PUTTING UP WITH DAVID EISENSTEIN

David, a significant point, I feel, in the life of our friendship, is that there are times you have trouble putting up with me.  Putting up with things I say, things I do, or ways I say things.

My impression, David, is that those times of exasperation (small or large) are actually rather quite frequent.

But maybe I am wrong.

But if I am right, then I imagine something like this goes on within you rather frequently when dealing with me.

I say something silly, stupid, or another Eisenstein pun.

You roll your eyes one way or another.

The End.

BUT--

David Ackerman's rolling his eyes seems important somehow.  Why?

Because of the further intuitions (or maybe, rather, assumptions) I have about what's going on with David Ackerman when he rolls his eyes at David Eisenstein.

And it is basically, as I said above, exasperation.  A feel of, "Oh no!  I am having to put up yet again with this XYZ behavior of David Eisenstein's that makes me feel so _________.  Ugh!  *rolls eyes*"

Exasperation + putting up with the item that exasperates + a roll of the eyes = David Ackerman's coping mechanism.

No?

Assuming I am still on track, then further:
Your "ugh."

When you "ugh" (or roll your eyes), sometimes I interpret that event happening within you as a demonstration of just, perhaps, how superior you feel you are to me.  For you wouldn't feel exasperated at the things I say, the things I do, or the way I say things (such as punning) if they were truly acceptible behaviors in your book.

But, alas, they are not acceptible.  And, basically, I fear they may never be acceptible behaviors of David Eisenstein, so David Eisenstein doing "X" now and David Eisenstein doing "X" 20 years from now will result in essentially the same eye roll.

Why all this focus on a damned eye roll though??

Because.  At least half of the time you do an eye roll (of which I am aware), I don't feel very good about it.  Because those times, I tend to interpret David Ackerman's eye-roll as his demonstrating, in part, some of his condescension towards me.  

That is, you're better than me.  You know it.  I know it.  We all know it.  And, being better than your friend David Eisenstein gives you the right, over and over and over, to experience behavior "X" from Eisenstein, and grow frustrated, expasperated, or so with whatever behavior "X" is.

The key to me is this:  Does any of this forever-eye-rolling connote acceptance of David Eisenstein as an equal?  Does any of this connote that Ackerman will *ever* feel comfortable with some of Eisenstein's behaviors, words, or punning proclivities?

NO.

It doesn't.

So this leads me to a "therefore."

Therefore, David, I believe we do not have a true friendship.  Because there always has been and always will be quirks about me that you will never find acceptible, therefore will never accept, because they will elicit the dreaded eye-roll.  Which you can't control, really.  These things are a natural reaction you have in you to whatever behaviors "X" are.

David, I cannot accept anymore your (implied) lack of acceptance of all parts of me.  Or at least most.  For most people, puns elicit groans of pain or even grunts of admiration for the word-play.
But never for David Ackerman.  Never has.  Never will.  For David Ackerman, puns ARE pain.  I get it.

I must conclude therefore, I am on the whole unacceptible to you.  And not only because of my behaviors as of late to throw tantrums at relatively small provocations.  That's merely the icing on the cake, which proves, by the way, your inevitable superiority.

So, David.  I think this email is to say, "siyonara," (if I spelled it right).

Because I cannot accept nor abide your rejections and derision anymore.

Bye.