughter

User avatar
FPSSJ4_Goku
Regular
Posts: 537
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2020 1:33 pm
Location: New York, US
Contact:

Re: Dragon Ball Super Gets Cancelled Overseas Over Sexual Harassment Claims

Post by FPSSJ4_Goku » Sat Sep 25, 2021 2:55 pm

By the way, guys, I made a new thread!

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=46725
So, you decided to read my signature, eh?

If you'd like, check out my YouTube channel, and maybe subscribe?

Locked