One Piece Remake, fans are so lucky...

[Basaku]

Monthly manga vs weekly anime is an imprtant thing here and I wonder if it wasn't a case of Takeuchi simply relying herself on the anime portrayals of the girls and and affinity for the cast the audience developed because of it. The manga and anime were running almost concurrently and let's be honest, probs a good 95% portion of the manga audience was also watching the anime at the same time. So the fact that the girls were technically less developed in the manga wasn't such an obvious/visible issue back then and Takeuchi's writing may have fallen victim to this just as well, subcounciouslly transplanting the expanded character developement of the anime cast onto their manga counterparts

[Adamant]

Monthly manga vs weekly anime is an imprtant thing here and I wonder if it wasn't a case of Takeuchi simply relying herself on the anime portrayals of the girls and and affinity for the cast the audience developed because of it.

Kind of, I guess. The big difference is that with most manga the author is doing his or her own thing and then an anime studio comes in a year later and starts adapting thatthing into a TV show, while with Sailor Moon the entire concept was planned as a manga/anime dual presentation at the same time, and Takeuchi knew that she wasn't JUST writing a manga, she was also conceptualizing a TV show. It's why she's so protective of the brand in general - the entire thing is her creation.

[Basaku]

Monthly manga vs weekly anime is an imprtant thing here and I wonder if it wasn't a case of Takeuchi simply relying herself on the anime portrayals of the girls and and affinity for the cast the audience developed because of it.

Kind of, I guess. The big difference is that with most manga the author is doing his or her own thing and then an anime studio comes in a year later and starts adapting thatthing into a TV show, while with Sailor Moon the entire concept was planned as a manga/anime dual presentation at the same time, and Takeuchi knew that she wasn't JUST writing a manga, she was also conceptualizing a TV show. It's why she's so protective of the brand in general - the entire thing is her creation.

Aye very true. Although I have a hard time believing that years later when working in Crystal with Toei, she still didn't see the issue of minimal developement for many of the characters in the manga. It may have went unnoticed when it was a essentially a dualcast, for both her and the audience but when far removed from the time and context of the OG anime it becomes glaringly obvious.

Well, maybe she did notice it but at that point what could she do anyway? Adding new stuff would require quite a bit of work and perhaps some more extensive rewrites and after the more disappointings choices in the 90s anime she probs wasn't looking into any of that hassle at all

[Adamant]

Monthly manga vs weekly anime is an imprtant thing here and I wonder if it wasn't a case of Takeuchi simply relying herself on the anime portrayals of the girls and and affinity for the cast the audience developed because of it.

Kind of, I guess. The big difference is that with most manga the author is doing his or her own thing and then an anime studio comes in a year later and starts adapting thatthing into a TV show, while with Sailor Moon the entire concept was planned as a manga/anime dual presentation at the same time, and Takeuchi knew that she wasn't JUST writing a manga, she was also conceptualizing a TV show. It's why she's so protective of the brand in general - the entire thing is her creation.

Aye very true. Although I have a hard time believing that years later when working in Crystal with Toei, she still didn't see the issue of minimal developement for many of the characters in the manga. It may have went unnoticed when it was a essentially a dualcast, for both her and the audience but when far removed from the time and context of the OG anime it becomes glaringly obvious.

Well, maybe she did notice it but at that point what could she do anyway? Adding new stuff would require quite a bit of work and perhaps some more extensive rewrites and after the more disappointings choices in the 90s anime she probs wasn't looking into any of that hassle at all

Not speaking from any position of knowledge here since I dropped Crystal before the end of the Dark Kingdom arc, but my understanding is that it got considerably better and more willing to take inspiration from the 90s anime as it went on.
Most of the "issues" fans of the 90s show have with the manga tend to be with the earlier material too.

[Basaku]

Not speaking from any position of knowledge here since I dropped Crystal before the end of the Dark Kingdom arc, but my understanding is that it got considerably better and more willing to take inspiration from the 90s anime as it went on.
Most of the "issues" fans of the 90s show have with the manga tend to be with the earlier material too.

It got better with 2D transformations (no more of that awful jarring 3D from S1), tiny bit better pacing in S3 (still 99% 1:1 adaptation tho), the return of a more deformed comedic faces and a TINY bit of extra characterizarion where they could squeeze a 2 second extra scene here and there. Some of the issues came back with Eternal/Cosmos movies because of the time limit tho.

