Talk:orgastic potency

RFV discussion: September–October 2017
An incomprehensible mess. RFC didn't have any effect, so I'm sending it to RFV. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 06:50, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Easily attestable from Google Books. I have done a first clean-up.-Sonofcawdrey (talk) 08:30, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

cited Kiwima (talk) 03:02, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

RFV-passed Kiwima (talk) 06:21, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

RFC discussion: June 2012–November 2017
Doesn't make any sense, and full of links that might be spammy. Please cut it down to actual definitions that make sense to human beings. Equinox ◑ 21:00, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm really unfamiliar with how to write wiktionary entries, but of use may be three definitions on the related Wikipedia article, all by Wilhelm Reich:
 * "[the] capacity to attain gratification by discharging an amount of libido equivalent to the built-up sexual tension in the organism" (1927, Further Remarks on the Therapeutic Significance of Genital Libido).
 * "the capacity to surrender to the flow of biological energy, free of any inhibitions; the capacity to discharge completely the dammed-up sexual excitation through involuntary, pleasurable convulsions of the body" (1940, The Discovery of the Orgone, Volume 1: The Function of the Orgasm.)
 * "the capacity for complete surrender to the involuntary convulsion of the organism and complete discharge of the excitation at the acme of the genital embrace" (date unclear, Selected Writings).
 * All the other definitions are either distortions or derivatives.--Gulpen (talk) 16:03, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
 * They're not of much use, if any, to me. If other people understand them, great, good for them. I take it Equinox you've checked that this can get three citations, right? Mglovesfun (talk) 16:10, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
 * The problem is that these are terms very specific to Reich's arcane and long-discredited theories, and mean nothing to those who haven't drunk the Kool-Aid. Chuck Entz (talk) 00:14, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I do not see why the validity of Reich's work should be of any concern for an accurate definition. (It is also simply false to claim that all of Reich's work is discredited. His 'Character Analysis' was used as a standard textbook in psychology for many years, for example.) At any rate, there is such an incredible amount of disinformation and distortion about Reich's work that it justifies keeping close to Reich's OWN definitions, which is why I supplied them. Fact is that 1) Reich coined the term and 2) he adjusted the definition several times.
 * If it is necessary to fully understand the terms, there is a related Wikipedia article (including many references) that are available for study.
 * By the way, of interest to fixing this entry may also be the term 'orgastic impotence' as the opposite of orgastic potency.--Gulpen (talk) 12:11, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

I think our current definitions lack lexical potency in the sense that they fail to clarify the term. I'm not an expert in Reichology, but to me his definitions look like complicated ways of saying "capacity to reach an orgasm". --Hekaheka (talk) 23:53, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
 * No, the two are fundamentally different. For example, though virtually all men have 'ejaculative potency', during an orgasm many experience disgust, unpleasure, phantasies, partial release, various forms of anxiety (conscious or subconscious), mechanic movements, etc. etc. However, none of these can occur with orgastic potency (not to mention that almost no people experience the involuntary, rhythmic convulsion of the whole body - merely some local response). This is all written down on the related Wikipedia page. Every single word in Reich's definitions are crucial as they function to exclude all the pathological phenomenon associated with orgastic impotence.--Gulpen (talk) 12:45, 30 June 2012 (UTC) Again, I'm not arguing whether any of this is valid. I'm just trying to help clarify the conceptual difference.--Gulpen (talk) 01:43, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Have made a first effort at a clean-up._Sonofcawdrey (talk) 08:29, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks SOC. Looks much better now --Spreaderofwords (talk) 10:57, 14 November 2017 (UTC)