IF (huge if ) I GOT PAID EXTRA and AGREED I would not mind but if you try that shit with me your liable to get tazed in the TAINT ... NO MEANS NO MEN IT BACKED BY THE LAW .... Try that shit with a real gf and your liable to end up someone's sex toy, with a sex offender jacket on your back for a good 20+ years Tx will hang you.
I remember reading a few posts from gentlemen saying they hobby because they get perks they don't get at hm ... So if you want a gfe respect her like a gf and Im sure you'll love the experience ...
He did NOT pay for it, it was NOT on the menu, and she said NO ....
She is the provider and the one in charge of her body, she did not sign a contract to be his sex slave ... Remember you fellas say so your selves you pay for time and companionship not sex and activities
I wasn't there but IT SOUNDS TO ME LIKE HE GOT OFF LUCKY !!!
Originally Posted by Lana_kane
And God only knows what your driver would do, right?
On a more serious note, nobody here is arguing that "No" doesn't mean "No" in the hobby world. It most certainly does. What many of us are trying to tell you and anyone else who might be reading this thread is that we have doubts as to the veracity of kitty's side of the story. We know her history very, very well around here, and credibility is not her middle name. Against her story, we have that of the hobbyist. That gets us to the proverbial "he said/she said." As you know by now, that doesn't resolve anything around here. But we also have more. We have the ISO to which kitty not only responded, but responded to enthusiastically. "Why haven't you called me already?" That ISO clearly states the scope and ground rules for the encounter. Including filming. Put all that together, and I find the hobbyist's account the more believable of the two. It's completely irrational to assume that she enthusiastically responded to an ISO requesting road-head with video when she did not intend for that very thing to happen. From there, the hobbyist says she gave lousy service and he ended the session. I fail to see a hole in that, and he, unlike kitty, has no credibility history that I'm aware of.
Well, I'm sure I'm not going to convince you of anything, but there all that is for what little if anything it might be worth. At a minimum, those of us who have reason to doubt kitty's account, including whether the hobbyist refused to cease activities after she uttered "No" (assuming she did), have a long history upon which to base those doubts. That said, we've been wrong before. But kitty has fabricated many things before, too.