Talk:prurient

Explaining a tricky word with tricky words... --Abdull 18:26, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

prurient
The third jurisprudential meaning in this entry is impossible to be found both in the contemporary Merriam-Webster Dictionary and the 1913 edition. Given the fact that it must be US only should it exist at all, I consider this absence from both dictionaries confirming that a verification is exigent. Bogorm 22:56, 21 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I don’t know if the third definition is really needed. It simply reflects the view that some conservative people, including judges, have toward sex in general, that anyone who demonstrates a strong interest in it is sick (mentally ill), shameless, and wicked. —Stephen 13:42, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the explanation, in this case I embrace their point. However, why is then the regional use, if it is only the convictions of the judges that are responsible for the meaning? There are enough conservative judges in Britain or Australia or RSA, aren't they? Bogorm 15:12, 24 November 2008 (UTC)


 * It is used rather heavily in US constitutional law, especially in cases arising under FCC censorship issues. 69.125.24.158 23:57, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

RFV failed, sense removed. —Ruakh TALK 00:01, 14 May 2009 (UTC)


 * In US law, prurient is defined as "...a morbid, degrading and unhealthy interest in sex, as distinguished from a mere candid interest in sex" (source: []) Shouldn't this be taken into account with the definition since the Wiki article on obscenity links to this? Shrewmania 00:32, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Curious
"Curious" is not a sound choice of definition as is, as the sense needs to be clarified: inquisitive or peculiar/unusual (or something else)? The quotations provided do not shed a lot of light on this, but seem inclined towards the meaning of peculiar (an anecdote itself cannot be inquisitive). —DIV (1.145.89.110 10:15, 12 February 2024 (UTC))