Since your title suggests you’re asking for an explanation:
NSFW(ish) explanation
Eating out with your friends: Going out to a restaurant with friends.
Eating out your friends: Performing oral sex (either vaginal or anal) on your friends.Maybe she should try having her friends over for ‘dinner’.
Could imply fava beans, cianti, bdsm gear, kinbaku ropes, who knows.
What’s the point of censoring her handle but not her (I assume) real first and last name?
I mean…… there are a lot of Joanna Ellises. Ellis’? Ellis’s? English is hard. Joanna’s Ellis? Ok I’m done.
deleted by creator
Eating out is different than eating out with. The difference is fishy.
PSA: If its fishy, should probably see a doc just in case.
… or a baker.
If it’s me? I feel a little targeted here.
I’ve been trying to workshop a flirty reply for longer than I’d like to admit.
Looks like I also need to go to the doctor. The Love Doctor.
We are not always our quickest. My original response should have been something like:
Leave me out of it. Whatever you got it wasn’t from me.
But I thought of that too late.
If my original comment was better it would have been easier to reply to and carry on the joke.
… Maybe you just got attracted by the bait.
Probably a typo of fisty
A little sweet
Or sticky.
I’m sure she got some new friends so let’s call it a social media win
She’s a doctor, so obviously this only applies to friends with benefits.
violet?
Didn’t mention armpits.
Ye olde missing Oxford comma strikes again
The Oxford comma is when you have a list of things that have basically one more comma than usual, following the penultimate member of the list.
Oxford: Red, green, and blue.
Standard: Red, green and blue.
… The thing that is missing from the OP sentence that dramatically alters its meaning is the word ‘with’, not a comma.
