You seem to completely miss my point. Thought these characters history we see that a vast majority of the time we see them they are represented as superior to the average person in some way (strength, intellect, leadership, etc.) and posses no shortcoming. Your post sounds like defensive, but I was not trying to attack these characters (i love Kirk, and especially love superman) my point is that when you look at it objectively most of the time we see these characters they fit the description of what we call a "Mary Sue". My point is that characters like this have existed since the beginning of story telling and the fact that we now call it a "Mary Sue" and the public gets outraged when a woman portrays these character traits is sexist. We should not have a gendered term to describe a character that we think might be underwritten, hell why do we even need a term for it period.
You seem to have completely missed my point. I am not defending those characters against what I think are your attacks, I am attacking those characters or at least attacking the idea that those characters are perfect enough to be considered Mary Sues when clearly their greatness is marred by some character flaws. Kirk and Picard, for example, may be the greatest and best Starfleet captains of their eras, but neither is a perfect Starfleet captain and neither is perfect enough to be a Mary Sue character.