Anyone interested in discussing the social issues of DB?

[ABED]

Why are Westerners so easily offended/ find everything offensive? Is that the next step humans take when they're living in the best countries possible and have everything they want? Do they get bored and getting offended is at least something and comparable to the problems the rest of the world has?

I think there's something more insideous than being bored. This is fundamentally ideological, and I think many of those that get offended by seemingly everything are trying to shut down any conversation.

[Kuririn Fan]

Why are Westerners so easily offended/ find everything offensive? Is that the next step humans take when they're living in the best countries possible and have everything they want? Do they get bored and getting offended is at least something and comparable to the problems the rest of the world has?

It's a little bit of "yes, we have a lifestyle that affords us the opportunity to sit back and discuss something other than when the tiger is going to invade our village and eat our young" combined with "it's just that we happen to have some intellectual curiosity in things, sometimes that's OK, and equating it to people sitting here being offended on a 24/7 basis is only slightly out of context and asinine."

Maybe, but thats what it looks like most of the time and thats why fun is being made of extreme groups that do that.

[VegettoEX]

It's a Dragon Ball forum thread about social issues. The people responding are obviously going to be a self-selecting group of those who are interested in both Dragon Ball and social issues.

Someone who doesn't care about those two topics in conjunction with each other isn't going to respond.

So what else are you expecting to read about here? Like, yeah. You came in and saw exactly what you expected to see. Of course you did. On a larger scale, that's like coming to a Dragon Ball forum in the first place and making fun of the fact that people are talking about Dragon Ball. Or a fantasy football site and people are playing fantasy football. Or a political forum with people fact-checking debate statements. Them nerds sure are doing the exact thing I expected them to do!

[Piccolo Daimaoh]

Regarding the rather crude sexual humour that happens early on in the series, is the concern that children will copy what they see/think it's normal? I would agree that it's definitely a possiblity, and I don't think I'd show that part of the series to my children. Sensibilities have without a doubt changed in that regard (or maybe it's a cultural thing as others have suggested). But if you're an adult and you know that this is deviant behaviour, I don't see it as being a huge problem.

[Tyro]

General Blue's defining trait is that he's gay, and it's always portrayed in a negative light. Same with the one-note guy in the last Budokai.

I disagree with your post, but this specifically sticks out to me. I don't think Blue's sexuality is an issue at all.

General Blue's defining trait is that he's gay

What? There's so much more to him. He's like the first villain in the RRA arc that has some real flavor to him. Being gay just happens to be another thing about him, and it's not made to be a big deal, because, well, it's just not a big deal.

It's what he's most remembered for since he's drawn, as Toriyama puts it, like a "pretty boy-type", (which I love BTW because of the eyelashes, along with Zarbon and Whis) and he's one of only a few people who're said to be gay in the series, which itself is a memorable trait. But it doesn't "define him".

and it's always portrayed in a negative light.

Again, what? I'll start by saying "always" here means twice in the pirate cave, and that it's not something he's made fun of about continuously or anything like that. Just for some perspective.

And the anime aside, the manga doesn't make a big deal about his sexuality at all. Blooma's like "Shit, my diversion tactic didn't work. He must be gay." And Kuririn even goes so far as to say he didn't know there were gay bad guys, which, yes, is a stereotype, but one in the positive spectrum. Blue acts a tad excessively repulsed by Blooma, but I would say you're bringing your own baggage into the story if you think that was negative. I'd like to see how this is worded in Japanese, but I think the most you could speculate on is that he hasn't accecpted it himself.

A little later Blooma tries to seduce him again, but this time she says that she's a man to which Blue responds that would make her a freak of nature. Two things here. 1) This was a light hearted gag. It's meant to be funny and not a downer on trans people. "A product of its time", or whatever. 2) Even if it were (which I repeat: it isn't) at the expense of trans people, it's still not a portrayal of Blue's sexuality in a negative light because the focus wouldn't be on him in this situation.

Same with the one-note guy in the last Budokai.

What's everyone's deal with this guy? His look? He looks like Freddie Mercury. I think he's fine just the way he is. He makes one pass at Trunks, and Trunks isn't into it because he's either straight or not into the guy's look at all. Hardly a negative portrayal.

