Roshi's antics

[Doctor.]

I don't know how or why I have to explain why reaffirming rape culture is a bad thing.

Ignoring the use of that nonsensical term, how was it reaffirming anything if it's portrayed in a negative light?

[floofychan333]

One reason I think this topic is pointless is the fact that stopping Roshi isn't going to help anyone. They could erase him from the entire history of DB and real life sexual harassment.

And honestly how would they even handle it, apart from the usual punch over the head?

Close your eyes and think about every aspect of Dragonball; the way it's written, drawn, paced, it's entire vibe. Even throw in Funimation's version for good measure. Can you honestly picture an episode where Roshi has to register as a sex offender or has an intervention.

I'm not saying here that he has to register as a sex offender or that, but I don't see why they can't phase out his inappropriate actions. It's not like being a gross pervert is all he has as a character; the reason why I love him is because he played such a heroic role in the Piccolo Daimao conflict and regardless of the indecent actions he performed around Goku and Kuririn, he still played a role as a mentor and father figure for them. I'm not in touch with Super but from what I've heard he's back into fighting and I can see the writers build on his character by making him teach more martial arts and play a heroic role in the arc.

Why are real-life events and children's fiction an entirely fair comparison?

Because the children are taking in this kind of fiction and believing that it happens in the real world. Hell, as a kid who went to an "alternative" school until grade 6, I got my idea of what mainstream school was supposed to be like from the Diary of a Wimpy Kid series (which is laughably inaccurate for those who aren't familiar with it). When I started going to mainstream school I was surprised in many ways and realized I was completely clueless about what life was actually like for a student in the mainstream education system. I'm just saying that if I had my perspective completely warped by the fiction I took in, other children could too. Obviously, this isn't always the case, as stated by many posters here, but it's definitely something to take into serious consideration.

I ask once again: why is murder and destruction okay and we can make up any excuse for it but the second anything related to sex happens, it's immediately a big deal? Cause I would think Vegeta murdering people, 99.999% of which never ever come back and never get any proper justice for what happened to them is infinitely worse then Roshi peeping on Bulma and Chi-Chi then getting smashed for it with neither of the two suffering any long term negative effects from him doing so.

This differs greatly from the "anything related to sex causes people to overreact" argument. People do tend to get triggered by any kind of sexual content, which is sometimes extreme, but this is violence combined with sexual content. We're not talking about seeing kid Goku skinny-dipping here, we're talking about a character who is respected and beloved by many sexually assaulting women (some of which are underage). This is drastically different because people get traumatized by these experiences, especially Bulma, Lunch, 18, etc. Bulma, at the point where she was most frequently harassed by Roshi, was 16. That's underage in pretty much every country, and it's obvious from what we see in the show that she's still learning about romance and all that (e.g. she expects way too much out of Yamcha and has the insane sexual desires of youth that generally seem to wear off when one matures more.) Having her first sexual experience be forced and non-consensual is damaging to her future romantic life. It's also worth noting that despite the females regularly disapproving and not consenting to his actions, Roshi ignores their feelings and pursues them endlessly.



Anyway, here's more of my insight on this: firstly, many children are, tragically, sexually abused in their lives. Having to see that in the fiction they're taking in cements their idea that it's normal and seeing Bulma et al never really complaining about Roshi's behaviour further discourages them from getting help in their predicament. While it's important to consider that lots of this happened in the 80s and 90s, I'm hearing things about Roshi continuing to be a gross pervert in Super in this decade from people and that really is not acceptable. I'm also quite concerned with the backlash here because, in the wise words of VegettoEX,

I don't know how or why I have to explain why reaffirming rape culture is a bad thing.
This is very frightening to read on my forum.

Whether we like it or not, we are having to come to terms with celebrities we enjoy being accused of sexual assault, e.g. Louis CK and even George Takei (though that claim isn't as strong as most of them). We can still enjoy their work, but we also have to know that they've done horrible things and ruined lives. We can apply this to Roshi because though we may love him, we still need to criticize his horrible actions and realize they're wrong and not justifiable in any way.

I don't know how or why I have to explain why reaffirming rape culture is a bad thing.

Ignoring the use of that nonsensical term, how was it reaffirming anything if it's portrayed in a negative light?

