You mean like your post? Essentially you just set up a straw man version of one of several complaints about the new movies. You set up the argument in an irrational way. Then you proceeded to claim that your irrational version of the complaint proved the complaint was irrational.
No. I gave a point about human cognition which is pretty well established, and then gave one demonstrative example, chosen for convenience.
I don't think I've ever encountered a complaint about the character of Rey that matched the argument you just gave.
A rational and logical understanding of statistics should leave you with the expectation that your own personal experience is not terribly relevant, as it likely does not represent a good sampling.
Your post strikes me as a rationalization itself that doesn't hold up under scrutiny, because while no one I've encountered claims that the new trilogy is bad solely or even mostly because of Rey...
So much to unpack.
First, as above - your personal experience is not reliably representative. You probably should stop holding that up as support.
More importantly, please show me where I said, "People claim the new trilogy is bad solely or even mostly because of Rey."
Because, I didn't say that. Or anything like that. I gave a very short analysis of one argument, to show how emotional bias is likely present. What you came out with... is thoroughly unrelated. If you needed a reductive form of what I said, it would be more, "People claim the new trilogy is bad for emotional reasons, rather than rational reasons." Those paying close attention would also note I think that's valid, if you admit to the emotional bias.
You don't seem to be responding to what's actually written - folks may decide for themselves if that seems ironic to them, given the point I was making. In any case, thank you, but I'm done discussing this with you.