[rereboy]

Regarding the rather crude sexual humour that happens early on in the series, is the concern that children will copy what they see/think it's normal? I would agree that it's definitely a possiblity, and I don't think I'd show that part of the series to my children. Sensibilities have without a doubt changed in that regard (or maybe it's a cultural thing as others have suggested). But if you're an adult and you know that this is deviant behaviour, I don't see it as being a huge problem.

Imo, that's like arguing that kids would imitate what they see on Tom and Jerry and on the Three Stooges and try to hurt each other with hammers and all sorts of instruments. Or see a superhero series and try to fly out of a window. Kids aren't brainwashed by TV like that.

[VegettoEX]

What's everyone's deal with this guy? His look? He looks like Freddie Mercury. I think he's fine just the way he is. He makes one pass at Trunks, and Trunks isn't into it because he's either straight or not into the guy's look at all. Hardly a negative portrayal.

It's less all that and more I think the fact that they literally named him "Otokosuki". Sure, it's just as on-the-ball as naming the black guy "Black" (or more likely, making the guy named "Black" black), but maybe that's the point here: it being so literal is a bit much. Like, yeah. He's gay. With a gay name. With a look fashioned on gay stereotypes. We get it. No, really, we get it. Yep. Got it, Toriyama.

[Gaffer Tape]

Whew. So many posts have caught my eye!

- Bulma used as fanservice in the first arc isn't the best representation. I know why it's there, but it doesn't make me like it. At least she becomes more of a character later on, and by the Z-era it's pretty much all gone.

I don't know if I'd even call that fanservice (and I love how this ties into our current discussion on YouTube... I'll be replying to that soon). I wouldn't be against someone classifying it as that, but I define sexual fanservice the same way I'd define any other fanservice: gratuitous. And since in Blooma's case, her use of sexuality is both defining for her character and instrumental in the progression of the story, I wouldn't call it fanservice. Now Alice Eve stripping down to her undies in Star Trek: Into Darkness for no other reason than... I don't even know (that movie is so stupid!)... I'd call that fanservice.

- General Blue's defining trait is that he's gay, and it's always portrayed in a negative light. Same with the one-note guy in the last Budokai.

As has been said, I don't feel Blue's defined by being gay at all. In fact, in the manga, there is not a single instance of him showing sexual proclivity towards ANYBODY. If you want to get really nitpicky, he never even confirms that he is gay, so you could assume that he's not and simply doesn't care for women. I think it's definitely safe to assume he is because Blooma's line about him being gay is never contradicted, but I could see someone making a convincing case that he's not. I will give you that the IDEA of him being gay is portrayed in a negative light. Neither Kuririn nor Blooma seem to be pleased with the idea. But if you're referring to his personality being portrayed in a negative light, I'm not sure I see that either. It's not like his subordinates whisper behind his back about what a pansy he is. On the contrary, they all have the utmost respect for him. But if you're saying that his personality traits all come from the idea of him being gay, while I don't deny that's possible or even probable, as a lot of his quirks are stereotypical gay traits, they aren't what makes someone gay. I can be about as flamboyant as they come and often am, but it has nothing to do with my sexual orientation.

- Videl vs Spopovich has some undertones that could be seen as sexist. It was probably unintentional, but...there's something wrong about having the event that triggers Videl to sit on the sidelines for good is her getting beaten up and still continuing to fight, despite everyone else telling her it's hopeless. It's one of the few times in the series where surrendering against an unbeatable opponent is portrayed as the right option.

I agree with you and Mike over the idea that it's a poor implication that she's been all demure ever since then. And as Videl is my favorite female character precisely for those original attributes, I am not satisfied with the way she's been treated lately either. But the way you say it's a trigger makes it sound like there's anything in the series at all to confirm that those two situations are linked somehow. Unfortunate implication? Sure. But at no point does Videl give any indication that her getting beaten up by Spopovitch has any connection to her not fighting anymore. I mean, well, unless there's a newer episode of Super that does indicate that, in which case, ignore me, please. But let me contrast that with Yamucha. He gets impaled by #20 and then immediately says, "I'm not going to fight anymore." I hate that too, but there's a clear connection between the two events. This is more akin to saying Chichi gave up fighting because Goku knocked her out of the ring, and those two things happened at around the same time. I mean, it's possible, but in her case it's far more likely that she gave it up because she felt she had duties as a wife and mother, and it's not proper in her mind for a mother to do that. And I think that's stupid too and carries its own unfortunate baggage. But I'd be more inclined to believe that motivation from Toriyama, whose own wife retired from her career to be "the wife", than I would to believe that Videl had her fighting spirit beaten out of her.

