Let's suppose that intuitions are something halfway between, or a robust melding of, Kantian awareness/representation of particulars and then the "rational hunches" of more modern discourse. Let's assume that seeing a red sky "intuitively supports" judgments like, "The sky is red here and now," or, "I am experiencing a red sky."
Now, when there is talk of something being unintuitive, is this always the same as if to say that it's counterintuitive, or is there an epistemic difference between non- and anti-intuitive states/information? Like the phenomenal conservative might be more amenable to the one rather than the other, for example; or (it might be supposed) it is generally easier to justify non-intuitively justifiable claims than outright counterintuitive ones.