across the health dimension

— पांच हजार सात सौ बहत्तर — I've got to say, I'm finding the search for a marriage counselor to be a bit overwhelming. Where are they located? Do they have a focus on LGBTQ+ people? Do they accept insurance? Are they even accepting new patients? I got a few recommendations indirectly through the Seattle Women's Chorus. I had hoped I could find someone through a recommendation, but none of these names were people who accepted insurance. At this therapy practice's website, they explicitly state: "Insurance coverage for mental health services can be limited and requires a mental health diagnosis." And yet, I called Aetna directly today and the woman there told me that for in-network providers they'll cover 100% with just a $20 copay. She even sent me a list of Seattle providers, although I did not find it particularly helpful, and am honestly not fully convinced she filtered her search properly. I kind of fear billing coming back to me later with something along the lines of "Actually we do not cover this specific type of service." Still, I have been able to find lists of in-network providers on the Aetna website, which even has a map you can use to zoom in and out of a preferred geographical area. In the end I still used this tool to send an email to a woman located in the Central District, on E Union between 27th Ave and MLK Way. I asked for clarification on insurance coverage. Among the many websites I have now browsed, I found one with a FAQ about payment with an FSA card. So, I checked this as well. I got excited when "Therapy, mental health" was listed as qualified, but then the fine print says: Therapy not required for a medical or mental purpose will typically not qualif, such as marriage or family counseling. Well, crap. And although I did ask the Aetna agent to clarify this, she said I would be covered with an in-network provider. But I suppose we'll see. When I searched "therapy" among the list of FSA eligible expenses, though, it also said massage therapy was covered—pretty much irrelevant to the conversation, but still something to note. I saw no similar qualifying fine print on that one. I wrote the above as a draft earlier this morning, and have since exchanged a couple of emails with the woman I found in the Central District. Apparently a first appointment will have to be telehealth, and I have to be put on a waiting list; it may be several weeks, though she said the more flexible we are with time availability then the earlier she is likely to make it happen. I went ahead and asked to be put on the list. I will continue looking in the meantime, but have a feeling I will encounter these sorts of delays with many, as therapists and counselors are generally in high demand. — पांच हजार सात सौ बहत्तर — — पांच हजार सात सौ बहत्तर — Last night was Action Movie Night at the Braeburn Condos theater, and it was back to a high-attendance night: 12 people, only 2 empty seats. There were Tony, Jake, Ryan, Ben, Chris B, Derek, Tom, Andrew, Greg, Daniel, Shobhit, and myself. Chris B is usually a reliable regular, and had he made it we would have been 13. But, he didn't make it this week. There was also an unusually large spread of food last night. We had only like two things to choose from last time, but last night we had the nachos Shobhit made (using sample seitan crumbles I brought home from work, which Shobhit smartly mixed with black beans); a mushroom pizza Ben brought; a bag of Cheetos; pistachio nuts brought by Tony; and the one thing Shobhit and I didn't touch, several bags of Dick's burgers brought by Jake, as he often does. Shobhit and I both ate way too much. Mostly our own nachos. I'm glad we decided against making a double batch; the nachos were surprisingly popular and still the one tray we brought down was only mostly consumed by the end of the evening. I made myslf a hot buttered rum, which was very tasy but I nursed it slowly enough that I wasn't even done with it by the time the movie was over. While we ate before the movie, Ben went out of his way to offer some more hot takes on movies, which he frequently does. His opinions are almost always wildly different from mine. "I saw Anora," he said. "I didn't like it. I thought it was garbage." He later acknowledged the excellent acting in it, but had a problem with how stupid he thought the characters were and how he'd never want to hang out with any of them. These would never be disqualifiers for a quality film for me. Also, I'm not sure he has the breadth of cinema knowledge to appreciate Anora specifically as a Sean Baker film, although admittedly that's not that fair a criticism given that it would also be the case for most of the movie's viewers. Nevertheless, among the actual Best Picture nominees, I'd have voted for Anora. Shobhit didn't hate Anora but could not see it as all that great. Shobhit has his own takes, that's for sure: he was legitmately most impressed with Emelia Pérez, and felt strongly that Karla Sofía Gascón should have won Best Actress—she's who he voted for in the SAG Awards—her history of racist tweets notwithstanding. I think in Shobhit's mind, the voting should be based on the performance and in a vacuum, with no consideration for outside influences, even