You... You what? You're a buffoon if you don't realise tertiary Se isn't as mature as primary Se. This is a description of the void left by immatured Se, because of the giant fucking pull of Ni. Of course it well smell like the primary function in the pair, you fool.
You're not sorry at all and you have no right to negatively detype her. Even if you have no idea who the hell she is. What the fuck are you, an INTJ?
Now I have that bile of my system from your sheer disrespect and idiotic judgement out of my system... if you are willing to discuss your statements I will reply as logically as possible. Hell, with your cocksure attitude I don't even know if it's possible. But I'll give you that doubt.
ahem
Internalisation of environment. Well, that's how a function pair works. Se takes in information and hands it to Ni. Of course it gets internalised, it would be silly to leave it all external. Does a Se not think about their environment and not dress appropriately for the weather? Of course not. They internalise, process and adapt their external sensory information. You are a fool to suggest it shouldn't happen that way. We just don't do it as often as they do.
Turning it off and on. So she definitely said it goes off, she definitely is "missing the environment". Well, she did say she couldn't catch and I think that's the most literal meaning of miss there is. The whole point is that we can't do it all the time and we don't always have it consciously available. But also whole point of a conjugate pair of functions is that the immature end of the pair fills in for the weaknesses and inabilities of the primary end. Sometimes we do switch on Se. We can use Se, just not all the time and not well. To say otherwise misses the whole point of tertiary/inferior or otherwise immature functions.
Go and read up on functional stack theory because if there's one thing that contradicts it, it's your post. You're the antithesis of knowledge: all I found was ignorant and pointless misunderstanding of the immature function concept. And then you had the pathetic idea to retype her out? Well you don't get to argue what someone else's type is in the first place. You suggest and see if it fits. Statistical testing isn't the be all end all. Such a disgusting conceptualisation of the theory makes me sickened with what has become with the MBTI, and if there's anyone who's misunderstood it is certainly you. Without doubt.
Now out with it. Either reply explaining how you are able to be so certain about your interpretation of tertiary functions, or exit. I dare you, just try and troll me more. It will not end well for you.