it does worry me

that michaela felt the need to call my cell after i'd messaged her about spy guy, to make sure that i wasn't falling in love with him.

the irony is that i'm incapable of falling in love. not these days.
but i guess i do get attached to things and people.

and it would not be good for me to be more attached to spy guy than i already am.

friendships last longer if they don't burn so fast

that was what spy guy told me tonight. we went to a gallery, had dinner in our neighbourhood, then walked home. as his place was closer to the restaurant than mine, technically i walked him home. he kissed me, i kissed him back more passionately than he intended i'm sure, and that was that.

it sucks that he has more self control, or that he doesn't find me irresistible. i know he finds me attractive. but aren't guys meant to think with the waist down part of their anatomy and not the top part?

someone who was browsing random blogs once said that spy guy was only interested to scratch an itch. guess that was a valid point. and one that makes me feel not very good.

i think we have chemistry. not smoldering chemistry, but enough that it's noticeable. but maybe it's just me. that i'm such a romantic that i read more - even into sexual chemistry - than i should into things. but the thing between chemistry and love is that chemistry is purely sexual, so it has nothing to do with the romantic wanting to read into things.

i have no clue.

all i know is i can still feel how soft and warm and delicious his lips were. and i hate the fact that i want more and he doesn't.

where were we before viber?

michaela vibered me tonight as she lay in bed slightly worse for wear after a night of champagne and vodka with her gay bff.

her long-distance-boyfriend is going to visit her at the end of the month. he's a nice mid-western boy whom she has great sex with and can't get out of her mind. she can't seem to get him out of her mind too. so an ocean or two is standing in the way, but at least there's feeling there. i hope it works out for her. michaela is gorgeous, smart, sexy and cooks very well. he's lucky to know her.

relationships can be so complicated. and yet they don't have to be. for friends who are confident in themselves and the love of their spouses, everything is straightforward. likewise, for the simple folk with no ambition, relationships are also very straightforward.

at the other end of the spectrum, for friends who embrace the superficial, everything is also straightforward provided he is rich and she is pretty enough and everyone is in the right set.

for those of us in the middle, it becomes complicated. or maybe we make it complicated.

do michaela and mid-western boy love each other because they don't live in the same city and thus can be the ideal partner in each other's minds? if you don't live in the same city, you never have to put up with the mundane. take cassandra and her boyfriend. he packs them a gourmet picnic lunch complete with chilled champagne and hot chocolate in a thermos for a road trip they had planned when she last popped across the channel to see him. i can't think of the last time some guy did that for me.

do i desire spy guy because of his physique and his mind, and the way he makes me feel in bed? does he desire me because i'm young and expressive and totally different (read: american) to all the women he's known? and flattering his ego as i desire and am unquestionably attracted to him?

in the days before viber, michaela and i would spend a small fortune dissecting these theories. thanks to the wonder of vopt, we can microanalyze each word and each gesture, only to end up no wiser than we were three hours ago.

at least her man is coming to visit, and i managed not to message spy guy - which would be very bad manners considering my boyfriend is now asleep next to me.

spy guy has been traveling a bit. and since he's back we've hung out maybe once a week.

we went for ethnic food in the east one night which became a pseudo celebration of his one year anniversary in london. i was leaving work when i received a text asking if i'd eaten. i hadn't. so we took the subway across town, waited, ate and talked. though there were some awkward silences which i attribute to the bright lights of the joint we're in. soft lighting somehow makes conversation easier. but then again i had dinner with a good friend tonight, albeit one i hadn't seen in a month and whom i never had romantic feelings for, and we chatted easily and effortlessly. maybe that's the trick. if you don't like them sexually and you have a lot in common, you just get along. so spy guy and i crossed town on the subway back, where he was nearly falling asleep, walked home - technically i walked him home as my place is further from the subway stop than his and that was that.

then we went for burgers and a cocktail last week before i went to a friend's gig in the middle of the night. i'd invited him to join us and he'd texted me on friday evening suggesting dinner as he would not be able to make the club due to exhaustion from a heavy work week. though there was quite a bit of flirtatious texting which started from an overt comment by me which culminated in him inviting me over. like all strong women, i chose my friends and didn't.

so all this wasn't resolved until last night, as i was away for the weekend and we didn't catch up during the week more on account of his schedule than mine. and it's really quite pathetic as i had asked what he was doing three nights in a row. sure, i said no to him last weekend, but for me to ask 3 nights in a row if he was free, that's pathetic, no? or maybe i'm just distracted by good sex and not thinking with my brain.

the thing is, the fact that he walked me home, made me feel great in bed and held me for the twenty minutes as we tried to sleep for an hour before he had to get up to catch a plane seemed completely worth it in the moment.

in the cold light of day the company and hot sex and being held after is still wonderful, but it doesn't take away the needy air from my text messages. what must he think? i have no life and thus keep contacting him?

the cold hard truth

i just noticed that another blogger made a comment to an earlier post i made, where i was musing over spy guy's initial interest in me.

i'm sure the commenter is a guy and of course here is truth behind his comment: that spy guy seemed interested because he had an itch he wanted scratching that night.

part of me is angry that someone who doesn't know me, who's only read what i've typed and ranted, thinks that it wasn't my charm, my looks, my conversation that dazzled spy guy and intrigued him. that perhaps this all started because he was missing his wife, his girlfriends were busy, he was stuck in london for a few days and thus i was the perfect distraction of the moment.

i'm sure there's an element of truth in that.

but i'd like to think that there's more to it than that. that the human condition is complicated and you can appreciate more than one woman or one man simultaneously. and if you fall in love, and choose to love that person, that's when you don't give in to temptation.

but at other times, all bets are off.