If Dragon Ball is a worldwide mainstream children's franchise...

[JulieYBM]

Well yeah, but it is important to consider the context of which Dragon Ball is made. At the end of the day, Dragon Ball started out as gag manga in the 80s, created by people who were born fairly after WW2. To expect that Dragon Ball should have been made with the modern context of queer identity and sexuality especially when the things that we so casual talk about have only entered the mainstream space in, what, twenty or so years, doesn't really make any sense. And sure racism, sexism, queer and trans identies have always persisted in this world. And honestly more often than not there's plenty of cases of "the more things change..." However, the context of how we talk about those things have absolutely changed, especially as the internet brought those topics into the forefront.

Both Dragon Ball and its creators are products of their time, and that has to be considered. I've read a lot of old manga where there are characters that make Roshi look like a docile puppy. Again not a justification, but it is an understanding as to why people of that time would find those jokes funny.

This is not me defending the Master Roshi stuff, because I agree that that stuff has aged fairly poorly. However, I don't really see it as any more harmful than the juvenile gag humor or violence that is on display. Because much in the same way that I don't see a causal connection between video game violence and real world violence, I don't think it's likely that someone is going to see Dragon Ball and think sexual assault is a-okay from watching Master Roshi sex perv on Bulma. In regards to kids, the answer is and always will be parental guidance to contextualize what exactly is being seen and why these things might not be ok, and sex education to teach children consent. That's just way more important than worrying about a 40 year old anime.

Consistently expecting the parties harmed by these depictions to just not criticize or expect better is honestly just...a really weird hill to die on? Nobody is sharing a sentiment that wasn't also true back in 1984, after all.

I mean that’s not what I’m saying…like at all? What I am saying (or trying to say) is that there is a better way to talk and discuss these topics than just dunking on Toriyama for being a misogynist jerk to women and queer individuals. It’s just an overly simplistic view to a complicated man—because art is complicated and more than its “problematic” parts.

The systemic issues—editorial, publishing, animation studio, television network, et cetera, et cetera—that allow this material to be produced and published is consistently brought up—if not by me, but by other users—as an issue that needs to be addressed, so I really don't see how anyone is 'just dunking on Toriyama'. Furthermore, I'm not really seeing the lack of acknowledgement of there being only one dimension to Toriyama as a creator when anyone who brings up these extremely basic criticisms also discuss other aspects of the work that they do enjoy. This isn't the first time the forum has collectively had this conversation.

Like, at the risk of sounding antagonizing here, I think you're the one having an overly simplistic view? It's the fans who have a horse in these races who have to deal with rolling with the punches of not grinning and baring with it when the series they come to for cool martial arts shit then turns around and dehumanizes them. To expect anyone to just roll over and cut the millionaire and massive publishing companies slack like that is just...nonsensical?

[BlueChi]

The systemic issues—editorial, publishing, animation studio, television network, et cetera, et cetera—that allow this material to be produced and published is consistently brought up—if not by me, but by other users—as an issue that needs to be addressed, so I really don't see how anyone is 'just dunking on Toriyama'. Furthermore, I'm not really seeing the lack of acknowledgement of there being only one dimension to Toriyama as a creator when anyone who brings up these extremely basic criticisms also discuss other aspects of the work that they do enjoy. This isn't the first time the forum has collectively had this conversation.

Like, at the risk of sounding antagonizing here, I think you're the one having an overly simplistic view? It's the fans who have a horse in these races who have to deal with rolling with the punches of not grinning and baring with it when the series they come to for cool martial arts shit then turns around and dehumanizes them. To expect anyone to just roll over and cut the millionaire and massive publishing companies slack like that is just...nonsensical?

As someone who has a horse in the race as far as being dunked on in early DB, I have to agree with kemuri.
Dragging on a dead man for insensitive jokes he pulled back in the 80s is pointless at best, and self-serving at worst.