It isn't, which is one of the reason why normal people are called straight and they're not.

Far more likely a reason is that the majority rule gets to name these things in the first place. They also get to define what "normal" is. I think it's very, very, very important for you to remember that there are no set guidelines for normal. It's arbitrary. It's relative. It's ever-changing. Sixty years ago, it was "normal" for black and white people to drink from different water fountains. If you were to attend a pride parade (and I highly recommend doing so) I can assume based on your posts, you would be exposed to a very different definition of normal. And, well, rereboy already made a fantastic post elaborating on the hypocrisy of some preferences being okay but others being taboo, so I'm not going to go into that other than to say I wholeheartedly agree. If you say it's totally fine for 51% of the population to, for example, be attracted to men or wear dresses, there is no logical basis to deny such things to the other 49% or judge them for having the same desires or tastes as that 51%.

That dangerously borders on MRA analysis territory (and yes, let me acknowledge the apparent hypocrisy of shooting down one Internet acronym while using another). I think it's fair when you consider that up until that very point, Videl was written as a very strong (both physically strong and strong-willed) character. Of course she as a regular human was never going to stand a chance against someone with the Majin charm, male or female be damned. Where the storytelling falters, and what people continue to have a problem with now with Super, is that none of that strong will has returned. Even I was giving them a chance in those first couple Super episodes, and I'd like to continue to give them a chance, but we're missing a key part of Videl's character by having "strong girl gets beaten down, never again taking up the mantle of fighter!"

I.. what?! How?! This legitimately confuses me. Because on the one hand, as I said above, I completely agree with your post. Every point. But I've double-taked so many times at that first sentence that I am in danger of contracting whiplash! Even though I'm not convinced the two events are necessarily linked, I do agree that I think it's fair to find unfortunate implications in it. But I don't think it's fair to imply that someone who disagrees with that assessment is bordering on expressing a misogynistic intent, which, based on the context, I assume is what you mean by "MRA analysis territory." Is there legitimately something I'm missing here? Because I don't see anything wrong with his use of comparative examples.

[VegettoEX]

My reading of the initial statement was "but men get beat down, too!" which... I dunno, it's hard to read, which is why I tried to go on to further clarify and explain. Like, "it's OK for the girls to get beat down (despite all this other stuff that we're not yet acknowledging and putting into context) 'cuz the men do too!" But that's not really the point here, 'cuz ______________ (insert all this other context).

Thus my not total condemnation of it all. Tricky issue to discuss!

[Gaffer Tape]

My reading of the initial statement was "but men get beat down, too!" which... I dunno, it's hard to read, which is why I tried to go on to further clarify and explain. Like, "it's OK for the girls to get beat down (despite all this other stuff that we're not yet acknowledging and putting into context) 'cuz the men do too!" But that's not really the point here, 'cuz ______________ (insert all this other context).

Thus my not total condemnation of it all. Tricky issue to discuss!

Oh, definitely! I just worry sometimes in issues like this because we get so passionate, myself included, it becomes all too easy to take a disagreeing point and use that to label someone "one of 'them,'" with "them" being whatever the apparent opposing side is. I think more often than not we're on the same side, but even people who want the same think won't agree on what all the standards should be. And that can be okay too! So I suppose I was concerned that opening statement read that way to me.

As for the reasoning... eh, I dunno. I always find this kind of thing very tricky because there are so many elements at play. I don't think it's wrong to use the male fighting characters as counterexamples because most of the fighting characters are going to be male, so most examples you're going to find are just going to be that way. But then you get into representation and whether or not it's equivalent when it happens to ALL of the female fighting characters. And while I am against the idea of quotas being used to decide story elements, I can't deny either that that result does annoy me. And basically what I'm getting at is that I think both sides of that debate have a legitimate argument to make.

That said, especially getting into Super, it does remind me a bit of another example. When I saw Resurrection 'F' it drove me crazy when #18 was left at home while Kuririn went off to fight. Not only was it annoyingly stereotypical, it didn't even make logical sense in its own context. Likewise, when I got around to watching the BoG arc of Super, it really pissed me off when Chichi basically put Kuririn in his place by saying he should be fighting instead of his wife... because he's a man, and I don't think it's any less sexist to force a man into a role than to do it to a woman. Because it is basically the equivalent of a man telling a woman to, "Get back in the kitchen." And again, just like with Resurrection 'F' it isn't even logical in its own context because #18 is the stronger fighter of the two. However, putting those two together did kind of mollify me a bit. While I'm probably reading into it, it almost seems like they take turns. I mean, hey, the kid's around. One of them has to look after her. Sometimes it's Kuririn. Sometimes it's #18. And if that's a decision they made together, then that's great.

