>>3002067>>30028321. If she doesn't view lewd thoughts in the privacy of her own home as shameful, then she's merely masquerading as prude due to the public and your defense of her being one falls through. Lewd thoughts are lewd thoughts and she does have sexual ones, so in that way your defense of "her interpretation" of what is sexual goes out the window too, since those would be included, the sexual ones would always be sexual, yet she has a different reaction in public vs. private. Meaning she is objectively shameless about having them; if you get to dip back into objectivity then so do I but your defense falls through none the less.
2. If she does view lewd thoughts in the privacy of her own home as shameful, then she views the thoughts themselves as shameful and regardless of whether she feels shameful or not for having them, she would consider herself shameless for having shameful thoughts. i.e. You are correct on her being a prude but by her own interpretation she would consider herself shameless.
>2. She's a prude in an objective sense because she's easily shocked by things she considers sexual, for example when Kyousuke says things she interprets sexuallyThis is irrelevant because of above. If you're going to defend based on her interpretation and consider anyone else's null and void then you cannot inject your own interpretation nor objectivity into it as it invalidates your own defense. Further, a classical prude would not support incest and in general one would not have lewd thoughts at all.
>I'm assuming shamelessness to entail a conscious rejection of values in the sense of "I know this is wrong but I don't care" And what is incest? What is a threesome? She herself would even consider lewdness in general to be wrong. That's her interpretation after all.
