Quote Originally Posted by Joy
I saw that coming...

When I bitch, I'm mainly talking about specific behaviors that certain groups exhibit (aka- the basis of socionics), not saying ALL people in that group are that way. When I meet someone new, I don't think of that person in terms of what group that person is in. I see that person as an individual. For example, Kelly is INFp. I'm not thinking about that when I talk to her though. I love Kelly. I like FDG. I like Vague. There are others, of course. Honestly, I like many more of then than I dislike. You I like as well, but I'm not totally convinced that you're an ethical type.

I'm reminded of a conversation we once had... just today I was thinking about if it was related to this dichotomy.

Let's say I say, "Red heads are hot." It seems to some, this sentence would mean that I think that all red heads are hot. This seems absurd to me... IMO, it's clear that I was saying that there are red heads who are hot. *shrugs*
The way I see it by simply proclaiming statements like that, unconsciously, they could be taken as indicators of type.

And also Joy, a democrat would've said it was a preference, not a group division "Like I said, I find the preference of read hair in individuals hot".
You never disputed the fact that it's a group division. In fact there is no indication that it even crossed your mind. For you division by group seems natural. That's what I was getting at.