Dragon Ball and the Bechdel test.

[UltimateHammerBro]

Do you think the end justifies the means? I don't.
There is a concept called "freedom". I decide if I want to exercise to improve my life. Anything that will try to force that improvement by taking away my freedom to choose whether I want it or not will be, in fact, "gagging" me. Both policies are equally bad.

And I'm going to switch to something different, but related:
-A man hits a woman with, let's say, a frying pan, and she's severely injured. That's gender violence.
-A woman hits a man with the same frying pan and he's as severely injured as she is in the previous example. Let's make the initial assumption that it is the man's fault.
I'm not trying to trivialize gender violence: on the contrary. Around a year ago, an example like the one I've just written made it to the Spanish headlines (the woman had been cleared of all charges, while sentences tend to be very hard). And there still were some feminist (feminazis, as they were called by the press back then) collectives with said that it was completely fair.

I love it when people talk about gender equality, but I despise feminism disguised as said gender equality. And IMHO, taking the Bechdel test seriously (as in strictly and not just as something curious to talk about) is just that.
I'm no more than any woman, but I'm no less either. And no woman is ever going to make me change my mind about that.

[Gyt Kaliba]

We do not live in an ideal world. Which policy should be removed first?

I refuse to answer the question, I stand by what I said - both would be disgusting policies, and equally so as they are both stripping people of freedoms.

Stories do not in exist in a vacuum.

Perhaps not, but to treat them as the same as reality is folly.

Exercise is fundamentally good. It makes you live longer, it makes you stronger, etc etc. The method taken is bad, but the end result is an improvement in the men's lives.

That doesn't change the fact that forcing someone to do something is still wrong, just like forcing them to not do something. It doesn't matter if it's beneficial or not.

The same cannot be said for gagging all women. That is the difference, that is why the gag order should be removed first; that is why the Bechdel test is valid, and why it is more important than "but the media tells me to not be a fatass therefore we're even nothing to be done everybody has troubles deal with it"

There you go again, trying to make it as if one side is allowed to voice their problems while another isn't. One cause does NOT have the right to complain about injustices more so than another group does, and decrying sexism against men while also going 'lalalala men can't complain even when the same is done to them lalalala' is not gender equality, at all.

And don't even get me started on how poorly overweight people are treated and barely anybody bats an eye at that, sadly. It gets old fast when even being slightly overweight is treated as if you need a forklift to get out of your house, or that stupid BMI (Body Mass Index) thing that school's tried to introduce (I have no idea if it's still being used or not), where even people with next to no meat on their bones were declared "Fat".

I love it when people talk about gender equality, but I despise feminism disguised as said gender equality. And IMHO, taking the Bechdel test seriously (as in strictly and not just as something curious to talk about) is just that.
I'm no more than any woman, but I'm no less either. And no woman is ever going to make me change my mind about that.

And that pretty sums up my viewpoints on this in a short manner, far better than I ever could.

[Mr.Judge]

Was Akira Toriyama aware of Bechdel test when writing DB?
Did the Japanese Manga Editors inform Akira Toriyama that whenever he portrays a conversation between 2 women , he should see to it that his work should pass the criteria for Bechdel test for American(western) audience?
Did he study in the American film school?
/s.


Considering How Akira Toriyama writing for japanese male audience first , these test seems irrelevant in the context of Shonen manga.

Akira Toriyama based on his previous Shonen Manga Dr. Slump seems to be the forerunner in depicting a Strong Female lead and Main Protagonist as Female in Shonen Manga.

Akira Toriyama has created many Empowering Female Characters Like
i) Arale Norimaki, who can destroy planets super easily .
ii) Chi Chi who is not afraid to slap Super Buu in the face, a being more powerful than Super Perfect Cell, who can destroy entire Solar system. Even Bulma did slap Beerus, the god of destruction in the latest movie BOG.
ii) Bulma , A genius scientist who surpasses her father's intellect and again confirmed in his Latest Manga "Jaco the Galactic Patrolman"
iii) C-18/Android 18 who broke a Super Saiya-jin Vegeta's arm with a super casual kick.

And Also DB is japanese shonen manga and Cultural Gap/Difference .

Spoiler:

Shōnen, shonen, or shounen manga (少年漫画 shōnen manga?) is manga marketed to a male audience aged roughly 10 and up.

