There's so much wrong in your comment, I barely know where to start. > Did you immediately understand what set of behaviors I implied by saying "wild Indian" a

There's so much wrong in your comment, I barely know where to start. > Did you immediately understand what set of behaviors I implied by saying "wild Indian" and "slovenly Barbarian"? No, actually, I still have no idea. My guess was that those behaviors do not include "great table manners, is polite, shares, and is quite empathetic" but beyond that, I can barely guess. > (Why isn't anyone upset that I included the Barbarians?) Who are "the Barbarians"? > Simply using existing stereotypes is not racism. Response a) So what, only new stereotypes is racism? b) Yes, it is, when those stereotypes are based on race. > I have neither commented on the superiority-level of Indians and Barbarians Um, you said your kid is well-behaved, unlike those other people. That directly implies your kid is superior to them. And I guess your Alaskan Native friends are superior to the "wild" ones. Also, 'positive' racism (e.g. "asians are good at math") is just as bad, > or have I modified their access to resources and opportunities. Not directly, but racism is hardly so overt these days. > In fact, stereotypes can be quite useful, for example, when you are trying to determine which VC to impress or what demographic is most likely to use your kitten-photo sharing Facebook App. What?! I would never invest in someone that makes business decisions based on stereotypes rather than data, or that approached me because of stereotype they had about me.