Melissa Trible
report this user
Jun 10, 2014 Melissa Trible commented on Savage Love.
@41: actually....
look here;…

In particular, look here:…

In case the links aren't working properly, one example: the bits in Leviticus could be interpreted as "Condemns all same-sex sexual behavior." or "Condemns gay ritual sex in a Pagan temple and/or males having sex in a woman's bed."
Mar 14, 2014 Melissa Trible commented on Savage Love.
A few things that I think may be going on with the facials=degrading idea.

1. Implied prior act. Coming in or near one's genitals or butt implies an act that was, at least potentially, equally pleasurable for both parties lead to said coming. A "facial" implies either oral sex (which has something of a similar vibe of "I am doing this only to please you", often "degradingly" so, consider how the term c**ksucker is used) or the come-er simply masturbating on the come-ee.

2. Passive vs active. Coming in an orifice implies that the person being come in had something to do with the orgasm. Coming on someone's face can involve no action on their part whatsoever.

3. Face vs body. Your face is "you" in a way your body isn't. Consider the implications of someone slapping you in the face vs punching you in the gut. So targeting the face for something at least somewhat distasteful (a sticky mess) is more of an "insult" than doing the same elsewhere on the body.

4. Intentional vs incidental. There's only 2 places I can think of where men typically intentionally aim their semen, rather than just happening to be pointed in that direction when they come. The face, and a woman's breasts. Something is more likely to be "degrading" if there is actual, specific intent behind it (eg ignoring someone that you obviously see vs ignoring someone you didn't notice)
Feb 10, 2014 Melissa Trible commented on Savage Love.
Just wanted to say a small thing in favor of using a coin toss to decide something, even something important.

If you use it *right*, it can be a non-trivial way to decide something. But using it right basically means using it to make yourself make a decision instead of waffling about it. If you flip a coin, and feel that the coin flip gave you the "wrong" answer, then... it probably did. If you feel it gave you the "right" answer, then... it probably did. If you truly don't have an opinion either way, then the coin makes the decision for you.

But, using it to decide whether or not to marry is.. probably, at the very least, something you should not tell your partner.
Sep 7, 2013 Melissa Trible commented on Savage Love.
@332: that's exactly the point I was going to make. There's a huge difference between using violence or threat of violence to keep someone from doing something *to you*, and using violence or threat of violence to make someone do something, or not do something that doesn't directly involve your own person.

You can use the "would you do it to a stranger" metric as a litmus test. If you said to a stranger "touch my body again and I will stab you", you would be viewed as someone who was tough and in charge. If you said to a stranger "do my laundry or I will stab you", you would rightly and justifiably be viewed as a dangerous psycho.
Jul 29, 2013 Melissa Trible commented on Savage Love.
#79: differences in sexual interest doesn't necessarily mean differences in total overall sex drive, it's also that for various reasons women are more likely to be sexually interested in a long-term partner than a casual one. Different patterns, even with similar levels.
Jul 25, 2013 Melissa Trible commented on Savage Love.
@23: I think it's not so much a matter of men having greater sex drives than women as men having different *patterns* of sexual interest than women.

As far as I know, men are *far* more likely than women to be interested in casual sex. Whether it's because of inherent differences in sexual interest, or the inhibiting effect of the greater risks women face from casual sex (greater chance of catching STDs, the possibility of pregnancy, and a greater risk that a casual partner could turn violent or whatever), women are just less likely to be willing to boink some random person than the reverse.

But, once *in* a relationship, with... some exceptions, women tend to have sex drives equal to or greater than those of men, afaik.

Though I think it may be kind of the reverse of the diversity issue betwixt men and women on things like intelligence.

For whatever reason, men tend to have a much wider bell curve on a lot of things than women do. There are more freakishly smart men than freakishly smart women--but there are also more really stupid men than really stupid women. I think there are similarly widened bell curves for things like height, though I could be wrong. I know there is a much wider bell curve for size of genitals.

But, on sexual interest, it's men who tend to be in a relatively narrow range and women who tend to be all over the map. Not only are women usually more individually flexible (I suspect there are more genuinely bi women than genuinely bi men, and almost certainly a lot more "heteroflexible" women), but I think there may be a somewhat wider range of overall level of sex drive (both more women entirely disinterested in sex, and more women who have through-the-roof sex drives) in women than in men.

But, I could be talking out of my, er, hat here.
Jul 16, 2013 Melissa Trible commented on Savage Love.
@103: one thing people seem to be missing... it may be the "porn" part more than the "gay" part.

I can... definitely see reservations about knowing that total strangers are, even now, spanking the monkey to images of one's beloved. Kind of a modified version of worrying about the number or identity of someone's exes.
Jul 8, 2013 Melissa Trible commented on Savage Love.
Personally, I use Native American rather than Indian to, well, avoid *confusion*. Because I know people who are Indian, as in from India...
Jun 14, 2013 Melissa Trible commented on Savage Love.
Possible alternate advice for EFFED...

Given how long it went on, presumably your husband's dirty talk is tolerable to you at least in small doses. So what you might do, if you can stomach it, is make him a carrot-and-stick bargain, something like this:

The stick is more or less what Dan suggested. If he's bugging you about his fantasies in such a way that it bothers you, call things off, don't just close your eyes and think of England.

The carrot is, if he can go... pick a time period, I'd make it at least a month, maybe 2 or 3--without so much as *mentioning* cuckolding to you, then you will, at the end of that period, once, play up a "scene" where you are "cheating on him" (pretend phone calls to your imaginary lover, unfavorably comparing him to same, whatever). Then, after that one night/weekend/whatever, the clock starts again. He has to drop the issue for another month (or whatever).

If he behaves himself, then he periodically gets a wife who is at least pseudo-enthusiastically playing the part of the cheating wife. And you may find it a lot more tolerable if it's only happening on your schedule, instead of every time you're going at it.

If he *doesn't* behave himself, then he doesn't get to have any fun, either.
Jun 3, 2013 Melissa Trible commented on Savage Love.
@107: I agree. I think the thing that took it from "acceptable PDA" to "involving others in your sex life" was the pointing.

If there was a "legitimate" non-sexual reason for the shoe tying (mental handicap, hand problems, etc), the interaction probably would have been verbal, something like "Oh, my shoe's untied" or "Could you get my shoelace, hon?".

The pointing is something that would pretty much *only* happen in a D/s relationship or an abusive one, and it kind of smacks of "Hey, everyone, look at our power dynamic" in a way a cough or a verbal request wouldn't.