Tensor

Ship Zone
[Spoilers] Shamy: Season 10

10,791 posts in this topic

Posted

14 minutes ago, Jonny said:

Yea or Nay it being a good idea to re-watch her first appearance before the new episode airs? Is anyone else going to?

Honestly if there was an attraction there it wasn't massive for me, she seemed all about channeling his brilliant mind more than anything and get joint credit for his discoveries. I guess she could have had real feelings for him as well but she never got the opportunity to express them before Sheldon booted her out lol. But i'll admit it's a long time since I watched it, wasn't a fan of it when I first saw it so not one that I check out if it happens to be on E4 repeats.

Well if you do watch her first appearance, pay attention to what she says to Penny.  From what I understand of it, she was interested in him but at the moment, more interested in the science.  And you're right, he booted her out before she even had a chance to go after him romantically once the project was done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

6 minutes ago, Kathy2611 said:

Well if you do watch her first appearance, pay attention to what she says to Penny.  From what I understand of it, she was interested in him but at the moment, more interested in the science.  And you're right, he booted her out before she even had a chance to go after him romantically once the project was done.

I will check that out, at the time I thought it was more about distracting factors than anything from stopping Sheldon achieve what he was meant to do. Again I didn't rate the episode that highly (and thought Sheldon was a bit of an ass back then, its took me time and a great deal of episodes to come round to really liking him) so I may have blanked out parts or themes from it.

Clearly she is not after just his mind in this next one.

Edited by Jonny
joyceraye and Kathy2611 like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

18 minutes ago, Soopysue said:


I'm just replying quickly, but I think the term is usually used is "Common law " wife or husband - when you live with your BF/GF - although I'm not sure if that only applies after a certain length of time . But certainly in the U.K. It eventually entitles you to roughly the same as a proper spouse by law .....although as I say I'm in a rush so can't google to check.
I think the point is that living with your boyfriend etc is considered a very serious relationship :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sorry, but as I work in family law, I have to jump in. Common law marriage is not recognized in all states (I believe it's currently recognized in only 17 of 50.) In states that do recognize common law marriage, it's not so simple to prove. One generally has to use their partner's surname in public, and even go as far as filing state and federal taxes as a married couple.... in other words, hold themselves out to be married. I don't have time to check, but I'm almost certain that California law does not recognize common law marriage. In Shamy's case, they'd just be living together. In Washington State, there is a precedent established for "long term committed relationship," which does provide for some legal protections (commonly for sam sex couples in estate and end of life matters), however, the law is vague at best, and probably doesn't apply in most cases. It wouldn't surprise me to discover that California has a similar law, but from a legal standpoint, Shamy are single adults, regardless of their living situation or commitment to each other, until a marriage license is filled.

joyceraye likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

2 minutes ago, DrWackaDoodle said:

Sorry, but as I work in family law, I have to jump in. Common law marriage is not recognized in all states (I believe it's currently recognized in only 17 of 50.) In states that do recognize common law marriage, it's not so simple to prove. One generally has to use their partner's surname in public, and even go as far as filing state and federal taxes as a married couple.... in other words, hold themselves out to be married. I don't have time to check, but I'm almost certain that California law does not recognize common law marriage. In Shamy's case, they'd just be living together. In Washington State, there is a precedent established for "long term committed relationship," which does provide for some legal protections (commonly for sam sex couples in estate and end of life matters), however, the law is vague at best, and probably doesn't apply in most cases. It wouldn't surprise me to discover that California has a similar law, but from a legal standpoint, Shamy are single adults, regardless of their living situation or commitment to each other, until a marriage license is filled.

I believe California has some of the more permissive [broad/easiest] legal interpretations of 'common law' marriage.

The time frame used to be 7 years.  Someone correct me if I am not correct.

The using "partner's surname in public" is interesting as it only relates to women.  [I think of the Harold Ballard family that owned the Toronto Maple Leafs where Yolanda [sp?] changed her name to 'Ballard' even though they were not married.  That was quite the soap opera and she didn't end up getting ownership of the Leafs, if I recall correctly.]

