Exactly this. What folks are missing here is that the way women are portrayed in this game and most media is a direct consequence of centering male characters in the narratives in which they appear, or even within their specific arcs. Hypothesizing a comparable scenario in which only women were centered, but in which they were still poorly portrayed, is not meaningful in this context-- in such a case, the ways in which women are portrayed would automatically differ. While that wouldn't serve as an excuse for bad writing, we can't just dismiss the specific baggage that attends depictions of male-female relationships and how that influences the way they're authored and received.
Honestly, this is just approach.
A conclusion of the females issues in their overall portrayal in this series being a direct consequence of male inclusion or male-female relationships is to be understood as subtextual evaluation. The effect of stereotypical devices in media is something that can't be afforded to be an oversight when it comes to criticism, I do agree and encourage this where it is applicable. But, what isn't being considered is the core, fundamental issue that characters like Kairi face in fictional material—the place in which you've initiated your interpretation from.
Kairi, as many characters in this world before her, suffers from this flaw in character creation: a character given purpose or portrayed in the story only through their role for another character. This fundamental approach in storytelling is something that is held without the regard of gender, race, age, etc. In its own function, it isn't an inherit issue, but it can be once it acts as a restriction that is reflected onto characterization within the narrative of a story. This is mostly done in which it typically prohibits the character to become what is understood as a "Dynamic Character", and their role in the story is emphasized only by their purpose through the other character or as a plot-device in a given circumstance. This is something that applies even to the character's individual agenda to serve the conflict, which is commonly referenced to villains who appear two-dimensional in their characterization at best. Initially, the problem isn't having a character involved with another or being an importance piece of the plot, but rather not using that simply as a stepping stone to further advance their involvement and portrayal in the story—the how, what, and why needs to be given more attention if the character has a prominent role going forward.
Taking this basic understanding of character construction in specific regards to gender tropes, and how this is implemented into a story can't be ignored. I agree. But, settling on this to define
all the females in this series, and how this is placed within their purpose of the story—the conclusion of sexism or male inclusion for their issues isn't an omniscient ultimatum to their depiction, or rather, it isn't at the heart of the problems they all face in the narrative. Even implanting the idea that having another character as a center of motivation is in itself an inexorable issue is inaccurate as well, seeing that this completely hinges on the "how" factor in retrospect of what is portrayed in the narrative. Correlation vs. Causation ideals start to swell up when placing male presence in this narrative as the core reasoning for recognizing the issues the female characters face in this game—primarily to the females that this isn't an applicable use to understand their portrayal. Stating that it is a
direct consequence, as such if to be regarded as an inevitable trait in effect, is stigmatizing the very notion of having male/female coexistence in storytelling. It is here where it seems an obvious double standard is designed by the specific inclusion of male counterparts, as opposed to it being a general foundation of flaws in character construction. However, we can understand the issues with the application of male-female relationships to
certain female characters to a degree, as characters like Kairi have had another character define her presence in the story since the beginning.
Of course, we can all choose to see what we want to see, that's not something I can do anything about, and I've already said quite enough in this topic. I know what lens you're firm on using to understand the issues for all female characters in the series—so agree to disagree. I can't ignore the issues of Kairi's character, but what I do understand is that the core issue goes beyond the male-female relationship she has with Sora. KH3 had high expectations to rectify the lack of presence and depth of her character, and, well...Nomura failed to exceed the previous writings of his games in KH3 concerning her characterization, and with how easily this was to be presented in the narrative—I understand too that this missed potential reflects his ability to not take advantage of character development as a whole. I can still understand the conclusion of centering her issue around male-female relationship tropes—it's an interesting picture to paint to understanding
part of the flaws in Kairi's character despite these issues going deeper than the direct placement of gender, i.e. this wouldn't serve a different function if Sora was a female instead and if she was still given the same treatment—the core, fundamental issue in character construction is still there regardless of female-female relationship. However, issues of male-female portrayal in media isn't an ultimate appliance for
every damn female in the game. Relating the issues Kairi has faced since the very beginning to Aqua's character is an inadvertent placement of criticism, especially when the foundation of this correlation relies on the male presence alone. The treatment between them in regards to this is not nearly the same degree, and it isn't functioning as a clear problem for characters like Aqua (who arguably is the most used/expressed character of the BBS narrative) and Xion (who in some eyes, took over Roxas' narrative in
Days) to begin with. Their issues don't rely on the gender of those involved in their narrative, so I see no point in enforcing it where it isn't applicable.