Who is older: Pan or Bra?

Discussion, generally of an in-universe nature, regarding any aspect of the franchise (including movies, spin-offs, etc.) such as: techniques, character relationships, internal back-history, its universe, and more.

Moderators: Kanzenshuu Staff, General Help

rereboy
Namekian Warrior
Posts: 10261
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 8:42 pm

Re: Who is older: Pan or Bra?

Post by rereboy » Wed Jun 22, 2016 9:56 am

Cetra wrote:
Kamiccolo9 wrote:No, Pan has always been older. GT's character designers were just on crack.
I am curious about how you feel after you have noticed that Toriyama-san is the one who designed Bra like that.
Toriyama designed Chi-chi, so...

ImageImage

User avatar
Hitiro
I Live Here
Posts: 3433
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 8:43 pm

Re: Who is older: Pan or Bra?

Post by Hitiro » Wed Jun 22, 2016 11:55 am

rereboy wrote:Toriyama designed Chi-chi, so...
I consider Chi Chi a warrior princess kind of design compared to Bra's "I'm a young hooker." design. I don't know what he was thinking when he designed Bra. But I can kind of understand what he was getting at with Chi Chi.

User avatar
Cetra
I Live Here
Posts: 3856
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 3:01 pm

Re: Who is older: Pan or Bra?

Post by Cetra » Wed Jun 22, 2016 2:06 pm

rereboy wrote:
Cetra wrote:
Kamiccolo9 wrote:No, Pan has always been older. GT's character designers were just on crack.
I am curious about how you feel after you have noticed that Toriyama-san is the one who designed Bra like that.
Toriyama designed Chi-chi, so...

ImageImage

I know. We have had that talk before. I thought about that yesterday.
"Citation needed."
"too lazy

feel free to take it with grain of salt or discredit me altogether, I'm not losing any sleep"

rereboy
Namekian Warrior
Posts: 10261
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 8:42 pm

Re: Who is older: Pan or Bra?

Post by rereboy » Thu Jun 23, 2016 5:01 am

Hitiro wrote:
rereboy wrote:Toriyama designed Chi-chi, so...
I consider Chi Chi a warrior princess kind of design compared to Bra's "I'm a young hooker." design. I don't know what he was thinking when he designed Bra. But I can kind of understand what he was getting at with Chi Chi.
Huh...? That seems to me that you are letting preconceptions/stereotypes dictate what you think of the clothes. Chi-chi basically has panties and a bra with shoulder pads (and also gloves and boots), while Bra has a top and a skirt (and also gloves and boots). Objectively speaking, Chi-chi's outfit is clearly much more revealing while Bra's doesn't reveal that much at all. Even Chi-chi's gloves and boots are more revealing than Bra's gloves and boots.
Cetra wrote:I know. We have had that talk before. I thought about that yesterday.
I don't really remember.

User avatar
Hitiro
I Live Here
Posts: 3433
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 8:43 pm

Re: Who is older: Pan or Bra?

Post by Hitiro » Fri Jun 24, 2016 12:22 pm

rereboy wrote:
Hitiro wrote:
rereboy wrote:Toriyama designed Chi-chi, so...
I consider Chi Chi a warrior princess kind of design compared to Bra's "I'm a young hooker." design. I don't know what he was thinking when he designed Bra. But I can kind of understand what he was getting at with Chi Chi.
Huh...? That seems to me that you are letting preconceptions/stereotypes dictate what you think of the clothes. Chi-chi basically has panties and a bra with shoulder pads (and also gloves and boots), while Bra has a top and a skirt (and also gloves and boots). Objectively speaking, Chi-chi's outfit is clearly much more revealing while Bra's doesn't reveal that much at all. Even Chi-chi's gloves and boots are more revealing than Bra's gloves and boots.
But there is a reason for her to be dressed akin to that. Like Amazonian warriors wear little clothes. It increases mobility in combat. And she is actually wearing armour. Bra's clothing is designed for none of these features. It is purely designed for sex appeal. Especially with it being some sort of latex.

User avatar
TheGreatness25
I Live Here
Posts: 4362
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 9:36 am

Re: Who is older: Pan or Bra?

