This topic addresses an issue I see underlying many threads, most recently the Tag Cloud one.
It seems that the general trend among many forum members (most especially those who've been here a while and probably know more about socionics) is to avoid or reject discussion around a trait or behavior being associated with a particular type.
I think we all understand the dangers of stereotyping and how it can impoverish our understanding. I think there is another danger lurking here, and that is denying an exploratory understanding of how the various ways of thinking and processing information can or even tends to manifest into specific behavior, and why. I am very interested in the process of thought-into-behavior. I very much appreciate the deviations from what is expected or common. And, I don't find it harmful to discuss what is common.
And the reason I don't find it harmful is that I am not trying to gain any absolutes about types through talking about this.
I also hold this likely controversial opinion: People that are new to socionics and are grappling with understanding the basics may actually benefit from dealing in 'stereotypes' initially. Understanding is a process. One of the initial stages seems to be gaining a hold of an oversimplified interpretation of things. My guess is that most people here were brought to socionics through MBTI, and were first inspired to learn more after reading their type description, full of stereotypes of traits and behaviors. And then most of us opted to refine that initial understanding. And hopefully most of us continue to do this.
As we are in different places as far as refining that understanding, I can see why there is much bickering and nit-picking. However, I don't think it is helpful to write off discussion surrounding behavior and traits. Instead of rejecting it, why not approach with caution, and throw in all the caveats you feel you need to in order to avoid the rigidity of fixed absolutes?
Obviously, not all discussions on this will prompt your interest or care, or are necessarily worth engaging. I just see a general trend on this forum that is worth pointing out. Often someone asks a question out of genuine interest and desire to know more, and it gets shut down out of the starting gate with "not type related" (with no explanation). Yet, the topics about 'who wants to fuck who', or 'what are the weirdest fetishes', or 'what is the essence of masculinity (which seems to be an ok place to discuss stereotypes?)' gets a ton of responses. Seems lazy.