DrWackaDoodle and joyceraye like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

California marriage laws for those that are interested.

Quote

Does California have common-law marriage?

No. In California, you must obtain a marriage license and enter into a legal marriage in order to be considered married. Living together and taking the same name don't create a common-law marriage. http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/california-marriage-laws-32188.html

 

joyceraye likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Sorry, but as I work in family law, I have to jump in. Common law marriage is not recognized in all states (I believe it's currently recognized in only 17 of 50.) In states that do recognize common law marriage, it's not so simple to prove. One generally has to use their partner's surname in public, and even go as far as filing state and federal taxes as a married couple.... in other words, hold themselves out to be married. I don't have time to check, but I'm almost certain that California law does not recognize common law marriage. In Shamy's case, they'd just be living together. In Washington State, there is a precedent established for "long term committed relationship," which does provide for some legal protections (commonly for sam sex couples in estate and end of life matters), however, the law is vague at best, and probably doesn't apply in most cases. It wouldn't surprise me to discover that California has a similar law, but from a legal standpoint, Shamy are single adults, regardless of their living situation or commitment to each other, until a marriage license is filled.

Sure jump away ! - as I said I hadn't had time to google or check facts and I certainly don't work in law, but my point is - regardless of the terminology living with your significant other( whether by marriage in the conventional sense or not ) IMO is someone who is in a very serious relationship :) I'm super busy today & I'm not looking to start any debate , just saying that IMO Sheldon & Amy are way off limits to anyone else - and again IMO anyone who try's to push in or separate the couple is being extremely disrespectful and is a nasty piece of work, I have no time for these people !


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
mirs1, Riley7, Shamyfan95 and 4 others like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

3 minutes ago, DrWackaDoodle said:

California marriage laws for those that are interested.

 

Too late for Lee Marvin!

Shamyfan95 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

5 hours ago, wowbagger said:

i am a little uncomfortable with the term 'fair game'. Sheldon and Amy have ultimate responsibility for their own relationship. But Ramona's behaviour at the end of the episode is basically assault, so i guess the argument is sort of moot. Whether or not Sheldon is in a relationship, his behaviour did not indicate that he would find any sexual overture welcome. In fact the opposite. For that reason, if for no other, Ramona is culpable.

I don't think I'd go so far as to call it assault. Possibly by its strictest legal definition, but if I'm remembering the TR correctly, Sheldon asked her if she was interested in him romantically and her response was to kiss him, no?  In another context and if Sheldon felt differently about Ramona, her kiss would have been okay. She might have even seen his question as an invitation to respond with a physical gesture.  Imagine a scene between Sheldon and Amy years ago: He says, "are you interested in me romantically?" she responds with a kiss, we all "awww."  Not assault.  Imagine a scene between Leonard and boat girl: "are you interested in me romantically?" she responds with a kiss, we all "hey, that's not cool!" Tacky, but still not assault.

Now if I'm remembering incorrectly and Sheldon had already told Ramona no or not to touch/kiss him, then my argument is moot & wrong :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

7 minutes ago, Kathy2611 said:

No, you didn't remember it right.  He does ask her if she's hoping for a romantic relationship with him and her verbal answer is "what if I am?"  He then response by listing a number of reasons why they can't, the most important being him currently being in one with Amy.  As he's STILL talking, she kisses him.

As for your last paragraph, he talks about Amy all the time and that's something Ramona says.  So she clearly knows he is in a relationship and happy about it.  

Thanks for correcting my memory :) I couldn't remember if there was any discussion between the question and the kiss.  I did know that Ramona is aware of his relationship with Amy. That's why I threw in the Leonard/boat girl comparison. I think Ramona's kiss is tacky and wrong, given Sheldon's relationship status. I just wasn't sure if he'd given her a clear "no" ahead of time.

