Lora_Sweet - Bow

[Tekka123]

Price: £100 for 1 hour
Location: Bow
Services: LFK, OWO, Miss (with protection)

External Link/Members Only

Lora Sweet is part of the Romanian group. I had seen her photos before and really had the itch to see her, mainly because she looked very attractive.

In person, she is genuinely gorgeous. Great body, very sexy, and looked amazing in her small lingerie — hard to take your eyes off her. Physically, she definitely lives up to the pictures.

We only had LFK at the start, which to me is quite useless, and there was no DFK — that was a bit of a letdown. The session overall felt quite basic, and her attitude wasn’t the best. She came across as a bit cold and not very engaging at times.

That said, she is quite submissive in nature and handled the physical side well, which did make the experience more enjoyable. I wore a condom throughout.

Overall, a weak positive — very attractive and submissive, but the attitude and limited engagement hold her back.

Rating: 5.5/10 (Weak Positive)

[Tekka123]

External Link/Members Only

[puntingking]

Thanks for the review 

Your link doesn't seem to be working, here is the correct link : External Link/Members Only

 

[jamiekinkxxx]

None mobile link:

EDIT: beaten to it 

[puntingking]

None mobile link:

EDIT: beaten to it 

 

[advent2016]

I wish people would put that the SP has bareback as a like early in the review so that I can avoid it. Maybe on the title like would be a good place. I'm not judging, just it's not my thing.


Hidden Image/Members Only

[PilotMan]

I wish people would put that the SP has bareback as a like early in the review so that I can avoid it. Maybe on the title like would be a good place. I'm not judging, just it's not my thing.

As per rule 4:

The title of the review should only have SP Name - Location - (B&S / TOFTT / SCAM label if needed),

[Tekka123]

I wish people would put that the SP has bareback as a like early in the review so that I can avoid it. Maybe on the title like would be a good place. I'm not judging, just it's not my thing.


Hidden Image/Members Only

In my next review - I will flag it in the text (not main header though)

[PilotMan]

I wish people would put that the SP has bareback as a like early in the review so that I can avoid it. Maybe on the title like would be a good place. I'm not judging, just it's not my thing.


Hidden Image/Members Only

I would say if the review definitely contains bareback, or she is a confirmed barebacker, then yes, flag it at the top. But, sometimes the SP inadvertently leaves it in her likes, along with many other things.

Some people don't participate in OWO for health reasons, but members aren't asked to immediately flag a warning that the SP offers OWO.

As with various offerings by SP's, it's up to members to read the review and the SP's profile and make your own decision.

[advent2016]

I would say if the review definitely contains bareback, or she is a confirmed barebacker, then yes, flag it at the top. But, sometimes the SP inadvertently leaves it in her likes, along with many other things.

Some people don't participate in OWO for health reasons, but members aren't asked to immediately flag a warning that the SP offers OWO.

As with various offerings by SP's, it's up to members to read the review and the SP's profile and make your own decision.

A very large difference in risk between OWO that is very, very safe compared to vaginal/anal bareback

I'm very risk-averse. If the helper app shows bareback / unprotected in the profile I move on.

[puntingking]

I wish people would put that the SP has bareback as a like early in the review so that I can avoid it. Maybe on the title like would be a good place. I'm not judging, just it's not my thing.


Hidden Image/Members Only

Then read the review. 

Sps over 35 is not my thing but I don't go around wanting other members to state their "older" age earlier on in the review. We each have our own likes and dislikes.
The only thing you can do is read the review 

I want to avoid older sps but I don't ask nor do I want other members to state their older age earlyer on in the review because that is not my thing 

[puntingking]

I would say if the review definitely contains bareback, or she is a confirmed barebacker, then yes, flag it at the top. But, sometimes the SP inadvertently leaves it in her likes, along with many other things.

Some people don't participate in OWO for health reasons, but members aren't asked to immediately flag a warning that the SP offers OWO.

As with various offerings by SP's, it's up to members to read the review and the SP's profile and make your own decision.

and some members like myself don't want to see older sps, should this be flagged up the top too to save me trouble from reading the full review in its entirety.

I don't want that to be the case, we all have our own likes and dislikes. You can't simply flag up everything as this is what the review is for 

[advent2016]

As per rule 4:

The title of the review should only have SP Name - Location - (B&S / TOFTT / SCAM label if needed),

Fair enough. The rules is the rules and I try and abide by them.  I just like to know early on if the content is unlikely to match my prefs like  not BB, NBA, nonCIS etc

[exitonly]

Fair enough. The rules is the rules and I try and abide by them.  I just like to know early on if the content is unlikely to match my prefs like  not BB, NBA, nonCIS etc

I'd like to see BB in the title also.. so I can narrow down exactly the type of provider I want to see.
If I may politely suggest some help..before you read the review, have another window open with AW open and look up the name  first.. your choice to open the review or not then.. could save you some time (and blushes)