The Raj/penny Scene

[Kutra]

After he got caught by Sheldon!!

[Nogravitasatall]

A friend having secret sex with your sister behind your back is a much much bigger break of the Bro code in my opinion than hitting on your friends ex.

Yeah, but one generally never has sex with ones sister, so I think drunk possibly non consensual sex with a former sexual partner is a worse breach. Why does a brother have any say in his sisters consensual sexual partnerships? Can that play both ways? Would you let your sister dictate with whom you can have coitus. I do now worry about how they can fix Raj. I really think as written he can't relate to women in a healthy way, but he is funny outside that.

[SRAM]

I came up with a different slant on this. Soon after the break up, Sheldon had that Dr. nympho (I forget her name) stay over and Leonard had sex with her. He got caught by Penny, who was hurt and he ended up ashamed, even though they were not a couple then. Later she seems to have sex with Raj and gets caught by Leonard, who is hurt, and she is ashamed. Could these have been two situations to show the fans that these two still have feelings for each other, more than just friends? Just a thought.

[Nogravitasatall]

I came up with a different slant on this. Soon after the break up, Sheldon had that Dr. nympho (I forget her name) stay over and Leonard had sex with her. He got caught by Penny, who was hurt and he ended up ashamed, even though they were not a couple then. Later she seems to have sex with Raj and gets caught by Leonard, who is hurt, and she is ashamed. Could these have been two situations to show the fans that these two still have feelings for each other, more than just friends? Just a thought.

Ok. I can see that. That they each felt remorse about how the other reacted rings true. Leonard had no excuse then other than "she let me", which he knew was lame. Penny was also remorseful - there might have been a little bit of payback in picking Raj because Leonard was moving in with Priya, but to say that I'd have to recant on my earlier position that she had no intent. Unless I also say it went further than she thought it might because she got too drunk. If it had been a random partner like Plimpton I might have felt better about it. And they do mirror events, as in the s3 cliffhanger. Though they did random with Zack.

It did do what you said; show they still care for each other, but it was so unsubtle and went so big. I think Lorre did it to shake up the audience and hit them in the amygdala - which I now think might be found in the body, a little below the belt. Still I did laugh. In a shocked way. It was unexpected and funny but it did not make Raj look good, if you think about too much.

Still I have no complaint about the reconstruction. Like repairing a deviated septum, break it to fix it (got that from "Hope Springs"). Maybe that was part of Lorre's intent.

Another notion. Maybe this went so big to whack the other (x)nnys between the eyes and say "no". Not that I want to rain on parades at all. Lorre did it.

(Sorry about prolixity. )

Edited January 1, 2013 by Nogravitasatall

[Doug]

u might be the first person i've talked too who wished Priya had stayed... everyone i know/talked too including myself couldn't stand her haha

Like is too strong a word.

Two episodes earlier she was picking fights with Penny and Sheldon.

Pretty much the opposite of what you want a character to do to be liked.

If you take a step back and look at the character and actress without the negative emotion of fighting Penny and Sheldon she is a lot more interesting.

Priya was beginning to make  friends with Penny an episode earlier.

Another Penny bonding episode combined with a good deed for Sheldon would have made her much more popular.

 

Put another way Priya had a lot of potential that could have been explored.

 

[Kati]

Just remembered how Leonard slept (and dated) Dr Stephanie, who, was meant to go out with Howard on the first place (and he really believed they were fine until he finds out the truth). So well...

[Pomita]

My first reaction was 'oh frickety-frack, not this again', but I see some interesting perspectives here. Here goes mine.

 

a) did you like it

 

b ) was it necessary

 

c) who was at fault  Raj/Penny/Both

 

d) was it a betrayal to Leonard

 

e) any other thoughts

 

a) No. I didn't hate it either. It just seemed odd and unnecessary.

 

b ) I don't think so. I felt it was put there just to have a shocker of a cliffhanger - and sure enough they retracted it (lamely) 10 minutes into the next season.

 

c) Both, because both were drunk. There's nothing to indicate that it was non-consensual, even if Penny was more drunk.

 

d) No. As far as they knew, Leonard was in a happy relationship with Priya at that time. Penny and Raj were free agents.