[Rocketman]

Do you think the end justifies the means? I don't.
There is a concept called "freedom". I decide if I want to exercise to improve my life. Anything that will try to force that improvement by taking away my freedom to choose whether I want it or not will be, in fact, "gagging" me. Both policies are equally bad.

Freedom of speech is equal to freedom of fatness. Ok then.

And I'm going to switch to something different, but related:
-A man hits a woman with, let's say, a frying pan, and she's severely injured. That's gender violence.
-A woman hits a man with the same frying pan and he's as severely injured as she is in the previous example. Let's make the initial assumption that it is the man's fault.

This is rooted in the misogynist belief that women are inferior to men and cannot seriously injure them.

I love it when people talk about gender equality, but I despise feminism disguised as said gender equality.

Feminism is gender equality.

And Also DB is japanese shonen manga

Yu-Gi-Oh! passes the Bechdel test.

[rereboy]

Feminism is gender equality.

No, its not. Feminism, by definition, is a positive discrimination of women. In a male-centric world, feminism can be important to achieve greater gender equality but its not the same thing.

Its important to not confuse the two because its not even that uncommon nowadays for feminist notions to actually contribute to a greater gender inequality in certain situations, given that nowadays there's much more gender equality than in the old days, so strong feminist notions in some cases actually end up hurting gender equality.

[ABED]

Freedom of speech is equal to freedom of fatness. Ok then.

Freedom in this context means freedom from force, or to put it positively, it's freedom to use your own mind to reach your own conclusions.

[Gaffer Tape]

Here's the thing: I don't mind one way or the other if someone says that the hypothetical gag issue is a more important problem to be solved than the hypothetical working out issue, and that it needs to be addressed first. Fine. That's an opinion, and it's a valid one, and I might even be inclined to agree with it. That's not the point. The point is that you, Rocketman, are espousing the viewpoint of, "How dare you complain about men being forced to work out every day when there are women who have to wear gags? Hop on your mighty steed of privilege and get over it because the problems I champion totally invalidate the ones that you do." That's where you and I seem to differ. While I see two problems that need correcting, you see it as a competition of two unrelated problems wherein one must grind the other into the ground for some reason. And I just do not understand that mentality. I don't understand why males are supposed to carry male guilt, whites carry white guilt, straight people straight guilt, cisgendered people cis guilt. Again, it's ridiculous and patronizing, and before you say it's just because I'm a white, straight, cisgendered male, I do not fit in all of those categories, thank you very much. Not that what I'm labeled as should have any impact on the validity of my opinion, any more than a black, gay, transgendered woman's opinion should be dismissed or deemed any less valid because of those labels.

To bring it a bit further onto the topic, ABED asked me a question, and I have to say I really don't understand what you're asking. You asked if I genuinely want to see more main female characters in fiction or if I just want to "appear like I care about social injustice." I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're not trying to insult me with that last part by implying that I'm putting up some sort of PC front. But I would say that, yes, I do want to see more females represented in media but not just to fulfill a quota. I don't want to see tokens. I don't want to see "representatives" for their own sake.

I'd say the issue comes back to something that I believe Kendamu pointed out, which is the notion that young boys (Dragon Ball's target demographic) would rather see Goku punching stuff than a story that fulfilled the Bechdel Test. I agree that there's no need to shoehorn something in to Dragon Ball that does not fit its tone or genre. An extended episode of Blooma and Lunch having a girls' day would probably not work in this series. Then again, there was a segment of an episode of Avatar where Katara and Toph did just that, even though that series is also primarily targeted towards young boys (so much so that Katara didn't even get a freakin' action figure!).

However, I think it's more interesting to ask why that is. Why do, as Kid Buu revealed, companies actively discourage media from passing the Bechdel Test? Well, because male-related media can sell to both sexes, while female-related media, sadly, does not. And that's because femininity is still seen as a female-exclusive realm. Males are discouraged from participating from anything deemed feminine from birth, be it clothing, activities, toys, or television shows. Girls, generally speaking, have much more freedom in that area than boys do. And while girls participating in masculine activities is generally accepted in today's society, feminine behavior is still seen as being beneath men. And that's why you can't just dismiss people's arguments with a, "Well, we have it worse!" mentality, because the same sexism hurts both sexes!

[ABED]

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're not trying to insult me with that last part by implying that I'm putting up some sort of PC front. But I would say that, yes, I do want to see more females represented in media but not just to fulfill a quota. I don't want to see tokens. I don't want to see "representatives" for their own sake.

