VIZ 3-in-1 Editions Coming Summer 2013

[Kid Buu]

She isn't under-age.

16 is less than 18.

16<18.

In some areas 16 is the legal age of consent.

So, I'm kinda confused, its uncensored except for 3 pages, which 3 pages?

[Zenkai]

16 is less than 18.

16<18.

The national age of consent in Japan is 13 as specified by the Japanese Penal Code Articles 176 and 177. (However, prefectures can have ordinances that prohibit sexual activities with any minor under 18.)

I'd prefer not to see naked women or girls in Dragon Ball. Is that so difficult to understand?

[TheDevilsCorpse]

I'd prefer not to see naked women or girls in Dragon Ball. Is that so difficult to understand?

I'm not debating your preferences, you can choose to enjoy Dragon Ball however you like. I'm just countering your statement of Bluma being underage as if it were a fact.

[Zenkai]

I'd prefer not to see naked women or girls in Dragon Ball. Is that so difficult to understand?

I'm not debating your preferences, you can choose to enjoy Dragon Ball however you like. I'm just countering your statement of Bluma being underage as if it were a fact.

I don't live in Japan.

And do you honestly think it would be appropriate to have nude 13 and 14 year old girls?

[Kaboom]

It's not about WANTING specifically to see Bulma's goods or anything. It's about censorship, and messing around with art. That's the way the series was originally drawn, and it's bothersome to see it altered. Editing away the manga's nudity is just as much an annoyance as editing away its guns.

[ShadowDude112]

I'd prefer not to see naked women or girls in Dragon Ball. Is that so difficult to understand?

I'm not debating your preferences, you can choose to enjoy Dragon Ball however you like. I'm just countering your statement of Bluma being underage as if it were a fact.

I don't live in Japan.

And do you honestly think it would be appropriate to have nude 13 and 14 year olds?

But do you understand what he's saying? In Japan, Bulma is of legal consent. So yes, it is appropriate in Japan. In some states in the US, 16 is the consent age. We're saying that with the customs of Japan, and some laws of states, it technically is appropriate. Is that really so hard to understand?
Edit: Also what Kaboom said right above me.

[Kid Buu]

What would you say is the best release of the English Manga so far? I still haven't bought the manga yet, just don't know which one to get.

[Scarz]

I'd prefer not to see naked women or girls in Dragon Ball. Is that so difficult to understand?

I actually do understand. There are just some people out there who prefer not to see nudity in a certain genres and that's okay. Personally, I'm fine with the nudity in DB and I would like the uncensored release and I'm sure those like me would prefer the unaltered manga as well.

Oh and let's not forget that Bulma is in fact, a drawing.

[Zenkai]

But do you understand what he's saying? In Japan, Bulma is of legal consent. So yes, it is appropriate in Japan. In some states in the US, 16 is the consent age. We're saying that with the customs of Japan, and some laws of states, it technically is appropriate. Is that really so hard to understand?
Edit: Also what Kaboom said right above me.

Well, nude 13 and 14 year old females sounds like child pornography to me.

[ShadowDude112]

But do you understand what he's saying? In Japan, Bulma is of legal consent. So yes, it is appropriate in Japan. In some states in the US, 16 is the consent age. We're saying that with the customs of Japan, and some laws of states, it technically is appropriate. Is that really so hard to understand?
Edit: Also what Kaboom said right above me.

Well, nude 13 and 14 year old females sounds like child pornography to me.

Well, in Japan it's not. Here, sure it totally is. But if the main problem is Bulma, she can pass as legal. You should get off your moral high horse and deal with it.

[Insertclevername]

Nudity isn't synonymous with pornography.

[ShadowDude112]

Nudity isn't synonymous with pornography.

This. This so hard. Insertclevername, I love you so much right now. Said it better than I could ever do.

[Rukura]

I'd prefer not to see naked women or girls in Dragon Ball. Is that so difficult to understand?

I'm not debating your preferences, you can choose to enjoy Dragon Ball however you like. I'm just countering your statement of Bluma being underage as if it were a fact.

I don't live in Japan.

And do you honestly think it would be appropriate to have nude 13 and 14 year old girls?

No, you don't live in Japan. But you're reading a comic written by a japanese person in the 80's that felt there was nothing wrong in using it as a gag in a comic for young boys.

Regardless of you wanting to see it or not, that's what exists in the original version. If you're not willing to look at it from that perspective and take it for what it is (for the 5 seconds it will take you to go through those panels), you have an even easier solution. Also, you might not want to check out Toriyama's "Dr. Slump".

Also, "child pornography"? Really, you're gonna go there? Now it just seems like you're looking for things that aren't there.

[Zenkai]

But do you understand what he's saying? In Japan, Bulma is of legal consent. So yes, it is appropriate in Japan. In some states in the US, 16 is the consent age. We're saying that with the customs of Japan, and some laws of states, it technically is appropriate. Is that really so hard to understand?
Edit: Also what Kaboom said right above me.