 

e) I thought it was a silly twist, and not at all required in the larger scheme of the story arcs. But I was flummoxed by the intensity of rage and hatred against that scene which erupted afterwards. As if both their characters were completely destroyed, the show has jumped the shark, yadda yadda. I didn't even see anything particularly out of character in the scene; Penny, from the beginning, is shown to have a penchant for getting drunk and out of control, especially when emotionally disturbed (remember her season 1 dialogue about rebound sex). And Raj had a crush on his best friend's girlfriend and was trying to hit on her, just a few episodes earlier, which to me was worse than getting together with a friend's ex as a drunk mistake. He's lonely and frustrated, and certainly seems to have a questionable moral code in this sense. But that's who he is. If we're talking of morals (not just sexual), none of the characters are spotless.

Edited January 1, 2013 by Pomita

[Nogravitasatall]

It might be that the rage just took place in a teacup. It never hurt the show AFAIK.

[annieogly]

c) Both, because both were drunk. There's nothing to indicate that it was non-consensual, even if Penny was more drunk.

 

Pomita; fyi this is the California law: a rape is committed (among other circumstances) when "a person is prevented from resisting (sex) by any intoxicating, narcotic or anesthetic substance. .

  It doesn't say how much either, it is oh so grey. Given a certain amount of sexism this law will be applied 9 times out of ten to men who have sex with drunk women. So yeah Raj would know about this for sure, he's at a university and this coming week the episode is about sexual harassment. So the writers have made Raj both stupid and guilty.  

 

http://www.scu.edu/wellness/topics/sexualassault/What-is-the-Ca-law-regarding-rape.cfm

[4ofN]

a) did you like it - No. It destroyed the fundamental chemistry of the show.

 

b ) was it necessary - No. It was stupid, stupid, stupid. The whole "we won't call it sex because the tip didn't get inserted" non-resolution nonsense was insulting.

 

c) who was at fault  Raj/Penny/Both - Both but more so Raj.

 

d) was it a betrayal to Leonard - Yes - Both Penny and Raj showed us all that they do not have any deep feelings of friendship towards Leonard.

 

e) any other thoughts - I find it interesting that you can have a thread called "the Raj / Penny scene" and there is no doubt in anyones mind that you are referring to the season 4 finale which was a year and a half ago. I think that this shows how much that scene affected the fan base.

 

 

e) any other thoughts - If you're travelling at the speed of light, and you look at yourself in a mirror that you're holding, what would you see?

 

First off, you can't travel at the speed of light.

 

You could theoretically travel at 99.999999999999999...% of the speed of light at which point if you looked in a mirror you would see yourself. That is the basis for the theory of relativity. Light travels at the speed of light relative to the observer (in this case both you and the mirror since they are motionless with respect to each other) regardless of how fast they might be moving themselves.

Edited January 2, 2013 by 4ofN

[Nogravitasatall]

I meant to say that it did not hurt the show commercially AFAIK.

And it energised the fan base as noted.

[4ofN]

I meant to say that it did not hurt the show commercially AFAIK.

And it energised the fan base as noted.

 

 

I'm not sure that I would agree with this. While it is true that the show has gained a lot of fans since "the scene", it has also lost some.

 

There has been a net gain for the show over the past year and a half, but the viewership could perhaps have been even higher if they hadn't alienated the set of fans who have left because of the "the scene" and other changes to the show.

[Tensor]

I'm not sure that I would agree with this. While it is true that the show has gained a lot of fans since "the scene", it has also lost some.

 

There has been a net gain for the show over the past year and a half, but the viewership could perhaps have been even higher if they hadn't alienated the set of fans who have left because of the "the scene" and other changes to the show.

Or the viewership could have declined. The only evidence we have is the LARGE net gain over the last year and a half. And it's not just the gain, it's the timing. Very, very few shows will increase their numbers as TBBT has done at the five-six year point. There's no evidence that keeping the show the same would have increased ratings, there is evidence that making changes increased ratings.

Whether or not you see the changes as good is another story. I've been with the show since the beginning and I like the additions, changes, and the scene, as an overall part of the arc of the show(I have qualms about certain aspects), doesn't bother me, YMMV.

[viddy9]

I don't see what was wrong with it, to be honest. It was both of their faults. I do like Sheldon's reaction: "what did it look like?"

[BangerMain]

Or the viewership could have declined. The only evidence we have is the LARGE net gain over the last year and a half. And it's not just the gain, it's the timing. Very, very few shows will increase their numbers as TBBT has done at the five-six year point. There's no evidence that keeping the show the same would have increased ratings, there is evidence that making changes increased ratings.