That's an outrageous thing to be saying here. Doing so not only delegitimizes sexual assault as a major issue, but also shows that you are blissfully living in denial of something that is EXTREMELY obvious. We've seen the beliefs of the incel community on Reddit show that rape culture is VERY present in our time. And that's just scratching the surface. There are WAY more examples than that which show that rape culture is very real. Your denial of that shows that you're either blissfully ignorant of evidence that counters your beliefs or that you truly don't think the sexual assault of millions that goes on in our world is an issue.

[Doctor.]

Because the children are taking in this kind of fiction and believing that it happens in the real world. Hell, as a kid who went to an "alternative" school until grade 6, I got my idea of what mainstream school was supposed to be like from the Diary of a Wimpy Kid series (which is laughably inaccurate for those who aren't familiar with it). When I started going to mainstream school I was surprised in many ways and realized I was completely clueless about what life was actually like for a student in the mainstream education system. I'm just saying that if I had my perspective completely warped by the fiction I took in, other children could too. Obviously, this isn't always the case, as stated by many posters here, but it's definitely something to take into serious consideration.

Children learn from a young age that rape and sexual assault is bad, just like they learn from a young age that murder is bad. One comic that already portrays sexual harassment negatively isn't going to change anything. Attempting to suggest that this would in any way affect real-life cases of sexual harassment is just as ridiculous as the complaints that videogames cause violence.

That's an outrageous thing to be saying here. Doing so not only delegitimizes sexual assault as a major issue, but also shows that you are blissfully living in denial of something that is EXTREMELY obvious. We've seen the beliefs of the incel community on Reddit show that rape culture is VERY present in our time. And that's just scratching the surface. There are WAY more examples than that which show that rape culture is very real. Your denial of that shows that you're either blissfully ignorant of evidence that counters your beliefs or that you truly don't think the sexual assault of millions that goes on in our world is an issue.

It is an absurd term because rape is (idiotically) seen as something worse than murder. You will not find one credible person who believes that sexual assault is an okay thing to do. The incels, a small crowd of men who chose a private community to voice their frustration about their inability to get laid in largely hyperbolic fashion, truly are the rapist mongol hordes of our daily lives.

Obviously sexual assault is an issue, but it's stupid to pretend that anyone thinks it's not an issue.

[Asura]

What could they have done?

They could maybe have stopped themselves before writing a potential rape scenario for him in 2015-2017 and no-one would have missed it or thought any less of him as a character going into a multi-universal fighting tournament.

If people want to talk about "flanderizing" and obscene exaggeration of characters in Super to the point of them being out of character, let's be self-consistent and comprehensive here.

I definitely agree with this. They could have just actually written him competently. The perverted jokes don't have to end. They just need to be funny, and rape is a topic that few comedians can turn into a successful joke, least of all the writers for a kids show. There shouldn't be any limits when it comes to comedy, but if you screw up a joke on a taboo subject, well, expect retribution and backlash for it.

That's an outrageous thing to be saying here. Doing so not only delegitimizes sexual assault as a major issue, but also shows that you are blissfully living in denial of something that is EXTREMELY obvious. We've seen the beliefs of the incel community on Reddit show that rape culture is VERY present in our time. And that's just scratching the surface. There are WAY more examples than that which show that rape culture is very real. Your denial of that shows that you're either blissfully ignorant of evidence that counters your beliefs or that you truly don't think the sexual assault of millions that goes on in our world is an issue.

I don't know how or why I have to explain why reaffirming rape culture is a bad thing.

This is very frightening to read on my forum.

