Talk:point of no return

RFV discussion: October–November 2019
Rfv-sense "a rush of sexual pleasure; orgasm". Tagged by User:Tooironic, but not listed. &mdash; surjection &lang;?&rang; 20:30, 31 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Isn't this just a special case of sense 2? Kiwima (talk) 21:29, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
 * In which case it should be in RfD. DCDuring (talk) 23:56, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Here “point of no return” is identified as signalling the onset of orgasm. Here and here (and elsewhere) the term is equated with “ejaculatory inevitability”. This all confirms this is a special case of sense 2. --Lambiam 11:26, 1 November 2019 (UTC)


 * It's clearly used this way. A very common cliché in pornographic writing (he said, as an expert). Did you mean to RFD? Equinox ◑ 01:42, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Is it used in this sense outside the realm of pornography? Otherwise we should label it as such. It is not mutually substitutable with the definition: *“Alex felt the [point of no return] that came with a woman's submission.”  --Lambiam 08:18, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Even in specialized domains terms can be used in their normal senses. This is such a case. - TheDaveRoss  13:45, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Not my tag, so not my decision to make. &mdash; surjection &lang;?&rang; 18:54, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Unless any attestations of this sense are forthcoming, it should be deemed to have failed verification. --Lambiam 21:04, 8 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I thought you had already provided some, ! Kiwima (talk) 21:07, 8 November 2019 (UTC)
 * “Orgasm” is not the same as “ onset of a male orgasm”, and while one of the telltale signs of that onset may be a rush of pleasure, that rush is also not the onset, just like we cannot use “vomiting” as the definition of . So, based on the examples of use I gave, the current definition is incorrect. A definition like “ejaculatory inevitability” would not be incorrect. However, it has the problem that it is then quite clear that this is nothing but the application of a more general, normal sense to a specialized domain. With equal rights we could give “inevitability of war” as one of the senses . Perhaps there are attestable uses in a domain Equinox is an expert in, in which the term is used in the sense of “a rush of sexual pleasure; orgasm” rather than (as I suspect) the point of onset of male orgasm. If such exist, I haven’t seen them. --Lambiam 22:27, 8 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Deleted. Added by an anon in this edit from 2016, though I believe that the anon meant well. Inner Focus (talk) 19:50, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Though the attestation is not in the entry, the term is attested with an altered definition. It therefore cannot be deleted. If someone wants to RfD, they may do so. DCDuring (talk) 19:58, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Restored. The cites should be added to the entry. DCDuring (talk) 20:01, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

RFV-resolved The definition has been altered to match the cites. As DCDuring says, if someone wants to RFD, they may do so. Kiwima (talk) 20:35, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
 * See WT:RFDE. DCDuring (talk) 01:50, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

RFD discussion: November 2019–October 2020
"The moment when orgasm is felt to be inevitable."

This seems to be a direct application of one of the general senses. There are plenty of citations to refer to. DCDuring (talk) 20:45, 27 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete, just sense 2 applied to some specific situation. Examples of the term meaning “inevitability of war” rather than “inevitability of orgasm” by its application to the path leading from peace to war can be found in the discussion at Requests for verification/English. Here we see the term applied to the complete gravitational collapse of a star, becoming a black hole. Here it is the inevitability of the wrath of the Lord strafing those who persist in their folly. Here it is the inevitable decline of civilization brought about by our collective ecological folly. Many of such specialized applications are attested through three or more uses, much like the term can be attested as used for a tea cup, a coffee cup, and so on. Yet these are not senses that warrant separate definitions. Sense 1 is worth retaining because it is the original, literal sense; the others are a figure of speech.  --Lambiam 09:32, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

Delete. I agree with Lambiam. This may be a cliche in porn, but it is still just a case of definition 1. Kiwima (talk) 20:21, 28 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Sense 2 seems sufficient for everything and could be argued to be SoP... Equinox ◑ 23:23, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Do you mean we could delete the aviation sense too (I agree, or at least I don't see why it should get a pass if this doesn't... unless it's the source of the figurative generic sense, but I have my doubts), and possibly the whole entry (that seems a bit much)? Canonicalization (talk) 14:19, 5 December 2019 (UTC)


 * I don't know enough about aviation to say, but yeah, it does just seem to be the point at which return is no longer possible. Couldn't one use the same term about (say) a car journey, when one has gone so far beyond the last petrol station that it is impossible to drive back for more petrol? Equinox ◑ 03:15, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I vote to keep the aviation-specific sense as it is non-obvious that the reason one cannot return is because of fuel. I abstain on the "orgasm" sense. I never look at pornography, so I don't know anything about that. Mihia (talk) 20:30, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I've looked at pornography. Actually saying "point of no return" in porn isn't common afaik. I think I'd keep the aviation sense though. If a pilot wrote a book about flying, and the first line was "I have crossed the point of no return many times in my career, and sometimes I felt a bit uneasy about that" you would (or could) understand what it's about. If a porn star wrote a book about making porn and used the same opening line, you'd probably be confused. The point of no return, perhaps the moment you've been paid and pretty much must do the scene? Or the moment a movie is published and there will never be any way to remove it from the internet again? Or the orgasm thing? Alexis Jazz (talk) 18:13, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete if the aviation sense is deleted too, keep if not. Canonicalization (talk) 22:22, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete, a specific case of a general definition. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 20:23, 3 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete, I agree it feels like the general definition is being used / meant even when someone is referring to the orgasm thing. Assuming the etymology given is right, the aviation sense would pass under something like the JIFFY test (the phrase originally meant only that, and broader use came later). - -sche (discuss) 23:48, 5 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep -- Dentonius (talk) 12:59, 4 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete, a use of sense 2. J3133 (talk) 14:59, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 06:13, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * RFD-deleted &mdash; surjection &lang;??&rang; 08:51, 12 October 2020 (UTC)