I... cannot figure out how this is supposed to work, because so many characters fit all the criteria for one of the dozens of stereotypes, but also can carry their own storylines, have flaws, etc. and so would also count as "strong women." And it's so linear - what, you can't be a strong supporting female character? Ever? Pretty much every possible aspect of any character, male or female, can be a stereotype if that's all they are, but having a particular characteristic or role isn't an automatic ticket to Stereotypeland. But going by this chart, it's almost impossible for a female character not to be a stereotype.

And I complain about stereotypical female character all the time. It is a problem. And a female character being stereotyped does have a different effect than a male character being stereotyped, because of all the history and context baggage... but even if you stipulated that, say, female characters had to be twice as original/strong to be thought half as good, this sets the bar way more than twice as high as the bar for the male characters. Most of whom get way more credit for being nuanced and original than they actually deserve. How many World-Weary Law Enforcement Dudes alone get credit for being soooo nuanced because they have one quirk or a dead younger sibling or war angst that gets mentioned once or twice a season in passing, with maybe one episode that one time focusing on it?