DB/Fiction's Handling of Diversity

[Doctor.]

Yes, for all we know it could be. But given that it's the only examples in the franchise of LGBT characters, it's absolutely no surprise to be questioned. And everything an artist does represents them one way or another.

It's unrealistic to question Toriyama's motives and thoughts due to two characters in a 520-chapter series that represent a subject that Toriyama evidently doesn't care much about implementing in the series. I'm sorry, but I find that ridiculous.

Goku & Chi-Chi, Vegeta & Bulma, Krillin & 18 (core plot critical developement!). Countless Kamesennin sexual jokes being one of the stamples of the series. Magazines with girls in bikinis. Boobs jiggling. Goku grabbing Chi Chi's critch to check whether she has a penis or a vagina. Sorry, but are you serious? Heterosexuality. Is. Sexuality.

Yes, and none of that is relevant to the main plot besides Kuririn & 18's relationship, an exception to the rule. The rest of your example are either jokes or they're ships made to create new characters and continue Goku/Vegeta's bloodline, something you can't do with LGBT couples. Toriyama doesn't include romance in the story because he likes it or he's making some statement, he includes it because it's practical to continue the story and, in that sense, including LGBT couples would be pointless.

Not using vulgar words doesn't mean you didn't claim it to be pure good-spirited comedy without any malice. You did as you disagreed and got bothered by even considering that it could be less than pure-hearted comedy.

Except that's not what I did. I asked whether or not you thought Toriyama's intent was malicious, then in the same post I assumed you thought so just to make a point, nothing else.

[rereboy]

But if the world of arts & enterianment collectively excludes and/or exclusively caricatures them then yes it is born out of politics because their existance is a simple fact of human species. Denying the reality is not "the natural state". And that's what's been happening for the most part in arts & entertainment in XX century, thankfully on the course to reverting back to normal nowadays.

All the artists need is freedom. As long as they are free, they will write about what they want and, since there will be all kinds of artists, there will be works with all kinds of people and characters, which will include LBGT. That's why things have been improving recently, because the artists (for various reasons) have more freedom to write whatever they want.

Arguing inclusion just for inclusion's sake is not so different than arguing exclusion just for exclusion's sake, both are an intromission in the artist's freedom with a certain objective in sight, they are just on the opposite side of the political spectrum.

[pacz360]

I find it funny that people thinks toriyama could give a shit about stuff like diversity and LGBT themes in dragon ball of all things.

[Basaku]

Yes, and none of that is relevant to the main plot besides Kuririn & 18's relationship, an exception to the rule. The rest of your example are either jokes or they're ships made to create new characters and continue Goku/Vegeta's bloodline, something you can't do with LGBT couples. Toriyama doesn't include romance in the story because he likes it or he's making some statement, he includes it because it's practical to continue the story and, in that sense, including LGBT couples would be pointless.

And Kuririn & 18's subplot is one of the highlights of the Cell saga and as it's there so there can be other couples in future, maybe LGBT, if Toriyama feels like one is needed for plot developement of any future arc. Or if he feels there's enough Saiyans around and he needs to make Pan/Bra lesbian couple so there's less Saiyan offsprings that he would have to write for while at the cost of already existing gigantic rest of the cast. Countless reasons to include, versus your countless exuses one after another not to include. Of course at this point I think you will understand that I'm hardly still buying your artistic integrity and freedom concerns after the last few posts where you've been desperately coming up with anything you could think of to "keep the gays out".

All the artists need is freedom. As long as they are free, they will write about what they want and, since there will be all kinds of artists, there will be works with all kinds of people and characters, which will include LBGT. That's why things have been improving recently, because the artists (for various reasons) have more freedom to write whatever they want.

Arguing inclusion just for inclusion's sake is not so different than arguing exclusion just for exclusion's sake, both are an intromission in the artist's freedom with a certain objective in sight, they are just on the opposite side of the political spectrum.

The increased freedom the artists are experiencing is precisely because of correcting the politically-created unnatural state of artistic constraints and that included calls for inclusivity. The two are not equal, one corrects illogical and forced restraints while the other aims to restore positive & natural state. And trying to equal it is your political play to prop the politically-created restraints.

