Inclusivity towards women in Dragon Ball?

[Majin Buu]

So that got me wondering are there any elements of Dragon Ball that could be considered inclusive towards female audiences? Be it characters, actors, story elements, anything?
Toriyama as a gag writer who's fond of poop and pervert jokes probably wasn't thinking about inclusivity when writing his comic for pre-teen boys, but you never know what ideas can slip through from him, the anime staff, or the cast.

Honestly, it often feels like one step forward, two steps back when it comes to Dragon Ball doing anything with women.

A proactive, tech savvy female character is the one that kick starts the story- But she's an underaged girl that's frequently the butt (No pun intended) of sexual jokes and decreases in relevance as the series goes on.

The original run occasionally introduces female fighters- Only to have virtually all of them become housewives and moms in the end.

Pan is pretty much the secondary protagonist of Dragon Ball GT- But is specifically regulated to damsel in distress status to serve as motivation for Goku and is implicitly forbidden from getting too strong (In addition to getting a bunch of creep shots from the animators despite being an underaged girl).

Wasn't the head writer of GT a woman?

The Universe Survival Saga featured more female fighters than we've ever had in a single arc, plus the overdue first appearance of female Super Saiyans- Yet both versions of that arc feature Roshi being the grossest he's been towards a female character in a long while.

And as others have noted here: The female voice of Son Goku got to keep voicing him into adulthood- But her being just that talented was likely incidental to Toei simply not wanting to go through the trouble of recasting the main character.

You usually don't have to look too far to find some underlying regressive element, to the point where unambiguously positive examples are few and far between. Frankly, it's kinda surprising that Kale and Caulifla weren't sex-joked/perved on to hell (by either other characters or the camera).

[JulieYBM]

Wasn't the head writer of GT a woman?

Matsui Aya is indeed a woman. She left the series part way through, however. According to the Japanese Wikipedia article, Matsui left the series for maternity leave.

[BootyCheeksJohnson]

As I've been rewatching the original Dragon Ball anime (in Japanese) I started thinking about something that Sean Schmmel said at a panel for the Super Broly movie at NYC. He mentioned that he thought it was a win for feminism that Goku is voiced by a woman into adulthood in Japan. "And, #feminism the voice of Goku being played by a woman all these years. Hello! One of the most legendary characters... In the world."

I distinctly recall FUNimation VA's (and this includes Schemmel himself) and staff members being a helluva lot more snarky and dismissive about adult Goku being voiced by a woman in interviews back when FUNimation were originally dubbing the series in the early 00s. Its good to see this attitude shift now, but it also comes across as maybe somewhat disingenuous on their part.

The early to mid 2000s was an incredibly bro-douchey period in U.S. pop culture in general, and FUNimation, as a collective whole, were riding that wave like there was no tomorrow, and that extended even into their attitude toward Goku's Japanese VA at the time in behind the scenes talks whenever the subject came up.

I've heard statements about the dub staff being dismissive of Nozawa early on for some time now, but I've never been able to find any hard evidence of it. Now, that's probably because I wasn't an avid Internet user in the very early 2000's on account of being born in 2000. If anyone has some citable quotes from interviews from that time that'd be interesting to see.

[Cure Dragon 255]

The One unambiguos time they did it is Chris Sabat Mocking a death ill Joji Yanami's Kaio. He even imitated him and said its so lifeless and so on I really hated that.

[AliTheZombie13]

The original run occasionally introduces female fighters- Only to have virtually all of them become housewives and moms in the end.

And this is why I'm happy Toriyama forgot (?) Lunch, she disappeared, but she at least disappeared with her status intact.

[MasenkoHA]

The original run occasionally introduces female fighters- Only to have virtually all of them become housewives and moms in the end.

And this is why I'm happy Toriyama forgot (?) Lunch, she disappeared, but she at least disappeared with her status intact.

I think he wrote her out because she was too much of a gag character to keep around in the more serious direction the series was heading in and the joke with her had worn thin anyways. There was a provided explanation for why she was no longer around (chasing after Tenshinhan according to Kuririn) so he definitely didn't forget about her.

[SuperSaiyaManZ94]

The original run occasionally introduces female fighters- Only to have virtually all of them become housewives and moms in the end.

And this is why I'm happy Toriyama forgot (?) Lunch, she disappeared, but she at least disappeared with her status intact.

