What I'm trying to say is that whether it exists or not in a given episode (hell, a given scene) is entirely arbitrary, the result of an on/off switch the writers can choose to flip or not. It's not a true part of his character (otherwise the writers would stick to consistent rules that make sense), it's just another quick joke they can make on Raj, i.e., if they want the audience to laugh at him they'll put him in a scene with a woman without a beer. If they want him to act normal they'll stick a single beer in his hand and then continue on as normal.

I mean, really, what would be the difference between Raj walking in and saying "I went to a hypnotherapist, I can talk to girls now!" vs. him always having a beer in his hand?

This was poor wording on my part.
What I mean is, there's nothing about Selective Mutism that suggests that, upon a person with Selective Mutism drinking alcohol, the Mutism will be negated or it will (even temporarily) fade away.
So, I do think it is reasonable for me to have referred to Raj's condition in the show as promoting a message that Alcohol Cures All Problems when alcohol is used for exactly that purpose, and alcohol has no similar effect for actual individuals with Selective Mutism in real life. Alcohol is presented as a cure-all when it really isn't.

The fact that Raj suffers occasional consequences for his reliance upon alcohol to speak to women does not refute the fact that alcohol is necessary for him to speak in the first place, when it shouldn't be. That's simply not how Selective Mutism appears to work, at least based on what I'm reading.

Well you just stumbled on a point many fans of the show are arguing, myself included... they managed to fix Howard's storyline a bit with Marriage, they are moving on with Sheldon, Leonard is only getting fixed in the end of the show obviously... i don't recall Raj ever mentioned going to a therapist, only the experimental drug test... i don't know how the real treatment for his condition is, but i would imagine if it was done poorly or too "fantastical" it could be considered in poor taste. And then, like you said it... take that away from the character and what does he have?

it's a Sitcom not a documentary. It's exagerated to comedic effect. Selective Mutism is linked to Anxiety and Shyness... light Drunkness is known to ease up on those 2 things a bit, they just wrote that in for comedic effect.

Mind you that in the show it's very clear that his issue is psychological, since eating a -rum cake- was enough to allow him to speak with a FBI agent once. And the effects are nearly immediate.

I dunno, finally have him come out and start dating Stuart like they hinted at in the beginning of this season and see where he goes from there....Eer, since I've hated what they've done with all of the major relationships, and their past stance on homosexuality, maybe not that. But hell, do almost anything else, since sticking with the detrimental busted ass status quo that's easily fixable just because it's the status quo is one of the contributors to labeling it as the Worst Thing on TV.

To be totally honest i really don't like how they tease that Raj and Amy are "probably-maybe" bi-curious (or in Amy's case Bisexual) now THAT is a forced joke that pokes at nothing.

Specially since it correlates the fact the least sexually active characters suddenly have feelings for the opposite sex... that does rub me badly.

You Been Law Schooled
 

So, just to clarify.

You accused me of not knowing what the hell I was talking about:

…Which, by the way, is an objectively wrong characterization of my degree of knowledge of The Big Bang Theory.

The misrepresentation of mine that you seized upon was that I typed this sentence:

Which you disputed because, in your words:

You likewise point out that the show isn’t advocating that “Alcohol Solves All Problems” because there are occasionally negative repercussions to Raj’s reliance on alcohol. That’s okay, though I directly responded to that argument here:

You didn’t really respond to that yet.

Only, the bottom line is that you’re really assuming that I was attempting to make an argument I wasn’t making at all:

You’ve conceded that Raj is in fact ‘shy.’ You’ve either agreed outright or chosen to simply ignore the related commentary I’ve made regarding misogyny and homophobia in other scenes . Yet you still think it’s appropriate to have essentially trolled – yes, trolled me not once but twice previously when responding to my comments. First you gave a glib TL:DR quip (ironic since you’ve actually typed walls just as long as mine in this thread), then instead of engaging me on the merits on my arguments you said, and I quote:

And now you’re debating around in circles regarding Raj’s Selective Mutism. When it’s beneficial for you to rely on the diagnosis of a real disorder, you do so. When it’s beneficial for you to rely on “comedic exaggeration” as justification for RAJ’S MUTISM NOT ACTUALLY RESEMBLING THE ACTUAL DISORDER you do so and brazenly contradict yourself in the process. You can’t rely upon the defense that Raj’s disorder is ‘real’ as a justification of the sitcom’s approach to Raj, then claim that the exaggerations are for comedic effect WHEN YOU SAID:

…Do you see the inherent contradiction here? In your words the show never “pokes fun at his disorder,” but we’ve just established HIS DISORDER IS DELIBERATELY EXAGGERATED FOR COMEDIC EFFECT. If the disorder is deliberately exaggerated for comedic effect, then yes, that decision was deliberately made to poke fun at an imaginary version of Selective Mutism which alcohol mysteriously temporarily alleviates so that the audience can laugh when Raj gets drunk to solve his problems, and laugh at Raj when he's sober and incapable of speaking.