This however, is nonsense in my opinion. I fully agree with Doctor. There is no such thing as a rape culture. Culture is defined as "the customs, arts, social institutions, and achievements of a particular nation, people, or other social group." Implying that there is a rape culture means that rape is some sort of value or custom that a nation/group of people holds dear. It implies that rape is literally embedded into our culture and makes it appear as if we (or whoever and wherever the "we" is) embrace the idea of rape and overwhelmingly partake in it. In essence, it means that the idea of rape is normalized within our culture. Now, I don't know where some of you folks live, but here in the US no one considers rape to be normal. Here's a great excerpt from a TIME article from 2014 about rape culture:

• "RAINN (Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network) is America’s largest and most influential anti-sexual-violence organization. It’s the leading voice for sexual-assault victim advocacy. Indeed, rape-culture activists routinely cite the authority of RAINN to make their case. But in RAINN’s recent recommendations to the White House Task Force to Protect Students from Sexual Assault, it repudiates the rhetoric of the anti–“rape culture” movement:"

• "In the last few years, there has been an unfortunate trend towards blaming “rape culture” for the extensive problem of sexual violence on campus. While it is helpful to point out the systemic barriers to addressing the problem, it is important not to lose sight of a simple fact: Rape is caused not by cultural factors but by the conscious decisions, of a small percentage of the community, to commit a violent crime."

So there you have it. Even the largest and most influentical anti-sexual-violence organization rejects the idea of a rape culture (although they go on to say that sexual violence is an "extensive problem" on college campuses which has no proof or research to back it up. The only study done on the topic of sexual assault/violence on college campuses has been thoroughly debunked countless times, even by liberal outlets.) Our culture, and most other cultures in the world, does not embrace rape. We do not teach our children that it is okay to rape. Rape culture does not exist and never has existed. Making jokes about rape, however poor they may be, does not contribute to a rape culture. Making jokes about rape does not normalize the idea of rape, just like making jokes about murder does not normalize the idea of murder. When asking yourself if some form of media depicts sex in any kind of light, whether positive or negative, and you are offended by it, ask yourself if you would be reacting the same way if sex was replaced with murder.

[Cipher]

Whatever shorthand we elect to refer to the prevalence of sexual harassment and assault in our culture, I'm with VegettoEX in that it's baffling that we're being asked to workshop the character responses into something acceptable rather than accepting that that avenue need not have been gone down in the first place.

"How should we write the characters to make Kame-Sennin's sexual harassment gags okay?" is so far beyond the point of, "It would have been best to not include Kame-Sennin sexual harassment gags in the first place" that it's hard to even know what to say.

It's like, "Sorry, how would you have preferred I put out the fire I started in your house?" "That's a little beside the point."

[Doctor.]

Whatever shorthand we elect to refer to the prevalence of sexual harassment and assault in our culture, I'm with VegettoEX in that it's baffling that we're being asked to workshop the character responses into something acceptable rather than accepting that that avenue need not have been gone down in the first place.

"How should we write the characters to make Kame-Sennin's sexual harassment gags okay?" is so far beyond the point of, "It would have been best to not include Kame-Sennin sexual harassment gags in the first place" that it's hard to even know what to say.

It's like, "Sorry, how would you have preferred I put out the fire I started in your house?" "That's a little beside the point."

Yet again you're equating a cartoon with a real life example and treating it as if it were the same. People draw and write what they want. It is absolutely their right to draw sexual harassment gags if they choose to, like it's their right to draw and write whatever other joke they want. So, yes, the question is "Are these gags funny? How would they be well executed?" rather than "How can we censor this?" Art that makes you uncomfortable deserves to exist just as much as any other.

[ABED]

rather than "How can we censor this?"

Only the government can censor something. Everyone has every right to dislike that sort of humor and even ask for the artists to no longer use sexual harassment as fodder for a joke. By the same token, the artists also have a right to not listen.

[ekrolo2]

This differs greatly from the "anything related to sex causes people to overreact" argument. People do tend to get triggered by any kind of sexual content, which is sometimes extreme, but this is violence combined with sexual content. We're not talking about seeing kid Goku skinny-dipping here, we're talking about a character who is respected and beloved by many sexually assaulting women (some of which are underage). This is drastically different because people get traumatized by these experiences, especially Bulma, Lunch, 18, etc. Bulma, at the point where she was most frequently harassed by Roshi, was 16. That's underage in pretty much every country, and it's obvious from what we see in the show that she's still learning about romance and all that (e.g. she expects way too much out of Yamcha and has the insane sexual desires of youth that generally seem to wear off when one matures more.) Having her first sexual experience be forced and non-consensual is damaging to her future romantic life. It's also worth noting that despite the females regularly disapproving and not consenting to his actions, Roshi ignores their feelings and pursues them endlessly.