I think he wrote her out because she was too much of a gag character to keep around in the more serious direction the series was heading in and the joke with her had worn thin anyways. There was a provided explanation for why she was no longer around (chasing after Tenshinhan according to Kuririn) so he definitely didn't forget about her.

That said i do like that Z had those filler bits in the Saiyan arc showing Launch so she wasn't completely absent, and sure it wasn't too impactful overall (like quite a bit of the anime original stuff) given it was mostly her antics in her blonde form and brief interactions with Tien and Chiaotzu but at least she got something and wasn't just basically disappeared entirely like in the manga. Then she also got that brief appearance in the Buu arc while the people of Earth are donating energy to Goku's Genki Dama/Spirit Bomb to defeat Majin Buu compared to the scene in the manga where it was No. 17, as apparently Launch was supposed to be there in that panel in the draft of Ch. 515 (as Toriyama mentioned in the seventh Daizenshuu) but the former was shown and the dialogue backs this up given it doesn't make sense for #17 to say such and it was thus nice seeing her there too.

So yeah, while Toriyama didn't really forget about her per se he did effectively drop her from the story after the 23rd Budokai.

[BootyCheeksJohnson]

The One unambiguos time they did it is Chris Sabat Mocking a death ill Joji Yanami's Kaio. He even imitated him and said its so lifeless and so on I really hated that.

Is there are recording of him doing that? Seems like a very disrespectful thing to do to an ill man.

[AliTheZombie13]

I don't care if she was made for shits and googles, Lunch was a funny and kickass female character, fight me.

[MasenkoHA]

The One unambiguos time they did it is Chris Sabat Mocking a death ill Joji Yanami's Kaio. He even imitated him and said its so lifeless and so on I really hated that.

Is there are recording of him doing that? Seems like a very disrespectful thing to do to an ill man.

https://youtu.be/0MAFdBSqbLs?si=NXDj643eYMTS9LVz


Tbf, I don't think Sabat knew Yanami was ill (he didn't even seem to know his name) but it does seem a bit tasteless regardless

[Mireya]

I don't think inclusion should be forced. It should come off as natural. If an author thinks having mostly men in his show is the way to go, then that's it, it's their decision and their story, which should be done in regards to what he thinks fits better, nevermind needing to include women. What I don't like is the way jokes were structured in early DB having Roshi sexually harassing women as joke and comic relief moments, but that also came from a different time and it's a different culture, which I think it's better not to be employed again because it gives off a bad message of taking serious situations like those without the seriousness and reflection needed. Some people complain about the way Chi-Chi was portrayed, as a stereotype to hysterical women, but I don't think that was the case at all. She was in my perception portrayed as the caring mother that saw benefits in studies and wished the best for her son, who liked studying. Sometimes she seemed kinda annoying yeah, but far from a misrepresentation imo.

[JulieYBM]

I don't think inclusion should be forced. It should come off as natural. If an author thinks having mostly men in his show is the way to go, then that's it, it's their decision and their story, which should be done in regards to what he thinks fits better, nevermind needing to include women. What I don't like is the way jokes were structured in early DB having Roshi sexually harassing women as joke and comic relief moments, but that also came from a different time and it's a different culture, which I think it's better not to be employed again because it gives off a bad message of taking serious situations like those without the seriousness and reflection needed. Some people complain about the way Chi-Chi was portrayed, as a stereotype to hysterical women, but I don't think that was the case at all. She was in my perception portrayed as the caring mother that saw benefits in studies and wished the best for her son, who liked studying. Sometimes she seemed kinda annoying yeah, but far from a misrepresentation imo.

Women are portrayed in Dragon Ball no matter what, so to so universally portray them poorly is bad. This isn't an issue of time, either, because these portrayals were back today, forty years ago, and four hundred years ago.

Chi-Chi is consistently portrayed as an antagonistic force for our characters. The audience of children is meant to identify with the male characters, who want to go out and fight. They're not going to be reading between the lines, and even if they did, they're going to tell that Chi-Chi is being written to be annoying and not relatable because that is what women are to Toriyama: we're this alien force there to get in the way of men doing Man Things, like adventure and defeating Other Men.

[Basaku]

That's why I'm clad sometimes corp Toei will come to the rescue adding Kale which in turn inspired Toriyama himself to add Caulifla and we got a great new fighting duo.

There's also 18 who got housewife'd but came back as the fighter in Super.

