You probaby also totally disregarded may warning in advance about how caraciturized my examples were going to be.
But I don't blame the people who ask, because they're usually newbies. What annoys me, is how any attempt to answer, that does not encompass the full nuances of complete individual human being and every possible individual within a type, is struck down. Neither I, nor you, nor anyone else can make sense of a type system that way.
I'm not going to trade ridiculously specific examples with you, because putting so much emphasis on most of those extaneous details misses the point in entirety. The OPs question was apparently unanswerable within the perameters it gave. I'm never going to do this again, I've made this mistake too many times. From now on, I'm going to tell people to accept answers in the form of cognitive constructs, or take no answers at all, because trying to give any tangible examples is hopeless. There's too much information for quibbling over.