1. Thanks for your trust for 'I even wanted to tell you more about my life';
2. However, about 'you've shut all the doors': is no logic, if what you said is true, then you had no chance spoken to me or let alone we ate in a table with conversation;
3. 'I felt you're not easily accessible' has no logic: on the one hand, we did have a conversation which you expressed 'But I do need to talk to people who can tolerantly understand me', 'Like you of course', which obviously against your statement.
4. In the conversation mentioned in 3., you said several times 'do not judge me', which is pretty obvious contradict from what you are doing now (which is that you are judging me so easily).
5. in both general and macroscopic perspective, sense of judgement is one of basic characteristics of human being, thus I am not blaming you.
6. But I think what you mean about 'judge' is relate to stereotypes if I am right, which nobody would like if they come from other individuals.
7. and the point is that every individual should at least behave following their own principles as what they believe before requiring others to follow their principles or belief;
8. obviously, most people cannot follow 7;
9. your behaviour according to 3. And 4. Show that you are belonging to most people see 8.;
10. by the way, in relevant to 'no easily accessible', on the one hand, I had explained the reasons to you twice which seems not convince you, but that's your choice to believe or not;
11. on the other hand, your behaviour such as frequently sending your selfies before made me confused, therefore I was trying to keep our relationship within friends and hope it would not be influenced by the nature of last topic we had (which in common sense a girl may not very appropriate to talk sexual topic with a man, but at least that had past, and I am an open-minded person);
12. above all, it's your choice to make friends or not, join our meeting or not, as an organiser I would very welcome and listen to a real you.
13. I do not have any meaning to offend you, however I would apologize if you feels that.
his reply:
Thank you so much for this remarkably interesting use of a deeply philosophized argumentation! Yet, your discourse is dense of association fallacies! I am not trying to refute every individual argument.
Nonetheless, your use of syllogism is extremely interesting, yet products incoherent facts! To illustrate this, my preliminary judgment was that you can easily talked to! However, the accessibility ostensibly entails the reciprocation (its lowest scope is conversational if not emotional). Therefore, the accessibility I was alluding to is only delimited with the context of the late or even terse responses if not ignored altogether!
Regarding the talk about sex, our mindsets are evidently operated within multi-dimensional perspectives imbibed in sociological and cultural backgrounds! I might be taking a pseudo-anarchist attitude! I do not deeply believe the bourgeois attitudes towards sex and pleasure and this is incompatible with my philosoph!
Lastly, thank you so much Sherry for allowing me to be a friend of yours! Also your effort and time to analyze my texts are much sincerely appreciated and I do even feel privileged to be given this unprecedented attention!
I will stay a friend and an active member of the group!
Have a good night 😘