So I would say even Toriyama is slowly improving too. And about time

[Mireya]

I don't think inclusion should be forced. It should come off as natural. If an author thinks having mostly men in his show is the way to go, then that's it, it's their decision and their story, which should be done in regards to what he thinks fits better, nevermind needing to include women. What I don't like is the way jokes were structured in early DB having Roshi sexually harassing women as joke and comic relief moments, but that also came from a different time and it's a different culture, which I think it's better not to be employed again because it gives off a bad message of taking serious situations like those without the seriousness and reflection needed. Some people complain about the way Chi-Chi was portrayed, as a stereotype to hysterical women, but I don't think that was the case at all. She was in my perception portrayed as the caring mother that saw benefits in studies and wished the best for her son, who liked studying. Sometimes she seemed kinda annoying yeah, but far from a misrepresentation imo.

Women are portrayed in Dragon Ball no matter what, so to so universally portray them poorly is bad. This isn't an issue of time, either, because these portrayals were back today, forty years ago, and four hundred years ago.

Chi-Chi is consistently portrayed as an antagonistic force for our characters. The audience of children is meant to identify with the male characters, who want to go out and fight. They're not going to be reading between the lines, and even if they did, they're going to tell that Chi-Chi is being written to be annoying and not relatable because that is what women are to Toriyama: we're this alien force there to get in the way of men doing Man Things, like adventure and defeating Other Men.

Well I see your point. Not gonna say I wholeheartedly agree, but I see the logic behind it. But I think the time it was written should be factored too. It's not like DB didn't depict women in a contributing way either like Bulma who has made most things possible in many arcs. But your point about Chi-Chi, I feel it's good.

[MasenkoHA]

I don't think inclusion should be forced. It should come off as natural.

People say this all the time but what the fuck does that even mean? Yeah if it's a story about all boy boarding school or a Men's Prison I wouldn't expect too many women characters but its a martial arts series. How would the inclusion of [insert group here] feel forced?

If an author thinks having mostly men in his show is the way to go, then that's it, it's their decision and their story, which should be done in regards to what he thinks fits better, nevermind needing to include women.

Most people's problems isn the lack of female characters it's that the few female characters introduced are reduced to homemaker roles or written out or in the case of Bulma the subject to a lot of misogynistic jokes and reduced from co-lead to supporting charadter

People aren't demanding a 50/50 split of male and female characters, they're asking the female characters to be treated better.

. Some people complain about the way Chi-Chi was portrayed, as a stereotype to hysterical women, but I don't think that was the case at all. She was in my perception portrayed as the caring mother that saw benefits in studies and wished the best for her son, who liked studying. Sometimes she seemed kinda annoying yeah, but far from a misrepresentation imo.

You can spin it however you want the series intentionally frames it so Chi-Chi is supposed to be the nagging broad of a wife and a tiger mom archetype. Characters will call her out for being "unreasonable" we'll see characters like Goku sheepishly try to "reason with her" She's shown yelling 90 percent of the time. Every now and then the series throws her a bone like having her throw Gohan's abusive tutor out the window but 90 percent of the time from Z onward her entire character is "shrew"

And yeah that really only applies to the anime. She's close to a non-entity in the manga where she pretty much only exist because Toriyama wanted Goku to have a son and he needed a vagina from somewhere.

That's why I'm clad sometimes corp Toei will come to the rescue adding Kale which in turn inspired Toriyama himself to add Caulifla and we got a great new fighting duo.

There's also 18 who got housewife'd but came back as the fighter in Super.

So I would say even Toriyama is slowly improving too. And about time

I will add I agree with this. There's been some improvement in the modern material for sure.

[JulieYBM]

I don't think inclusion should be forced. It should come off as natural. If an author thinks having mostly men in his show is the way to go, then that's it, it's their decision and their story, which should be done in regards to what he thinks fits better, nevermind needing to include women. What I don't like is the way jokes were structured in early DB having Roshi sexually harassing women as joke and comic relief moments, but that also came from a different time and it's a different culture, which I think it's better not to be employed again because it gives off a bad message of taking serious situations like those without the seriousness and reflection needed. Some people complain about the way Chi-Chi was portrayed, as a stereotype to hysterical women, but I don't think that was the case at all. She was in my perception portrayed as the caring mother that saw benefits in studies and wished the best for her son, who liked studying. Sometimes she seemed kinda annoying yeah, but far from a misrepresentation imo.

Women are portrayed in Dragon Ball no matter what, so to so universally portray them poorly is bad. This isn't an issue of time, either, because these portrayals were back today, forty years ago, and four hundred years ago.