[KameRule]

In the pirate cave, when Kuririn and Bulma comment on General Blue's sexuality, the joke isn't that "gay people are bad", the joke is that "Kuririn and Bulma are being assholes". Bulma can't use her sexuality to escape the situation like she so often does, and Kuririn is just a child, written in 1980's Japan, who is saying "I didn't know that there were gay bad guys". The manga isn't being intolerant, and Toriyama isn't being intolerant, the characters are being intolerant (which is the point of the joke). It's supposed to elaborate on character and create humour instead of drive home a political agenda, and at the risk of sounding like another anti-PC teenage Reddit-er, it's a confusion that people who scour the four corners of the Earth for racism, sexism etc. are particularly prone to.

Another example of this is when Lunch is instructed to don the 'Turtle School Martial Arts Uniform' by Muten Roshi - it's not just to exploit her for fanservice, it's to drive home the Turtle Hermit's character, and it's funny. I mean, humour is subjective and all, but I at least found it funny. Whenever Bulma uses her body in order to try and get her way, she's doing it because she's entirely practical and has no shame. Again, that's not the manga's official statement on ALL WOMEN, that's just the manga's statement on Bulma and her character. When Chi-Chi is going around in a skimpy outfit beating up dinosaurs, it's not to titillate the male audience (that would be just a bit creepy), it's because she's sheltered from the outside world, and is pretending to be a magical girl/superhero whilst slaying these creatures. The brutal decapitation of an enormous T-rex by a little girl in a cape, helmet and silly outfit is a JOKE. She marries Gokuu years later because, again, she's sheltered from real life and on account of Gokuu's pat-pat and flimsy, uninformed promise, she believes that they HAVE to marry. In real life, that scenario would be seen as rather grim by most people (and rightfully so), but here, it's played for laughs. It's like, as some have already stated, how in Tom and Jerry, Tom may get his entire face ripped off, but it's fine, because it's not real and it's presented as a joke.

I'll admit that General Black may be perceived as a little bit insensitive by some, reminiscent of offensive blackface in cartoons and other media, but there's nothing beyond that that suggests any kind of intolerance or hatred towards black people. The fact that General Black is, well, black, has no bearing on his character, his personality, or anything beyond his name and appearance. The same goes for Mr. Popo as well, in fact, there's only really one instance of a truly racist portrayal of a black person in Dragon Ball (IIRC), and that was on FUNimation's part.

And that's all I'm really asking for in terms of storytelling in Dragon Ball every so often. Don't confuse the issue and exaggerate the standpoint; I'm not necessary saying "the series will never be redeemed in my eyes until they definitively declare a woman the strongest fighter in all the multiverse!" I mean, if they do, I guess that's be pretty cool, too. I'd just like for Videl to throw a goddamn punch again .

I agree, but then again, the newer material hasn't exactly been making exceptional use of the supporting cast full-stop. At least Videl got more screen-time and character interactions than Yamcha, who's a series veteran, even if some may call this new development of her character... uh, problematic.

*throws up in closest garbage-bin*

In-universe, I'd describe her settling down and giving up martial arts as a result of her beatdown from Spopovitch, her becoming a mother, and her acknowledging that she's probably not going to be useful to the main cast any time soon, seeing the ever-increasing crowd of replaced/retired planet-busters gather around the Saiyans. However, that's just an excuse, and I also prefer the spunky, strong-willed, short-haired Videl with the "FIGHT!" vest and playful, yet also sometimes serious attitude. She's just boring now, and I will agree that it's just a little insulting to see all of the female characters in Dragon Ball relegated to mother roles, or just completely AWOL, even if it's for perfectly valid story reasons. I think that's the reason why we now have Vados, and why Bulma is taking a much more active role in the story, and why her character seems completely different from her jaded, middle-aged mum appearance at the end of the series. The fact that these two exist in the ways that they do tell me that Videl's current role in the story isn't due to sexism on Toriyama's or Toei's part, but rather that the former felt that it was a natural progression for her character. She's calmed down now and become a mother and keeper of the house, much in the same way that Gohan has calmed down now and become a father and the family breadwinner. The show isn't uber-progressive and it isn't stripping down the gender-roles, but I don't think it's sexist, or racist. And now, with the inclusion of Whis, who is a great character, I don't even think that it's homophobic.

