Subhakar Das writes about a discussion he had with friends over dinner, regarding what does or doesn't define 'strong female characters':
Last week, we had this debate on strong female characters in movies or books. They said the term implies women are weak. I said strong as in strength, strength as in character. The discussion veered to a post in NYT where the writer lampooned strong female characters as ‘men with boobs.’ She thinks it casts them in a mould be it movies or books: beautiful, capable, brilliant – just your everyday Jane, but without any genuine feminine characters.
It's a worthwhile read. A lot of assumptions come to the fore, as when his friends complain that 'strong' implies that somehow regular female characters are weak, and that they'd prefer a different term altogether, such as 'memorable'. They discuss examples of memorable female characters, and look into how these have changed over the decades.
It was midnight when we left. By then we were getting into an argument over strong male characters, and we came to the conclusion that there weren’t any. ‘There is no need,’ I said. ‘Exactly,’ said my friends. ‘Now you know why we hate strong female characters?’