I am curious as to how you responded in the first place Victor Murphy, to get a reply from her citing a law regarding oral sex.
On the surface, it does seem a bit strange that she sent that statute to you, although I don't find it strange at all that she initiated a discussion regarding the subject.
If I had been corresponding with a lady for ten years I would have probably run out of things to say if the conversation was limited to certain so called safe topics. Maybe she was feeling the same way.
Has the thought occurred to you that she had initially wanted to maybe broaden the horizons a bit? I have no idea what the relationship is here, but my first reaction was that she was probably wanting to spice things up slightly.
It would have been interesting to see how she would have reacted if you had told her exactly what you liked about oral sex, in reasonable detail. After all, she did ask! You could have then asked her the same question and possibly ended up with a very steamy reply.
It may
well be that she has some peculiar reason for asking in the first place, but I feel that you may have lost a possible opportunity to "enhance" your future correspondence together.
Flirty, (yes, erotic as well) correspondence can be a very good thing between consenting adults. When written well, it can be very arousing for both parties.
Do you think that she was trying to spice things up in a roundabout way?
However I may be totally misreading the situation not knowing all the facts, in which case please ignore the above.