can't touch this

nothing insightful to read here! almost everything below is fairly obvious.

so, clearly, there are awful hugs and awful kisses and there are wonderful hugs and wonderful kisses. the difference between the yum and yuk isn't always straightforward, though... aside from cracking ribs and epileptic tongues - those are unambiguously bad signs.

earth-shattering proposition: the "who" matters infinitely more than the "what" because context really is key. and that goes for friendship as well as morethanfriendship.

i was reflecting on my affection history and expected it to be confusing, but the over-riding theme is a huge disconnect between mutual touchyness and mutual emotional engagement. (and that has cut both ways: sometimes way too much touching and sometimes surprisingly little.)

it's also appears that i think hugs end fights. that is, i think they're legitimate stand-ins for apologizing/extending forgiveness/promising never to criticize the way you do dishes again/what have you. oh, and i am really, really wrong about that.

but - k, don't laugh! - part of me really believes that words are easier to misinterpret or overanalyze. meanwhile, it's hard to parse a hug: it just means good things. yeah, i'm naive.

a more-than-a-friend-with-enormous-complications once predicted that i'd get married for the conversation.
a) this is a load of crap and always has been.
b) i posited a while ago that maybe the point of life is to notice the implicit false dichotomies all around us and intentionally reject them. i guess what i'm saying is... surely we don't have to settle for either words OR actions. we can have a healthy dose of each.