Fair points them all, Louise, but it was clarified by the poster and others earlier in the thread that their position is very much as yours, so no need to discharge quite as much vitriol as you did, but I think we see quite where you're coming from
For the record I think that the human animal, regardless of how intelligent it sees fit to credit itself with has tendencies to default to some basic determinates when it comes down to choosing a mate. I recall a series by Robert Winston which revealed that people can be attracted by scent (in that people with different scents have different gene make ups, are therefore less likely to cause any duplication in faulty genes with offspring and it's therefore hardwired in to us that we should find ourselves attracted to different scents). Is that what we'd call deep? What's love after all other than a series of chemical responses and stimuli? But then when we talk like that it doesn't sound half as appealing, does it?
Also, if you're tired of being labelled based on your hair colour, what about us guys who don't fit into that oldest of classifications of being tall, dark and handsome? Tall - well yes in my case, dark - definitely not, and handsome - well that's up for grabs really. However we are similarly tarred. Personally I'm happy enough not to look like a Mediterranean type and happier still not to act like them!
And may I add finally that if anyone does think anything along the lines of
'Blondes are the best, readheads are wild, brunettes are boring' they must subject their tiny minds to the very worst of trash tabloid media. A bookshelf or artistic portfolio is lot more indicative of a personality in my opinion.