I reckon if there's one good thing about True Blood is that it's not afraid to keep a balanced strong female and male characters ratio.
One of the first things I've noticed about Buffy is that it was filled with strong women that overshadowed the male cast, the men were built as great love interests, but the characters weren't exactly the female's counterparts. It was the exact same problem with Angel IMO, only this time it was the men who were stronger and overshadowed the female cast, the women were written as perfect love interests but, Lilah Morgan aside, they weren't exactly the male characters's counterparts. I think the Twillight and Underwold sagas had a similar problem, only thing is they were more blunt about it (Bella and Michael were the designated "damsel-in-distress" and they embraced their respective parts as much as their significant others seemed to embrace the respective "knight-in-shining-armor" roles).
However, I think True Blood is groundbreaking territory in the sense Pam's presence seems as powerful as Sheriff Northman's, Debbie's as strong as Alcide's, Tommy got the same amount of attention as fellow skinwalker Luna and Nan didn't even need to be a girlfriend to have storyline as good as Bill's. The way I see it, True Blood doesn't "pick" a gender to be more powerful than the other, it doesn't stuck its characters in sterotypes: although Sookie is a girlfriend that's not what defines her, although Hoyt was "Jessica's man" that not all what he is which, I believe, keeps things interesting in a way that other shows can't.
Edited by zomb, Dec 19, 2011 @ 10:09 AM.