So yeah there was an improvement and it DID help but in the end, even with the changes attempted, it's obvious that a much more extensive additions would have to be implemented to actually, substantially improve the story flow and the characters in the vein of the 90s anime. Let alone having the time to give some of the villains ANY sort of an arc (Amazon Trio remains just Monsters of the Day, most of the Witches 5 and Animamates too)

[AliTheZombie13]

Aye very true. Although I have a hard time believing that years later when working in Crystal with Toei, she still didn't see the issue of minimal developement for many of the characters in the manga. It may have went unnoticed when it was a essentially a dualcast, for both her and the audience but when far removed from the time and context of the OG anime it becomes glaringly obvious.

Well, maybe she did notice it but at that point what could she do anyway? Adding new stuff would require quite a bit of work and perhaps some more extensive rewrites and after the more disappointings choices in the 90s anime she probs wasn't looking into any of that hassle at all

Not speaking from any position of knowledge here since I dropped Crystal before the end of the Dark Kingdom arc, but my understanding is that it got considerably better and more willing to take inspiration from the 90s anime as it went on.
Most of the "issues" fans of the 90s show have with the manga tend to be with the earlier material too.

Two things I want to point out here:
1. Naoko Takeuchi did get involved with Pretty Guardian Sailor Moon (The Live-Action series), and many fans, including myself, consider that a great series on its own. I don't think Naoko Takeuchi was too involved, or cared, about Crystal, at all.

2. A lot of my problems with Crystal (and the manga) boil down to the sheer awful characterization of the main cast, including Usagi herself. The fact Usagi barely seems to care about her friends more than she cares about her boyfriend, her family, or the fate of the world in general in the first two arcs, to the point of killing herself and nearly dooming the entire world in the process because she couldn't have her man, hurt me.

It doesn't get better in season 2, where she's constantly jealous of a little kid and accuses said little kid, multiple times, of trying to steal her man. And she doesn't even stop after she learns said little kid is her future daughter. And then, it gets even worse when her fears are practically confirmed by the story (that her daughter was trying to steal her man). It's the same problem I have with Super!Goku: Manga!Usagi is impossible to root for.

I also hate how every single character in the manga seems to only exist to admire Usagi, tell her how much she's perfect and beautiful in every way, and how they want to be her so desperately, or how they want to be her girlfriend so desperately in the case of Haruka and Seiya, and that's just so... problematic... considering Haruka already has a girlfriend.

And then comes the Dream Arc. There is a "monster of the week" chapter for each of the Inner Soldiers, each of them get attacked by a monster who motivates them to look inside themselves and realize what their "true dreams" are. And like a bunch of single-minded robots, each single one of them proudly respond, "Yes, I did have a dream once, to be a doctor or have a flower shop or something, but now I realize what my true dream is... It's to serve Sailor Moon forever and ever like the perfect beautiful goddess that she is!"

Maybe I'm biased since I watched the anime first, but I vastly prefer that my girls had unique personalities and goals in the 90's anime rather than just fawning over Sailor Moon 24/7 like a hive mind. A lot of people used to dismiss the 90's anime by arguing, "The characters were more mature in the manga." And I heavily disagree, they only seem that way because they have no character. Their whole character in the manga is, "Sailor Moon is pretty *-*" and that's it.

(Phew)

Sorry, ended up ranting a lot more than I should've. At the end of the day, if people like the manga, I'm happy for them. But hey, you did want the perspective of someone who didn't, so there you have it.

[SuperSaiyaManZ94]

Aye very true. Although I have a hard time believing that years later when working in Crystal with Toei, she still didn't see the issue of minimal developement for many of the characters in the manga. It may have went unnoticed when it was a essentially a dualcast, for both her and the audience but when far removed from the time and context of the OG anime it becomes glaringly obvious.

Well, maybe she did notice it but at that point what could she do anyway? Adding new stuff would require quite a bit of work and perhaps some more extensive rewrites and after the more disappointings choices in the 90s anime she probs wasn't looking into any of that hassle at all

Not speaking from any position of knowledge here since I dropped Crystal before the end of the Dark Kingdom arc, but my understanding is that it got considerably better and more willing to take inspiration from the 90s anime as it went on.
Most of the "issues" fans of the 90s show have with the manga tend to be with the earlier material too.