[Doctor.]

And Kuririn & 18's subplot is one of the highlights of the Cell saga and as it's there so there can be other couples in future, maybe LGBT, if Toriyama feels like one is needed for plot developement of any future arc. Or if he feels there's enough Saiyans around and he needs to make Pan/Bra lesbian couple so there's less Saiyan offsprings that he would have to write for while at the cost of already existing gigantic rest of the cast. Countless reasons to include, versus your countless exuses one after another not to include.

Sure, but what this comes down to, and what I've been trying to tell you, is that Toriyama has no interest.

Of course at this point I think you will understand that I'm hardly still buying your artistic integrity and freedom concerns after the last few posts where you've been desperately coming up with anything you could think of to "keep the gays out".

I'm bi. I sure want to keep myself out.

[rereboy]

The increased freedom the artists are experiencing is precisely because of correcting the politically-created unnatural state of artistic constraints and that included calls for inclusivity. The two are not equal, one corrects illogical and forced restraints while the other aims to restore positive & natural state. And trying to equal it is your political play to prop the politically-created restraints.

You are just viewing the subject with your own opinions on how things should and shouldn't be.

Freedom as a principle doesn't exist to conform to whatever our opinions are, but to allow them in conjunction with others.

That's why all the artists need is freedom to write whatever they want. Everything else is basically just pushing our views.

[Basaku]

Sure, but what this comes down to, and what I've been trying to tell you, is that Toriyama has no interest.

What it comes down to is once again you proclaiming what Toriyama has or doesn't have interest in, along with arguing it for past few pages just to end up with most illogical and contradicting to the franchise's history story excuses why "the gays don't fit in".

I'm bi. I sure want to keep myself out.

You're coming up with every reason you can think of to do so, why is that I dunno 'cause I'm not in your head. Sure is food for thought though in the everlasting questions of bi people who don't care that much for the perspective of LG_T side and then ask "why do you think we're trying to have the cake and eat it?".

That's why all the artists need is freedom to write whatever they want. Everything else is basically just pushing our views.

And that freedom would never happen/begin to happen without asking and raising concerns etc.

[Doctor.]

What it comes down to is once again you proclaiming what Toriyama has or doesn't have interest in, along with arguing it for past few pages just to end up with most illogical and contradicting to the franchise's history story excuses why "the gays don't fit in".

Fine, let me correct myself.

Toriyama seemingly has no apparent interest in including and representing any LGBT characters in a positive, progressive way in the work of fiction that he owns and has absolute right over.

This should cover every base. I never said why "the gays don't fit in", I've explained why Toriyama, in my perspective, never included LGBT characters before, that's all.

You're coming up with every reason you can think of to do so, why is that I dunno 'cause I'm not in your head. Sure is food for thought though in the everlasting questions of bi people who don't care that much for the perspective of LG_T side and then ask "why do you think we're trying to have the cake and eat it?".

You're making assumptions, I never said I didn't care about the other perspective. I'm saying I want a work of fiction to be fully representative of the creator's vision, negative and positive points all included. I don't feel the need to be represented in a work of fiction that isn't mine just because I'm a minority.

[rereboy]

And that freedom would never happen/begin to happen without asking and raising concerns etc.

The concerns raised were about freedom in all kinds of issues, not just LBGT's issues.

Eventually more freedom happened because the principle of freedom regarding all sorts of issues (not just LBGT) is a principle that the majority of people considered reasonable and correct.

Inclusion for inclusion's sake is no longer about the principle of freedom regarding all kinds of issues.

[Basaku]

Toriyama seemingly has no apparent interest in including and representing any LGBT characters in a positive, progressive way in the work of fiction that he owns and has absolute right over.

Sure enough valid argument/theory based on evidence. Only more surprising then why you got so defensive that based on the same evidence I suggested that disrespect for LGBT is one of the possible reasons for Blue+Otokosuki+no-standard-LGBT-characters. Just as possible theory as yours, neither of us will know for sure, nor whether will TOriyama include "standard" LGBT characters in future or not and if he does, there's no reason not to, certinately none of the ones you brought up that contradict what's already in the franchise.

