<round of applause for Kirsten>
She said it far better than I did. We're not writing "male characters" and "female characters," as if that's the overwhelming consideration. We're writing characters. Characters who have many traits including gender. The choice we make about them are the ones that make the most sense given the needs of the stories and the arcs and relationships of the characters. And since we're writing stories about officers and professionals in an egalitarian society, there are few story situations where any character's gender would be an overriding factor. Heck, gender isn't even necessarily an overriding factor in romantic subplots, considering how free the novels have been about incorporating GLBT themes.
's generalization here seems to be based on only two examples, Janeway and post-timejump Kira. Because of what happened to those two captains who happen to be female, he imagines there's a pattern specific to female captains created onscreen. The problem there, really, is that screen canon gave us so very few
female captains as regular characters in the first place. With only two examples, it's impossible to distinguish between a genuine pattern and a coincidence. The sample size is simply too small.