the actor's own behavior. Even I would say her performance in that movie was excellent. I was delighted by Mikey Madison's upset win over the expected Demi Moore, though, and here is where trying to vote with no consideration for outside details becomes a detriment: Madison's performance was so incredible, it's easy to assume she is like that character in real life, but she could not be more different. Anyway. Shobhit, Ben and I did find one place of common ground in this conversation: Tom Cruise. We all acknowledge that he is nutso-cuckoo as a person, but he's an undeniable movie star and we simply can't help but eat up his blockbuster performances. Soon enough we filed into the theater for the movie. It was supposed to be Derek's choice last time, and it was because he was unprepared that Shobhit got to choose then. So now Derek actually did bring a movie, and it was The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension. What a bonkers movie, in a way that just stripped it of any meaning. Shobhit fell asleep, and I had to nudge him when he snored pretty loudly at one point. And then I also fell alseep, and snoozed through at least the last half hour. As it happens, this was the first movie ever watched when, twenty years ago, Gabriel and Stephanie and I did a series of "cult movie" watches. Buckaroo Banzai was the first one we watched, and it had been Stephanie's choice, apparently a favorite of hers. I had to look up when I first watched it: July 2004. I hadn't logged that on Letterboxed, and now I've logged it twice. I kind of hope now that I never see it again. It wasn't painful, exactly, just weird in ways that I found a bit annoying, it was so random and never really made any sense. It has a star studded cast of people before they were super famous, though: Peter Weller, John Lithgow, Ellen Barkin, Jeff Goldblum, Christopher Lloyd, Clancy Brown. I spent a lot of time tracking whether the move passed The Bechdel Test. It didn't seem to, not while I was awake, anyway. After the movie, Shobhit and I went back upstairs and watched another episode of Silo before I went to bed. — पांच हजार सात सौ बहत्तर — [posted 12:41pm]

positive adjustments

— पाँच हजार सात सौ इकहत्तर — Here are the latest updates at McQuilkin-Agarwal Manor. By last night, Shobhit was clearly in a different emotional space. He was much more placid, reserved, even docile. We walked up to Trader Joe's to get some produce for use on nachos we're going to bring to Action Movie Night tonight, and he glanced at all the clutter in the closet by the front door. "We have too much stuff," he said. "We need to start getting rid of stuff. If we're going to separate. I used to be able to move with just two suitcases of stuff." This was not said in an aggressive tone. It had a sort of resignation to it, but not in a way that I felt indicated anything definite. He's worried. I think this is maybe the third or second time ever, in the entire time we've been together, that he has actually taken a threat to our relationship seriously. I actually think this is a good thing, especially once we move forward with some professional help. As I said to him on Monday: we'll never know whether going to a counselor will help unless we try. We simply cannot go on not doing anything at all. Something he said while we were walking has really stuck with me. "You're the only one having a problem," he said. He kind of walked right into the point with that one. That's precisely the issue. Of course, this is just a way of subtly inferring that I'm the only one bearing any responsibility. Naturally he wants me to go on tolerating things that are intolerable, because that way it can feel like everything is okay. But everything is not okay. But it could be! I also stick on this idea that I'm trying to "change him" (this did not come up last night, for the record). Getting professional help doesn't change a person's fundamental being. It gives us the tools to be better versions of ourselves, ways to communicate in healthier ways. I want to gain skills of this sort for myself just as much as I want him to. I don't see why we can't simply decide to have faith that we can make this work. It absolutely will not work—not for me, anyway—if we continue going on without taking some decisive action. Even Shobhit's emotional turn as of yesterday, this is part of a well-worn pattern. I told him last night, we both have patterns we need to break. We clearly can't do it on our own. It doesn't make either of us worse as people. Everyone can benefit from therapy. And sure, maybe I'm wrong. Maybe this is delaying the inevitable. I've been wrong many times. But, faith is a powerful thing. We've proved people wrong many times in our relationship, just by making our own rules. It's time to make some new ones. Something has to change, and I think we can do it. Here's the flip side: Shobhit told me he had spoken to his friend Faith, the one we visited in Palm Springs for Thanksgiving in 2021 and in 2023, and who was the roommate he was subletting from when we first met in 2004. Apparently she said to him, "You guys are never going to separate." I did not take this as a criticism; I know Faith pretty well. I took it as her simply taking for granted