Well, nude 13 and 14 year old females sounds like child pornography to me.

Well, in Japan it's not. Here, sure it totally is. But if the main problem is Bulma, she can pass as legal. You should get off your moral high horse and deal with it.

So, if you imported pornography from Japan that had 16 year old females in it, do you think the law here in the US would be fine with you watching it?

That's the logic I'm hearing from some on this forum.

"It's Japan, therefore it's A-ok!!!"

[ShadowDude112]

Well, nude 13 and 14 year old females sounds like child pornography to me.

Well, in Japan it's not. Here, sure it totally is. But if the main problem is Bulma, she can pass as legal. You should get off your moral high horse and deal with it.

So, if you imported pornography from Japan that had 16 year old females in it, do you think the law here in the US would be fine with you watching it?

That's the logic I'm hearing from some on this forum.

"It's Japan, therefore it's A-ok!!!"

Wow. Just, wow. Like, are you serious? Or is this some elaborate trolling? Because I can't tell. There's a difference between pornography and nudity. Pornography has sexual intercourse in it, while nudity is just someone's nude body. You seem to think Bulma is having some graphic sex scene with Yamcha or something to really think this is pornography. You are completely wrong with your terminology and should just stop now.

[Kamiccolo9]

Sooooo.... VIZ 3-in-1's. How does an error like the one that happened happen anyway? Did they not check to make sure that the product was as advertised?

[Scarz]

Sooooo.... VIZ 3-in-1's. How does an error like the one that happened happen anyway? Did they not check to make sure that the product was as advertised?

I had the same conversation with my bf about this earlier today. Printing the censored version instead of the unaltered manga seems like a HUGE oversight. I wish it was explained how something like this slipped by Viz.

[Zenkai]

Wow. Just, wow. Like, are you serious? Or is this some elaborate trolling? Because I can't tell. There's a difference between pornography and nudity. Pornography has sexual intercourse in it, while nudity is just someone's nude body. You seem to think Bulma is having some graphic sex scene with Yamcha or something to really think this is pornography. You are completely wrong with your terminology and should just stop now.

Hypothetical scenario:

--A man has a picture of a nude 16 year old girl hanging on his wall. The picture is not portraying sex at all. It is just a picture of a nude 16 year old girl in the shower.

--A police officer decides to search his house for an unrelated reason.

Question:

--Do you think this man would be charged with possessing child pornography?


According to your logic, he would not, as there is no sex in the picture at all.

[Insertclevername]

Well, nude 13 and 14 year old females sounds like child pornography to me.

Well, in Japan it's not. Here, sure it totally is. But if the main problem is Bulma, she can pass as legal. You should get off your moral high horse and deal with it.

So, if you imported pornography from Japan that had 16 year old females in it, do you think the law here in the US would be fine with you watching it?

That's the logic I'm hearing from some on this forum.

"It's Japan, therefore it's A-ok!!!"

The nudity in Dragon Ball (concerning Bulma) has always been used for pure comedic gags rather than for mastubatory purposes.

She shows her vagina to Kamesennin & co. (and just her butt to the reader) which was done as a joke.

Her breasts are shown in the shower only to have Yamucha see them and have a panic attack. Comedy.

Her breasts are shown to yet again execute a joke/plot device where Kamesennin shoots blood on the Invisible fighter.

Those were done for jokes. In pornography, nudity is done for the reader to masturbate to. I'm sure you could wank one out to any of those panels, but doing so wasn't the intention of Toriyama (at least as far as I can tell). What your arguing about isn't at all the same thing).

[ShadowDude112]

Wow. Just, wow. Like, are you serious? Or is this some elaborate trolling? Because I can't tell. There's a difference between pornography and nudity. Pornography has sexual intercourse in it, while nudity is just someone's nude body. You seem to think Bulma is having some graphic sex scene with Yamcha or something to really think this is pornography. You are completely wrong with your terminology and should just stop now.

Hypothetical scenario:

--A man has a picture of a nude 16 year old girl hanging on his wall. The picture is not portraying sex at all. It is just a picture of a nude 16 year old girl in the shower.

--A police officer decides to search his house for an unrelated reason.

Question:

--Do you think this man would be charged with possessing child pornography?


According to your logic, he would not, as there is no sex in the picture at all.

Jeez, you are everything that is wrong with society. You are way to fucking uptight about the slightest hint of nudity. People like you are the reason that when I watched Babel in my TV Production class, we had to skip scenes thus losing context and missing seeing some artistic integrity in the film even though we signed off on a waver toy watch R rated movies. Don't reproduce. To answer your question it would most likely depend of the state the person was in, and if it had no sexual content other than nudity, it's not that big of an offense. If it was like a 10 year old, there would be some problems.