A more productive approach would be to analyze the current Dragon Ball content, which does indeed still contain Roshi being a pervert, sadly, but as far as queer stuff goes... it improved remarkably? Or do we conveniently forget that an explicitly queer-coded character is teaching our main protagonists and has their wholehearted respect when it doesn't suit the argument?

I dislike going off-topic, but the Toriyama slander was annoying when he was alive, and now just feels disgusting when he's dead.

[MasenkoHA]

The systemic issues—editorial, publishing, animation studio, television network, et cetera, et cetera—that allow this material to be produced and published is consistently brought up—if not by me, but by other users—as an issue that needs to be addressed, so I really don't see how anyone is 'just dunking on Toriyama'. Furthermore, I'm not really seeing the lack of acknowledgement of there being only one dimension to Toriyama as a creator when anyone who brings up these extremely basic criticisms also discuss other aspects of the work that they do enjoy. This isn't the first time the forum has collectively had this conversation.

Like, at the risk of sounding antagonizing here, I think you're the one having an overly simplistic view? It's the fans who have a horse in these races who have to deal with rolling with the punches of not grinning and baring with it when the series they come to for cool martial arts shit then turns around and dehumanizes them. To expect anyone to just roll over and cut the millionaire and massive publishing companies slack like that is just...nonsensical?

As someone who has a horse in the race as far as being dunked on in early DB, I have to agree with kemuri.
Dragging on a dead man for insensitive jokes he pulled back in the 80s is pointless at best, and self-serving at worst.

A more productive approach would be to analyze the current Dragon Ball content, which does indeed still contain Roshi being a pervert, sadly, but as far as queer stuff goes... it improved remarkably? Or do we conveniently forget that an explicitly queer-coded character is teaching our main protagonists and has their wholehearted respect when it doesn't suit the argument?

I dislike going off-topic, but the Toriyama slander was annoying when he was alive, and now just feels disgusting when he's dead.

I don't think Toriyama being dead means we shouldn't be critical of his past work.

Not exactly the same but Stanley Kubrick being dead since 1999 doesn't mean we shouldn't criticize his abuse towards Shelley Duvall during the filming of the Shining. Alfred Hitchcock being dead doesn't mean we should ignore his misogyny and sexual harrassment towards his lead actresses.

I agree it's not fair to make assumptions about Toriyama's character since nothing we know indicates he was pulling Kame Sennin behavior in real life, but being critical of the misogyny, sexism queerphobia, and racism of his original manga is 100 percent fair game.

[Dragon Ball Ireland]

I agree it's not fair to make assumptions about Toriyama's character since nothing we know indicates he was pulling Kame Sennin behavior in real life, but being critical of the misogyny, sexism queerphobia, and racism of his original manga is 100 percent fair game.

Everything we know about Toriyama points towards him being extremely socially awkward and averse to societal norms, but the latter was things like disliking the expected dress code for work, not necessarily anything that would cause discomfort or distress for other people.

I would imagine all things considered Toriyama was a harmless introvert and nothing more. The man got married and had two kids, so he was doing something right, especially when it comes to women. The same certainly can't be said for Kame Sennin.

That of course doesn't excuse Kame Sennin's behaviour in the manga, but Toriyama probably trusted kids reading to know they were wrong, or if they didn't they would learn from reading Dragon Ball because no one in the manga approve of his behaviour or react positively to it.

[BootyCheeksJohnson]

Well yeah, but it is important to consider the context of which Dragon Ball is made. At the end of the day, Dragon Ball started out as gag manga in the 80s, created by people who were born fairly after WW2. To expect that Dragon Ball should have been made with the modern context of queer identity and sexuality especially when the things that we so casual talk about have only entered the mainstream space in, what, twenty or so years, doesn't really make any sense. And sure racism, sexism, queer and trans identies have always persisted in this world. And honestly more often than not there's plenty of cases of "the more things change..." However, the context of how we talk about those things have absolutely changed, especially as the internet brought those topics into the forefront.

