A few questions from the comments I wanted to address.
Anonymous says, "You've never discussed (I don't think) whether you and Emily play with strap-on or other simulated cock play."
Answer: Um, we totally play with strap-ons and I can totally cum like a girl (i.e., from penetration only, no stimulation of my sissy clit).
Tanya wonders about Matthew (Anonymous jumps in, too), whether he'll accept Sara.
Answer: I don't know. When he said words to the effect of, Well then, I suppose I'm going to have to meet her," his tone suggested not mere resignation that he would have to meet Sara for Emily's sake, but instead amused teasing. I think he's drawing it out to tease me, to control me. He's going to meet Sara when he wants. And to some extent, to me, it's like chastity-I'm released not when I want (always) but when Emily wants (more rare). And because of that, I enjoy it more.
Emily is coy on the subject, but I judge from her reaction I'm not wrong. It's when, not if, and it's willingness, not acquiescence.
Ritemate commented he likes controlling couples, not just wives. I think he likes controlling us, not. Ritemate also says, "I’d be surprised if Sara doesn’t eventually find herself on her knees in front of Him."
Answer: Oh god, I hope so!!! (Emily, too.) If I do, though, it will be when Matthew wants it, not when I want it (now.)
Anonymous comments about Matthew's "she's my whore" comment and whether Emily will do whatever Matthew wants, using examples of entertaining his friends, going to swingers clubs, substances.
Answer: Substances? Never. Emily would never in a million years. Not a question in my mind. His friends? Don't see it. Swingers clubs? Nope. She's just not that kind of person. (Yes, I recognize the irony of what I'm saying, but it's true.)