Whether or not you see the changes as good is another story. I've been with the show since the beginning and I like the additions, changes, and the scene, as an overall part of the arc of the show(I have qualms about certain aspects), doesn't bother me, YMMV.

 

I'm with you all the way, Tensor. I'm another old timer who has seen a lot of sitcoms and TBBT acceleration of added viewers in the 6th season is, I believe, unprecedented. I can only think of Sienfeld as a possibility but I think that happened in season 4 or 5. For those who have not done so, read Tensor's analysis on this years ratings vis-a-vis "Friends" in the Season 6 thread "The Big Bang Theory Hits All-Time High Ratings".

 

The big increase in the number of viewers has come from the viewers who were introduced to TBBT through syndication at the start of season five. By the midway point of season 5 the ratings started growing to the point that during the February sweeps, the number of viewers passed 16.5 million. The newbies who came in because they were hooked by TBS and Indy station reruns were mainly seeing seasons 1 thru 3. Good thing they did not see the season 4 finale for the Raj/Penny thing until after they were hooked. I talked to a co-worker who started looking at the show on reruns and when she got to season 4's ending show, she was appalled. By that time she was already looking at season 5 so she knew the result. 

 

Still TBBT has kept most of it's long time viewers and I believe, the story format for season six, where they keep the drama contained to with in the 22 minutes of an episode and making sure that the couples are happy most of the time, makes for very happy fans.

Edited January 2, 2013 by BangerMain

[Nogravitasatall]

I'm not sure that I would agree with this. While it is true that the show has gained a lot of fans since "the scene", it has also lost some.

There has been a net gain for the show over the past year and a half, but the viewership could perhaps have been even higher if they hadn't alienated the set of fans who have left because of the "the scene" and other changes to the show.

With no malice I do say " neener, neener" to them. I'm still enjoying the show. Individuals with offended sensibilities are entitled to switch off. But I think I recall that the wired up rats may starve rather than stop pressing the pleasure button. Also, what can those who were offended substitute for this product? I don't think it has an equivalent. I'd contend, without evidence, that it would be a very small set of viewers who never opened up this metaphorical box of chocolates again.

Maybe all the whining is the evidence. And I have now thought of another usage of the word "adulterated". It doesn't really help my case, but it may be apropos.

Edited January 2, 2013 by Nogravitasatall

[4ofN]

With no malice I do say " neener, neener" to them. I'm still enjoying the show. Individuals with offended sensibilities are entitled to switch off. But I think I recall that the wired up rats may starve rather than stop pressing the pleasure button. Also, what can those who were offended substitute for this product? I don't think it has an equivalent. I'd contend, without evidence, that it would be a very small set of viewers who never opened up this metaphorical box of chocolates again.

Maybe all the whining is the evidence. And I have now thought of another usage of the word "adulterated". It doesn't really help my case, but it may be apropos.

 

Well, gee, thanks for that.

 

I happen to be one of the old time fans who has mostly stopped watching the show (even reruns) because of the changes. The laughs are fewer and I find the relationship focus to be annoying. This has changed the show for me. Originally I considered it to be a unique show that I could relate to as the characters were so like me and the culture that was depicted was so familiar. However, I find that I just can't identify with the characters any more.

 

You are absolutely right that there is no substitute. I've seen IT Crowd and Community, but these do not interest me as much as the original big bang did. This is probalby why I am often negative when discussing the show. It is unfortunate that they found a different, demographic that allowed the show to become more popular. My problem is that I like so few shows that are on the air that to have have a show that I loved change into a show that I don't love any more has been somewhat depressing.

 

As for the suggestion that only a "very small set of viewers" may have stopped watching the show, I would disagree. There were many members of this forum who we don't see here any more because of the changes. While the number of people who have left the fan base may be small, the phrase "very small set" is unfortunate as it is dismissive of those that have left. The only thing one can say is that the number who have left appears to be less than the number of new fans.

 

The reason I say "appears" is that the group that tabulates the ratings have acknowledged that they changed the rating system between seasons 4 and 5 so there is technically no way to tell if the ratings have gone up or down since then. I will, however, go with the popular opinion that the ratings have indeed gone up although the only evidence for this is the opinion of many industry insiders.

