
BH's comment points out that it's impossible to actually draw a circle around, isolate, define any group of people because everyone of us is different. Inevitably every attempt to represent a group of people on any topic ends up looking like a cloud who's boundaries are undefinable and constantly shifting. The same thing is true everywhere we look. The truth is there is no solid truth. we live in a probabilistic world not a deterministic one. The closer we look at anything the more we understand that there is no there there.
Communication though requires some type of symbolic representation that always ends up drawing lines where none actually exist. The physicists tell us that we live in a quantum world populated by probabilities, but when asked to use words or pictures to describe the quantum they're stymied because defining a thing locks it into a deterministic reality that doesn't exist. Without definitions words are gibberish, without boundaries pictures are meaningless, so the physicists use mathematical equations whose values are all derivatives of other derivatives. In a communicative sense at least, more gibberish.

Science, technology, art, literature, are all forms of symbolic representation that employ simplification of the incomprehensible quantum world as their tool to communicate their truths. Tomorrow this old fool will walk out to the mid-span of our new metaphorical communication bridge and try to use communication's reductionist tools to tell his truth about the field possible solutions to our environmental and social quagmire offered by the quantum reality that 'we're all in this together'.