Anyway, here's more of my insight on this: firstly, many children are, tragically, sexually abused in their lives. Having to see that in the fiction they're taking in cements their idea that it's normal and seeing Bulma et al never really complaining about Roshi's behaviour further discourages them from getting help in their predicament. While it's important to consider that lots of this happened in the 80s and 90s, I'm hearing things about Roshi continuing to be a gross pervert in Super in this decade from people and that really is not acceptable. I'm also quite concerned with the backlash here because, in the wise words of VegettoEX.

You mean like how Goku, Vegeta, Piccolo and all sorts of members of the cast are beloved in and out of universe even though they're selfish fighting junkies who've caused lots of pain, misery and death out of purely selfish or entirely malicious intent? Especially Vegeta who's respected and liked even though he's a barely reformed sociopath who's murdered who knows how many planets and killed millions of men, women and children, he's still respected as a friend and ally in universe and one of the best characters outside it? Or how Goku is constantly called a great, stand up guy for being a selfish fighting junkie who will gladly let countless people die and suffer as long as he gets what he wants: a good fight.

The idea that Bulma is also screwed up because of Roshi is laughable at best, nothing in the series ever remotely infers on this and it blatantly ignores stuff like her having a warped view of romance WEEELLL before she even meets Roshi to the point she has to hunt down mystical wish granting orbs to make herself the perfect man. There's also the fact she's fine with boning Vegeta even though he's a piece of shit who's never gotten any proper punishment for any of the bad things he's done and is hailed as one of the good guys now. This entire notion that Bulma is screwed up because of Roshi is laughable at best and you've still not answered my question: beyond us being desensitized to violence, why's Vegeta's shit okay but Roshi is the lightning rod beyond Roshi's stuff being more sexual in nature, why's there a weird double standard here?

[Doctor.]

rather than "How can we censor this?"

Only the government can censor something. Everyone has every right to dislike that sort of humor and even ask for the artists to no longer use sexual harassment as fodder for a joke. By the same token, the artists also have a right to not listen.

Of course only the government can actually enforce it but demanding that an author doesn't write or draw something is the same as wanting censorship in my eyes. Not liking it is one thing, saying "It shouldn't have been done/It shouldn't be done regardless of context" like some people here are implying is completely extremist totalitarian behavior. It doesn't matter if you like it or find it in good taste or not, you will never have the right to limit a person's vision.

[VegettoEX]

why's there a weird double standard here?

Humans can't actually fly around under their own power firing energy blasts through people and eating aliens in space and destroying planets from the safety of their intergalactic space pods.

Humans actually can go around slapping women's butts and threatening to rape them.

I continue to be baffled and extremely concerned with some of the responses on this forum, particularly on this point because it's been explained several times over (and even then, that's the least concerning problem on display here).

[ABED]

No, they can't fly or shoot energy blasts, but we can kill people.

Of course only the government can actually enforce it but demanding that an author doesn't write or draw something is the same as wanting censorship in my eyes. Not liking it is one thing, saying "It shouldn't have been done/It shouldn't be done regardless of context" like some people here are implying is completely extremist totalitarian behavior. It doesn't matter if you like it or find it in good taste or not, you will never have the right to limit a person's vision.

It's not the same. One is force, the other is persuasion. One of my biggest problems is blurring the distinction between peaceful voluntary action with force.

[VegettoEX]

No, they can't fly or shoot energy blasts, but we can kill people.

You say this as if this isn't obvious. I wonder if you're just trying to be contrarian at this point and willfully ignoring everything else being said.

Yes, of course human beings can kill other people.

Why are you writing this?

[ABED]

No, they can't fly or shoot energy blasts, but we can kill people.

You say this as if this isn't obvious. I wonder if you're just trying to be contrarian at this point and willfully ignoring everything else being said.

Yes, of course human beings can kill other people.

Why are you writing this?

Art takes liberties with ethics and the line isn't exactly black and white.

[ekrolo2]

No, they can't fly or shoot energy blasts, but we can kill people.

You say this as if this isn't obvious. I wonder if you're just trying to be contrarian at this point and willfully ignoring everything else being said.

Yes, of course human beings can kill other people.

Why are you writing this?

