And I said what about Breakfast at Tiffany...

It seems like lately, every time Nick and I have to make a together-y decision, we have vastly different ideas.

It could be something as small as breakfast or as large as forever. Lately, we disagree. We had a huge disagreement about smoothies the other day. Smoothies. Wtf?

We are people who want to be together, who really like doing things together. But recently our ability to agree has taken a vacation.

On a lot of things, I'm fairly easygoing. I don't tend to care which restaurant we choose for dinner. Or what music we listen to. Often, if you have a really strong preference on something, I'll be fine with it.

And this leads people to think that I don't have extreme opinions on things. Because until you've seen me really want or really not want to do something, you have no idea how stubborn I can be. People are often shocked.

Most of the time, I'm happy to go along. If asked, I could voice a preference, but it's often not an strong one. But when there's something I really want to do, I'm not going to try to convince or cajole you into doing it with me. If it's not your thing, I'll do it without you.

I see no reason to drag or guilt someone into going to an exhibit or event that doesn't interest them. Or going somewhere they don't particularly want to. I am perfectly happy to go on my own or with friends.

But it turns out that when you're getting married, there are a lot of together-y decisions to be made. Like, for example, everything. Including the honeymoon. Which you are not going to do on your own.

My beloved, it turns out, would be more than happy to spend the two weeks on the Chesapeake, relaxing and poking around small towns. As you may imagine, the idea of getting a couple hours away from home for two weeks excites me about as much as counting the same 25 green marbles over and over and over.

Nick hasn't taken two weeks off in almost a decade. Two weeks is wild extravagance. And I know for dead certain it won't happen again any time soon. Not only because he works all the time, but because our best case scenario entails getting knocked up as fast as possible post-wedding and buying a house. Which means money, time, and energy-wise, we will not be able to go anywhere for years.

And so my goal for the honeymoon is to get as far away and go somewhere as exotic as possible. Considering where I grew up, going to Angkor Wat is not crazy.

But most people think I'm nuts.

The woman I work for now laughed out loud when she asked where I wanted to go, and I said, "Cambodia!"

Laughed. Out. Loud.

And then said, "For me, diarrhea would be one of the top things I'd want to avoid on my honeymoon."

Um. Awkward.

But even without bodily function issues to consider, I do realize it's 17 gazillion hours and many time zones away. And that kind of travel is not necessarily relaxing.

But I also have this fear that this trip is it.

It's sort of like wanting to have one last fling, albeit with exotic adventure rather than some hot naked man. Because I have this fear, realistic or not, that after this I am locked into a completely prosaic, baby-diaper and what-should-we-have-for-dinner, sweetie? existence. Our big trips? Will be to Costco.

And it's not that Nick doesn't want to check out Cambodia. He'd like to go somewhere I've never been - which eliminates a lot of places. But it's really far. And we only have two weeks. And he doesn't have a the huge need I do for the exotic. We might want to make a more reasonable choice.

So there's the idea of compromise. We should find middle ground.

My geography sucks, but middle ground between Cambodia and the eastern shore of Maryland? Would be somewhere in Africa, like Chad or the Sudan.

Which is of course exactly where neither of us want to wind up on vacation. I am being literal, but you know what I mean.

Nick has suggested that we each make a top three list and see where that gets us. And if there's no overlap?

Then we just hope Chad is nice in October?