I'd say you're actually anti-pedagogical about it, which is to say you approach the issue the way I would if I were specifically trying to raise people's hackles into not agreeing with me.
I'm just opinionated.

I'm not very interested in discussing my beliefs concerning cinema. I state them and expect people to either agree or disagree. This changes when it comes to individual films - I'm willing to change my mind on those much more fervently. But my actual beliefs about the purity of film watching are unshakeable.
How much can someone appreciate a film about love if they've never been in love? Or a film about grief if they've never lost someone?
Funny you mention this because I wish I never loved anybody and never lost anybody. This would make my appreciation of such films much purer, impartial, and impersonal. I think we're prone to overrate films that seem personal to us, that talk about things dear to us. A true cinephile (yes, again) would (ideally) never let themselves be influenced or swayed by that. A true cinephile would only take into account the purest cinematic. Of course, such a pure cinephile doesn't exist, so making this a requirement is too extreme even for me. Unfortunately, I just cannot pretend I haven't experienced life at this point, that I haven't loved, that I haven't felt grief, or even both at the same time: "Grief is love that has nowhere to go" to continue using quotes. I think it's easy for a film to make you cry if it talks about contemporary times and a romantic relationship similar to yours. It's impressive if a film makes you cry even though what is shown on the screen is not relatable to you.
Maybe. But I get suspicious when the thing someone thinks is most persuasive happens to be the easier thing. The thing that requires no empathy, or allows them to talk themselves up the most, or just generally requires the least of them.
I don't think my way is the most persuasive, but I think a little bit of gatekeeping is good from time to time.
Because it should be abundantly clear by now that the un-minced words sow pointless discord and hamstring the (ostensible?) goal of helping other people experience and appreciate the things you love.
My approach is if they're to love it, they will. If they're to not love it, they won't. All I have to do is put something in front of their eyes. If they're worthy, this should be enough.
If you ask why you don't watch more Asian cinema relative to other cinema, there's no reason not to also ask why you don't read more books instead of watching so many films.
Because I'm a cinephile, not a book lover. As to why I'm not a book lover, the answer is... I'm a cinephile. Technically, I COULD be both but I'd have to experience less of both worlds and therefore make my passion for film less intense. Maybe that'd be better for me all around, I'm not saying it wouldn't... But my original point was that I'm a cinephile, so I can watch films of a great variety, just like I could read books of a great variety if I was a bibliophile.
This is exactly the kind of kinder, more nuanced sentiment that probably would've helped the first reply land better, if it had been included.

See, I'm not as bad as I look.