I just saw last week episode of the big bang theory.
-
kerryedavis — 9 years ago(November 16, 2016 03:53 PM)
Racket?!?!That's Brahms!!!Brahms' 3rd Racket!!! - Basil Fawlty
If you follow Star Trek you know it's actually Mr Flint's 3rd Racket.
SPOCK: Your collection of Leonardo da Vinci masterpieces, Mister Flint, they appear to have been recently painted on contemporary canvas with contemporary materials. And on your piano, a waltz by Johannes Brahms, an unknown work in manuscript, written in modern ink. Yet absolutely authentic, as are your paintings.
FLINT: I am Brahms.
SPOCK: And da Vinci?
FLINT: Yes.
SPOCK: How many other names shall we call you?
FLINT: Solomon, Alexander, Lazarus, Methuselah, Merlin, Abramson. A hundred other names you do not know. -
nishivijay — 9 years ago(November 17, 2016 07:44 AM)
The way it was portrayed in this episode though, I'm saying this is implied to be a more than one time thing by a wide margin. If you imagine the scenes portrayed as the sway inward as a recovery mechanism from this sexual commingling, he comes off as a Casanova. if you just imagine it like they did this and they're showing it 'now' but this was Sheldon's big coming out trying to get his woman pregnant the way the commercials were and just presumably another day for Raj Kootherpalli the Caltech physics professor that traveled all the way to the Golden State where his people are still openly at times persecuted as they should be but more likely to uphold the respect that if these guys could have easily looked the other way and they called a bunch of people over and made a spectacle of it maybe in those conditions with reasonable care (promiscuous sex with relatively unknown women in semi public places) if attention was called to something that the coupling was trying to hide, in the Golden State the law may grant clemency or leniancy amongst consenting adults it must have become his Mecca because no matter where you are from including California almost no one suffers from this condition as stressfully as Raj his portrayal as a man with such a unique sex addiction frees his problem from any form of cultural stereotype we can really say about other people.
-
nishivijay — 9 years ago(November 17, 2016 08:57 PM)
It's not though. I'm stating facts that give very little room for the goings on in the episode if you put them together.
It is stated when you add up the total that he is in a relationship with a woman he is not dating that he only sees in the office. He could be lying to make it true but when they are together they appear to be in a relationship.
That's pretty grounded. Now let me go here. If they are not dating and in a relationship, they are in a sexual relationship. And if they are only together in the office, if we accept the first part, then they must be having a sexual relationship within the office.
If you accept my first assumptions (and if not can you reasonably argue why - we would be assuming they are lying but what about the stuff they can't hide, like when raj and the cleaning lady are together interacting alone, cleaning toilets for the first time, having romantic dinners with relatively little presumptions, they appear to be in a relationship but there is some ice you can slide on) Now you're boxed into a very limited potential of what could go on if you analyze the situation.
It's on demand right now, most likely. So I know it's a lot but you could easily check the facts and do a double take but the fantasy cannot be the facts. Closest thin to a fact is the statement if you are not dating and in a relationship, you are in a sexual relationship, but you play the then part different and tell me if you can come up with anything reasonably practical
but these are factors here. There's a kind of math that is not numbers based that I don't know that could express these logical statements. I don't know what it is though. But I assure you that I am a South Asian man that is fairly good at some forms of math and regardless of my lack of knowledge of the proper terminology of this logical style math, a mathematical foundation for it rather than just logic or reasoning, I would be good at this math.
Can you say that any of the assumptions are wrong though? The episode adds in all those assumptions for these statements and then where can you go? If you accept all these assumptions (or then tell me what you don't accept, especially if you on demand it) then where can you go?
I can't really argue this much more and come up with even more points because it's just not worth it anymore but every one of those pillars stands strong within reasonable boundaries. And then what can you build from that? They really box you into this one this time if you're paying attention
I know not many people are going to go through the trouble of on demanding it and watching it again, but keep a logical tally. I'm not a fan fic writer. This would be more like critical analysis of an episode but when it appears to be fan fictional analysis, think the boundaries that I'm reasoned into when I let my mind go now. if you see it again, you know what I mean?
But then back me up on it cuz you'll see it too. Most people won't check twice though and it's quite the double take if you didn't catch it the first time I wonder if it's like this on a bunch of episodes or this is the precedent for a presumption that the way it was advertised Sheldon is changing getting sexualized out of desire for a baby, but that's new, and there's nothing particularly new in Raj's life, though he may be dealing with his sex addiction to raise his dating and relationship capacity in some regards so there is progress.. but if you look at the facts, it's hard to deny, and where they can't lie, when they are together, it's pretty tough to see it the other way. -
rene-482-93855 — 9 years ago(November 18, 2016 07:34 AM)
Oh wow. you must be a great source of income for a psycho analist.
