Publically drawing a line in the sand or pointing at something important and refusing to go into more detail is valid.

As I'm trying to articulate the principle it's settling down on something simple as, "people don't owe you their internal information." But why?

The main reason for not revealing information including internal information is self-protective in that curiosity can be malevolent.

Hiding, camouflage, and counter-surveillance defend against the interested information gathering that precedes a planned attack.

However, interest can be positive and strong relationships cannot form without it.

In intimate trusting relationships, interest is used in the service of care.

There's tension in the relative openness in our Twitter neighborhood contrast against the open war that accounts for much of the Twitter Experience.

We want to find and relate to people on one hand and not be destroyed on the other.

The other reason to not reveal internal information is to defend something sacred, unspeakable, or intimate.

This can be both innately reactively protective and ethically or morally driven.

Powerful topics around this:

Chastity, shame, intimacy, vulnerability, modesty. Temples as protected & sacred space. Sex. Sexuality. The connection between sexuality and divinity. Yab/yum. Ecstatic states. Orgasm. "Feeling the spirit." Nowness, presentness, mindfulness.

Also, there's a sense in which words reinforce suffering.

Objectification through using language tends toward loss of intimacy with the present, connection to subjective context, and nebulosity & ineffability.

Making an Inquiry isn't neutral. Questioning is a net positive for society but that doesn't mean it's welcome or appropriate in all contexts.

This is pretty compact and a bit disjoint but interesting I hope!