I based what I said on the words he chose to use.

What facts? This whole conversation runs on the assertion that he isn’t lying.

I understand that your spout the “celebrity women” deal with creeps all the time speech., but I assure you none of them deal with it on a one to one level.

Uh, what I said. Please read.

“she has agreed to meet him in person”

Lying require before hand knowledge.

He would only have to lie if he knew that Clark was against his vision. Something that Zod wouldn’t actually be aware of.

“I care that a core trait of Superman’s identity happens to be missing”
“I don’t care that Superman is new on the job and is probably terrible at multitasking”

Exploration comes from first hand experience and discovery comes from knowledge.

Someone who is reasonable wouldn’t take it the wrong way. What you follow is not what you embody. If everyone takes offense for things they do not embody everyone would be close minded.

I was calling him unreasonable for assuming and attacking rather than cooperating and meeting at a middle ground.

Context is what builds surprise. Not snippets.

Unreasonable, yes. Dumb, no.

It is negative judgement on both ends. He calls my action as being dickish, I had formally called a way of thinking as being dumb and pointless.

Good to know that you can be a dick to things but I can’t.

I get not being a dick to someone. I don’t get being a dick to an idea.

A dick to a concept? I’m not attacking anyone personally.

Except I was calling the general concept dumb and pointless. You may share such notions, but in the end it is up to you to decide to take it personal or not.

You too. I hope I wasn’t a burden and I apologize for your misunderstanding. And no I am not being facetious (as I hope your not as well).

Reading condescension between texts is on you, not me. You can understand that right? (This is condescension)