Really do you watch every show on tv like that?
I'm reminded of the joke about the guy who comes in to see his psyciatrist.
The doc shows him the ink-blot pictures for the rohrschach-test.
What do you see in this asks the doc, showing the first ink-blot.
A couple having sex in a bush is the answer.
And this one? The doc shows another ink-blot.
A couple having sex in the backseat of a car is the answer.
And this one showing the third one.
A couple having sex on a fire-escape.
This goes one the patient sees couples having sex in every ink-blot he's shown.
In the end the psychiatrist concludes: I'm sorry sir, but you clearly have a sex-complex.
To which the patient replies: I have a sex-complex? you're the one showing me the dirty pictures.
I think it's a bit like that here as well. Raj was infatuated by the cleaning lady. And when he says "i'll remember you everytime I come in the bathroom" he is embarrased because it is not nice to be rememberred by the work you do especially when it is in a dirty bathroom.
i'll help you with your vocabulary a little.
To come is a verb meaning to approach or move toward a particular person or place. That is it's general use and it is not referred to ejeculating over your keyboard whilst watching internet porn. I know i know. You can also use it as a meaning for reaching orgasm when you spell it with a U. But again, that is mostly confined to internet porn.
And when i write "dirty" what i mean is "not clean" "soiled by general usage"
I hope i didn't burst your bubble and wish you happy wanking. -
nishivijay — 9 years ago(November 19, 2016 06:55 AM)
It's like you have your phone number posted publically in your profile. I don't want to know what that's about but quite frankly you sound crazy and mean to me, as if you make stories paint blotches and disassociate too much to find cohesion or synergy. With such inner division, how can you build?
But I'm not here to help you out or get more mean cuz you sound crazy mean and I don't want to get mean cuz that's crazy so I'm not going to tough it out with you
So we both made crazy claims. You claimed that I was crazy fun and I claimed you have some form of disassociative disorder that creates a situation on IMDB (at least now) where you frame movies and TV shows as if they were paint blotches because you cannot synergize the plot.
But keep it here so we can redirect it.
If this if worth discussing, Tell me I'm wrong about my assumptions. You can't within reasonable boundaries. And by the time it leaves the wiggle room, it's already pretty ridiculous. Jerry Springer guests would be shocked as would the audience and maybe even Jerry but what Raj isn't talking was said through context because this isn't ink blotches. It's a story with pictures and words and there are too many rhythms here to deny the probability of a peculiar sex addiction. TV doesn't always scream about problems but they cannot always be logically denied either, and TV is not always perfect. But we got to synergize and bring cohesion to stories.
***Keep it to those statements, and whether or not they are true, and when we get past the facts or presumed facts from the show, then we can discuss reasonable potential but you can't just get caught up in the scene and ignore the facts revealed and how they stack up. that's dull and we got to be bright
I could accept that he may be gay as a potential within reasonable boundaries but keep things in reasonable boundaries.
I think people get caught up in the movement but where does it go with time? It's not possible to deny this now. -
rene-482-93855 — 9 years ago(November 21, 2016 08:19 AM)
You've got something seriously messed up in your head dude.
Maybe Im mean, but someone needs to tell you this.
The Big Bang Theory is a show!! A SHOW!!!
IT IS NOT REAL.
outside what you see on your screen nothing happens. There are no backstories we are not aware of.
The persons do not exist in real life.
Raj is not gay because the writers haven't decided yet what to do with his character. If tomorrow they decide to make him gay, he'll be gay. If the day after tomorrow, they decide he's a transsexual he'll be a transsexual. And if they decide to write the character out of the show he'll die or move back to India.
And if they decide to give the actress Maria Canals-Barrera a bigger part on the show they will write her in as Issabella. And then, and only then will we know what happens.
Otherwise the character Raj is not having sex with other people on strange places or wherever. This all happens in your head and nowhere else. not on the show and not in real life.
So Im telling you, you are wrong in your assumptions, simply because there is nothing to assume.
So there is nothing to discuss. Have fun with your fantasies. But know they are just that: your fantasies.
Oh and by the way: My handle. It's not my phone number. It's just a randomly assigned number by IMDB. Again you jump to a conclusion that is way off base and wildly exaggerated in your head.