Oral Sex escorts in Hong Kong

One line, and four questions underneath it

The four questions hiding under oral sex are easy to state and almost never stated.

1. What she actually does. A blow job, written blowjob as often as not, deepthroat or deep throat, or going down on you at length instead of as a prelude.
2. Whether anything comes between. OWO on British-style adverts, BBBJ on American ones, both meaning oral without a condom; an advert that says neither has not answered. Rimming travels in the same run of letters and is its own agreement, in whichever direction it is meant.
3. How it finishes. The abbreviations treat this as a topic of its own, and so does she.
4. Whether any of it comes back the other way.

Naming which of the four you mean costs you one sentence and changes the answer completely. She is not being cagey when she replies briefly to a broad question; she cannot tell from it whether you are asking about the easiest item on the list or the one she refuses, and answering the wrong one wastes both of you. The women who write back at length are almost always the ones who were asked something specific.

It is named on 488 adverts in Hong Kong, 395 of them receiving at their own address and 408 willing to travel.

How oral ends is agreed separately from how it starts

CIM, COB and CIF are not intensities of the same thing, and a facial is not a decoration on the end of a blow job either.

Each one names a different ending, and in Hong Kong each is treated as its own agreement. It is the one part of the whole business that women most often mark differently from everything else in their advert, and the part most likely to come back as a no when the rest came back as a yes.

An ending is therefore the worst part of an oral booking to leave to the moment. An unstated ending is not an open ending; she has one she assumes, you have another, and the gap turns up at exactly the point in the evening where neither of you wants to be negotiating. Swallowing is a further step again, distinct from CIM and not implied by it, and it is asked about beforehand or it is not on the table.

There is a reason this cluster of codes reads as fussy, and it is worth knowing rather than resenting: the list was borrowed wholesale from British and American escort copy, where it had already been sharpened by years of exactly these misunderstandings. The same borrowing is visible on the women who name anal, where three separate words survive for one act.

Only one item on the list needs two people

Every oral code so far describes what she does.

Sixty-nine, written 69 on half the adverts, is the exception, because it describes what both of you do at once, and cunnilingus, going the other way on its own, is a third thing again. Neither is implied by the words she uses, and neither follows from her agreeing to the rest. Where the second mouth belongs to another woman rather than to you, that is the duo adverts and a different booking. If reciprocity is the part you actually care about, that is the sentence to write, because it is the one thing here that no amount of agreement about the other three questions will settle. It also tends to sit closer to the GFE side of the same advert than to the list of acts. For everything the codes leave out, every advert in the city sits one step back.