Both Dragon Ball and its creators are products of their time, and that has to be considered. I've read a lot of old manga where there are characters that make Roshi look like a docile puppy. Again not a justification, but it is an understanding as to why people of that time would find those jokes funny.

This is not me defending the Master Roshi stuff, because I agree that that stuff has aged fairly poorly. However, I don't really see it as any more harmful than the juvenile gag humor or violence that is on display. Because much in the same way that I don't see a causal connection between video game violence and real world violence, I don't think it's likely that someone is going to see Dragon Ball and think sexual assault is a-okay from watching Master Roshi sex perv on Bulma. In regards to kids, the answer is and always will be parental guidance to contextualize what exactly is being seen and why these things might not be ok, and sex education to teach children consent. That's just way more important than worrying about a 40 year old anime.

Consistently expecting the parties harmed by these depictions to just not criticize or expect better is honestly just...a really weird hill to die on? Nobody is sharing a sentiment that wasn't also true back in 1984, after all.

I mean that’s not what I’m saying…like at all? What I am saying (or trying to say) is that there is a better way to talk and discuss these topics than just dunking on Toriyama for being a misogynist jerk to women and queer individuals. It’s just an overly simplistic view to a complicated man—because art is complicated and more than its “problematic” parts.

And sure there have always been counter-culture media that does push back on a lot of toxic ideas, even back then. Not dismissing that either.Nor am I doing the “Japan doesn’t understand western ideals” shuffle because I know very well that Japan can do bad all on its own But my point still stands for good and for ill Toriyama is a product of his time, and discussing things from that perspective is far more valuable than what we’re doing right now.

Yes Toriyama was a "product of his time" we all are. Nothing/no one exists in a bubble. However that doesn't mean that we shouldn't expect better. If you want to see a positive towards Toriyama I think the fact that he realized that his treatment of black characters was bad a good step forward, and you can see him genuinely try to rectify this with the design of Pan's kindergarten teacher. So there are some areas where the man did change with the times for the better. I will say that Toei's staff is equally guilty of perpetuating Roshi's behavior in filler material and their creative direction with Super. The episode where Goku recruited Muten Roshi and Tenshinhan was the first time that I felt like turning the TV off while watching Roshi's antics. It made me take a step back and wonder if other people felt the same way.

[Dr. Casey]

Consistently expecting the parties harmed by these depictions to just not criticize or expect better is honestly just...a really weird hill to die on? Nobody is sharing a sentiment that wasn't also true back in 1984, after all.

I mean that’s not what I’m saying…like at all? What I am saying (or trying to say) is that there is a better way to talk and discuss these topics than just dunking on Toriyama for being a misogynist jerk to women and queer individuals. It’s just an overly simplistic view to a complicated man—because art is complicated and more than its “problematic” parts.

And sure there have always been counter-culture media that does push back on a lot of toxic ideas, even back then. Not dismissing that either.Nor am I doing the “Japan doesn’t understand western ideals” shuffle because I know very well that Japan can do bad all on its own But my point still stands for good and for ill Toriyama is a product of his time, and discussing things from that perspective is far more valuable than what we’re doing right now.

Yes Toriyama was a "product of his time" we all are. Nothing/no one exists in a bubble.

Yeah. Which is why "The author/the story was a product of its time" isn't always an invalid argument, even if some people here dislike the argument wholesale. Saying that the time period never matters is basically saying "Context is completely irrelevant at all times and should never be considered." Which obviously isn't true. I think it's a matter of the severity of the offense and whether the person from that time period had the tools to reasonably know better.

Would a high school bully beating up a gay kid in 1985 for being gay be excusable by the fact that homophobia was even worse back then? No, because it's a severe crime and because the bully had the tools to know better. He understands the concepts of cruelty, of right and wrong, of not harming people who haven't done anything to you. It was a fully conscious and informed decision to be terrible.

