I think the point here is not that disliking a female character is problematic but whether you respond equally as strongly when it's a male who is equally as poorly written. I will in no way disagree with you that Carter has been written in a way that sets my teeth on edge; I think it undermines so much of who she is and what makes her cool and interesting.

So, for instance, when Jack took a turn for the "cosmic giddiness" to the point of undermining his portrayal as a cunning leader of above average intelligence and gravitas, did you find yourself equally disgusted and annoyed and alienated from the character as when the writers screwed up and wrote Carter as unprofessional and making decisions that undermined her credibility as an officer? Did you want him to disappear with the same fervor you wanted her to disappear?

Do you condemn Carter for her inability to commit to her fiance Pete while the married Teal'c's implied night with Shaun'ac failed to raise a quibble? What about Daniel's time with the princess before the sarc twisted him? Or did you assume that was platonic before he did the sarc one time too many? What about his fling with the Destroyer of Worlds the very week after the dramatic and powerful death of his wife? What about his willingness to abandon the search for Sha're because Heliopolis was more compelling? None of these are particularly stellar moments of moral strength and dedication for the characters. Do you think less of Teal'c because he was willing to leave his wife and his son to the mercy of Apophis because the Jaffa's freedom was more important to him? How about his blindness to Jack's well-being because he was bent on revenge on Tanith? There's nothing wrong with finding a behavior wrong and off-putting and repulsive and even irretrievably wrong. The question is does the male get a free pass for a behavior while the female is condemned and hated? Is he authoritative while she's the bitch? He's complex while she's inconstant?

Do you find it as annoying to be asked to believe that Daniel earned not one but two or maybe even three doctorates before he was 24, that he is an expert in Mayan archaeology and Egyptology and British archaeology and mythology from all over the world as you find it annoying to be asked to believe that Sam's an ace shot, an expert in hand-to-hand combat, a PhD in astrophysics, a Desert Storm vet, AND she spent two years writing the program that dials the gate all before she shipped out to the Pentagon -- and all before she was out of her 20s? (Or thereabouts?)

They're both implausible but does one fly under your radar while the other sets your teeth on edge? I had the unsettling realization that when I thought about it that I was willing to suspend my disbelief for Daniel far more than for Carter and I'm not even a Carter hater. THAT is what the essay gets at and I'm not very happy with myself after looking at the issue.