Chi-Chi is consistently portrayed as an antagonistic force for our characters. The audience of children is meant to identify with the male characters, who want to go out and fight. They're not going to be reading between the lines, and even if they did, they're going to tell that Chi-Chi is being written to be annoying and not relatable because that is what women are to Toriyama: we're this alien force there to get in the way of men doing Man Things, like adventure and defeating Other Men.

Well I see your point. Not gonna say I wholeheartedly agree, but I see the logic behind it. But I think the time it was written should be factored too. It's not like DB didn't depict women in a contributing way either like Bulma who has made most things possible in many arcs. But your point about Chi-Chi, I feel it's good.

The problem with factoring in 'the time' it was made is just an assumption that what is right-or-wrong about how oppressed people are treated can or does change. Depicting women as the butt as sexual harassment and assault jokes is just as bad (and annoying as hell for us women) in the 1980s as it is in the 2020s. Toriyama was married to a woman for goodness' sake, and yet he consistently treated women like this unknowable foreign entity that the series is unsympathetic to, and that ultimately influences how they're portrayed. It's a rigid, inflexible portrayal that led not only to poor charicaturization over the years (which continues to this day, even), but also decreasing plot relevance.

[Basaku]

I will add I agree with this. There's been some improvement in the modern material for sure.

Yeah, and TBH there was an improvement during Toriyama's original material run too if we compare the early DB in the mid-80s to the Z section crossing into 90s. Even the "old times" excuse wouldn't work that much when you had a freaking Crayon Shin-chan comedy in the early 90s literally spelling it out to the mainstream Japense audience that women ain't just housewives and "shut up and back to the kitchen".

[Mireya]

I don't think inclusion should be forced. It should come off as natural.

People say this all the time but what the fuck does that even mean? Yeah if it's a story about all boy boarding school or a Men's Prison I wouldn't expect too many women characters but its a martial arts series. How would the inclusion of [insert group here] feel forced?

If an author thinks having mostly men in his show is the way to go, then that's it, it's their decision and their story, which should be done in regards to what he thinks fits better, nevermind needing to include women.

Most people's problems isn the lack of female characters it's that the few female characters introduced are reduced to homemaker roles or written out or in the case of Bulma the subject to a lot of misogynistic jokes and reduced from co-lead to supporting charadter

People aren't demanding a 50/50 split of male and female characters, they're asking the female characters to be treated better.

. Some people complain about the way Chi-Chi was portrayed, as a stereotype to hysterical women, but I don't think that was the case at all. She was in my perception portrayed as the caring mother that saw benefits in studies and wished the best for her son, who liked studying. Sometimes she seemed kinda annoying yeah, but far from a misrepresentation imo.

You can spin it however you want the series intentionally frames it so Chi-Chi is supposed to be the nagging broad of a wife and a tiger mom archetype. Characters will call her out for being "unreasonable" we'll see characters like Goku sheepishly try to "reason with her" She's shown yelling 90 percent of the time. Every now and then the series throws her a bone like having her throw Gohan's abusive tutor out the window but 90 percent of the time from Z onward her entire character is "shrew"

And yeah that really only applies to the anime. She's close to a non-entity in the manga where she pretty much only exist because Toriyama wanted Goku to have a son and he needed a vagina from somewhere.

That's why I'm clad sometimes corp Toei will come to the rescue adding Kale which in turn inspired Toriyama himself to add Caulifla and we got a great new fighting duo.

There's also 18 who got housewife'd but came back as the fighter in Super.

So I would say even Toriyama is slowly improving too. And about time

I will add I agree with this. There's been some improvement in the modern material for sure.

By forced I mean that the author shouldn't think "hmm now I should add a women for the sake of inclusion"... He should put whoever he feels it's more suitable and thinks it's better for the way he wants his story to be.

About the part of sexual harassment from Roshi being treated in a comedic way, I specially highlighted that I thought it was wrong and takes away from the seriousness such issue should be faced. It shouldn't be made light of, I agreed with this.

In regards to Chi-Chi, I had recognised that already from the user above as a valid point.

And in regards to what people were demanding, the title confused me because inclusivity screamed for me in the sense of representation of more female character, but I guess it could be taken that way too, or maybe the flow of the conversation shifted. I think a better way to word that would be misrepresentation of women or portrayal, as inclusivity is more prone to be seen as that, though I agree that as long as there were women characters, inclusivity can be seen also in regards to how they were included in the story in a nice and not derogatory way, and the OP started speaking straight about Goku's voice being done by a woman, but I should have read more carefully.