Edited by Gbb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Oh my.... where to begin with this?
Giving you the benefit of the doubt here I guess you're coming from a legal angle and yes, in that case the state or governmental institutions don't care about "serious relationships". BUT we're talking about a dating situation here and none of the legal stuff has anything to do with the situation at hand.
Yes, you can walk away from a relationship. But you can also walk away from a marriage, hence the handy thing called "divorce". And no, the marriage license doesn't say anything about commitment or availability of dating. There are marriages that are just downright awful and abusive and I would have a hard time calling those "committed". There are also marriages where both partners agreed to an arrangement where they are open to date others so exclusivity is also not something you'll automatically find in marriages. On the other hand there are lifelong caring committed relationships where the partners decided not to get married for some reason or were legally barred from doing so because of discrimination and basically telling these people that their relationship doesn't count because of some stupid legal formality is an awful way of thinking, sorry to be so blunt here.
So when it comes to dating the only thing that matters is what the couple in question thinks of their relationship and how they conduct it. Sheldon and Amy are committed to each other and exclusive to a level that's pretty rare these days - and that is all that counts when a third person tries to intrude. If Ramona thinks that Sheldon is fair game because Amy is out of town then she is at best sadly mistaken and at worst a terrible terrible person for trying to ruin someone else's relationship.

Love this


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
joyceraye, April and Shamyfan95 like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

3 hours ago, Soopysue said:

Sure jump away ! - as I said I hadn't had time to google or check facts and I certainly don't work in law, but my point is - regardless of the terminology living with your significant other( whether by marriage in the conventional sense or not ) IMO is someone who is in a very serious relationship :) 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A very serious relationship also of a only one love interest, which is something rare among people nowadays but quite meaningful and beautiful  :)

9583cda2-cd90-4a09-94b2-71f0f107d3a1.gif

Edited by spidergirl
April, jenafan, Gbb and 6 others like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

16 minutes ago, spidergirl said:

A very serious relationship also of a only one love interest, which is something rare among people nowadays but quite meaningful and beautiful  :)

9583cda2-cd90-4a09-94b2-71f0f107d3a1.gif

That flirty look...

TBBTsquee.gif.3850eef9b51dc7f9c9c348d51acac3c9.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

5 hours ago, Capt. Hilts said:

The term 'spinsters' is almost extinct here in the States.

What do they put for marital status on marriage licences and certificates ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Just now, joyceraye said:

What do they put for marital status on marriage licences and certificates ?

Single for either gender, if never married.

joyceraye likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

3 minutes ago, Gbb said:

Single for either gender, if never married.

Yes, 'single' is the standard usage for both sexes.

Now, on a legal form, such as a marriage license, they usually ask applicants to specify widowed [the verb is the same for both sexes] or divorced, because those are legal statuses relating specifically to marital status.

joyceraye and Gbb like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

17 hours ago, joyceraye said:

So Sheldon, as a bachelor, isn't considered fair game ? 

I don't know how it works in America, but here in the UK, he wouldn't be considered fair game.

If you are decent person, you don't make a move on someone else's boy/girlfriend.

Also, the argument that Sheldon isn't married, so he's fair game, could equally have applied to Leonard, when Mandy kissed him.

Edited by Stephen Hawking

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

4 hours ago, Soopysue said:


I'm just replying quickly, but I think the term is usually used is "Common law " wife or husband - when you live with your BF/GF - although I'm not sure if that only applies after a certain length of time . But certainly in the U.K. It eventually entitles you to roughly the same as a proper spouse by law .....although as I say I'm in a rush so can't google to check.
I think the point is that living with your boyfriend etc is considered a very serious relationship :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't know what part of the UK you're referring to, and I'm no expert on Scots law, but in England and Wales there's no such thing as a 'Common Law' marriage although some younger people think there is and get quite a rude awakening when they find there isn't. There's a term LTAHAW  for tax and benefits purposes ( used to be called Living in Sin ) so that single people who are living together as husband and wife can't cheat the system to put themselves at an advantage above a married couple. Common Law is a general  legal term that means the law as interpreted by judges. The only time it could describe an official marriage was when the ceremony had taken place on a battlefield.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

9 hours ago, April said:

I'd probably always be worried about the relationship ending the way it began: with the guy cheating because someone better came along. ugh.