You're making assumptions, I never said I didn't care about the other perspective. I'm saying I want a work of fiction to be fully representative of the creator's vision, negative and positive points all included.

As we all, except in case of LGBT inclusion, Toriyama's vision does not represent any positive point about LGBT.

I don't feel the need to be represented in a work of fiction that isn't mine just because I'm a minority.

Heh, part of you IS being constantly represented though and you know it and you know that it will always be different from full-gay/lesbian perspective.

Inclusion for inclusion's sake is no longer about the principle of freedom regarding all kinds of issues.

Except that we're nowhere near that point yet. Often brought up Marvel here, how many more decades will it take for Black Widow to finally get her solo movie? Sure doesn't looks like end-game of fight for freedom to me where people are just being petty and annoying with "inclusion for the sake of inclusion" complaints

[Doctor.]

Sure enough valid argument/theory based on evidence. Only more surprising then why you got so defensive that based on the same evidence I suggested that disrespect for LGBT is one of the possible reasons for Blue+Otokosuki+no-standard-LGBT-characters. Just as possible theory as yours, neither of us will know for sure, nor whether will TOriyama include "standard" LGBT characters in future or not and if he does, there's no reason not to, certinately none of the ones you brought up that contradict what's already in the franchise.

I got "defensive", because Toriyama having no interest in including more LGBT characters doesn't necessarily mean that his views on LGBT as people are being represented in his work.

I don't see what's negative about him not wanting to include normal LGBT characters, that was my point.

As we all, except in case of LGBT inclusion, Toriyama's vision does not represent any positive point about LGBT.

And again, why does it need to?

Heh, part of you IS being constantly represented though and you know it and you know that it will always be different from full-gay/lesbian perspective.

And this is why I was hesitant to bring up the fact that I'm bi in the first place. Not only should it have no bearing on my argument, but I was certain it would devolve into a game of identity politics, about who's less privilieged than the other. But responding to your point anyway, you can't represent half a group. You either represent the group fully or you don't. In the case of bissexuals, making a straight character and thinking "well, that should do in regards to the representation of Bi people" doesn't work. The point is that artistic integrity and freedom should always come before any other aspect, I'm sure if I were gay I'd think exactly the same way, because it's not my sexuality that defines me; it's, in reality, a very small part of me as a person.

[rereboy]

Except that we're nowhere near that point yet. Often brought up Marvel here, how many more decades will it take for Black Widow to finally get her solo movie? Sure doesn't looks like end-game of fight for freedom to me where people are just being petty and annoying with "inclusion for the sake of inclusion" complaints

Artists and authors don't need to have the level of inclusion in their works that you want to see just because you want it to happen, just like they don't need to have the level of exclusion in their works that someone else wants to see. That's the point of their freedom in writing what they want.

If we care more about seeing our view reflected in their work than the freedom of the authors to write what they want, then, obviously, it's no longer about freedom, but about pushing a specific political point, whether that specific point is inclusion, exclusion or something else.

No matter how "annoying" you think that notion is, it doesn't make it any less true.

[Soppa Saia People]

Man, even though this has extended past DB, it's still great reading through it. Props guys.

[Basaku]

I don't see what's negative about him not wanting to include normal LGBT characters, that was my point.

And neither would I see it as anything that negative, simply as something he has no interest in and that's fine, IF the bad/punchline examples didn't exist already. That' my point. If someone wanna use LGBT in comic/movie/novel fine, but we're not solely a joke catalogue of dated stereotypes so a varied portrayal would be rather nice, jokes and punchlines along normal characters. If not, absolutely no one should be surprised about criticism and raising question "why only the jokes?".

And this is why I was hesitant to bring up the fact that I'm bi in the first place. Not only should it have no bearing on my argument, but I was certain it would devolve into a game of identity politics, about who's less privilieged than the other.

Well I already saw it coming I understand though but you did bring it up nonetheless mate/gal, and you did it in an attempt to combat my arguments by claiming yourself as in the exact same position in arts & etrertainment catering to you while it's not the same.

