Trans/Gay/Bi-sexual villians

[Cold Skin]

^ You do seem to consider that mere non-inclusion means "mean exclusion".
If we take it that way, then A LOT of people should feel offended A LOT of times.

[Basaku]

^ You do seem to consider that mere non-inclusion means "mean exclusion".

Not a "mean" exclusion in most cases probably. "Apathy" exclusion tho? And again, we're talking a series with hundreds of characters, 500+ chapters/episodes AND idiotic stereotype examples like Blue/Otokosuki.

[soulnova]

As I mentioned earlier, half my friends are gay or bi. They all loved Dragon Ball since they were kids... and at the time most of them had a crush on some of the characters (Gohan and/or Future Trunks in most cases).

Speaking of which, the character that would be easier to out as bi, with just a single tiny mention would be Future Trunks. Would you honestly be surprised by that? Nah. C'mon, even my 10 year old sister at the time straight up told me she suspected Trunks could be a little gay (bi). That would certainly not feel shoe horned and detract on his character or the story at all.

[Rocketman]

The problem is that the gay/bi/trans community is a small minority. There could a seamless character like that but for what purpose? It serves no purpose for the story or anything else in the series, so even a seamless inclusion of such a character would feel more like "agenda" than anything else.

What purpose does it serve for everyone to be straight?

[Bullza]

So every single anime, movie, TV show HAS to have a gay character now?

[rereboy]

Agenda was the concious effort to exclude/ridicule minorities in previous century. Bringing them in now would just be normalizing unnatural exclusion

Since series are basically stories that have a point, and not a complete representation of everything that exists in the world, the natural thing to happen is for series to have norm-like view of families and (sexual) preferences, unless the objective of the series is to tackle those issues a bit or a lot.

Nobody expects a series to have a character who has a minority sexual preference, like being sexually attracted to shoes, unless there's a point to it. If there's no point to it, that inclusion generally just feels like agenda or pointless.

Gay/bi/trans people, despite deserving all of our respect, also are a minority and not the norm. Therefore, pretty much like guys with other minority preferences, like the ones who are attracted to shoes, they aren't part of the norm and thus, unless series are tackling those issues, their inclusion, without having a point to it, also generally just feels like agenda or pointless.

In shows like Flash, which have a close representation of the present and real modern society through their characters, it's possible to have a seamless inclusion of characters like that because its implicit point is the seamless representation of the present and real modern society in their characters. In such a situation, such a inclusion works seamlessly.

In Dragon Ball, I simply don't see how that would work without feeling like agenda. And yes, the conscious effort to include/praise minorities is agenda just like the opposite is agenda. It's a more positive agenda than the other one, but its agenda all the same.

What purpose does it serve for everyone to be straight?

Read above.

[Rocketman]

Gay/bi/trans people, despite deserving all of our respect, also are a minority and not the norm.

OK, but women are the majority of humanity and are also subject to exclusion.

So every single anime, movie, TV show HAS to have a gay character now?

So every single anime, movie, TV show HAS to have a straight character now?


The problem is not "everyone must be represented", the problem is treating "straight, white, male" as the default that any variation from must be justified.

[Bullza]

So every single anime, movie, TV show HAS to have a straight character now?

Dont answer my question with another question. Does every single movie, cartoon, anime, TV show, Video Game have to have a gay character in it now?

[Polyphase Avatron]

So every single anime, movie, TV show HAS to have a straight character now?

Dont answer my question with another question. Does every single movie, cartoon, anime, TV show, Video Game have to have a gay character in it now?

No, but is that any reason to deliberately not have any? I mean, DB already had 2 so your argument is kind of silly. Wouldn't it make sense to have an LGBT character that wasn't an offensive stereotype like the previous ones?

[Bullza]

So every single anime, movie, TV show HAS to have a straight character now?

Dont answer my question with another question. Does every single movie, cartoon, anime, TV show, Video Game have to have a gay character in it now?

No, but is that any reason to deliberately not have any? I mean, DB already had 2 so your argument is kind of silly. Wouldn't it make sense to have an LGBT character that wasn't an offensive stereotype like the previous ones?

My question wasn't related to just Dragon Ball. Why would it make sense to have a LGBT character that isn't a stereotype?

As far as I was aware the series was incredibly popular already so that can't be the reason, the fan base at large have never asked for this so that can't be the reason and it's never been widely criticised for it's lack of gay characters and how the existing ones have been portrayed so that also cant be the reason.

So what is it exactly that makes sense for a LGBT character to be included?

[rereboy]

OK, but women are the majority of humanity and are also subject to exclusion.

That's another discussion. That's more about typical gender roles, not minorities (because its not about how many men are in series compared to women, its about their roles). But, just like it happens with minorities, unless the series wants to tackle those issues or have a point, they generally also follow the norm regarding gender roles.

So every single anime, movie, TV show HAS to have a straight character now?


The problem is not "everyone must be represented", the problem is treating "straight, white, male" as the default that any variation from must be justified.

Because they ARE the default... Straight relationships are the norm. So, series that don't tackle those issues, naturally follow the norm. That doesn't mean that those that don't follow the norm should be oppressed or treated badly or excluded from media entirely, but their inclusion without any point at all, just to fill some sort of quota or to say "hey, we have diversity", clearly stands as agenda for their inclusion.

[Polyphase Avatron]

My question wasn't related to just Dragon Ball. Why would it make sense to have a LGBT character that isn't a stereotype?

