First conversation with M in a few days; first lengthy conversation with M in at least a week; first conversation where we covered more than what might have happened to us in the intervening days in who knows how long. (Probably not as long as I think.) Or, at least, the first conversation including such where I didn't feel like I was dragging him along...the entire time. Progress, if I'm willing to apply that concept.

I don't want to complain here about how difficult it is to engage him in enjoyable intellectual dialogue--something other than me blabbing on, or feeling like I'm doing so, and him throwing in the occasional "yeah" and "really?" while I make some conclusion. I don't want to complain here about how thoroughly strange and geeky (in a bad sense) I feel when I find certain questions or explorations interesting and he, and most people for that matter, would rather discuss Adult Swim. (I love Adult Swim. But we don't deal with its social ramifications or anything.) I really want to ask: do you routinely find that conversations with your significant other, especially when s/he's far away, leave you wondering whether anyone will ever really understand and feel understood by anyone else? And is this only the emptiness of saying goodbye to that person for the immediate future, or is it an illustration of our more fundamental inability to connect, to break from our isolation?

We all know people, especially people who profess to know each other well, don't "run out of things to talk about." You just get lazy about thinking of new ones, or allowing the conversation to take unexpected or unfamiliar turns. Perhaps there are certain topics you avoid through mutual agreement, because you always disagree. Regardless, there will always be something else to think critically about. But I just can't find people who find critical thinking--an aggressive, aware, exploratory approach to any given topic--entertaining. Sure they bring these skills to certain types of information. But no one I spend a lot of time with uses it as a broad-based conceptual tool. And sadly enough, based on my experiences here and elsewhere, I suspect even those people I hold up as models of sharp observational thinking--who are enviably great conversationalists--probably disintegrate into undifferentiated hum's and haw's when on the phone with the one person they feel comfortable being boring around.

I don't know about you, but I think that's bullshit. Aren't we supposed to be at our best with our loved ones? Aren't they supposed to make us feel the most at home and the happiest, and so allow us the most space to be the best of ourselves? And doesn't "the best of ourselves" include our brightest thoughts and our most directed energies--at least if we only get two-four hours a week of interaction? I want that from M, and I want to foster that for him. I went on a long rant today on the phone about unconditional attachment--okay, I used the word "love"--to point out that he's not an asshole for not noticing my dissatisfaction with our conversations; he's simply not used to being held to this standard. I might be contradicting myself to say that I want more from him while trying (for my own sake) to love him unconditionally, but I don't think so. I tried to make it clear that he has space to relax and be "off" around me; I won't love him less if he can't think of anything to say; but that I save up my energy and very limited time in order to be "on" around him. That's what I want out of myself. And I'd prefer that from him too, but--of course--only if I know he believes in it. If he's doing it to make me happy, he's not really doing it at all.

I think I got all that out. I fucking hope so.

Is this a classically emotion-driven, "feminine" perspective? Have any of my male readers (I know you're all male) laughed out loud or just shaken their heads in bemusement? Am I missing a major hypocrisy or two in my own thoughts? I'd love to know.

Really.