Would a congressman in the 1850s trying to pass legislature to keep slavery in place be understandable because that level of racism was common at the time? No, for the same reasons as 1985 kid (and because there were so many people/groups that were sympathetic to black people and against slavery that he would have been exposed to those concepts many times over, and thus had the exposure to alternate viewpoints needed to integrate those attitudes for himself).

Would a deeply racist person from the 1600s, who didn't actually do anything to harm or wrong the races they disliked, be sympathetic? I think so yeah. There wasn't mass media to disseminate ideas and values in the same way, and since they never actually took any harmful actions their 'crime' is lesser and needs less excusing to begin with.

Would a pre-language caveman doing something that seems violent by modern standards be excused by the context of the time? Yeah. Society didn't exist at all yet outside of tribes, and language is required for much of our complex, higher-order thinking. Judging pre-language humans for almost anything would be like going "25 year olds can keep control of themselves when upset, why can't 18 month olds do the same?"

As for Toriyama and Dragon Ball, I think the context of the time is admittable and can be considered because the offense isn't that severe - offensive jokes in a manga. If you're surrounded by people who are accepting of something, and that something isn't clearly terrible on its face, it can be easy to go "Well, a lot of people I respect say that this thing is okay, so I guess it's okay." When I was in high school, I remember the teachers talking about a mock drag queen contest at an upcoming school event. I thought "That seems like it might be offensive, but the teachers are all in favor of it, so I'm probably overthinking it." That wouldn't have applied for clear-cut examples of mistreating trans people (which I would have known was wrong no matter the source), but for certain edge cases, if everyone around you is accepting of something, sometimes that can make you think it's alright after all. And if "Humor of this type is offensive" wasn't a message that was commonly disseminated in society yet (I'm aware that social justice movements have always existed but I dunno if 'Flippant humor about sexual harassment is bad' was one of its messages yet), if your peers along with kids writing to you tell you that the Roshi humor is funny and always makes them laugh, then it would be easy not to think about it too much.

But from what I see in this thread nobody here is raking Toriyama himself over the coals and they're simply criticizing the jokes rather than his character, which is fine. I think context (the times) should be taken into account enough not to be unduly harsh, but simply calling out the humor isn't overly harsh.

[JulieYBM]

The systemic issues—editorial, publishing, animation studio, television network, et cetera, et cetera—that allow this material to be produced and published is consistently brought up—if not by me, but by other users—as an issue that needs to be addressed, so I really don't see how anyone is 'just dunking on Toriyama'. Furthermore, I'm not really seeing the lack of acknowledgement of there being only one dimension to Toriyama as a creator when anyone who brings up these extremely basic criticisms also discuss other aspects of the work that they do enjoy. This isn't the first time the forum has collectively had this conversation.

Like, at the risk of sounding antagonizing here, I think you're the one having an overly simplistic view? It's the fans who have a horse in these races who have to deal with rolling with the punches of not grinning and baring with it when the series they come to for cool martial arts shit then turns around and dehumanizes them. To expect anyone to just roll over and cut the millionaire and massive publishing companies slack like that is just...nonsensical?

As someone who has a horse in the race as far as being dunked on in early DB, I have to agree with kemuri.
Dragging on a dead man for insensitive jokes he pulled back in the 80s is pointless at best, and self-serving at worst.

A more productive approach would be to analyze the current Dragon Ball content, which does indeed still contain Roshi being a pervert, sadly, but as far as queer stuff goes... it improved remarkably? Or do we conveniently forget that an explicitly queer-coded character is teaching our main protagonists and has their wholehearted respect when it doesn't suit the argument?

I dislike going off-topic, but the Toriyama slander was annoying when he was alive, and now just feels disgusting when he's dead.

If people didn't keep trying to weirdly lionize the bad behavior any time someone says "Wow, that was bad! I sure hope they don't do it again!" I'm pretty sure that these conversations would probably end a lot quicker.

