My simply stereotyping one group assumes that that 'group' exists in the first place.
1) existence of group established or accepted
2) group is stereotyped as having certain characteristics
IMO, most people who talk about inequality of races and concomitant racism, or world issues between and amongst various cultural groups, are stuck on number 2. I'm more concerned with number 1.
What are the criteria and motivations behind accepting the ontological status of a cultural group in the first place?
e.g. is "West" (and "East") a coherent and valuable concept? Is "Asia"? Is "Europe"? Is "Africa"? Are "Black" and "White" and "Latino"?
If they are valuable, maybe they're only valuable for discussion under certain limited circumstances and in others are potentially damaging to understanding of the world and people as they are.
I hope that makes my approach clearer.