No, I could've been less pushy in my wording, but I do think sometimes people put up a fuss to make it look like they care, including to themselves.

[Gaffer Tape]

Not that I have to, but let me assure you that issues of gender are foremost on my mind and have a very personal impact on me on a daily basis. But, yes, I agree with you that some people feel the need to put up a front. But I have to wonder if that's largely because of the idea being forced down people's throats that unless they prove that they're not sexist/racist that they are.

[Gyt Kaliba]

Freedom of speech is equal to freedom of fatness. Ok then.

So, let me see if I'm reading you right here. You'd be perfectly all right with people who don't fit a certain body image being rounded up and literally forced at gunpoint to 'shape up'? I might be jumping to quite an extreme here, but that's pretty much how it's coming off.

Feminism is gender equality.

...Okay, I think I need to go lie down for a while. That's one the richest things I have ever read, that I can't even bring myself to actually laugh at it. Oh man, that hurts.

But I have to wonder if that's largely because of the idea being forced down people's throats that unless they prove that they're not sexist/racist that they are.

That assumption does run pretty rampant in society, unfortunately. I just love being treated as if I must automatically be a bible-thumper who hates anyone that isn't straight or white simply because of my home state.

Again, equal rights doesn't mean championing that one side in an issue is due better rights - it means they're due equal rights just as it says in the name. Equal rights all around.

[Gaffer Tape]

Feminism is gender equality.

...Okay, I think I need to go lie down for a while. That's one the richest things I have ever read, that I can't even bring myself to actually laugh at it. Oh man, that hurts.

Sorry, but, no, I can't take it that far. While I do believe that the notion of equality rooted in a belief system championing the interests of a single group is completely paradoxical, I do support that the intention of feminism is for equality and that it is an overall positive step, and it's a step that is completely necessary to reach equality. But it's JUST a step. On its own, it can never reach equality because it is exclusive, and when you have exclusivity, you cannot reach equality. We must reach a point where we are all-inclusive.

[Gyt Kaliba]

Sorry, but, no, I can't take it that far. While I do believe that the notion of equality rooted in a belief system championing the interests of a single group is completely paradoxical, I do support that the intention of feminism is for equality and that it is an overall positive step, and it's a step that is completely necessary to reach equality. But it's JUST a step. On its own, it can never reach equality because it is exclusive, and when you have exclusivity, you cannot reach equality. We must reach a point where we are all-inclusive.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not again feminism in of itself. But if it's taken as far as 'All men are statistically jerks that should be shunned' as some take it? THAT'S what grinds my gears. I agree that feminism is a step, it's the notion that it's the final answer, as seemed suggested in Rocketman's post, that I find laughable.

[garnetjester]

Ok, I'll bite. Feminism as a political and philosophical current has a lot of branches, waves and whatnot, but what it essentially looks for is to make sure that women have the same rights and are treated equally compared to men. For example, even in this day and time women earn less than men even if they do the same job and are equally qualified. In this example feminism strives for making sure that a woman isn't underpayed in account of her gender, like it's been documented to happen, even in the western world.

I think some of you guys are going way overboard with your interpretations of radical feminism and man-hating women as proper feminism. Most of us are pretty collected and harmless, and we don't hate men at all, we just wish that things weren't so screwed up in our end in certain matters, like sexual violence, culturally sanctioned victim blaming etc.

It doesn't mean that being a man is easy peasy and there aren't struggles with that as well, sure there are, everything is complicated in life. But feminism's goal isn't to shut up the men, it's just to point out that things could be better than they are now for half of the human population (that would be the women) if we could stop being treated differently (and often unfairly, like when rape victims are blamed because they wore a mini skirt or went out at night etc) because of our gender.

[Rocketman]

While I see two problems that need correcting, you see it as a competition of two unrelated problems wherein one must grind the other into the ground for some reason.

I see it as an issue of limited resources, so the more severe problem should take priority.

it means they're due equal rights just as it says in the name. Equal rights all around.

Equal rights like being able to talk to each other?

[Gaffer Tape]

I think some of you guys are going way overboard with your interpretations of radical feminism and man-hating women as proper feminism. Most of us are pretty collected and harmless, and we don't hate men at all, we just wish that things weren't so screwed up in our end in certain matters, like sexual violence, culturally sanctioned victim blaming etc.