Post by TheGreatness25 » Fri Jun 24, 2016 12:31 pm

Hooker Bra in GT was easily the worst character in the series who was carried over from Z. Then again, when her mom was a teenager, she was willing to show her panties to strange, savage 12 year old boys, so what the hell can one expect? No... no, screw that. Still doesn't compare to 8 year old Bra not only dressing like a hooker, but flirting with guys (I think she did, can't remember really but I'm sure she does with the guys driving next to Vegeta).

User avatar
Anime Kitten
I Live Here
Posts: 4261
Joined: Mon May 23, 2016 3:53 pm
Contact:

Re: Who is older: Pan or Bra?

Post by Anime Kitten » Fri Jun 24, 2016 12:35 pm

Nah, she just says hi to them, at least in the dub. That's something I really hate about the Japanese version, is there's NO WAY Bulla could be 8. She's... just, no.
MyAnimeList | AniList
Discord: Nagareboshi#5185

User avatar
Kaboom
Moderator
Posts: 14185
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 6:07 pm
Location: Funky Town
Contact:

Re: Who is older: Pan or Bra?

Post by Kaboom » Fri Jun 24, 2016 12:40 pm

If I recall, in the Japanese version of that scene Bra basically just offered those dudes a (perhaps insincere) apology for her strong papa being in a bad mood.
deviantART
FanFic: DragonBall GT Revised
[thread]
Powar Levuls: Main Series | Movies and Specials | GT
Nintendo/PSN/Steam: KaboomKrusader
ACNH Dream Address: DA-1637-4046-7415 ("SlamZone")

We Gotta Power >>>>> Cha-La Head Cha-La. Fight me.
If Super wanted to be "canon," then it should have been good.
A handy video guide to Kanzenshuu-level grammar quality!

User avatar
Cetra
I Live Here
Posts: 3856
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 3:01 pm

Re: Who is older: Pan or Bra?

Post by Cetra » Fri Jun 24, 2016 1:59 pm

Bra was never flirting with them. She apologized for Vegeta because he was in a bad mood (because of the shopping). Yes.
"Citation needed."
"too lazy

feel free to take it with grain of salt or discredit me altogether, I'm not losing any sleep"

User avatar
Bansho64
I Live Here
Posts: 2034
Joined: Fri Dec 25, 2015 12:59 am

Re: Who is older: Pan or Bra?

Post by Bansho64 » Sat Jun 25, 2016 7:33 am

TheGreatness25 wrote:Hooker Bra in GT was easily the worst character in the series who was carried over from Z. Then again, when her mom was a teenager, she was willing to show her panties to strange, savage 12 year old boys, so what the hell can one expect? No... no, screw that. Still doesn't compare to 8 year old Bra not only dressing like a hooker, but flirting with guys (I think she did, can't remember really but I'm sure she does with the guys driving next to Vegeta).
I'm surprised Vegeta even let her plant one foot outside the door wearing that crap :shock: Like Vegeta, ain't there somethin' else you gots to worrying 'bout besides surpassing Goku? Yo daughter walkin' outside lookin' like she ain't got no sliver of sense. :?

User avatar
Ringworm128
I Live Here
Posts: 2948
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 3:27 am
Contact:

Re: Who is older: Pan or Bra?

Post by Ringworm128 » Sun Jun 26, 2016 5:19 am

Wait Bra's 8? I also thought she was at least 12-13 but 8? :shock:

Only something Toriyama could think up.
If you have to write a small thesis every time you respond to a post you're not an intellectual, you're just bad at making your point.

rereboy
Namekian Warrior
Posts: 10261
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 8:42 pm

Re: Who is older: Pan or Bra?

Post by rereboy » Mon Jun 27, 2016 5:29 am

Hitiro wrote:But there is a reason for her to be dressed akin to that. Like Amazonian warriors wear little clothes. It increases mobility in combat. And she is actually wearing armour. Bra's clothing is designed for none of these features. It is purely designed for sex appeal. Especially with it being some sort of latex.
I don't think anyone can argue that Chi-Chi's clothes are meant to be armor and to protect her body with a straight face. Amazonian warriors who wear little clothes aren't concerned with protection and armor, and amazonian warriors who care about protection have at the very least the same protection that Xena had in her series (and even that was already a little amount of armor and had a sexualized style).

