Stereotypes are good even when not Sony or RCA

The other night in mentored inquiry someone derisively spoke of how Harvard produces nothing but conformists. The sneer curled her lip so far I thought it would make a nice candleholder. It was hilarious.
It was especially funny because it was said in a class at a school that repeatedly parrots the same set of phrases. Person A "proves" she is independant by talking about how awful the Republicans are. Person B proves he walks to the beat of his own drum by demeaning the hateful Republicans. Person C differentiates itself by proclaiming the detrimental effects of the Republicans. In 3 or so years I have yet to hear a single student speak well of the Republicans.
What makes this particularly funny in their "independant" thoughts is the realization that far closer to 50% than 0% of the people in the state happen to like the Republican views. Their "independant, non-conformist views" that parrot each other so exactly are the same thing as their opposition.
The "progressive" viewpointed students largely fit a particular stereotype just as the theoretically "anti-change" Harvardites largely fit a particular stereotype.
That is a dangerous word to use. It has fallen in to great disfavor. Stereotypes are trumpeted as universally bad. They are repeatedly spoken of as harmful, demeaning, counterproductive, and inaccurate.
Truth to tell, sometimes they are. But then again...sometimes not. How do stereotypes start? here is a crazy thought: by repeated instances of encountering them! Guess what? If I run into 10 midgets and every one of them is short...I just might start associating midgets with...*gasp* BEING SHORT! And as I continue to encounter them, let us assume I meet another 20 midgets. 19 of them are 4'3 and under and the 20th is 7'2. Sure enough, here comes some mental midget proclaiming, "See? See? Stereotypes are wrong! And inaccurate!" as if an exception proves a rule inaccurate.
Now, I suppose some people wonder how a 7'2" person qualifies as a midget. It is a simple answer. I thought the comparison was funny. And that is enough reason for me.
Yes, sometimes stereotypes are inaccurate. Indeed, elements of stereotypes seldom all fit a particular individual. Stereotypes can provide useful data as well, however. They can give you an idea of how to prepare.
Tomorrow I leave for Seattle for a couple days. Knowing the stereotype of Seattle I am taking galoshes (which in reality I do not own) and a chess board so I will be allowed into Starbucks (although I don't drink coffee). Sure, I may run into that one section of Seattle where you go almost three houses without seeing a Starbucks...but I at least have a general idea of what to expect.
I am sure 27 parrots are running to their keyboards right now to talk about "this idiot who said stereotypes are a good thing". Ignore them. They are long haired hippie stoners who think the worse music sounds the better it is and claim to be the intelligentsia because they hold minority views in a world run by racist religious rich white zealots. As a racist religious rich white zealot who only misses the parts about being racist, rich, and a zealot, I am one of the ruling class and therefore completely right. Well, except I am not ruling.

I must look strange the way my cheek puffs out. Must be a tongue in there.