Once again, a straw man argument. I can't really be surprised, at this point it's kind of humorous.

knowing stereotypes are based in truth allows you to anticipate an argument for them being meaningful, and counter it with the fact that the only evidence for a vast majority of stereotypes is anecdotal (which still is based in truth, as i understand based in truth).

How? Do you disagree that those are stereotypes? You have repeatedly reaffirmed your belief that stereotypes are not fabricated. You have defined stereotypes as the direct product of recurring observations of a trait or behavior attributed to members of a particular group and subsequently extended and assumed descriptive of the group as a whole. Likewise, you have asserted your position that the initial observation was made directly and constitutes a real event; therefore, stereotypes are "based in truth". In accordance with these premises you have concluded that stereotypes are "more meaningful than someone just making it up" that "they mean something" (you have not put forth a means of separating a fabrication from a stereotype) implying that they are meaningful to an extent, but are meaningful none-the-less. By the transitive property all the aforementioned stereotypes have meaning as per your definition. Or does semantics only count when it supports you?

Regardless, your definition of "based in truth" has become so broad and arbitrary that it can be applied to anything spoken. All anyone needs to do is claim to have observed an event and they will receive your seal of "based in truth". The scientifically supported phenomena of mass hysteria and suggestion extends this sentiment to cases where several people make the same claim as exemplified by my earlier example of their being thousands of individuals claiming to have seen aliens or been abducted. Since your concept of "based in truth" cannot consistently eliminate any item on a list of statements, it is invalid.

To recap, here are your sentiments about stereotypes:

• You should not rely on them to form opinions
• They are not inherently reliable
• They do not inherently have value
• They are not reliably true
• They are often the product of confirmation bias

While my position has been:

No one was arguing that you will never have an incidence where a stereotype manifests as predicted. The argument is that particular case or even several cases do not validate the stereotype and justify its being applied universally.

My position is that stereotypes are useless and more often than not based in ignorance and prejudice.