Two things I want to point out here:
1. Naoko Takeuchi did get involved with Pretty Guardian Sailor Moon (The Live-Action series), and many fans, including myself, consider that a great series on its own. I don't think Naoko Takeuchi was too involved, or cared, about Crystal, at all.

2. A lot of my problems with Crystal (and the manga) boil down to the sheer awful characterization of the main cast, including Usagi herself. The fact Usagi barely seems to care about her friends more than she cares about her boyfriend, her family, or the fate of the world in general in the first two arcs, to the point of killing herself and nearly dooming the entire world in the process because she couldn't have her man, hurt me.

It doesn't get better in season 2, where she's constantly jealous of a little kid and accuses said little kid, multiple times, of trying to steal her man. And she doesn't even stop after she learns said little kid is her future daughter. And then, it gets even worse when her fears are practically confirmed by the story (that her daughter was trying to steal her man). It's the same problem I have with Super!Goku: Manga!Usagi is impossible to root for.

I also hate how every single character in the manga seems to only exist to admire Usagi, tell her how much she's perfect and beautiful in every way, and how they want to be her so desperately, or how they want to be her girlfriend so desperately in the case of Haruka and Seiya, and that's just so... problematic... considering Haruka already has a girlfriend.

And then comes the Dream Arc. There is a "monster of the week" chapter for each of the Inner Soldiers, each of them get attacked by a monster who motivates them to look inside themselves and realize what their "true dreams" are. And like a bunch of single-minded robots, each single one of them proudly respond, "Yes, I did have a dream once, to be a doctor or have a flower shop or something, but now I realize what my true dream is... It's to serve Sailor Moon forever and ever like the perfect beautiful goddess that she is!"

Maybe I'm biased since I watched the anime first, but I vastly prefer that my girls had unique personalities and goals in the 90's anime rather than just fawning over Sailor Moon 24/7 like a hive mind. A lot of people used to dismiss the 90's anime by arguing, "The characters were more mature in the manga." And I heavily disagree, they only seem that way because they have no character. Their whole character in the manga is, "Sailor Moon is pretty *-*" and that's it.

(Phew)

Sorry, ended up ranting a lot more than I should've. At the end of the day, if people like the manga, I'm happy for them. But hey, you did want the perspective of someone who didn't, so there you have it.

Agreed, i just think the '90s SM anime run did a better job as an adaptation in terms of following the general storyline but at the same time also not merely being a carbon copy of the manga's story. Sure, it took liberties and went in directions plot wise that granted were questionable and even lacking/not great from a writing sense at times but overall as a whole i definitely enjoy it more than the manga. I've read the latter a handful of times in the last dozen or so years and i simply don't get the same feeling as from the '90s anime. The manga has it's moments sure, but i wouldn't really count myself as someone who likes it all that much either. Crystal thus doesn't appeal to me for a lot of the same reason, because it really brings out the faults of the manga and Takeuchi's writing in a noticeable manner.

[super michael]

I have seen many TV series, anime, cartoons, etc, that boys are scared of mouse. Just incase the boy is attracted to girls.

I really don't think they had bad intentions in having General Blue being scared of a mouse, just like Yamcha was scared of girls.

dragon ball products were in fact still perpetuating homophobic stereotypes, 'intentions' be damned.

Michael.

Sir.

Putting aside that knowing these things is my fucking job, I litterally have decades of lived experience as a queer woman. I know homophobia when I see it. General Blue schreeching at the idea of being touched by a woman, scared of a mouse, or any number of his mannerisms screams "I'm going to make my one canonically queer character look like a joke because that's what queer people are."

Think about the entire fucking comic. How Blue—and later Otokosuki—is written is a clear pattern of depicting queer men as something to mock. Similarly, the lack of queer women in the original comic is further a sign of homophobia because cishet men will often think that women can't be women-loving-women. That's why the only depictions of queerness are from two stereotypical men, and they're depicted in such a way so as to make the audience creeped out and also make them mock them for not being 'the right kind of man'.

General Blue and Otokosuki are absolutely things that can be vastly improved upon in a future Dragon Ball project and should be.

-Dragon Ball is my best show, but it's against all of my values, I find it offensive up to disgust, and I want for it to be totally rewrote, so my beloved characters will get more focus (maybe some romance) and cut out the rest. It need a shift on focus, from plot profluence to deeper subtle meanings, so I can empathize with someone more. Ah, and the show is terrible with women, they have to change this entirely. But is my best show, I swear.-
JulieYBM and some others, regular Kanzenshuu contributors.

