NEW YORK – When London Mayor Boris Johnson recently referred to radical Islamic jihadists as “porn driven losers,” some of us thought his focus on porn was beside the point, akin to pointing out Jeffrey Dahmer drank a lot of Mountain Dew, or delving into Ted Bundy’s proclivity for wearing deck shoes with no socks.

Apparently, we got it wrong. According to Phyllis Chesler, an emerita professor of psychology and fellow at the City University of New York, Johnson was “on to something important and profound.”

Clearly, Chesler really stands by this assertion, because she makes it twice, word for word, in the first three paragraphs of an op/ed for the New York Post entitled “Why are jihadis so obsessed with porn?”

In support of the notion that jihadis are “so obsessed” with porn, Chesler cites several widely reported intersections between jihad and porn use, including the porn allegedly found in the Abbottabad compound where Osama bin Laden eventually was killed by Navy Seals – none of whom have ever watched porn, I’m sure. It’s just not in the character of military men, or any manner of sailor, to be crass, profane or interested in something as dishonorable and degrading as porn, obviously.

As for bin Laden’s porn stash, the article Chesler links to does indeed describe it as “fairly extensive,” although the same article also notes “It is not known whether bin Laden himself watched the pornography, which consisted of recent, electronically recorded video.”

It might also be worth noting intelligence officers have long known al Qaeda and other militant groups embed encrypted messages in images, including pornographic images, as a means of securely communicating with each other in a form that is hard for counterterrorism agents to track or decipher. Might OBL’s “porn stash” have been practical?

Chesler’s article admits jihadis use the encryption practice, called steganography, but in her mind it’s simply more evidence of the their “obsession” with porn, rather than something suggesting a more pragmatic orientation toward the material.

Why do jihadis use things like child porn forums and encrypted porn images to communicate with each other? For starters, such forums are resilient to law enforcement efforts to shut them down, otherwise they wouldn’t continue to exist. Unlike a YouTube channel, a Facebook account, or a Twitter feed, the admins of child porn forums aren’t likely to close an account in response to an “inappropriate” post.

It’s also true that while such forums are scrutinized by law enforcement, it’s usually law enforcement out to bust child porn peddlers, not terrorists — at least back in the days before the jihadis use of such forums was well known.

My hunch is jihadis probably have altered their tactics in the past few years, because whatever else they may be, the people who run terrorist operations are not complete fucking idiots. Over the decades, they have proven themselves to be very adaptable, leading many in law enforcement to complain they always find themselves to be one step behind the terror groups.

What really undermines Chesler’s point, however is the lack of any evidence showing jihadis consume porn in a higher volume than any other “social network” that primarily attracts men.

I don’t care what sort of male-dominated workspace is at issue, whether it’s a restaurant kitchen or a software company IT department, the front offices of a professional sports team or the Marine Corps: If you dig into the lockers, cell phones, browser caches and personal movie collections of the members, you are going to find porn. A lot of porn.

Remember when Professor Simon Louis Lajeunesse of Montreal University in Canada wanted to conduct research on porn and needed a control group of men who had never consumed porn?

The reason the plan didn’t play out, and I’m quoting Professor Lajeunesse here: “We started our research seeking men who had never consumed pornography. We couldn’t find any.”

The truth is, the only reason anybody might expect male jihadis to watch less porn than any other guy is they profess adherence to a religion that strictly forbids porn. All this means, however, is many jihadis are also hypocrites — which is super-duper shocking, considering how rare hypocrisy is in the world.

I mean, what’s next: Catholic priests molesting young boys?

Put succinctly, there’s no evidence jihadis are “obsessed” with porn, just evidence many of them watch the stuff — something I think we can all agree isn’t exactly rare with respect to men.

In other words, the Big Story here, the thing Chesler finds doubly “important and profound,” boils down to this: Even men who profess devout adherence to a religion and philosophy that doesn’t tolerate porn often watch porn.

Color me stunned.

Men watching porn, even at work, even when their organization is officially against porn in the workplace? Who has ever heard of such a thing — except, you know, every single cop, soldier, fireman and employee of the Defense Department alive today?

By the way, the reason jihadis’ obsession with porn “matters,” according to Chesler? She seriously believes a wedge can be drawn between non-jihadi Muslims and jihadis by focusing on the jihadis’ porn habits.

Let me get this straight: ISIS can murder thousands of Syrian and Iraqi Muslims merely for refusing to adopt the particular brand of Islam to which ISIS subscribes, and other Muslims often turn a blind eye to the carnage — but we’re going to get them fired up and engaged in open opposition to ISIS and other radical Islamist groups by pointing out the groups are composed of perverts?

I can see this approach working beautifully — as the plot arc of the dumbest action movie Michael Bay ever made, perhaps.