[Basaku]

What's everyone's deal with this guy? His look? He looks like Freddie Mercury. I think he's fine just the way he is. He makes one pass at Trunks, and Trunks isn't into it because he's either straight or not into the guy's look at all. Hardly a negative portrayal.

It's less all that and more I think the fact that they literally named him "Otokosuki". Sure, it's just as on-the-ball as naming the black guy "Black" (or more likely, making the guy named "Black" black), but maybe that's the point here: it being so literal is a bit much. Like, yeah. He's gay. With a gay name. With a look fashioned on gay stereotypes. We get it. No, really, we get it. Yep. Got it, Toriyama.

Which wouldn't even be much of an issue if it wasn't for the fact that Toriyama pretty much exclusively used LGBT characters as cheap punchlines. In the other Japenese export-hit Sailor Moon, Naoko Takeuchi had 'cheap stereotypes' alongside major layered LGBT characters. It never really mattered if she wrote/drew something offensive or controversial, as everyone knew she was open-minded well-intentioned. I dont think Toriyama is homophobic, racist or trully prejudiced in anyway, but he obviously didn't bother (at least back in the previous century) to think much outside of the social box he grew up in that treats LGBT people as a joke. Takeuchi did bother and it came off as effortless.

[Kid Buu]

To be fair though, I don't think Takeuchi actually created any LBGT characters besides Haruka & Michiru. Zoisite & Kunzite being a couple, Fisheye being gay, and the Starlights being men who change into women were all Toei's idea. There's also a gay fashion designer in the SuperS season voiced by Vegeta.

[gogeta97]

My reading of the initial statement was "but men get beat down, too!" which... I dunno, it's hard to read, which is why I tried to go on to further clarify and explain. Like, "it's OK for the girls to get beat down (despite all this other stuff that we're not yet acknowledging and putting into context) 'cuz the men do too!" But that's not really the point here, 'cuz ______________ (insert all this other context).

Thus my not total condemnation of it all. Tricky issue to discuss!

Just to clarify, are you trying to say that it's fine for men and women to get beat down, but Videl's case is problematic because the one time we see her get beat down she retires and becomes a stereotypical housewife? Because if so a totally agree with you. I know Toriyama prefers writing and focusing on male characters but that pissed me off. That "MRA levels of analysis" comment was ridiculous for multiple reasons though....

[Soppa Saia People]

What in the Sam hell is MRA ?

[Basaku]

To be fair though, I don't think Takeuchi actually created any LBGT characters besides Haruka & Michiru.

Which is 2 more developed, layered main LGBT characters than 0 that Toriyama created. Even if you only count Haruka & Michiru, you can easily tell how open, aware, respectful and simply natural Takeuchi was about the diversity in society.

[gogeta97]

What in the Sam hell is MRA ?

MRA=Men's Rights Activist


It may seem ridiculous at first but if you look more into it it really isn't. Despite what some people may tell you most MRAs are NOT sexist, just like most femenists are NOT sexist. Both are perfectly valid ideologies and groups, although both have their fair share of assholes.

[Kid Buu]

To be fair though, I don't think Takeuchi actually created any LBGT characters besides Haruka & Michiru.

Which is 2 more developed, layered main LGBT characters than 0 that Toriyama created. Even if you only count Haruka & Michiru, you can easily tell how open, aware, respectful and simply natural Takeuchi was about the diversity in society.

It was in reponse to the 'cheap stereotypes' comment. Most of the more 'cheap stereotypes' characters stemmed from the anime, so what I'm saying is that it'd be unfair to put that on Takeuchi.

[Basaku]

It was in reponse to the 'cheap stereotypes' comment. Most of the more 'cheap stereotypes' characters stemmed from the anime, so what I'm saying is that it'd be unfair to put that on Takeuchi.

But there were jokes in the manga too on the topic, with Haruka/Three Lights flirting etc. No one cared and even with anime no one cares about the stereotype part because of the legitimate and honest presence of main LGBT characters.

[Kid Buu]

I think we're having miscommunication here. I'm not trying to say you're wrong, I'm actually trying to back you up.