Buffy Isn't Invalid Just Because She's Pretty

I think some of the worst anti-Joss Whedon comments on the MP Neil Gaiman thread are from people claiming that Whedon didn't write proper female characters because sometimes the actresses who played them were really attractive.

For me, the amount of skin shown on Buffy was never gratuitous, but there were times when, say, Buffy would wear a mini-dress because she was a 16 year old girl who was comfortable with her body.

She also wore grungy overalls and regular jeans and t-shirts, and let's not forget that this is the final shot of the show — with all characters, male and female, wearing casual clothes with pretty much the exact same amount of skin coverage.

Do people not get how ridiculous they sound when they claim that traditionally attractive women can't be empowering characters? If anything, isn't it nice to have a character who starts off as someone you'd write off as being some dithering bimbo and watch her develop her into a fully-fledged person who goes through an enormous amount of change?

Anyway. That is my rant since I cannot comment on the MP Neil Gaiman article.