Its tragically obvious that your impression of these women plays in tangent with the very demeaning presumption that in your perception a woman is not a woman unless she complies to your moral (and other) standards- you admitted that. In reference to compliance my point is- these videos arent about showing body parts- otherwise they would show toes and elbows; and if your concern was body parts you would have just as much problems with those limbs being shown- you dont and you wouldnt.

You have a problem with particular parts and their objectification- claiming that to show them is a reduction- yet in another context (the latifah scenario) showing just her head would admittedly bore you but you wouldnt think her any less of a woman. Even gentlemen ingratiate the idea that a woman's sexuality should be kept under wraps while under the auspices that they respect them and their integrity- that seems to be your steez. No offense- just callin a spade a spade.

Do you have a problem with men who parade bare chested in videos-probably not- i bet you dont turn the channel- cuz you're not predisposed to think that the man should conduct his physical form in such a strict fashion that it complies to your sense of integrity certainly not for you to respect him as a man. You unfairly project that obligation on the women in these videos.

When I say the primary intent is to depict compliance my point is its not so much the body parts that are demonstrated and demeaning but the idea that the women involved are complying to the sexual appetities of men. To an extent they are (but I disagree with the idea that they do so without integrity) if you have a problem with that then so too should you have a problem with expecting these women to comply to your moral standard. You dont but you're under the impression that your standards are in their best interests.

Thats a blatant double standard - flip sides of the same coin

the paternal order in full effect

K