The difficulty with "realistic", "subtle", or "non-stereotypical" portrayal of non-human races is that we are all working from a our understanding of human psychology and motivations when we portray them. (And, judging by the number of wierd romance plots mentioned by people on the boards, we tend to draw from a rather narrow range of post-modern, western human cultures and motivations when it comes to sex--as if it were impossible to imagine anything else). If I decide to play a "non-stereotypical" dwarf who likes the outdoors and animals, rides a horse, and uses a bow--in other words, a mongol-based dwarf--what is it that makes him a dwarf? He's a short, stocky mongol with a con bonus who uses a waraxe. Similarly, if I decide to play my elf as an Inuit, the only things that distinguish him from a human Inuit are his pointy ears and dex bonus (and his sword/bow proficiencies I guess). The stereotypes are the narrow ranges of human behavior and culture that we have assigned to particular D&D races. Departing from those doesn't make the other races more "realistic"; it just robs them of their defining characteristics unless the DM develops a different cultural stereotype and people use that instead.
If that gets boring, my own suggestion would be to try playing in a world without demi-humans for a while and just develop realistic human cultures in their place. (Though maybe people will be more comfortable attacking the orc brigands who sacrifice people to their dark gods than the human barbarians who act in exactly the same manner).