A construction of an individual identity, in dual ethno-cultural environments, is often based on a premise that an ethnic identity is a primary human determinant. In such dual ethno-cultural communities, a basic ethnic stereotype could be called „relational“: it is founded on the concept of „Others/We-group“ distinction, where the Others appear as a main reason for the existence of the We-group members who use the distinction. This stereotype is based on the following premises: the first one says that a local socio-cultural reality contains two solid ethno-cultural groups, whereas the other suggests that in a local context, there exist just „They“ as a solid ethno-cultural group while among „Us“ the solidity is in fact, limited to ethnic affiliation. The consequence of the attitude is pervasive presentation of intra-ethnic differences, more than mere stereotyping of the Others. These stereotypes are based on the so-called „homeland“ classifications and appear to represent a small ethnography of ideas and images on what constitutes and makes a local ethnic community. The stereotypes of this particular kind are more often seen among members of Serbian ethnic group, at least based on a research in two local communities - Bečej and Seleuš. In the two communities, the prevailing attitudes on intra-ethnic differences and the stereotypes developed out of the differences are more numerous and elaborated, based on the „homeland“ classification. This cultural, cognitive process is a consequence of intertwining of two perspectives in understanding of the We-group. The first perspective narrates about the We-group ethnic background, and the second emphasizes the group domicile, that is, it defines the We-group in space. The first perspective is founded, more or less, on indispensable experience of an ethnic identity, while the other perspective is more based on empirical experience; the second perspective is also a creation of a symbolic construction, the same as an image on an ethnic identity per se.