As far as I was aware the series was incredibly popular already so that can't be the reason, the fan base at large have never asked for this so that can't be the reason and it's never been widely criticised for it's lack of gay characters and how the existing ones have been portrayed so that also cant be the reason.

So what is it exactly that makes sense for a LGBT character to be included?

To have a fair portrayal to compensate for the stereotypes that were used previously?

[rereboy]

To have a fair portrayal to compensate for the stereotypes that were used previously?

In other words, no real reason related to the series itself, just agenda.

[Basaku]

Since series are basically stories that have a point, and not a complete representation of everything that exists in the world, the natural thing to happen is for series to have norm-like view of families and (sexual) preferences, unless the objective of the series is to tackle those issues a bit or a lot.

Nobody expects a series to have a character who has a minority sexual preference, like being sexually attracted to shoes, unless there's a point to it. If there's no point to it, that inclusion generally just feels like agenda or pointless.

Gay/bi/trans people, despite deserving all of our respect, also are a minority and not the norm. Therefore, pretty much like guys with other minority preferences, like the ones who are attracted to shoes, they aren't part of the norm and thus, unless series are tackling those issues, their inclusion, without having a point to it, also generally just feels like agenda or pointless.

In shows like Flash, which have a close representation of the present and real modern society through their characters, it's possible to have a seamless inclusion of characters like that because its implicit point is the seamless representation of the present and real modern society in their characters. In such a situation, such a inclusion works seamlessly.

In Dragon Ball, I simply don't see how that would work without feeling like agenda. And yes, the conscious effort to include/praise minorities is agenda just like the opposite is agenda. It's a more positive agenda than the other one, but its agenda all the same.

Norm is falling in love, getting into relationships or having sex. Heterosexuality is 1 way of doing it that's in great majority. But it's not all-encompasing and there's no reason to focus exclusively on it all the time other than agenda of exlusion. TBH it's like you and other people just don't seem to compererhand the very basic concept of diverse species we're part of and sharing within it. If you happen to be in dominant majority, or just the most influental group, you seem to think everything should be directed at and cater exclusively to you and your POV. I'm right handed, like 90% of the human species. But at no point do I think "well of course that means left-handed computer mouses shouldn't be made 'cause right-handed is a norm and why even bother". Really, how about a little bit of sharing? When it comes to heterosexuality vs. homosexuality you will always recieve the lion share anyway, despite the fact that as a singular viewer your POV is not more important than a gay singular viewer's POV. You'll aways "get" majority treatement because you happen to be in majority on this particular case. Is the lion share not enough or do you need absolutely everything devoted to you? If the answer is "yep, I want it all" fine. Just don't even think about complaining if in some other case/issue, you happen to be in minority.

[rereboy]

Norm is falling in love, getting into relationships or having sex.

I'm sorry, but that's just dancing around the issue. Nowhere in my posts do I claim that not being straight is wrong or that they should be given less rights, nor do I think that. In fact, I think the opposite. But, it's simply undeniable that, as a minority, gay/bi/trans don't follow the norm and it's natural for series that don't tackle these issues to naturally follow the norm.

[Polyphase Avatron]

To have a fair portrayal to compensate for the stereotypes that were used previously?

In other words, no real reason related to the series itself, just agenda.

So it's okay to have an 'agenda' to portray a group of people with offensive stereotypes, but not to try to rectify that?

[Bullza]

Exactly, it doesn't need to compensate for a stereotypical character that nobody remembers who showed up very briefly in the series 20 years ago and another that showed up 30 years ago when nobody complains about them in the first place.

[Polyphase Avatron]

If you think it's so inconsequential, then why are you so against having an inconsequential, non-stereotypical LGBT character?

[rereboy]

TBH it's like you and other people just don't seem to compererhand the very basic concept of diverse species we're part of and sharing within it.

No, I just comprehend that a series is not meant to be a complete and completely faithful representation of the world and its people in its entirety. There's no point in having every single type of person represented, nor would it even be possible. I comprehend that a series is basically just a story with defined points that it wants to achieve and address and unless among them is the issue of minorities and sexuality, or in some way characters like that serve a certain point, the inclusion of characters like that generally doesn't serve a purpose within the series itself just seems like agenda.

So it's okay to have an 'agenda' to portray a group of people with offensive stereotypes, but not to try to rectify that?

And just where did I say that it was "okay" to have that? Here's what I stated previously:

" And yes, the conscious effort to include/praise minorities is agenda just like the opposite is agenda. It's a more positive agenda than the other one, but its agenda all the same."

As you can see, I consider that agenda better than the older agenda, but it stills agenda and doesn't serve an actual purpose for the story itself. Ideally, there would be no agenda.

[Basaku]

Norm is falling in love, getting into relationships or having sex.

I'm sorry, but that's just dancing around the issue. Nowhere in my posts do I claim that not being straight is wrong or that they should be given less rights, nor do I think that. In fact, I think the opposite. But, it's simply undeniable that, as a minority, gay/bi/trans don't follow the norm and it's natural for series that don't tackle these issues to naturally follow the norm.

Following the norm would be having 1 gay character for every 20 straight ones. And we're not even talking about as "high" proportions as that but rather ANY first non-idiotic-stereotype gay/bi/trans character. Also, really, comparsion to shoes fetish?

As you can see, I consider that agenda better than the older agenda, but it stills agenda and doesn't serve an actual purpose for the story itself. Ideally, there would be no agenda.

And hopefully one day there won't be but at the moment, we're still trying to fix negative effects of the agenda against gay/bi/trans people that your majority started. You obviously realize who "started it" and who's responsible.