In this case, there is nobody better than Amy, for Sheldon, and vice versa.

6 hours ago, Jonny said:

Maybe that mindset is more from a different era long past.

I must be from a similar era to you.

joyceraye likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

7 minutes ago, Stephen Hawking said:

If you are decent person, you don't make a move on someone else's boy/girlfriend.

Exactly! No matter if the couple is dating , is engaged or married, they  are already bonded to each other. Imo these people are off to other romantic interactions and only someone with bad intentions may think that can go there and destroy what the couple has together. 

 Besides romantic relatioships as any relationships must not be forced.  Nobody benefits with that as feelings are those things people are into or not.  It is not insisting that they end for work. Who is meant to be would not stop to be just because someone  was intrested and insisted to other changed their minds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

9 minutes ago, Stephen Hawking said:

I don't know how it works in America, but here in the UK, he wouldn't be considered fair game.

If you are decent person, you don't make a move on someone else's boy/girlfriend.

Also, the argument that Sheldon isn't married, so he's fair game, could equally have applied to Leonard, when Mandy kissed him.

We who know Sheldon is one step away from getting his ring out wouldn't see him as fair game for any decent  woman, but what does Ramona really believe about Sheldon's availability ? We don't know what she's heard. The chopped-up, moved-about final version of episode 10.24 is yet to be shown, there might even be an added-to one, and there may be more revealed in  August and September. Yes, if Leonard and Penny were 'untogether' at the time he snogged Mandy, he was fair game. If Lenny were 'together', then he jolly well wasn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

24 minutes ago, joyceraye said:

I don't know what part of the UK you're referring to, and I'm no expert on Scots law, but in England and Wales there's no such thing as a 'Common Law' marriage although some younger people think there is and get quite a rude awakening when they find there isn't. There's a term LTAHAW  for tax and benefits purposes ( used to be called Living in Sin ) so that single people who are living together as husband and wife can't cheat the system to put themselves at an advantage above a married couple. Common Law is a general  legal term that means the law as interpreted by judges. The only time it could describe an official marriage was when the ceremony had taken place on a battlefield.

Funnily enough, Common law exists in Texas

http://statelaws.findlaw.com/texas-law/common-law-marriage-in-texas.html

I don't think Amy and Sheldon fall into the categories to which this law applies, though, but anyway what we are talking about it's not really a legal issue. Commitment in a relationship has not much to do with a ring on a finger, as nowadays society very clearly shows.

8 minutes ago, joyceraye said:

We who know Sheldon is one step away from getting his ring out wouldn't see him as fair game for any decent  woman, but what does Ramona really believe about Sheldon's availability ? We don't know what she's heard. The chopped-up, moved-about final version of episode 10.24 is yet to be shown, there might even be an added-to one, and there may be more revealed in  August and September. Yes, if Leonard and Penny were 'untogether' at the time he snogged Mandy, he was fair game. If Lenny were 'together', then he jolly well wasn't.

In the TR is expressly said Ramona asks many times about Amy, she even speaks with her through Skype and goes in Shamy's apartment. Sheldon himself says her there can't be anything between them because he is in a relationship. She knows enough to understand Sheldon is not available.

Edited by mirs1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

18 hours ago, Capt. Hilts said:

No.

Don't be logical!

OK I won't.

Capt. Hilts likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

4 minutes ago, mirs1 said:

Funnily enough, Common law exists in Texas

http://statelaws.findlaw.com/texas-law/common-law-marriage-in-texas.html

I don't think Amy and Sheldon fall into the categories to which this law applies, though, but anyway what we are talking about it's not really a legal issue. Commitment in a relationship has not much to do with a ring on a finger, as nowadays society very clearly shows.

Yeah, this discussion is drifting really off topic.

It's not an issue for Shamy either way because 1) they're already committed to another without a marriage license (if 10x23 didn't give you that vibe Idk what would) and 2) they are gonna get married anyway with Sheldon making the first step in the upcoming episode.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now