[Martin Pollard]

I happen to be one of the old time fans who has mostly stopped watching the show (even reruns) because of the changes. The laughs are fewer and I find the relationship focus to be annoying. This has changed the show for me. Originally I considered it to be a unique show that I could relate to as the characters were so like me and the culture that was depicted was so familiar. However, I find that I just can't identify with the characters any more.

Then pardon me for asking, and I'm not trying to be a jerk (truly), but why are you still here if you no longer like or watch the show? You certainly don't think you're going to convert many (or any) of the people here who still *do* watch and enjoy it over to your way of thinking, do you? I mean, why expend the energy on something that you apparently no longer care about? That's always confused me, I have to admit, because I've seen this on many other fan forums, going all the way back to the BBS days of the 1980s (damn, I'm old)... Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S III using Tapatalk 2

[Tensor]

The reason I say "appears" is that the group that tabulates the ratings have acknowledged that they changed the rating system between seasons 4 and 5 so there is technically no way to tell if the ratings have gone up or down since then. I will, however, go with the popular opinion that the ratings have indeed gone up although the only evidence for this is the opinion of many industry insiders.

 

The only change to the rating system between seasons 4 and 5 was to start including repeat DVR views in the Live + Same Day numbers.   That was shown have no or almost no effect on the numbers.    In a couple of cases, it raised the rating share one-tenth of a point.  And that, in one case on FOX,  was shown to be due to an increase of two-hundreths of a point, from 1.34 to 1.36, which was then rounded up to 1.4.  So your saying there is technically no way to tell which way the ratings have gone is simply wrong.  The big change, in relation to TBBT was between season one and season two, when they started including the Live + 3.  You could question the rise from 8.4 million in the first season to 10.0 million per episode due to the change.   But then, you will have to explain why many series' numbers, and viewership overall went down.  

[Nogravitasatall]

Well, gee, thanks for that.

 

I happen to be one of the old time fans who has mostly stopped watching the show (even reruns) because of the changes. The laughs are fewer and I find the relationship focus to be annoying. This has changed the show for me. Originally I considered it to be a unique show that I could relate to as the characters were so like me and the culture that was depicted was so familiar. However, I find that I just can't identify with the characters any more.

 

I understand. I get your "mostly". But it is sort of like trying to recapture that glow of infatuation in the early parts of a relationship. Its really hard to stay in that spot. The object of your affection has moved on and left you behind. It is real loss. Lorre did some "experimentation" I think to try to sort of do a reset. They have also gone after the bigger audience, which is their remit.

 

At least they didnt cancel, like Firefly (cries noiselessly).

 

And from what I have read of your very insightful postings you know that the self selected set that come to this place is not a random samplling and does not give a reliable indication of what is going on in the general population. And again, how could they just keep repeating the old tricks and stay on the air/web/aether for six years? The medium eats up novelty and spits out complacency.

 

Another good thing is that TBBT, as is, is displacing those contrived reality shows. Who can't be happy about that? One of my favourites once got swapped out for the Pussycat Dolls.

 

Though I will try not to be as dismissive in the future. I can get carried away and forget the winky things .

 

(Except for those misogynist dorks that popup from time to time - no winkies for youse)

Edited January 3, 2013 by Nogravitasatall

[SRAM]

Well, gee, thanks for that.

 

I happen to be one of the old time fans who has mostly stopped watching the show (even reruns) because of the changes. The laughs are fewer and I find the relationship focus to be annoying. This has changed the show for me. Originally I considered it to be a unique show that I could relate to as the characters were so like me and the culture that was depicted was so familiar. However, I find that I just can't identify with the characters any more.

 

You are absolutely right that there is no substitute. I've seen IT Crowd and Community, but these do not interest me as much as the original big bang did. This is probalby why I am often negative when discussing the show. It is unfortunate that they found a different, demographic that allowed the show to become more popular. My problem is that I like so few shows that are on the air that to have have a show that I loved change into a show that I don't love any more has been somewhat depressing.

 

As for the suggestion that only a "very small set of viewers" may have stopped watching the show, I would disagree. There were many members of this forum who we don't see here any more because of the changes. While the number of people who have left the fan base may be small, the phrase "very small set" is unfortunate as it is dismissive of those that have left. The only thing one can say is that the number who have left appears to be less than the number of new fans.

 

The reason I say "appears" is that the group that tabulates the ratings have acknowledged that they changed the rating system between seasons 4 and 5 so there is technically no way to tell if the ratings have gone up or down since then. I will, however, go with the popular opinion that the ratings have indeed gone up although the only evidence for this is the opinion of many industry insiders.