As for Bra, you just seem to be letting stereotypes influence what you think since you associate latex or leather with hookers.

Yes, Bra's outfit is sexualized, but it's basically the same thing as Chi-Chi. Chi-Chi's outfit is actually worse, objectively speaking, since it's more revealing.

User avatar
dbgtFO
Kicks it Old-School
Posts: 7801
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2010 5:07 pm
Contact:

Re: Who is older: Pan or Bra?

Post by dbgtFO » Mon Jun 27, 2016 11:53 am

ringworm128 wrote:Wait Bra's 8? I also thought she was at least 12-13 but 8? :shock:

Only something Toriyama could think up.
Toriyama may not have been given the specific placement on how many years after The 28th Tournament GT took place.
Even GT itself does not establish it.

User avatar
Ringworm128
I Live Here
Posts: 2948
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 3:27 am
Contact:

Re: Who is older: Pan or Bra?

Post by Ringworm128 » Mon Jun 27, 2016 12:08 pm

dbgtFO wrote:
ringworm128 wrote:Wait Bra's 8? I also thought she was at least 12-13 but 8? :shock:

Only something Toriyama could think up.
Toriyama may not have been given the specific placement on how many years after The 28th Tournament GT took place.
Even GT itself does not establish it.
Makes sense, she really just doesn't look 8, even if put her in a plain sun dress. Also I'l say that if you look at her design without thinking of it as being sexual, it's pretty neat character design. Definitely makes Bra stand out visually.
If you have to write a small thesis every time you respond to a post you're not an intellectual, you're just bad at making your point.

User avatar
Darkprince410
I Live Here
Posts: 2291
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 11:12 pm

Re: Who is older: Pan or Bra?

Post by Darkprince410 » Mon Jun 27, 2016 3:33 pm

ringworm128 wrote:Wait Bra's 8? I also thought she was at least 12-13 but 8? :shock:

Only something Toriyama could think up.
There's only a 5 year gap between the end of Z and GT (though the Funimation dub changed that to 10 year) and since Bra was only around 4 years old at the end of Z (would turn 4 that year, regardless), she'd be 8-9 years old at the start of GT.

User avatar
Hitiro
I Live Here
Posts: 3433
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 8:43 pm

Re: Who is older: Pan or Bra?

Post by Hitiro » Tue Jun 28, 2016 6:31 pm

rereboy wrote:I don't think anyone can argue that Chi-Chi's clothes are meant to be armor and to protect her body with a straight face. Amazonian warriors who wear little clothes aren't concerned with protection and armor, and amazonian warriors who care about protection have at the very least the same protection that Xena had in her series (and even that was already a little amount of armor and had a sexualized style).

As for Bra, you just seem to be letting stereotypes influence what you think since you associate latex or leather with hookers.

Yes, Bra's outfit is sexualized, but it's basically the same thing as Chi-Chi. Chi-Chi's outfit is actually worse, objectively speaking, since it's more revealing.
What are you on about? She is clearly wearing armour. Armour does serve a purpose. And I've seen plenty of Amazonian warrior designs similar to Chi Chi's. It serves the purpose of being protection and light fitting for manoeuvrability and flexibility. While I don't disagree that it is sexualised to a certain degree, Akira Toriyama clearly could have made her wear a bit more, it is honestly lessened by the fact that what she is wearing does serve a purpose. Bra's outfit however has not purpose other than to make her look sexual. For comparison you're basically saying that a girl in a bikini, which is designed to be comfortable to wear while swimming, is more sexual than a girl dressed in a full gimp outfit.

rereboy
Namekian Warrior
Posts: 10261
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 8:42 pm

Re: Who is older: Pan or Bra?

