>>
Maybe, if I saw the actual videos you mention, it's possible that I'd change my mind, but a quick look at the vidcaps and at the text description doesn't do that. If they were charged with obscenity, it looks to me now that I'd be able to successfully defend the two you mention. They seem to be in one of the oldest traditions of adult video - from the very old, pre-1970 days when some brief nudity was permitted just about everywhere in the US in movies if they supported the idea that so long as sin is punished in the end, it's OK to show some skin to teach the ageless story. The girl who seeks an isolated spot to masturbate might suggest just a desire for privacy, but it might also hint at guilt. And then the hedonistic act gets punished by God or some work of fate, so it tells a moral tale.
I notice these films are Canadian and I wonder if they come from the same talented man who got busted and convicted for films that showed sexy young girls being killed by bow and arrow; I can't remember his name now at 3am Chicago time, but he was not only convicted, but forfeited his domains, too. Years ago, when it was news, I copied some still images for a file I keep on obscenity law. But remember, Canada does not have the First Amendment, and the protections of its Charter of Freedoms are not quite as strong as the Liberty we enjoy in the US that protects erotic materials; it tends to be, IMHO, influenced by what is "politically correct" and this kind of stuff is almost certainly over the line under Canadian obscenity law. Best wishes to all of you posters. JD