1. identifies a particular type of person
2. characterizes them in a specific way that, like other group characterizations, is simultaneously an exaggeration, a truth, and a point of view
3. encourages us to think about that the assumptions we carry around about what a "default" model for life should look like
I know people who are very well described by this sort of language, even though (like any group characterization) it necessarily does not capture their whole selves. The description reminds me to not just accept that these people (or anyone else) have some natural born right to whatever position they end up in life, and that we can question whether we do in fact value what they do and say. It leads to questions like "Why are almost all the people who do <insert type of work> like this?", in ways that we frequently do for other sorts of work but tend not to ask about "success".