Like, Toriyama isn't the only one who shares the blame here. It's not like he has final word on what Shueisha publishes. Hell, look at the weird writing of women and the Muten Roushi nonsense in the Dragon Ball Super comic during the Moro arc.

Re Whis: I don't know why you think I'm ignoring Whis when I've very explicitly been making the argument that the issue I have is with fandom's use of the phrase "it was a different time." All I've said in this latest round of posts is that we should not act as if something written 40 years ago is some how an excuse. Modern stuff hasn't been on my mind at all because I'm speaking to broader, decades-spanning issue with the franchise.

But hey, there's plenty to criticze about stuff outside of the bad shit written in the 1984 comic series! Go read my old posts for the the 69,420 times I've criticized that shit.

[BootyCheeksJohnson]

The systemic issues—editorial, publishing, animation studio, television network, et cetera, et cetera—that allow this material to be produced and published is consistently brought up—if not by me, but by other users—as an issue that needs to be addressed, so I really don't see how anyone is 'just dunking on Toriyama'. Furthermore, I'm not really seeing the lack of acknowledgement of there being only one dimension to Toriyama as a creator when anyone who brings up these extremely basic criticisms also discuss other aspects of the work that they do enjoy. This isn't the first time the forum has collectively had this conversation.

Like, at the risk of sounding antagonizing here, I think you're the one having an overly simplistic view? It's the fans who have a horse in these races who have to deal with rolling with the punches of not grinning and baring with it when the series they come to for cool martial arts shit then turns around and dehumanizes them. To expect anyone to just roll over and cut the millionaire and massive publishing companies slack like that is just...nonsensical?

As someone who has a horse in the race as far as being dunked on in early DB, I have to agree with kemuri.
Dragging on a dead man for insensitive jokes he pulled back in the 80s is pointless at best, and self-serving at worst.

A more productive approach would be to analyze the current Dragon Ball content, which does indeed still contain Roshi being a pervert, sadly, but as far as queer stuff goes... it improved remarkably? Or do we conveniently forget that an explicitly queer-coded character is teaching our main protagonists and has their wholehearted respect when it doesn't suit the argument?

I dislike going off-topic, but the Toriyama slander was annoying when he was alive, and now just feels disgusting when he's dead.

Re Whis: I don't know why you think I'm ignoring Whis when I've very explicitly been making the argument that the issue I have is with fandom's use of the phrase "it was a different time." All I've said in this latest round of posts is that we should not act as if something written 40 years ago is some how an excuse.

To give an example outside of Dragon Ball, I've read a lot of superhero comic books throughout my life. And almost every writer doing dialogue between the 40 to probably the mid 70's (including the beloved Stan Lee) wrote very sexist dialogue that commonly degraded women. It was very common to find dialogue like: "that's what I get for hiring a woman as my assistant." Or "wives should be kissed, and not heard." (Sometimes Stan Lee would write dialogue undermining the women that was clearly contradictory to what was happening in the artwork.) Sure that kind of dialogue was "of its era", but that doesn't mean that we have to just excuse the behavior, or shouldn't cringe when reading it.
Context is key, but I feel like a lot of us aren't acknowledging that just because something is "of its era" that doesn't mean that we shouldn't expect better going forward. Future writers to handle this franchise can learn from Shueisha, Toei, and all of the writing staff who have worked on Dragon Ball.

[MisteryOne]

This thread has been quite a sad read because, in my country, Super was indeed still marketed at kids, to ridiculous censoring extents. Both Broly and Super Hero avoided it, but it was extremely sad how after years of asking for a better dub, we got only for them censorship hit up in a ridculous way (including anything that could be considered cursing...) and it was indees aired on traditional TV.

Thankfully now Kai (yes we are getting a dub for Kai...now) it isn't the case as far as I'm aware, but it has also been released...in cinemas.

I doubt Toei had anything to do witj it, and it was most likely the channel asking for said censorship. Just wanted to point out it's indeed still a thing even on the present era.