You know... Dragon Ball could, theoretically, have good writing, good representation AND good spectacular fights if either Toei, Toyotaro or Toriyama ever gave a damn about appealing to anyone else but little boys, or the lowest common denominator of adults.

If I criticize the series, it's because I respect it enough to want to see it be better than it already is.
Huh... Pushing past your limits... That's almost like... The entire message of DB or something...

Aww, I had this guy on my ignore list so I didn't see that blatant mocking me by name lol

Anyway, I just wanted to thank you for your reply to his post.

I would like to mention I don't know what your job is, however I don't question your experience, since I believe you.

However I don't understand this, why it is ok for straight males characters like this:

Male shy or afraid of Female - DB and Big Bang Theory
Male being a neat freak - iCarly
Male being afraid of a mouse and screams like a girl - Good Luck Charlie

But it is wrong that General Blue is afraid of a mouse and is a neat freak.


As for Otokosuki you and MasenkoHA were 100% right. He was written in the worst possible way, even his name had a bad meaning.

[Basaku]

However I don't understand this, why it is ok for straight males characters like this:

Male shy or afraid of Female - DB and Big Bang Theory
Male being a neat freak - iCarly
Male being afraid of a mouse and screams like a girl - Good Luck Charlie

But it is wrong that General Blue is afraid of a mouse and is a neat freak.


As for Otokosuki you and MasenkoHA were 100% right. He was written in the worst possible way, even his name had a bad meaning.

It isn't complex at all - if this is the ONLY gay male character present, or one of the two and the other one just so happens to be yet another collection of stereotypes, then does it need to be spelled out that the author is biased?

Does anyone care that Trunks is afraid of ghouls/ghosts? No because even tho it may seem as """""feminine""""" quirk, there's also about 2836382 other straight male characters in Dragon Ball with all sort of personalities and none of what could be questioned as offensive stereotype or a quirk typically associated with the "other gender".

Case in point - Takeuchi, Sailor Moon and Toei. No one really complained about any character that could be questionable otherwise because from the get go there was Haruka and Michiru, your "standard" lesbian couple, as part of the main cast. Takeuchi's intentions were clear, straightforward and appreciated, and her girls displayed all sort of characteristics associated with men, women, mixed and vice versa. No one bat an eye

[Shaddy]

However I don't understand this, why it is ok for straight males characters like this:

Male shy or afraid of Female - DB and Big Bang Theory
Male being a neat freak - iCarly
Male being afraid of a mouse and screams like a girl - Good Luck Charlie

But it is wrong that General Blue is afraid of a mouse and is a neat freak.

These are all examples of shows deliberately emasculating men for comedy -- of which the stereotypically-feminine portrayal of homosexuality is another example. You ask "why is it okay", but you have no idea whether the people you're talking to think it's okay. Do you think we wouldn't recognize The Big Bang Theory and iCarly are utterly overflowing with shitty writing regarding sexuality and gender roles?

[JulieYBM]

I have seen many TV series, anime, cartoons, etc, that boys are scared of mouse. Just incase the boy is attracted to girls.

I really don't think they had bad intentions in having General Blue being scared of a mouse, just like Yamcha was scared of girls.

dragon ball products were in fact still perpetuating homophobic stereotypes, 'intentions' be damned.

Michael.

Sir.

Putting aside that knowing these things is my fucking job, I litterally have decades of lived experience as a queer woman. I know homophobia when I see it. General Blue schreeching at the idea of being touched by a woman, scared of a mouse, or any number of his mannerisms screams "I'm going to make my one canonically queer character look like a joke because that's what queer people are."

Think about the entire fucking comic. How Blue—and later Otokosuki—is written is a clear pattern of depicting queer men as something to mock. Similarly, the lack of queer women in the original comic is further a sign of homophobia because cishet men will often think that women can't be women-loving-women. That's why the only depictions of queerness are from two stereotypical men, and they're depicted in such a way so as to make the audience creeped out and also make them mock them for not being 'the right kind of man'.

General Blue and Otokosuki are absolutely things that can be vastly improved upon in a future Dragon Ball project and should be.

You know... Dragon Ball could, theoretically, have good writing, good representation AND good spectacular fights if either Toei, Toyotaro or Toriyama ever gave a damn about appealing to anyone else but little boys, or the lowest common denominator of adults.