that Shobhit and I will always be together. And you know what? That could also be right. We just need to do something new in order to make sure it is. I'm really glad Shobhit and Faith are still close friends. Of all the many friends I have to lean on in real times of emotional need, Faith is the only version of that Shobhit has. I want that for him. She asked him to go visit her, and he's thinking about it. I'd love to go visit her together, but now is not the best time for that. He found a cheap ticket on March 18. I think it could be a good idea. The last time I came even close to thinking about separation this seriously, Faith had a clearly biased version of events from Shobhit and obviously thought I was in the wrong. I disagree but I also don't care: even then I thought, Shobhit needs a friend who is unquestioningly on his side. Not that this needs to be a side with battles. We need to work together. Shobhit is resistant to professional help of this sort, but I'm at a point where I have no choice but to force his hand. And I also said to him last night, "Even if our relationship weren't in as much trouble as I feel it is, we can always benefit from learning ways to make healthier choices." He brought up the relationship workshop we once took, subtly suggesting that should have been good enough. Two key points there: that was a group scenario and we need focused attention. We also need something more intensive, something potentially transformative. That workshop, which was ages ago (fifteen years at least), was informative but I would not call it transformative, and certainly not intensive. Right now is not the right time to go for something that is not a challenge. I don't see an easy way through this. But I do see a way through it, and that is an important distinction. I already have multiple names of therapists to start looking into. — पाँच हजार सात सौ इकहत्तर — — पाँच हजार सात सौ इकहत्तर — Even before all that, I mentioned something to Shobhit right after I got home yesterday . . . about cats. I was thinking about Shobhit's refusal to travel if it means leaving any cat at home alone. There are actually solves for this. They mean spending some money, but that's where compromise comes in, I guess. There's Rover, which Laney has actually used before and where you can hire pet sitters—and you can choose a sitter who either stops by to check up on your pet, or who actually stays at your place while you're gone. The daily rates for these sitters really run the gamut, and $40 per night was on the low side of what I found. But they have user ratings which can be very helpful. There's also Trusted House Sitters, which comes with a membership cost but otherwise can be used to travel in exchange for looking after pets. This is where we could become a host home for other travelers, and in that scenario they would be staying rather than just stopping by for half an hour every day, which is clearly not good enough for Shobhit. It's totally good enough for me (and the average cat, actually), but as I said to Shobhit: this would be a compromise for both of us. I did start by stressing that I was not suggesting we get a new cat any time soon (I'm inclined right now to wait until after we go to D.C. at minimum, as that's likely to be the longest both of us are away from home all year), and was only throwing these out as ideas to think about. Again, it does involve extra costs, but I figure they are just costs that we can fold into any travel planning. I saw many reviews of Rover users noting how frequently the sitter texted photos of the pets, which I'm sure Shobhit would find very reassuring. In any case, this is one issue where I am willing to move. We both have to move a little, though. That's the actual definition of compromise. Shobhit has spent a lot of time trying to insist he's the only one of us who ever compromises, which is patently untrue—and this would be one of countless things that a professional could help us communicate more effectively about. Which is to say: just because I am willing to concede on some things, like this, does not mean we don't still need to take a kind of action on our relationship that we have never taken before. Kind of desperately, in my view. Again, though: I have faith that it can work for us. It's simply going to require that we both make an effort. — पाँच हजार सात सौ इकहत्तर — Beyond all that, all we did last night was have veggie burgers for dinner again—I have a ton of samples to burn through, which we took home from the office over the weekend—and then watch four, I think it was, episodes of season 2 of Silo on Apple TV+. I'm really into it. Things pick up on the social front as of tonight, when we have our Action Movie Night, which I already mentioned. That'll get Shobhit's Winter Social Review points up to 29, compared to Laney's 23. Although Laney will be up to 25 by the end of the weekend. At that point, though, Shobhit will also be up further, to at minimum 31 and maybe 32. By the 21s, which is when this Social Revie date range ends, Laney should be at 30 at the highest. Shobhit should rest easy that he's now comfortably a lock for the #1 position, as he'll be at 32 or maybe even 33. — पाँच हजार सात सौ इकहत्तर — [posted 1:04pm]