So I guess if Roshi used some weird ki technique or an elaborate mechanism for his antics, they would be fine?

[PelicanDynasty]

Vegeta's mass murdering actions are all vilified, even if they are forgiven later in the series.

Roshi sexually assaulting people is NOT vilified, and continues to be used as a way to give the character "charm" (which it of course miserably fails at)

Not a good comparison

[ABED]

Vegeta's mass murdering actions are all vilified, even if they are forgiven later in the series.

Roshi sexually assaulting people is NOT vilified, and continues to be used as a way to give the character "charm" (which it of course miserably fails at)

Not a good comparison

But they don't show it as charming. I get why people find it uncomfortable, though. Vegeta's actions are barely vilified and you can't just forgive something like that.

[PelicanDynasty]

Vegeta's mass murdering actions are all vilified, even if they are forgiven later in the series.

Roshi sexually assaulting people is NOT vilified, and continues to be used as a way to give the character "charm" (which it of course miserably fails at)

Not a good comparison

But they don't show it as charming. I get why people find it uncomfortable, though. Vegeta's actions are barely vilified and you can't just forgive something like that.

Charm maybe isn't the best word, but they do it with the tone of "Ah good old Roshi up to no good again, gotta love that old fella"

Also, Vegeta is literally the main villain of the series for a lengthy period of time and they specifically state his goals include the mass murder of the people of Earth.

[ekrolo2]

Vegeta's mass murdering actions are all vilified, even if they are forgiven later in the series.

Roshi sexually assaulting people is NOT vilified, and continues to be used as a way to give the character "charm" (which it of course miserably fails at)

Not a good comparison

But they don't show it as charming. I get why people find it uncomfortable, though. Vegeta's actions are barely vilified and you can't just forgive something like that.

Charm maybe isn't the best word, but they do it with the tone of "Ah good old Roshi up to no good again, gotta love that old fella"

Also, Vegeta is literally the main villain of the series for a lengthy period of time and they specifically state his goals include the mass murder of the people of Earth.

And much like Roshi's antics, everyone forgets about it, including the people Vegeta tried to kill and they're both respected for it. Nobody cares Vegeta was a bad guy before, even though he and Nappa got Piccolo, Tien, Chiaotzu and Yamcha killed, and almost killed Goku, Krillin, Gohan and Yajirobe along with the entire planet! And yet, Vegeta's shit doesn't count because he shoots lazurs out of his hands but Roshi's are too realistic so it doesn't count?

[Olympian]

Who is this affecting? You keep claiming it's bad and expect it to believe it's bad... because? You have yet to give reasons as to why Roshi's actions are an issue at all.

I don`t know, female viewers who likely at some point in their lifes have suffered or were about to suffer the same type of antics. There is no double standard in this context to me. Murder, genocide, beating up children who aren`t Chucky is all wrong but thanks to literal devices like in this case, the Dragon Balls, fiction is allowed to exageratte (ala explosions in action movies) because said literal device brings people back from the dead. It`s the Ex Machina at work. It`s magic, poof! Everyone back with a single wish.

Is there any actual device to stop a Roshi antic being humilliating other than killing him? Well, no. Female characters have to suffer it. Don`t get me wrong, I would gladly turn the gag around with Roshi trying to harass and rape and getting perpetually offed by his victims only to be brought back but I`m not sure how better it would be because the joke would dry after the first attempt.

[rereboy]

I don`t know, female viewers who likely at some point in their lifes have suffered or were about to suffer the same type of antics. There is no double standard in this context to me. Murder, genocide, beating up children who aren`t Chucky is all wrong but thanks to literal devices like in this case, the Dragon Balls, fiction is allowed to exageratte (ala explosions in action movies) because said literal device brings people back from the dead. It`s the Ex Machina at work. It`s magic, poof! Everyone back with a single wish.

Is there any actual device to stop a Roshi antic being humilliating other than killing him? Well, no. Female characters have to suffer it. Don`t get me wrong, I would gladly turn the gag around with Roshi trying to harass and rape and getting perpetually offed by his victims only to be brought back but I`m not sure how better it would be because the joke would dry after the first attempt.

Jokes are not about morals because they are not to be taken seriously.