>>28891143As far as I am aware, no context for the purposes of the meeting was given. If it was a random man it would seem more suspicious I believe. It is impossible to say whether she was hoping to utilize this connection in her career, or any other such potentialities. Given nonsignificant evidence of betrayal and an attempt at making up for the mistake by cutting off all further contact, I do not believe the transgression justifies exclusion at this time. However, it is always up to the individual to decide what fits him best after gaining the insight required.
>>28890587Could you please provide a source for this? I was not aware. The closest I had heard from her was something along the lines of saying that her playing with men doesn't mean they are her boyfriend, and even that in the context of a hypothetical.
