In an attempt to clarify my comments:
I find no fault with Kahvi for being who she is. In disagreeing that she is not the "ultimate female," I am not judging her. Kahvi is Kahvi. She has strengths, she has flaws. She's a great character. What she is not, to me, is a definition of what is best or most desirable in a female.
My problem is that males are celebrated for being male-- often, the more "masculine" they are, the more they are admired. But often, females with female traits are looked down on. For a female to be admired, she often has to be like Kahvi-- to have as many male traits as possible while minimizing the female ones. Why should this be so? Why should women not celebrate being sensitive, nurturing, and caring for others?
My point was that the best of both worlds is to combine strong character traits from both gender roles-- and that this would apply to both males and females. Cutter is tender, thoughtful, calm, and puts others before himself. He is also strong, determined, and self-confident. Nightfall is gentle, nurturing, wise, compassionate-- and also a fighter who will die to protect her loved ones. Both these characters combine both "male" and "female" traits to be a balanced individual.
To me, Nightfall is a more "ultimate" female than Kahvi because Nightfall celebrates her feminine side-- she is a tender, nurturing friend, tribe-mate, mother, and lifemate. Kahvi, as far as I can tell, mostly ignores her feminine side. And other people's needs, except as they relate to her ultimate goal-- the well-being of the Go-Back tribe.
This has nothing to do with whether I find Nightfall vs. Kahvi sexy. They both are, I suppose, in different ways. Frankly, "sexiness" in females isn't something that means a lot to me, anyway. But if I had my choice, I'd choose to look like Nightfall.