It doesn't mean that being a man is easy peasy and there aren't struggles with that as well, sure there are, everything is complicated in life. But feminism's goal isn't to shut up the men, it's just to point out that things could be better than they are now for half of the human population (that would be the women) if we could stop being treated differently (and often unfairly, like when rape victims are blamed because they wore a mini skirt or went out at night etc) because of our gender.

Fair enough, but... who here is arguing against that? Who is bringing radical feminism and man-hating into this or conflating them? Or being negative towards feminism at all? Because I haven't seen a single example of anything you're saying.

[garnetjester]

Uhmm comments like this made me think that maybe people were misguided about feminism being about hating men and blaming them for everything and assuming they are all the devil.

'All men are statistically jerks that should be shunned' as some take it? THAT'S what grinds my gears

Someone brought up the term feminazi too, and somebody else said something about how men are all judged to be the same as a monolithic entity, so I figured I'd contribute my 2 cents to the discussion.

[Gaffer Tape]

Ah, okay. My apologies. I thought you were referring to the recent turn the conversation had taken towards the direction of feminism.

[FrogTrigger]

Ok, I'll bite. Feminism as a political and philosophical current has a lot of branches, waves and whatnot, but what it essentially looks for is to make sure that women have the same rights and are treated equally compared to men. For example, even in this day and time women earn less than men even if they do the same job and are equally qualified. In this example feminism strives for making sure that a woman isn't underpayed in account of her gender, like it's been documented to happen, even in the western world.

I think some of you guys are going way overboard with your interpretations of radical feminism and man-hating women as proper feminism. Most of us are pretty collected and harmless, and we don't hate men at all, we just wish that things weren't so screwed up in our end in certain matters, like sexual violence, culturally sanctioned victim blaming etc.

It doesn't mean that being a man is easy peasy and there aren't struggles with that as well, sure there are, everything is complicated in life. But feminism's goal isn't to shut up the men, it's just to point out that things could be better than they are now for half of the human population (that would be the women) if we could stop being treated differently (and often unfairly, like when rape victims are blamed because they wore a mini skirt or went out at night etc) because of our gender.

Yea feminism shouldn't be a bad word, thanks for your contribution garnetjester

[Gyt Kaliba]

it means they're due equal rights just as it says in the name. Equal rights all around.

Equal rights like being able to talk to each other?

I'm sorry, but I just can't get over the fact that you seem to be seriously saying that a work of fiction and whether or not it has two female characters talking, about men or anything else, actually has a real world effect. I've sure never seen anyone rushing around shushing women in my life.

I would also again point to how easily this can be turned to the lack of male characters that don't fall into one stereotype or another, but you're clearly only concerned with one side of the sexism card.

Uhmm comments like this made me think that maybe people were misguided about feminism being about hating men and blaming them for everything and assuming they are all the devil.

'All men are statistically jerks that should be shunned' as some take it? THAT'S what grinds my gears

Someone brought up the term feminazi too, and somebody else said something about how men are all judged to be the same as a monolithic entity, so I figured I'd contribute my 2 cents to the discussion.

That would be me (on the 'statistically' quote), and I thought I made it clear I was talking about the extremists. If it came off like I was talking about feminism, feminists, or just plain women in general though, I apologize. That's not how I meant it to be taken at all.

All I am trying to say is that it is not equal rights if one side gets more rights than another. Women should be allowed to talk about whatever they want, so should men. Female characters shouldn't always be shoved into one stereotype or another, and while they sometimes are unfortunately, there's plenty of examples that don't fit a stereotype - again, the same thing can be said of male characters. Equality goes both ways.

[garnetjester]

Yes, but the problem is that men don't need to fight some of these fights because they've already won them. It's not a matter of ignoring them, it's just not necessary in some cases. For example, about representation in the mainstream media, most of the main characters in anything outside of Barbie movies are men. There's nothing wrong with that, I largely don't care either. But there should be more representations of females anyway. At least outside of the "love interest" or "mom" aspect. That's why sometimes feminism seems one sided, but it's not because it's supposed to put women above men, it's because there are still things we as a society neeed to work on so that we can stand on equal footing.

The fact that a series doesn't even have two female characters talking about anything other than men is problematic because it means that writers (in general, not Toriyama specifically) don't think women are interesting or relevant enough in anything to even get featured unless its to flesh out the male characters. It's what it represents that's troublesome, but if you look at it in a case by case basis you could find different explanations in different situations.