It was cute, because Goku and Kuririn weren't presented as being 12 and 13 (at least, not physically). Goku looks like Gohan did aged 6, and going by those standards, it was cute, in the same way that seeing Dexter's bum is (suppossed to be) cute and funny.
Now, if Goku looked to be the same age as Brock from Pokemon, then it might be different. But again, possibly not, since the situation would be an embarrassing one, rather than an erotic one.
Deus ex Machina wrote:PsyLiam wrote:Er, it's not a double standard at all, as the two situations are completely different.
Er, yes it
is a double standard, since what we're talking about is the amount of clothing and coverage, and not it's situation. XP
But the situation is what is relevent. Goku's bum was presented in a humorous situation. It's the same as when you see his bum as an adult at various times in the series (such as in the first movie); it's for humour. Ranfan getting her kit out may have also been for humour, but it derived from an erotic startpoint. Same as with Bulma's various bits at the start of the series. There is an element of sex about it.
Context is everything. Cartoons have always had naked people for humour. Even the Powerpuff Girls were naked once, and they are girls. The situation wasn't sexual though, which was why it was allowed, and why Ranfan's thing isn't.
PINHEAD wrote:...Yep. Seeing a chick strip is different than seeing a butt intended for cuteness. But is seeing the butts of 13-14 year olds (which Son Goku and Kuririn were about) really cute and innocent?
No...no it wasn't cute. Toriyama has problems, that's all. Hence double standard.[/quote]
Oh, it was cute, because they
don't look 13-14. And I don't think that Toriyama really has any sort of dirty naked children fetish thing. (At least, no more than the average Japanese male). I always took Goku being 14 at the start of the series as a humorous element designed to wind Bulma up, rather than anything else.