If I criticize the series, it's because I respect it enough to want to see it be better than it already is.
Huh... Pushing past your limits... That's almost like... The entire message of DB or something...

Aww, I had this guy on my ignore list so I didn't see that blatant mocking me by name lol

Anyway, I just wanted to thank you for your reply to his post.

I would like to mention I don't know what your job is, however I don't question your experience, since I believe you.

However I don't understand this, why it is ok for straight males characters like this:

Male shy or afraid of Female - DB and Big Bang Theory
Male being a neat freak - iCarly
Male being afraid of a mouse and screams like a girl - Good Luck Charlie

But it is wrong that General Blue is afraid of a mouse and is a neat freak.


As for Otokosuki you and MasenkoHA were 100% right. He was written in the worst possible way, even his name had a bad meaning.

I actually abhor The Big Bang Theory for it's homophobic and transphobic depictions of characters, and it's blatant misogyny towards women. Not a single character in that series is likable and the messages that it sends out, especially in regards to fucking Howard Wolowitz, are just disgusting.

I've never seen iCarly or Good Luck Charlie.

[Tian]

I've never seen iCarly

Thank Kami you didn't. I regret watching it due to the abuse that Jennette McCurdy (one of the main actresses) suffered at the hands of the production crew and her mom during the production of the show.

Hell, they even mocked some aspects of Jennette's personal life in the show.

[JulieYBM]

I've never seen iCarly

Thank Kami you didn't. I regret watching it due to the abuse that Jennette McCurdy (one of the main actresses) suffered at the hands of the production crew and her mom during the production of the show.

Hell, they even mocked some aspects of Jennette's personal life in the show.

Goddamn, that sounds awful.

Also, I love the title of her book! That's a great title.

[Tian]

Goddamn, that sounds awful.

Also, I love the title of her book! That's a great title.

The poor girl's gone through a lot of shit. She even mentioned that Nickelodeon once wanted to shut her up with US$ 300,000.

I'm glad she's finally doing her own stuff and not her mom's projected shattered dreams.

[JulieYBM]

Goddamn, that sounds awful.

Also, I love the title of her book! That's a great title.

The poor girl's gone through a lot of shit. She even mentioned that Nickelodeon once wanted to shut her up with US$ 300,000.

I'm glad she's finally doing her own stuff and not her mom's projected shattered dreams.

Damn, that is such bullshit. I hate how there are no repercussions for corporations who do this kind of shit. Like, what the hell?

[MasenkoHA]

However I don't understand this, why it is ok for straight males characters like this:

Male shy or afraid of Female - DB and Big Bang Theory
Male being a neat freak - iCarly
Male being afraid of a mouse and screams like a girl - Good Luck Charlie

But it is wrong that General Blue is afraid of a mouse and is a neat freak.

These are all examples of shows deliberately emasculating men for comedy -- of which the stereotypically-feminine portrayal of homosexuality is another example. You ask "why is it okay", but you have no idea whether the people you're talking to think it's okay. Do you think we wouldn't recognize The Big Bang Theory and iCarly are utterly overflowing with shitty writing regarding sexuality and gender roles?

What Shaddy said but to add to that isn't the one Big Bang Theory character afraid to talk to women the Indian character? (Were there other characters? I try to avoid Big Bang Theory like gonorrhea) There's just a big heaping dose of racism with that. Not to mention the Jewish male character lives with his mom and has this whole schtick where "he thinks he's a ladies man but is actually weird and offputting" and that is the joke. The Indian character can't talk to women, the Jewish character is creepy, and the autistic character is asexual and antisocial.


There's also the fact that Big Bang Theory is just painfully unfunny.


Which male character in ICarly was the neat freak? The weird gay coded villain where him being super effeminate and prissy but lol he likes girls is the joke or the kid who had a crush on Carly, where the joke was oversheltered emasculated mama's boy?


Like 90 percent of a time when a straight male character is the butt of the joke it's not his sexuality and gender identity being mocked, it's almost always his ethnicity or expression of masculinity (or perceived lack thereof) or neurodivergence that is the butt of the joke.

[JulieYBM]

What Shaddy said but to add to that isn't the one Big Bang Theory character afraid to talk to women the Indian character? (Were there other characters? I try to avoid Big Bang Theory like gonorrhea) There's just a big heaping dose of racism with that.

