The retort that disagrees with my original essay is missing the point entirely. Even if different people have different levels of cleanliness that they find comfortable, that does not mean everyone should be immune from judgment. There is a limit to untidiness beyond which is considered unacceptable no matter your personal preference. For example, dried urine on the bathroom floor and a three-day-old bowl of beans calcifying on a desk are not personal preferences, they are objectively disgusting.
If I had said everyone should have the same standard of cleanliness, then maybe it would be cause for concern. But that's not what I said. Instead, I highlighted the outsized reaction to minor messes that don't pose any real health risk. If someone's couch pillows are slightly askew, do they really need to make a big show of apologizing in advance? Does that really deserve a swift judgement? I don't think so. It's a ridiculous standard that serves only to create unnecessary anxiety.
The fact that I once had an acid-induced epiphany in my mess of an apartment and saw it the same way as "respectable members of society" only goes to show how absurd these standards can be when taken to the extreme.
The retort also implies that tidiness is a source of pride for some people. Well sure, maybe for some it is, but for others it's just one of those things you do out of obligation. That's why I'm giving everyone permission to let things slide once in a while and not perpetually evaluate their homes according to some gold standard of cleanliness. UrRong if you think everyone has to strive for neatness 24/7 - you should try breathing out of your nose for once and just let it go!