Curious why the money shot, i.e. facial, isn't a prominent category of services provided. Under category "cum in mouth", 5 options mixed in are no, yes-spits, yes-swallows, yes-spits or swallows, no-but facial. I rarely see this category selected. Any thoughts?
and even those that do, often don't want it to be generally known that they do this.
Sometimes reviewers will forebear noting this even if the gal let them do so on the grounds that they don't want to offend the provider.
There is also the fact that the way this is set up, you can't have a gal who swallows, for example, also be shown as doing COF in addition to the swallowing.
It is screwed up, and COF should have its own stand alone catagory.
-- Modified on 6/20/2017 8:09:24 AM
It probably should be "COB - Come On Body." Otherwise you'd need a whole list, such as...
Facial
Come on breasts
Come on ass
Come on feet
It would make no sense.
I guess you never heard of head.
I agree with mrfisher and JFSF. For a LONG time, discussion on S&P, General and other boards made it clear that the old Profile method wasn't good. It was suggested (many times) that TER add more "check all that apply" options to the Profile data and review (and search) forms. They did add more of those but not always with the best implementation.
.
"No - but facial" was one of the specific examples often brought up as justification to go to "check all that apply" in the CIM category. CIM and facial are NOT mutually exclusive. Some do BOTH, even in the same session with MSOG! There were even suggestions to add other places to finish.
.
"No - but facial" is a dumb choice given that TER did add more "check all that apply" options to the forms. They should fix this and a bunch of other things.
Curious why the money shot, i.e. facial, isn't a prominent category of services provided. Under category "cum in mouth", 5 options mixed in are no, yes-spits, yes-swallows, yes-spits or swallows, no-but facial. I rarely see this category selected. Any thoughts?