Or: Everything else

Is that a thing? Being related to powerful force users can make you powerful as well?

Seems awfully cheap: it's not about the work you put in but rather the circumstances of your birth.

To suggest Rey is an excessively idealized female character and she sucks for that but then to deny Neo, Harry Potter or James Bond are excessively idealized males characters already proves my point, most of this complainst have a base on pure sexism, with her people tries to find every single little detail of why she is a Mary Sue, with them everybody does the exact opposite, try to find every little detail to prove why they aren't Marty Stus even when they clearly are if we apply the same values for all cases.

It's apparent that there is some kind of generic part of it, mainly from the idea that Luke and Leia had connections because of their father. But it still required training. Anakin was basically born of the force yet still had to go through a decade of training to get to the level he was. Luck also spent a good 3-4 years (not sure exactly how long it is between New Hope and Return of the Jedi). It isn't a days worth of sitting about, having an old guy be afraid of you and then suddenly being able to move tonnes of rocks... or even then being a one on one with a guy who trained for years as well.

Generally according to how the story was written in 1, most Jedi aren't allowed to breed however, they are Jedi. So that power most likely doesn't get passed down often.

Harry fails, multiple times he relies on others, he lets others down, people die because of him, he is helpless to save people he cares about.  He is terrified and need his parents and loved ones as he goes to die.  He has abilities and strengths, but he also struggles and weaknesses.  I was always good at art and writing as a child, but I struggled in mathematics no matter how hard I tried.  A character can have a specific positive aspect that makes them of interest.  It adds complexity and interest when they have to deal with real challenges with real consequences.  Life is hard, filled with false starts and failures, its how we respond to this that defines us.  

You throw around "sexism" casually as a lazy argument to poison the well of other members here.  You are the most sexist person I've seen in these threads. Treating women like fragile porcelain dolls who cannot handle criticism.  We ask to be held to the same standards as men, not just the advantages they get, but the responsibilities as well.  Major characters like Rey are massive missed opportunities for women and girls to look toward in fiction.  In real life the disillusionment will come when you fail, and fail again, and you have no excuse and your job fires you because accountability exists.  Strong women, or people in general, are forged through their trials and coming to terms with any limitations they have.

IMO, the key to understanding Harry Potter, Neo, and James Bond -- versus Rey -- is to understand that Harry and the rest were all created alongside their respective universes. In fact, the universes were designed in large part to accommodate or house those characters. This helps them to seem "in place" in their universe, even when they are unusually skilled and/or competent.

The thing about a Mary Sue, usually, is that the character sticks out as being unusual in that universe. The term and idea originated (as far as I remember) in Star Trek fan fiction, where an author insert character would be smarter/more logical than Spock, a better engineer than Scotty, win the love of Kirk, broker peace with the Klingons, etc. The Mary Sue was universe breaking, in this way, and diminished everything around her in comparison.

It's hard for a protagonist to do this in the universe created to house them, usually, because however skilled the protagonist is, the antagonists are (almost) equally prepared, and/or the story is set up in a way to challenge the protagonist internally as they go on their hero's journey. (And if they are not, it is unlikely for a story -- or a story universe -- to become popular enough to be worth this debate in the first place; it will lack the necessary drama to inspire peoples' interest.) Harry is (or becomes) a powerful wizard, true... but Voldemort is even more powerful, and Harry must deal with the pressures of growing up, coming to terms with his family, etc. Neo is the chosen one, true... but he is up against the entire world, in a sense, and a bunch of confusing metaphysical mumbo jumbo, too, and then he must learn to master himself in order to master his surroundings, and so on. James Bond is the most competent spy and action hero ever, yes... but his villains have egos and technology and henchmen to (nearly) match his efforts, and there are political machinations, and so forth.*

Contrarily, Rey stands out because she comes in and seems so much more powerful than everything around her, in comparison, and because everything seems to come so easily to her (she does not seem to struggle to the same degree to realize her power that a Harry Potter or a Neo does, for instance, though I will note that James Bond also tends not to have to struggle very much... or at least, not in the earlier films in the franchise). We can compare her skills against the people she's next to, of course, but also those who came before, like Luke. And she just seems better than everyone else, at virtually everything she does. Everyone past or present, protagonists and antagonists alike, seem to pale in comparison to Rey's "natural ability"... which does tend to play havoc with the stakes and dramatic tension.

Perhaps this will be redeemed in the third film of the new trilogy? I find that the first two movies were different in major respects, so much so that they don't really cohere very well, or tell a unified story. It seems to me that Rey could be anything or anyone in the third movie, and give fresh arguments to either side in this (unfortunately and unnecessarily politicized) debate. But based on what we've seen so far, and especially the first movie, I would say that yes, Rey is a Mary Sue. Or she is a badly drawn, tension-deflating, universe-breaking character, at least, if the specific term "Mary Sue" offends.

_______________________

* To understand better what I mean by "comparison," imagine instead that Harry Potter had actually, originally, been a story about Ron Weasley... and everything was designed around his level of competency... and then, later on (in a sequel, perhaps), Harry was introduced as the new protagonist, and he comes in as a fully fledged wizard with Dumbledore's skill, or even more, and blows everything up, including whatever piddling problems Ron was working on at the time.

The universe, having been designed to highlight/test a person of Ron's capability, would not be ready for Harry Potter (a fully functional Potter, if you will -- not the unsure, untested kid/teen of duration of the actual series) as protagonist. He would make everything seem silly and less than, in comparison. Arguably he already does this with respect to Quidditch, which I have long felt was poorly designed on Rowling's part, but if the series had been designed for Weasley, Potter's entrance would make everything look ridiculous.

This really show you have read and understood all the arguments...

Funny enough the Saiyan on your sig is kinda Mary Stu (as well as Satan's daughter).

She and her sister goes from not knowing Super Saiyan form to being on terms with goku on blue saiyan... that was to much of a power spike on short notice... but DBS have a lot of strange power spikes.

And she ultimately fails as depicted in my signature, her whole universe deleted, doesn't get bigger than that.

I agree the power scaling is annoying, been an issue for me since the Android and Cell Saga when they really went crazy and everyone had to be super saiyan. 

Seriously, stop accusing people of sexism when you don't even try to comprehend what anyone is saying. You're just resorting to name calling because you have no argument.