But responding to your point anyway, you can't represent half a group. You either represent the full group or you don't. In the case of bissexuals, making a straight character and thinking "well, that should do in regards to the representation of Bi people" doesn't work. The point is that artistic integrity and freedom should always come before any other aspect, I'm sure if I were gay I'd think exactly the same way, because it's not my sexuality that defines me; it's, in reality, a very small part of me as a person.

Catering to and servicing works though, and it is a simple fact that the whole arts & entertainment world has something for you to relate to in terms of sexuality/romantic subplots. You're bi, so yes, it is a difference experience for you watching 70 mainstream Hollywood romcoms with straight couples than it is for a gay/lesbian or even trans person. Just as it is different for you to watch Dragon Ball with multiple couples that DO share your romantic interests in opposite gender versus. gay/lesbian person who's romantic interests are exclusively caricatured. It's just how it is and something you can't deny. And of course sexuality is is only a part of any person, but this topic discusses diversity and all in DB so well, it's naturally gonne be one of the main points of discussion

That's the point of their freedom in writing what they want.

But they DON'T have that freedom yet, fully or even partially depending on industry or part of the world. Do you ackowledge that or do you think the world of arts & entertainment is already completly free of studio executives striking down ideas for say female-led blockbuster movies etc?

[Doctor.]

"why only the jokes?".

Because the author is free to portray the characters as he wants to. We're just going in circles here and it's evident we're not going to reach a consensus.

Well I already saw it coming I understand though but you did bring it up nonetheless mate/gal, and you did it in an attempt to combat my arguments by claiming yourself as in the exact same position in arts & etrertainment catering to you while it's not the same.

I only brought it up because you were pretty much implying that I was a homophobe, so I thought I should stand my ground.

Caterig to and servicing works though, and it is a simple fact that the whole arts & entertainment world has something for you to relate to in terms of sexuality/romantic subplots. You're bi, so yes, it is a difference experience for you watching 70 mainstream Hollywood romcoms with straight couples than it is for a gay/lesbian or even trans person. Just as it is different for you to watch Dragon Ball with multiple couples that DO share your romantic interests in opposite gender versus. gay/lesbian person who's romantic interests are exclusively caricatured. It's just how it is and something you can't deny. And of course sexuality is is only a part of any person, but this topic discusses diversity and all in DB so well, it's naturally gonne be one of the main points of discussion

But I don't feel like I'm being represented by any of the characters, though. I don't connect with Vegeta just because I understand his love for Bulma. I think everyone, hetero or not, can understand why one human being can love another. Also, can't it work the other way around, too? Dragon Ball is simulatenously portraying part of my romantic interests in a positive light through the heterossexual relationships and is portraying the other part of my romantic interests in a negative light through the jokes about gay characters. I have the right to find it irksome, don't I? Yet, as I evidently showcased in this argument, I don't find it questionable. It's not a matter of understanding the perspective of gay people, it's a matter of unnecessarily wanting to be represented in a series that doesn't concern itself with your issues.

[Basaku]

I only brought it up because you were pretty much implying that I was a homophobe, so I thought I should stand my ground.

No, you already mentioned before "you don't know what my sexuality is" so I was expecting it and hence eat cake and have it shade

I think everyone, hetero or not, can understand why one human being can love another.

Obviously, but the understanding and connection will always be greater with compatibility in place.

Also, can't it work the other way around, too? Dragon Ball is simulatenously portraying part of my romantic interests in a positive light through the heterossexual relationships and is portraying the other part of my romantic interests in a negative light through the jokes about gay characters. I have the right to find it irksome, don't I? Yet, as I evidently showcased in this argument, I don't find it questionable. It's not a matter of understanding the perspective of gay people, it's a matter of unnecessarily wanting to be represented in a series that doesn't concern itself with your issues.

