Quote Originally Posted by Xyril View Post
From context, I am guessing that this statement implies that you believe I made the assertion that people condemned OP for a sexual preference. I did not. If you take issue with this phrasing: "Note, nobody else is condemning the OP for judging a sexual preference", let me clarify that my choice to use the word "else" does not imply that I am claiming that you were shaming OP for a preference. However, given how apparently incongruent your way of reading context is from the way that I (and some others apparently) read context, I didn't want to offend you by making an assertion about your intent either way.

Just to clarify. 1) OP made a post. 2) Group A of people said they weren't comfortable with OP's post. 3) Group B of people accused group A of shaming a sexual preference. 4) You stated that (paraphrase) "everyone else who reacted as I did must have done so because they read OP the same way I did." 5) I disagreed with that assertion, because 6) People in Group A took pains to point out that it was the discussion of sexual preference combined with reference to a specific individual that bothered them. If this assertion is true, then Group A would not be more or less bothered whether OP said "I'm really into heavy people" or "I'm really not into heavy people anymore." 7) Similarly, the criticism of Group B is that Group A shamed a preference. That criticism would stand regardless of that preference.
I think I'm starting to follow?

On the agreement, I was more thinking along the lines that the people who were disagreeing were likely reading - like I was - that the OP was explaining why he was no longer into this particular woman, and/or assuring people that he wasn't into her. It's more likely that people are going to object to OP if it comes across that he's critiquing a particular individual.