My point is that his characterizations seem to be based off of a certain type of man and woman, and don't really apply to the range of personalities I've dealt with.

I've never known a woman to side with her worst enemy who was a woman just to be against a man. It's actually the reverse among most women I know - it takes a lot more to side with your worst enemy than being the same sex. And a lot of the girls I know consider their friends' ex-boyfriends "off limits" for a very good reason - they consider them damaged goods. Even if the prior break up was for a good reason that didn't reflect negatively on the boy (ie: He's so nice, but I need a bad boy.), I don't think being "passed around" is that common - it really depends on your particular circle of friends. There are even girls who consider it a transgression against "the girl code" to go after an ex, particularly when the breakup was a bad one.

And the problem with stereotypes is that they have a way of being confirmed every time someone fits the mold, but people who don't fit the mold are considered outliers. Throwing out critical thinking in favor of social bias might be easy, but I don't think it gives a correct view of the reality or people. People are more complicated than that. So when I use the term "conservative" for RJ, it has more to do with the small range of personality types I think are represented among the characters. Point being that the reason stereotypes exist is because they are self-perpetuating.