don't get me wrong, i am grateful for the review.  it clarifies for me that i will never visit this provider.

$80 and bb?  i don't care how often you frequent a gal, she has tons of other clients!  how many guys is she granting this "favor" to???

https://www.theeroticreview.com/reviews/showReview.asp?Review=1951030

guys and gals!  play safe!

go vote!!

is no bb, period, end of discussion. and if he flashes a lot of cash, the quicker i dash (in other direction).
as you say, how do i know where and how often my hobbyist clients may be getting that "favor" elsewhere?  
actually, i don't want to know that answer

ps. and in Cali please vote no on Prop 60 since it will endanger those of us providers who also do video work. thanks! xoxo kacy

Who would have thunk that we'd be voting for the use of condoms in adult films.  Based on what's out there and HIV it should be a no brainer.  But its not.  Russian Roulette!

It is a slippery slope to also including sports where bodily fluid can be exchanged, like boxing or mma.  

I like my hobbying to be protected, but my choice on provider is my own. We all have heard my stories where i have been offered bareback. I am not naive, im sure it was not a "special offer" just for me. Thats just too risky imo.

Now, the adult industry; when regulated from within by directors that insist on a recent and clean test, i dont have a problem with that at all

i appreciate support of you & LATSDog vis-a-vis Prop 60. it was much more of a wolf in sheep's clothing than "porn performers must wear condoms" as the 1 man behind it portrayed Prop 60. And as a point of information, the CA Occupational Safety & Hazards Administration that regulates worker safety, already has told producers that it believes condoms are part of a safe workplace. My understanding is that Producers & CAL OSHA are in talks to workout a compromise since the industry believes a blanket rule will drive production out of CA and/or into the shadows. Prop 60 was a blunt force object ignoring those talks as well as adding other dangerous provisions such as a private citizen being able to sue a producer for adult videos that depict sex without condoms. e.g., I produce videos for my website and that makes me a producer and i therefore could be sued when somebody sees one of my videos where thee is no condom used.

Lots more info at dontharassca.com since there was a lot more nefarious items in Prop 60 than the foregoing.

Anyways, thanks for your support in defeating Prop 60!
xoxo
kacy tgirl

Uncovered pussy and rimming and daty cleaner and safer than uncovred d*ck? Since your shit taklking about BB.

Its not RR. Talent in the industry is tested via NAT HIV, which is a test that detects the presence of HIV nucleic acid, and is accurate to within 4 days of transmission. On its own relining on a test (no matter now good it is) is total crap because its only relevant to the point of blood draw it was taken (+/-4 days), however if paired with a PrEP, such as Truvada, the risk is zero. It would actually have been wiser to require a performer to take some form of PrEP than even worry about conddoms.