Edit: about you saying she's close to a non-entity in the manga, with her misrepresentation stemming moreso from the anime, that already is a thing I don't see much a problem with. DB revolves ultimately about fighting and targets a young boy audience... Ofc she wouldn't appear, or at least, it's understandable she would barely serve a role made clear in the story as the focus was about Goku and fighting, not a novel story. That, already, I see no issue with.

[Mireya]

Women are portrayed in Dragon Ball no matter what, so to so universally portray them poorly is bad. This isn't an issue of time, either, because these portrayals were back today, forty years ago, and four hundred years ago.

Chi-Chi is consistently portrayed as an antagonistic force for our characters. The audience of children is meant to identify with the male characters, who want to go out and fight. They're not going to be reading between the lines, and even if they did, they're going to tell that Chi-Chi is being written to be annoying and not relatable because that is what women are to Toriyama: we're this alien force there to get in the way of men doing Man Things, like adventure and defeating Other Men.

Well I see your point. Not gonna say I wholeheartedly agree, but I see the logic behind it. But I think the time it was written should be factored too. It's not like DB didn't depict women in a contributing way either like Bulma who has made most things possible in many arcs. But your point about Chi-Chi, I feel it's good.

The problem with factoring in 'the time' it was made is just an assumption that what is right-or-wrong about how oppressed people are treated can or does change. Depicting women as the butt as sexual harassment and assault jokes is just as bad (and annoying as hell for us women) in the 1980s as it is in the 2020s. Toriyama was married to a woman for goodness' sake, and yet he consistently treated women like this unknowable foreign entity that the series is unsympathetic to, and that ultimately influences how they're portrayed. It's a rigid, inflexible portrayal that led not only to poor charicaturization over the years (which continues to this day, even), but also decreasing plot relevance.

Ok, that's fair enough. But the fact this side isn't shown anymore or if it is, it's in a way less visible way, shows progression and change from perspective from the author, which is something worth highlighting. He lived in a society that had a different and way more sexist vision and while that doesn't excuse his depiction, just the progression towards the evolving worldviews should also be accounted for and why not make the past actions justifiable, maybe some layers of understanding could be added. A society someone lives many times shapes the person too... Of course any case of violence is bad. No one should argue slavery and whoever practiced this heinous act should be made understandable because that was the perception. But the environment, likely sexist, someone grew in, imo should be accounted when viewing back the material, as someone for example who lives in a violent alley and lives with it daily will be more prone to repeat this. Not that it excuses, but the way we look at it imo should have a more comprehensive and distinguishable manner.

[JulieYBM]

But the fact this side isn't shown anymore or if it is, it's in a way less visible way, shows progression and change from perspective from the author, which is something worth highlighting. He lived in a society that had a different and way more sexist vision and while that doesn't excuse his depiction, just the progression towards the evolving worldviews should also be accounted for and why not make the past actions justifiable, maybe some layers of understanding could be added. A society someone lives many times shapes the person too... Of course any case of violence is bad. No one should argue slavery and whoever practiced this heinous act should be made understandable because that was the perception. But the environment, likely sexist, someone grew in, imo should be accounted when viewing back the material, as someone for example who lives in a violent alley and lives with it daily will be more prone to repeat this. Not that it excuses, but the way we look at it imo should have a more comprehensive and distinguishable manner.

I really don't like this idea that historically marginalized parties should have to make our historical oppressors feel good about themselves because they've done the easy and right thing of...stopping their marginalization. If anything, that just continues to keep people like me in a subservient role to those who have used their positions in those ways that have drawn our criticism in the first place. Furthermore, I'm not exactly heartend by phrases like "Well, at least it's less visible." That just reminds me of the scene from Barbie (2023) where the film outright says that our society is still a patriarchal one, it's just gotten better at hiding it. Which, yeah, we queer people see that sort of shit everyday in the existence of Rainbow Capitalism.

I don't know why you're acting like you have a personal investment in me cutting the millionaire comic book guy some slack in my criticism here. He fucked up, he should feel bad about it, and he should endeavor to avoid fucking up again in the future, like a normal person.

The unfortunate thing is, he has continually written and overseen projects that have depicted women in extremely poor manners within the past eleven years. It has to be intentional, especially considering the number of people involved in bringing these stories to life in both comics, film and television formats.

We don't owe Toriyama shit here lol