sass-quatch
Sasquatch
sass-quatch

I think this stems from a general attitude of shame around sex. Like, if I ride a roller coaster and I hate it, I just won’t ride another roller coaster. If I engage in a new sexual activity and I hate it, that may also come with a hefty side dose of shame, self loathing, regret, etc., and we are trained to feel like

I also don’t think it’s fair to expect that your partner’s interests and desires won’t ever change after you get married. That strikes me as a pretty unhealthy attitude. Especially when the person you’re marrying is so young; my sexual interests were still forming when I was 25. Hell, I’d say they’re still pretty

“I’ve realized that having children is important to me and if you don’t want to have kids with me, we should break up.”

I guess I land a place where it is possible to hurt someone without actually being an asshole. I have trouble imagining a situation where it is reasonable to call someone an asshole for coming out as gay. Sure, marrying someone of a gender you weren’t attracted to was probably a mistake, but coming out isn’t an

Totally. But that applies to absolutely anything. A partner ignoring their spouse’s apprehensiveness about anything (having children, buying a house, moving to a new city, enrolling their child in football) is being shitty. I just genuinely don’t see the difference between the statement, “I’ve decided I want to have

I went with a coworker to see 50 Shades of Grey after it had already been in the theater for quite a while. So the showing was mostly just hate watchers and the vaguely curious. There’s a scene where the protagonist of the movie asks, “And what do I get out of this?” and a women in the theater yelled out, “ASSAULTED!”

100%. No one should pressure anyone else into sexual situations that make them uncomfortable. But, again, is it coercion if someone says, “I’d like to have a threesome,” and their partner lies and says they’re fine with it?

To put it another way, what if you told your (primary?) partner up front that you were non-monogamous, they agreed, and then two or three years down the line they tried to say “Hey, I need you to be monogamous now or end our relationship”? In this hypothetical, everything about the relationship is working for you when

No, it’s like if they released a Hobbit movie and it ended before the adventurers even reached Smaug...

I completely agree about Middleditch, but in the end, his wife should just leave. Like, at any point one person in a relationship can be like, “Listen, I’m going to start having sex with other people. Do with that what you will.” And if that’s making their partner miserable, that partner should just bail. Every time I

1. That is a French tuck, not a full tuck. They are different.

I always struggle with the difference between coercion and being clear about what one needs/wants in a relationship. I’m fortunate enough to be in relationships with people who are on the same page as me about non-monogamy, and I dislike drama to the extent that I entirely avoid monogamous people who are ‘willing to

I read a lot of romance novels, and (probably because their fan bases tend to be smaller and more manageable) a lot of romance novelists have managed to build vibrant communities and cultivate a seemingly genuine closeness to their readers. There don’t seem to be very many novelists who deal well with blockbuster

That’s awful and ridiculous. I am also fortunate enough to work for an organization that genuinely prioritizes a work/life balance. Some weeks we’re crazy busy and we have to stay really late to finish our work, but on weeks when we’re not busy no one looks askance at you if you leave halfway through the day because

On the off-chance you’re looking for a serious answer, I work a 35-hour week (30 if you take into account my paid lunches) and I just work 5 shorter days. It means that I actually have a life outside of work. Like, at the end of the day I still have the time and energy to do other stuff, which is awesome. 

Nope. You’re thinking of Lyft. Uber started as a way to circumvent laws that prevented limo services from operating ‘on demand’. Uber was always supposed to replace taxicabs, and the app was basically just a sneaky way to ignore taxicab regulations. 

This isn’t accurate, though. After Lyft launched as a ‘ride sharing’ service, Uber sort of rebranded, but the purpose of Uber was always to act as an on demand limo service alternative to hailed taxicabs. It was never meant as a casual ride sharing app. 

Short curly red hair. Her wig in IM2 was garbage. 

Professionally, I definitely could still have lavender hair, I just don’t think it’s worth the time and effort. No one in my sector has ever blinked at my coloured hair or septum piercing.

I work at an NPO with a ‘mission’, but because we’re in the employment sector and one of our missions is better (ethical/safe/rewarding/respectful/etc.) employment, it makes for an absolutely stellar work environment.