Really you didn't want anything to change in the show!  The reason I ask is because if you watch the first part of the first season you can see that they played with the Sheldon character to finally come up with his character for the rest of the season.  You didn't want any character development, you just wanted to see a bunch of lonely brillant young men make jokes and get into funny situations until that got old and the show was cancelled?

[4ofN]

Then pardon me for asking, and I'm not trying to be a jerk (truly), but why are you still here if you no longer like or watch the show?

 

This question has been posed many times and it always confuses me. Why should people only discuss things that they like and not discuss things that they don't like?

 

People come to internet forums to discuss things of interest with other people. The show may not be my favorite any more, but it is still of interest. I was an obsessed fan of the show for years and there are still a few people around who share my position despite the fact that I am now in the minority. A year ago there were more of us around.

[4ofN]

Really you didn't want anything to change in the show!  The reason I ask is because if you watch the first part of the first season you can see that they played with the Sheldon character to finally come up with his character for the rest of the season.  You didn't want any character development, you just wanted to see a bunch of lonely brillant young men make jokes and get into funny situations until that got old and the show was cancelled?

 

Funny that. You see, I have a different view on things than you do. Perhaps we have different interests. Your suggestion that I "just wanted to see a bunch of lonely brillant young men make jokes and get into funny situations until that got old and the show was cancelled" implies that you see a limit to the possibilities within what I'll call "nerd culture" and that they needed to inject change (new characters, etc.) to keep the show going.

 

While I agree that this is probably true for some, it isn't for me. I would love the show to have continued as it was. In my opinion "nerd culture" has limitless possibilities.

 

I mean, come on, how many popular shows (don't forget that the show often had 15-16 million viewers back in season 3) make the changes that Big Bang has? Sienfeld, Friends, etc. didn't start adding main characters after they were already popular.

[BangerMain]

Funny that. You see, I have a different view on things than you do. Perhaps we have different interests. Your suggestion that I "just wanted to see a bunch of lonely brilliant young men make jokes and get into funny situations until that got old and the show was cancelled" implies that you see a limit to the possibilities within what I'll call "nerd culture" and that they needed to inject change (new characters, etc.) to keep the show going.

 

While I agree that this is probably true for some, it isn't for me. I would love the show to have continued as it was. In my opinion "nerd culture" has limitless possibilities.

 

I mean, come on, how many popular shows (don't forget that the show often had 15-16 million viewers back in season 3) make the changes that Big Bang has? Sienfeld, Friends, etc. didn't start adding main characters after they were already popular.

 

You should read the Season 6 thread called The Big Bang Theory Hits All-Time High Ratings

 

In it the ratings stat geeks discuss the historic ratings growth of TBBT in it sixth season and why it has stunned TV insiders and the cast and crew. Those changes have been, shall we say, quite successful.

 

It is sometimes forgotten that the first two seasons  finished 59th and 42nd in the ratings.The show was changed in season 3, by Lorre, to save it from the TV dust bin of history. They started the Leonard/Penny relationship, added Bernadette and finally Amy and moved it behind "Two and a Half Men" to get people to notice this "New" show. The problem TPTB saw in "limitless possibilities" within  "nerd culture" was that there just were not enough of those viewers out there to keep the show on the air. I'm sure they could have explored all those possibilities in Fanfics after the show was cancelled after season 3 or 4.

Edited January 3, 2013 by BangerMain

[Tensor]

 

I mean, come on, how many popular shows (don't forget that the show often had 15-16 million viewers back in season 3)

Often? Your memory of the numbers seems to be a bit off. Either that, or your definition of often is different from a lot of definitions in dictionaries and other locations on the internet. Going back and looking up the numbers for the third season, it goes as follows, in millions:

11    1 time

12    4 times

13    7 times

14    3 times

15    6 times

16    2 times

The average per episode for the year was 14.14 Current average for this season for all in time slot showings is 19.45 million.

 

 

make the changes that Big Bang has? Sienfeld, Friends, etc. didn't start adding main characters after they were already popular.

MASH, Mary Tyler Moore, Andy Griffith Show etc, did (they also subtracted main characters). And to make your point even weaker, those show's increases in their rating were not anywhere near the five million viewers TBBT has. You know, you really should do some research before making such sweeping statements.