what had happened was . . .

so i've chosen a slightly humorous title (those familiar with the usage of this phrase will get more of a chuckle obviously than those who are not) for today's blog entry because it's likely to be the only aspect of today's writing that will be even remotely funny. as i shared yesterday, today's entry is going to be an examination of the factors that led to this third and (absolutely) final break-up with michael (i'm still cringing every time i acknowledge that fact. maybe some behavior modification will change that. do they still do electro-shock therapy? ok, maybe the title won't be my only attempt at humor. back to the post-mortem on my relationship).

i would have to say the lead up to the end really started this summer. after several months of michael expressing his dissatisfaction with the long distance relationship (i need to stop and point out here that one of the conditions of our getting back together was that he had an understanding that the situation wasn't going to change for a minimum of five to seven years, so of course, within about two months of our getting back together, he was complaining about it. end of aside), michael shares with me that he is thinking about resigning from his position at the university. now, this news comes as a bit of a surprise to me as, even though he's not been happy in his job for pretty much the entire twelve years i've known him, he has consistently stated that he doesn't see how he is fit to do anything else, believing he would be consigned forever to the work category of mcdonald's team member or wal-mart greeter should he leave (at the time, i believed (note the tense) differently. more on this later).

we discussed the pros and cons with my being supportive of the idea of his leaving and moving to denver to be with me, yet, knowing what we will refer to as michael's "impulsive nature," i cautioned that he should likely go back to work for the fall semester (he had been on sabbatical) and see how he felt at that time. if he still wanted to resign, he could do so with an effective date at the end of the following semester, and we would then make arrangements for his moving out here. that was the plan.

so what happened? well, of course, two days later he called me saying that he had just spoken with the department chair and had made plans for resigning his position effective at the end of the fall semester (when i questioned him about the change in the plan, his reaction was "what? you said you were supportive of the idea. michael had somehow missed the part preceding the yet in the first sentence of the previous paragraph. either that or the hallucinogenics that i've never taken and am in sore need of now kicked in. ok, for those keeping score at home, that's the third humor attempt).

now, the resignation was contingent on certain conditions -- one of which was that he would be granted an "emeritus" status that would essentially give him certain privileges, e.g., the ability to teach a course every so often. i viewed it as a nice way that he could leave but still feel connected and that his hard work to gain tenure was not for naught. little did i know at the time how significant this "nice way" really was.

so michael and tillie came to denver in august for about a month long. it was nice to see them and be reunited as a family for an extended period. a few days into the visit, michael got an email stating that according to the provost's office, he wouldn't be eligible for emeritus status as that designation was only conferred on retiring faculty. since he was resigning rather than retiring (early retirement is age 55), it wasn't going to happen. this rapidly sent michael into a depressed state. it did not help that the entire time from resignation to the summer visit in denver, he had continued to express doubts about his ability to find gainful, meaningful employment.

after several conversations over the course of his visit, it became obvious that michael was not ready to leave his position and that the best course of action would be to see if he could rescind his resignation we would then revisit whether he wanted to stay in the job on a year by year basis. this time things went according to my understanding of the plan. the department chair accepted the rescission and michael was again a full associate professor with all the rights and privileges granted there unto. problem solved.

wrong. i've come to realize that this event was the breaking point for my relationship with michael. you see, the long distance relationship was beginning to wear at me both physically and emotionally. the many nights alone here, the many trips back and forth, which i bore the greater share of (michael has only made two trips to denver whereas i was travelling to st. louis on average about twice a month). ultimately, what was truly sustaining the relationship was my willingness to continue to live according to that pattern, my ability to endure the separation, and my belief that michael might be able to leave the university, move here, and move on to something else. over the months that followed, the spirit of willingness dissipated.

i was exhausted (burnt-out really) from the pressures of the travel (combined with the intensity of my job it became too much). i started to hate being alone (which, in all honesty, started to be a condition i felt whether i was apart from or with michael), and i lost all faith that michael would be able to do anything but the job in which he was currently employed. the cumulative effects of these factors sent me spiraling into a deep depression of my own. it was about that time that i started blogging again. and from there it became increasingly clear that this relationship was not going to work.

there were other issues that i'm not going to into, but i think the pivotal point came when i asked myself the question, "is michael the guy, is this the relationship that is worth living in this way?" and as sweet and kind as michael may be, the answer was clearly "no." truth be told i am in a place now that i'm questioning why i ever went back across that bridge in 2010. while good at times, my relationship with michael has always been pretty dysfunctional. i was done and had closure when we broke up in 2008. yes, i have explanations about how and why each reconciliation happened but they really, really, really shouldn't have. so i'm now hoping that bridge is not only burned but incinerated to a point that there is not even a remotely discernible trace of a way back. i'm sure michael feels the same way.

and now it's time for some music. i promised yesterday two more songs from mr. luther vandross. yesterday's songs were about emotions with respect to love. some i experienced to a certain degree with michael. many i desired but never quite reached. today's songs fit the circumstances of our relationship like the proverbial glove.

the ending of a relationship is hard. there's no way around it. and i keep learning every day new ways that i'm hurting and discovering anew the degree to which my heart is shattered. but as the last song makes clear, such endings are often necessary. may god help us both to find our way from here.

a house is not a home - luther vandross

how many times can we say goodbye - luther vandross and dionne warwick