word to the wise

[Cuirassier1812]

Screening is about safety so when someone doesn’t introduce themselves I feel that they are not a safe person. I have tried to imagine that maybe they are nervous and need to see if they have the correct number first, but often times I’m pulling teeth to screen. It’s as if they expect me to give them my address with out knowing anything.

Yesterday, someone texted me for the first time asking me about a list of acronyms. By acronyms I mean cw, bbbj, FS, etc. This could be a whole post in of itself, but I consider acronyms explicit language. Once the communication becomes explicit I’m forced to end communication. Maybe other women are okay with it? Being that it’s a felony in TX, I don’t get the risk.

You 100% correct about acronyms. They are a handy shorthand and time saving device, nothing more. Any one who thinks they create anything like " plausible deniability " is fooling themselves. In court it would go something like this:

Prosecutor- So you previously testified that the defendant used the term "FIP" in his text exchange with your undercover officer, asking if that would be included. What does that mean?
Officer- In my training and experience, amongst the community of prostitutes and their clients, the acronym "FIP" is short for "finger in p---y". This indicated that the defendant was asking if he would be permitted to digitally penetrate the person he believed to be a prostitute."
Prosecutor- Thank you officer. No further questions.

And that is going to be absolutely admissible in court and is going to be damning in the mind of a jury. So, in my mind, I can absolutely understand why a Hobby Lady would regard such acronyms as "explicit talk", especially with a stranger. Play it safe folks.

Hell, I tend to avoid explicit talk even when texting ladies I have a good standing relationship with. If I DO talk about sex its always after the fact and I try to word it as it it were a non-commercial act as part of a legitimate girlfriend situation.

Does that make sense?