Okay, I’m calling it like I see it.

Bells: You are trolling. You are trolling in this topic for the mere sake of being antagonistic. You are creating conflict for the mere sake of enjoying the subsequent conflicts. You’re more interested in antagonizing others than you are in actually advancing substantive arguments in defense of Big Bang Theory. Because there isn’t any substance whatsoever here.

Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, I rest my case.

Also; How can the pink panther strike again when it isn't even in the movie?!

Objection! I got better marks in law school than you!

It's mysterious curse does.

Not really. Penny's excessive alcoholism has been a consistent part of her characterisation since her previous break from Leonard. And most of the nerdy humour seems to come from when the characters not knowing what to do and asking other nerds what to do and getting very bad advice. Which is what you'd expect when you ask other socially awkward people how to handle awkward situations. And they might have conversations where they talk about comics or films and apply real life situations to that scenario (for instance, how does Superman wash sweat out of his suit?). That seems like a great length to go for a laugh considering you seem to think that the nerds draw laughs at the slightest geeky thing they do.

Why is it ridiculous that a girl like Penny would do those things? She looks more athleticv than the boys and lots of pretty girls binge drink.

Yes, but not because he's a nerd. It's because he eats fruit loops and that seems more like a hazing thing.

You say this but you're also aware that Raj has tried other methods such as drugs. And in another episode when he's teaching Sheldon meditation, he states it helped him stay in the same room as a girl. As someone said, it's a kind of selective muteism that's basically being exaggerated for humour.

Forcing it into his hand basically involves him holding a beer in his hand. They're usually eating anyway, so how is this really forced? But just to say alcohol does not allow him to act human. He becomes a jerk. The joke is that he can either not talk or be a jerk. Especially when they put him in situations where he has to talk to a woman, like a job interview or sexual harassment meeting. Yes, again, it's an exaggeration, but so are most characterisations in sitcoms.

But Raj isn't a homosexual. In fact he says himself that he's probably metrosexual (maybe that isn't one of the 12 episodes that you've seen.) So he would probably get annoyed if people kept thinking that he was just because he likes some unmanly activities. That would be frustrating and if this was a drama he's be deeply troubled. But it's a sitcom so we laugh at his frustration.

Yes but they usually laugh at what Howard says in response because Raj has said something that Howard can't ask or say in company. You've missed the actual joke there. And it has been used to further a scene, such as when Howard blamed Raj for something knowing he couldn't defend himself and when Raj whispered in his ear he totally lied. I found that funny.

And the laughter came when the side effects caused involuntary movements of his hand. It was still being tested anyway, for which Raj signed up for, so it was a solution that could be persistent anyway.

Does it really matter? This goes back to the rule of funny that was mentioned earlier in regards to ignoring science for the sake of a joke. Do they really need to be so strict in their comedy that they can't have alcohol inhibit his securities long enough for him to over come his mutism. This is not a documentary or a drama, it's a sitcom. If it's funnier to ignore the piece of information, then ignore it.

"That would be frustrating and if this was a drama he'd be deeply troubled."
But that's my entire point!!!

It's wrong plain and simple that our society views homosexuality as so abhorrent that for others to believe we may be homosexual is 'deeply troubling.'

Look, I know Raj isn't homosexual. It really shouldn't matter, but that's not the point of my argument. It's how Raj and others in his social network view the 'accusation' of homosexuality that's so offensive from a social justice perspective.

Ideally we'd live in a society where we didn't give a shit if someone misidentified our sexuality. Period. End of story. What this show does is it turns heterosexuality into a badge of 'normalcy' and 'honor' that Raj is only too desperate to cling to.

First: It's ableist. It's the same kind of shit that upsets so many people when it comes to Sheldon's potential representation of individuals with Asperger's. Exaggerating a disorder into the punching bag for a series of jokes -- so that the misconstrued disability itself is the butt of the joke -- is something that should be avoided. When this happens, Raj is stripped of humanity and simply becomes that guy whose Selective Mutism makes him unable to function. Hell, the fact that it happens solely, exclusively and consistently whenever a woman is simply present -- and the fact that alcohol always temporarily 'cures' the condition -- these are misrepresentations of what Selective Mutism actually is, done so that we can laugh at the idea that someone would have such an affliction.

Second: Bells can't simultaneously claim the 'real disorder' as a defense of Raj's representation of a 'dysfunctional' individual and suggest that "the show never pounces on his shyness...never makes light or pokes fun" at said serious disorder, then claim comedic license for the show's producers to exaggerate that disorder because doing so would be 'funny'. His positions are contradictory.