Unfortunately, I was forced to watch the series multiple times due to family, so I have been subjected to it enough to know some of the lore.

Until being dumped by a woman in Season 6 Episode #24 the character of Raj is unable to speak to women unless drunk. He uses Howard—who is often confused for his boyfriend—to communicate for him in the presence of a woman. It's bad.

the autistic character is asexual and antisocial.

Sheldon is supposed canonically 'not autistic', despite being written like a weird Hollywood stereotype of an autistic person. It's really off-putting, because general audiences still read him as being autistic-coded, and therefore simply assume he is. It feels really exploitive of neurodivergent people, especially because the character is never forced to grow up and learn to be self-aware or not speak like a raging asshole.

[ABED]

That's simply untrue. Over the course of the series Raj becomes more and more confident, Howard is the first to get into a long term loving relationship (one that sticks through the end of the series), Penny matures into an independent adult, and Sheldon also gets better with social cues. It's like you stopped at season 1.

Muten Roshi's issue is that he's an old man still pulling this crap, he NEVER learns and it's played off as "oh that Muten Roshi". Sheldon meanwhile has both his best friend and wife blow up at him and point out that his arrogance hurts the people he loves the most and he needs understand that. The final scene of the show (with the exception of the final image of them eating and hanging out) is Sheldon delivering a speech where he acknowledges his flaws but can also acknowledge the value his friends bring to his life and that he's thankful for them. Sheldon is NOT asexual. He gets into a romantic relationship, has sex, gets married, and has children.

[Shaddy]

You're giving it way too much credit. Raj doesn't "become more and more confident", he's treated as someone with an actual disorder that the show is content to make fun of for said disorder, who takes experimental drugs to try and help it, and then in one episode just kinda...gets better. It is, at best, a joke at the expense of Indian masculinity that the writers grew out of, but still pretty fucked-up in how it treats a condition that I don't think it would be fair to blame any real person on in terms of "confidence".

Either way, to act like the show isn't heavily, heavily playing into stereotypes with these characters is pretty silly. Whether they say Sheldon Cooper is autistic or asexual doesn't change what's actually on-screen, and what's on-screen is a laundry list of jokes and stereotypes centered around said people, with the best-case scenario being that he is asked to simply "grow out of it", a request that cannot (or at least fucking shouldn't) be made of the real-world groups being satirized.

In all of these characters' cases, the show is trying to have its cake and eat it with the characters having "grown" but still getting the same toxic traits written into them or their comedy whenever it's convenient (often times, very predictably after a character has a long line about how someone has "grown", because the writing of the show is really repetitive).

Which male character in ICarly was the neat freak? The weird gay coded villain where him being super effeminate and prissy but lol he likes girls is the joke or the kid who had a crush on Carly, where the joke was oversheltered emasculated mama's boy?

This one is such a weird accusation, because neither Freddy nor Nevel is really a "neat freak". Freddy's mom is, but that's just another extension of her control and abuse. Feels like they were really grasping at straws for that one.

Also, yeah, iCarly is just. So fucked up to look at as a show from my childhood now. It's the child abuse show. Even before Quinton's giant video series on it I knew shit got rough for Jeanette, but between her book and knowing how many of the traumatic things from various children's lives became topics and especially jokes in the show, the entire thing feels like it was poisoned from the start.

[MasenkoHA]

This one is such a weird accusation, because neither Freddy nor Nevel is really a "neat freak". Freddy's mom is, but that's just another extension of her control and abuse. Feels like they were really grasping at straws for that one.

Also, yeah, iCarly is just. So fucked up to look at as a show from my childhood now. It's the child abuse show. Even before Quinton's giant video series on it I knew shit got rough for Jeanette, but between her book and knowing how many of the traumatic things from various children's lives became topics and especially jokes in the show, the entire thing feels like it was poisoned from the start.

Right, I've seen a fair bit of the show when I was in high school from my little sister being a fan and I didn't remember any of the male characters being a neat freak and assumed it was one of those two, where the joke with both characters was always "they're not real men"

This is the same show where I distinctly remember an episode where Carly falls for a bad boy (or the G rated Kidvid's idea of a bad boy) and then loses interest in him when she finds out he collects *gasp* copyright evasive beanie babies. And that was the joke. She no longer saw him as a viable love interest when she found out he had a none traditionally masculine hobby.