‘Men want variety’: Why Dennis Prager’s defense of inappropriate contentography is profoundly dangerous...

[Wolseley]

I hate that word. It should be banned and replaced with ‘word salad’.

Oh, it's just typical P.C., trying not to offend anybody. I remember a contest I was in once where people were given a random word, and had to come up with a politically correct term for it. I got the word "spoon".

My definition? "Manually-operated, semi-contoured fluid elevator."

Thirteen syllables as opposed to one.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

I didn't realize the word in my post was censored until I came back to reread it.

Use your imagination.

 

[WarriorAngel]

I hate that word. It should be banned and replaced with ‘word salad’.

 

[LizaMarie]

I had never heard of contenography until this thread!

 

[zippy2006]

I hate that word. It should be banned and replaced with ‘word salad’.

Rather than referring to contentography I propose that we refer to "contentographic content." It's more precise and easier to understand.

 

[zippy2006]

Oh, it's just typical P.C., trying not to offend anybody.

My theory is that when CF asked XenForo to disallow p0rnography, the web developer at XenForo decided to take them really, really literally.

 

[DarkForest]

Many western men are tired of western women. They have been raised in a culture where PMS or anything kinda sorta like PMS gives women carte blanche to act like an unbearable person.

You are not allowed to talk about it, think about it, or do anything other than then feel bad an apologize for everything.

 

[Wolseley]

Many western men are tired of western women. They have been raised in a culture where PMS or anything kinda sorta like PMS gives women carte blanche to act like an unbearable person.

You are not allowed to talk about it, think about it, or do anything other than then feel bad an apologize for everything.

Google the term "Men Going Their Own Way" and read some of the stuff that comes up. You'll get an eye-opener.

 

[WarriorAngel]

For most women, PMS symptoms are mild. Less than 5% of women of childbearing age get a more severe form of PMS, called premenstrual dysphoric disorder (PMDD).

Are there meds for that?

ETA: Do these women with severe PMS have other days they are unbearable?
Is it hormonal or personality?

 

[Michie]

In a recent discussion with Jordan Peterson, “conservative” radio host Dennis Prager recently defended both lust and inappropriate contentography.

Prager objected to Jesus’ admonition that a man who lusts after a woman has already committed adultery in his heart. Prager smugly stated: “There is only one way to commit adultery in Judaism, and it’s with a different organ.”

Peterson, widely noted for his quick wit, should have challenged Prager on that ridiculous position. After all, in Prager’s view, a man who engages merely in heavy petting with other women has not committed adultery. Alas, Peterson did not challenge him. Instead, he merely asked Prager about his views on inappropriate contentography.

Prager answered, “Men want variety. … If inappropriate contentography is a substitute for one’s wife, it’s awful. If it’s a substitute for adultery, it is not awful.” This statement is offensive to both ethics and logic.

“Men want variety?” That’s his defense? That argument could be applied to any sin. What if, instead of inappropriate contentography, Peterson had asked, “Hey Dennis, what about idolatry?” Using precisely the same defense, Prager could have said, “Look, I get this monotheism stuff, but the truth is that men want variety. After all, the same God night after night? Get real!”

His next statement is an illogical mess. “If inappropriate contentography is a substitute for one’s wife, it’s awful. If it’s a substitute for adultery, it is not awful.”

This is what is known as a distinction without a difference. It is meant to be clever, but is incoherent. By definition, a husband’s intentional viewing of inappropriate contentography constitutes adultery because the intention is sexual arousal with someone other than his wife.

Beyond that, consider the following scenario. A woman comes home and finds her husband thumbing through inappropriate contentographic magazines in his bed. The wife is upset, but the husband assures her, “Honey, you’ve got this all wrong. I wasn’t substituting these Playboy models for you. That would be awful! I was substituting these Playboy models for the pretty woman across the street! I’ve been lusting after her for five months, and Dennis Prager said all this was okay.”

Though Prager’s defense of inappropriate contentography made a few headlines, sadly, it’s not only Prager who endorses inappropriate contentography.

Continued below.

Shame on Dennis Prager for Defending Porn

If you are involved in inappropriate contentography, the salvation of your soul is at stake. Ignore anyone who tells you otherwise.

www.ncregister.com

 

[WarriorAngel]

In a recent discussion with Jordan Peterson, “conservative” radio host Dennis Prager recently defended both lust and inappropriate contentography.

Prager objected to Jesus’ admonition that a man who lusts after a woman has already committed adultery in his heart. Prager smugly stated: “There is only one way to commit adultery in Judaism, and it’s with a different organ.”

Peterson, widely noted for his quick wit, should have challenged Prager on that ridiculous position. After all, in Prager’s view, a man who engages merely in heavy petting with other women has not committed adultery. Alas, Peterson did not challenge him. Instead, he merely asked Prager about his views on inappropriate contentography.

Prager answered, “Men want variety. … If inappropriate contentography is a substitute for one’s wife, it’s awful. If it’s a substitute for adultery, it is not awful.” This statement is offensive to both ethics and logic.

“Men want variety?” That’s his defense? That argument could be applied to any sin. What if, instead of inappropriate contentography, Peterson had asked, “Hey Dennis, what about idolatry?” Using precisely the same defense, Prager could have said, “Look, I get this monotheism stuff, but the truth is that men want variety. After all, the same God night after night? Get real!”

His next statement is an illogical mess. “If inappropriate contentography is a substitute for one’s wife, it’s awful. If it’s a substitute for adultery, it is not awful.”

This is what is known as a distinction without a difference. It is meant to be clever, but is incoherent. By definition, a husband’s intentional viewing of inappropriate contentography constitutes adultery because the intention is sexual arousal with someone other than his wife.

Beyond that, consider the following scenario. A woman comes home and finds her husband thumbing through inappropriate contentographic magazines in his bed. The wife is upset, but the husband assures her, “Honey, you’ve got this all wrong. I wasn’t substituting these Playboy models for you. That would be awful! I was substituting these Playboy models for the pretty woman across the street! I’ve been lusting after her for five months, and Dennis Prager said all this was okay.”

Though Prager’s defense of inappropriate contentography made a few headlines, sadly, it’s not only Prager who endorses inappropriate contentography.

Continued below.

Shame on Dennis Prager for Defending Porn

If you are involved in inappropriate contentography, the salvation of your soul is at stake. Ignore anyone who tells you otherwise.

www.ncregister.com