I just...what...how did this...WHAT?
Maybe this textbook was much better at its time of publication (1983), and maybe it's just little ol' me sitting here in 2013 who has the problem...but I really think that this book istelf has a lot of problems in terms of what it is trying to argue/the execution of that arguing.
Too many examples are too easy. I wish there were a better word for it, but there really isn't. These obsessions over "IS THIS STEREOTYPE REAL?" are frustrating because there is too much generalization across the Frank/Anshen board, so it doesn't matter if the stereotype is real because the examples are so GENERAL/stereotypical in themselves.