Post by rereboy » Wed Jun 29, 2016 5:20 am

Hitiro wrote:What are you on about? She is clearly wearing armour. Armour does serve a purpose.
She is wearing a bra with shoulder pads and panties. Even if they were made out of Katchin, those clothes would basically just be really resistant underwear, not an actual armored outfit that prioritized protection. I don't know how you can argue the opposite with a straight face.
And I've seen plenty of Amazonian warrior designs similar to Chi Chi's. It serves the purpose of being protection and light fitting for manoeuvrability and flexibility
You've seen fantasy renditions of amazonians. An outfit that offered some protection would have to be, at the very least, something like Xena wore in her series, and even that is on the light side. Less than that and clearly there isn't a real focus on protection in the outfit.
While I don't disagree that it is sexualised to a certain degree, Akira Toriyama clearly could have made her wear a bit more, it is honestly lessened by the fact that what she is wearing does serve a purpose. Bra's outfit however has not purpose other than to make her look sexual.


Bra's outfit is no more sexualized/revealing than Chichi's outfit. The only reason why you are saying it is, is because your preconceptions and the stereotypes are telling you that one outfit looks like an warrior princess kind of outfit, and the other looks an hooker type of outfit, so one is good and the other is bad.

If you thought about the issue rationally, instead of relying on preconceptions and stereotypes, you would realize that they are basically the same.

You would only have a point if we knew for sure that Toriyama designed her to look like a hooker on purpose, with that exact thought in mind. Without that, you are just seeing an outfit that reminds you of that and letting preconceptions and stereotypes do the rest.
For comparison you're basically saying that a girl in a bikini, which is designed to be comfortable to wear while swimming, is more sexual than a girl dressed in a full gimp outfit.
The only reason why people think bikinis are ok to look at, but underwear isn't, for example is just because of preconceptions and stereotypes. The same thing can be said regarding "hooker outfits". So you are kind of proving my point here.

User avatar
Hitiro
I Live Here
Posts: 3433
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 8:43 pm

Re: Who is older: Pan or Bra?

Post by Hitiro » Wed Jun 29, 2016 5:44 am

rereboy wrote:
Hitiro wrote:What are you on about? She is clearly wearing armour. Armour does serve a purpose.
She is wearing a bra with shoulder pads and panties. Even if they were made out of Katchin, those clothes would basically just be really resistant underwear, not an actual armored outfit that prioritized protection. If you can argue the opposite with a straight face, there is really nothing more to discuss.
And I've seen plenty of Amazonian warrior designs similar to Chi Chi's. It serves the purpose of being protection and light fitting for maneuverability and flexibility
You've seen fantasy renditions of amazonians. An outfit that offered some protection would have to be, at the very least, something like Xena wore in her series, and even that is on the little armor side. Less than that and clearly there isn't a real focus on protection in the outfit.
Look, despite what you say, it is armour and it does provide protection, however little that may be. It serves a function. Bra's doesn't serve anything other than making her into sex object. If you can't see that then you're blind. And really anything that offered protection would not have to apply to the whole body, the Sarmartian's, who were descended from the Amazons and the Scythians, often had male fighters who only wore a helmet and used a shield. As depicted in this stonework.[spoiler]Image[/spoiler]

rereboy
Namekian Warrior
Posts: 10261
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 8:42 pm

Re: Who is older: Pan or Bra?

Post by rereboy » Wed Jun 29, 2016 7:23 am

Hitiro wrote:Look, despite what you say, it is armour and it does provide protection, however little that may be. It serves a function.
It provides the same protection as underwear, only more resistant. If you want to call that an outfit that prioritizes protection, which is what an armored outfit is, be my guest. However, to me, it's clear that the focus of the outfit is not protection.
Bra's doesn't serve anything other than making her into sex object.
Because all you can see when looking at the outfit is a hooker, thanks to preconceptions and stereotypes. You don't even know if that was the intention of the author, but because it reminds you of that, that's all you can see, even though it's actually much less revealing than ChiChi's outfit which supposedly prioritizes protection.
If you can't see that then you're blind.


I can actually see beyond preconceptions and stereotypes, so...
And really anything that offered protection would not have to apply to the whole body, the Sarmartian's, who were descended from the Amazons and the Scythians, often had male fighters who only wore a helmet and used a shield. As depicted in this stonework.[spoiler]Image[/spoiler]
These Sarmatians?

"In the year 357 the Sarmatians did together with a neighboring nation the Quad incursions in the Roman bank of the Danube in Pannonia and Moesië led by their princes Zizais, Rumo, Zinafer, Usafer and Fragiledus. A contemporary writes about them: "these barbarians, who are better in raids than in open battle, armed with long spears and wearing armor of linen shirts on which are sewn as scales polished plates of horn"".