But a section of your romantic interest IS portrayed in a good/positive way. For a gay/lesbian person it's not, so again at least a slightly diffent perspective. And it's not about unnecessarily wanting to be represented in a series that doesn't concern itself with your issues because Toriyama DID concern himself with "my" issues and he did it in an exclusively caricature way. He didn't have to, could've just had more boobs jiggling and Kammesennin jokes, but he decided to use LGBT characters and that's open to evaluation and criticism as any other aspect of the franchise he brings up.

[Doctor.]

No, you already mentioned before "you don't know what my sexuality is" so I was expecting it and hence eat cake and have it shade

Yeah, but you could have always thought I was just being a smart-ass.

Obviously, but the understanding and connection will always be greater with compatibility in place.

Then the connection between bi people and straight characters would be greater if those straight characters were capable of understanding what it's like to be in love with someone from the same sex. Thus, again, they don't represent us.

But a section of your romantic interest IS portrayed in a good/positive way. For a gay/lesbian person it's not, so again at least a slightly diffent perspective. And it's not about unnecessarily wanting to be represented in a series that doesn't concern itself with your issues because Toriyama DID concern himself with "my" issues and he did it in an exclusively caricature way. He didn't have to, could've just had more boobs jiggling and Kammesennin jokes, but he decided to use LGBT characters and that's open to evaluation and criticism as any other aspect of the franchise he brings up.

I meant "your" in a general sense, referring to the entire LGBT community.

Toriyama didn't concern himself with those issues. He made two cheap barely-offensive jokes at the expense of the LGBT community, but that doesn't portray his real thoughts on the issue. It's open to evalutation and criticism depending on the context. As in, you're free to say it's unfunny. I don't think you have sufficient information to judge Toriyama's character.

[sintzu]

If we care more about seeing our view reflected in their work than the freedom of the authors to write what they want, then, obviously, it's no longer about freedom, but about pushing a specific political point, whether that specific point is inclusion, exclusion or something else.

This is why I don't have much to do with American entertainment anymore, the people involved only care about what others think of them and how to satisfy certain political groups.

Instead of making the product they want to make, they instead think about who needs to be representative, who can't be offended, what can and can't be said and done, ect.

It's a matter of unnecessarily wanting to be represented in a series that doesn't concern itself with your issues.

And where does it end ? if one group or issue is brought up then what about the others ? by the time he's done including every minority in his story and by the time he writes about every political issue, there'll be nothing left of what made DB, DB.

I noticed a big thing nowadays in American entertainment is that every piece of media has to follow a certain guideline and if it doesn't then it's racist, not inclusive and the people behind it don't care about anyone but themselves.

[SingleFringe&Sparks]

You mean the same social justice warrior's who created the 2017 Resolutions For White White Guy's, I know theres some good SJW'S but the bad ones just crowd the rest out.

I never hear what actually represents a "good" one, considering that the very subject, is automatically strawmaned as a "victimhood" plight.

YWhat you tuber's? Pewdiepie? The man who makes fun of everything? People in the marvel community dislike SJW Feminists for basically ruining Thor, and a whole slew of other characters.

More like people who generally take everything an "SJW" says and turn some naive notion they hear, into a conspiracy that persists audacity in a person's concerns with whatever criticized material is being focused on. In the majority, most of the people who get easy views by ranting about trivial things, and associate some form of exaggerated scenario with it in a facade of a rebellious righteousness against their medium or specific favourable figure's concept questioned. I have yet to hear why Wonder Woman's breasts being larger than what people realistically accept, is something crucial to the character herself and not just an aesthetic preference held by a section of the fanbase. Wonder Woman's body has never been the same in any media shes been in between the two, but those people would rather hear their denial of things they don't really care for as something that is politically unjustified. Also, the term "ruining" is also just used on very subjective grounds, and often falsely correlated outside of the direct flaw in the source of any alteration.

[sintzu]

DB is a story about aliens punching each other really hard, it has a chiled like thing who can destroy a universe, a bubble gum monster and a talking cat who likes pudding.

It isn't exactly an appropriate story to discuss political issues.

Toriyama has said multiple times that DB is aimed at young boys and belive me, political issues is the last thing they want to watch and as far as I'm concerned, it's inappropriate to force that down kids' throats.