Though I am just a massage guy in this hobby, I certainly understand (and appreciate) the need, desire, and demand for protection.  You are completely right: you have no idea how many others he has had unprotected sex with (either paid or unpaid).   As I write this, he rated you 7/7.  From what I can see on the various websites, I think I'd have to rate you at least an 8, and it would likely only go up after seeing you in person.

...for not being afraid to post the TER screen name of this guy, I hope many other providers become aware of this guy & turn him away to keep us all safer.

... I bet we'd see far fewer dishonest reviews like this one.  

I remember reading it when it first came out and thought it odd because it was so different from your other reviews.  Now thought it appears to abruptly end;  Now, the way it reads, it is as though it has been cutoff midway through the description.

That is a very level headed response Audrey it is obvious you have a lot of tact and class.For the life of me I don't know how anyone would not play safe in the hobby these guys are crazy!!Good for you for stating your case.I would actually be concerned if a lady didn't ask me to be safe.I thought something was real fishy when I saw your scores this explains it.Have nice day!!

Well said Audrey and thank you for trying to keep the hobby safe for all of us.

I believe the review right before this guy's review read the same way.

To be sure...  there are a few women who not only allow BB but will suggest it as an upgraded service.  There have been posts about that here over the years.

It was a big no-no that could get the post removed and the provider moderated. It was considered a  
hobbyist's board so you didn't dare say anything negative about them.  Glad to see that's changing
and providers have an opportunity in exposing the fucknuts.

Good point.  Hopefully that previous reviewer, who my brief survey indicates will mention the type of protection used, will chime in as to whether that was a mistake.  He and lennzi both have many whitelists --and one of those for the previous reviewer is AM herself-- and perhaps lennzi read it that way too and thought he'd see if he could get in on that.  At least we can hope AM can chime in and say the previous reviewer also neglected to mention the protection used.   This story has many angles!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xW8r503ny1Q

... but not respecting "No" and retaliating for the turn-down with a dishonest review, or in some other way, is another thing entirely.  

If you know, name those providers, I sure don't want to be with them.

kinda looks like this

TER used to not allow mention of BBFS in reviews but the review doesn't say BBFS happened so it probably would have passed muster in the old days as well.

With TER, you pretty much have to provide definitive proof.

It's easy to see clients and providers who get pissed off at someone falsely accusing them of BBFS.

Even with protection you'd still get STD,   BBBJ & DFK could potentially expose you to health risks as well.  You might want to consider going back to teaching or try cooking. No one likes drama queen. Suck it up and move on. He was merely asking and he didn't force it on you, did he???  Hate to see you end up in the same fate as your friend HH. Belinda or Vorlon can explain what happen.

The TER review dept. use to add "(cover)" in the review at the appropriate spot if I remember.

http://www.theeroticreview.com/discussion-boards/minnesota-21/be-careful-with-nicole-138477?page=

No, it wasn't rape, thank God. But you don't seem to get, or care, that a revenge review isn't something a provider should have to just "suck up and move on" from.

As someone who loves to push the limit with this hobby and also a medical professional, I will say you have a much higher risk of acquiring an STD via DATY versus BBFS (non-anal).  

Some years ago, I had a review where I did not specifically mention the use of a cover (one was used) and had someone PM me asking if it was a BBFS session.  At least that time TER didn't add anything; I contacted TER myself and explained the situation, asking to edit the review to make clear that a cover was used.  They let me edit it.

I remember that situation well.  I don't see this one as being similar at all.

Hi! Since you're a medical professional, could you explain to me how one is more at risk from DATY than BBFS?

To be clear, the originally published review (before being edited into its current form) stated that she simply refused to proceed without explaining why she refused.  That made it seem like she was wacko. I don't think she is wacko or unreasonable for refusing to proceed for her stated reason.  It seems like her account was accurate and that lennzi decided to trash her for her decision.   You may not be alone though, as lennzi appears to be keeping the majority of his white lists so all those ladies may agree that lennzi acted reasonably.  

I for one and many others think BBCFS is not the norm... I personally wouldn't see a provider if they did not use protection.  

Wow bluenorth you arent very smart are you??Why isn't it ok for her to stand up for herself??I think she has every right to do so.I have gotten to know many girls over the years and revenge reviews are childish and can often cause safety issues with the ladies.And why compare her to HH??You obviously have a vendetta somewhere.I think you should be the one who moves along loser....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RrZlWw8Di10

....this movie is about 10 yrs of my time though.
I'm guessing this is where a lot of Pootie Tang came from (2001).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_WQfZYacEAw

I certainly hope you compensated the person for cutting time short. It was uncalled for unless he insisted on bareback, imo.

No provider should need to post in their ad that they don't allow bareback full service.  In this day and age, anyone -- whether hobbyist or casual sex -- who has unprotected sex with a stranger is a fool putting both themselves and their partner at risk.  "Paranoia with STD" is a good thing for anyone: provider, hobbiyist, or otherwise.  And one should look with a leary eye at anyone who disrespects their own safety as well as their partner's.  

Right in the first part of her post she states he wanted BBFS and that is why she cut the session short.

People trying to engage in that kind of conduct should be called out for exactly what it is: beyond unsafe and extraordinarily stupid. You protect us all by letting us know who might be doing those things (and who they are seeing).

With a BBFS claim.  smh

I did see that. For a provider I have seen. I highly doubt she would do that. Looks a bit sketchy.

She replied that it's indeed fake.

http://www.theeroticreview.com/reviews/detail/abby-review-by-hajboom2-1822048

That guy is a walking time bomb of disease.

This is a minor point, but just because you're within five pounds of your photos doesn't mean you can't appear skinnier in person.  

http://www.theeroticreview.com/reviews/showReview.asp?Review=1672848
http://www.theeroticreview.com/reviews/showReview.asp?Review=1672869
http://www.theeroticreview.com/reviews/showReview.asp?Review=1672844
http://www.theeroticreview.com/reviews/showReview.asp?Review=1671431
http://www.theeroticreview.com/reviews/showReview.asp?Review=1671408

Maybe it's just my opinion, but your misogynistic comments and the sickening and cowardly implied threats need to disappear. I fully remember reading your tone in the past. By the way, I think this board is pretty boring now compared to what it once was. I think you deserve credit for some of that. Personally, I wish we could adsumsparkle versus what you "contribute".