In http://www.marres.education/sarmatians.htm

"Most adversaries were overwhelmed by the Scythian battle tactics. It was only the Sarmatians who found a successful counter-strategy to withstand the Scythians. The Sarmatian warriors and their mounts were protected with armor. Usually the armor consisted of metal plates of bronze or iron sewn onto leather garments."

in http://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/watkins/sarmatians.htm

Sarmartian who didn't prioritize protection might not wear anything. Those who did, wore.

And its all about that. It either priotizes protection or it doesn't. Chichi's outfit, by offering the same protection as underwear, does not.

User avatar
Hitiro
I Live Here
Posts: 3433
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 8:43 pm

Re: Who is older: Pan or Bra?

Post by Hitiro » Wed Jun 29, 2016 8:25 am

rereboy wrote:
Hitiro wrote:Look, despite what you say, it is armour and it does provide protection, however little that may be. It serves a function.
It provides the same protection as underwear, only more resistant. If you want to call that an outfit that prioritizes protection, which is what an armored outfit is, be my guest. However, to me, it's clear that the focus of the outfit is not protection.
Except I never said it prioritizes protection... I clearly said that it offers some protection and provides maneuverability and flexibility. The simple fact is that it's not just a skimpy outfit.
rereboy wrote:
Bra's doesn't serve anything other than making her into sex object.
Because all you can see when looking at the outfit is a hooker, thanks to preconceptions and stereotypes. You don't even know if that was the intention of the author, but because it reminds you of that, that's all you can see, even though it's actually much less revealing than ChiChi's outfit which supposedly prioritizes protection.
No, all I can see is that there is no reason for her to wear something like that other than to look sexual. It's not about preconceptions or stereotypes. If an 8 or 9 year old girl were wearing this sort of thing it would be wrong because, as I said, it serves no other purpose. It's just about the purpose of what they are both wearing and Chi Chi's actually has some purpose. If it weren't armour and some sort of skimpy bikini then I would understand. Because it would not be fulfilling any role other than to look skimpy on her. But that is not the case.
rereboy wrote:I can actually see beyond preconceptions and stereotypes, so...
Again, it's not preconceptions or stereotypes. Those clothes serve no purpose in real life. They are tight fitting, probably uncomfortable to wear through a general day, and don't provide any benefit regular clothes would. If you're in summer you wear light and loose clothes that make you cool. Because that's the purpose they fill. If you're in the winter you wear big coats, scarfs and other things because that's the purpose they serve. If it is raining then you wear a coat, because that's the purpose it serves. So why is she wearing what she is wearing?
rereboy wrote:
And really anything that offered protection would not have to apply to the whole body, the Sarmartian's, who were descended from the Amazons and the Scythians, often had male fighters who only wore a helmet and used a shield. As depicted in this stonework.[spoiler]Image[/spoiler]
These Sarmatians?

"In the year 357 the Sarmatians did together with a neighboring nation the Quad incursions in the Roman bank of the Danube in Pannonia and Moesië led by their princes Zizais, Rumo, Zinafer, Usafer and Fragiledus. A contemporary writes about them: "these barbarians, who are better in raids than in open battle, armed with long spears and wearing armor of linen shirts on which are sewn as scales polished plates of horn"".

In http://www.marres.education/sarmatians.htm

"Most adversaries were overwhelmed by the Scythian battle tactics. It was only the Sarmatians who found a successful counter-strategy to withstand the Scythians. The Sarmatian warriors and their mounts were protected with armor. Usually the armor consisted of metal plates of bronze or iron sewn onto leather garments."

in http://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/watkins/sarmatians.htm

Sarmartian who didn't prioritize protection might not wear anything. Those who did, wore.
And the ones in the image I linked are clearly wearing absolutely nothing and only wearing helmets and shields. Whether or not there are ones who wore little to nothing or those who wore full armour my point still stands that there were ones that would wear extremely little and wear only a bit of protection. And again, I never said "prioritize protection". You're putting words in my mouth.

Post Reply