Well, that's the thing about Fitz -- he now knows that Simmons loves him. But he also knows that she loves Will. And he's not going to prematurely try to force a decision out of her. Because he loves her.
We know that they're gonna get Will back soon,
Do well?
and that he survived his encounter with the specter, because drama, but they don't know that, and to me, Simmons asking what they should do was a pretty clear signal to him that he doesn't have to hold back entirely on Will's account.
On the other hand, I don't think Jemma is in any emotional state to be entering a relationship right now. She is still recovering from the trauma of surviving Planet Hell for six months.
Which I think is another thing that's factoring into Fitz's decision -- he knows better than to rush into this.
She's not in love with Will.
Maybe if she's an (emotional) idiot, Jemma thinks that she's in love with Will.
But she ain't.
It was the situation and the sex.
I mean, that just begs the question of what it means to love someone, doesn't it?
I do think Jemma loves both of them. That doesn't mean that a relationship with Will would actually function back on Earth, or that her feelings for him wouldn't change. But I also am not inclined to invalidate someone's feelings as somehow not being "true."
She didn't kiss (even on the cheek) any of the 3, or even so much as hold hands with them and she knew all 3 longer than she knew Will
Most of the characters in AoS haven't had anyone to make out with or hold hands with since the show began.
Coulson, so far as we know, has literally not gotten laid since he was resurrected until this week. Do we take this to mean that Coulson is chaste? Or Tripp?
Right, Jemma had opportunities prior to being taken by the Monolith and passed on all of them or at least took her time.
Coulson has had opportunities numerous times in Seasons One and Two and chose not to pursue them. This does not mean Coulson is chaste; he had specific reasons.
Same with Jemma. You can't separate her arc with Tripp from the fact that shortly after they became aware of their mutual attraction, her entire world fell apart when Hydra revealed itself and SHIELD collapsed. This drew her into a constant state of crisis for several weeks -- at the end of which, Fitz revealed his feelings for her, leading into their arc in Season Two.
So, no, having not pursued one relationship at the same time that she was engulfed in a huge political crisis does not constitute evidence that she is "chaste."
The first time we see Coulson with the opportunity, he does not take his time.
False. Coulson turned down a beautiful woman in the
very second episode of the series. And it was pretty clear in the first half of Season Two that he had wanted to, he could probably have pursued something with May.
Coulson is not "chaste," but he chose not to pursue some relationships even if he had an interest. Same with Jemma.
Jumping into the sack after only six months."
Like six months is some unreasonably short period of time.
It is, from what we've seen of Jemma.
This is circular logic; you are relying on an
a priori assumption that Jemma's romantic relationships rely on periods of time exceeding six months between first encounter and the beginning of intimacy, without there being clear evidence of this assumption.
Says who?
If nothing else, the deleted scene from S1 tells us what the writers' intentions are with the Simmons character. And their intentions are decidedly not that she is "chaste."
"Says" the fact that the deleted scene was not in an episode.
So? That does not mean it "doesn't count." It means it wasn't in the episode. Nothing in the series has contradicted that deleted scene. It's not like there are varying levels of fictional, here; it's all equally made up.
The writers have shown us their intent by what we have seen in episodes. If what was in that deleted scene had any importance or impact on the story, we would have seen it in an episode.
This argument completely ignores the numerous instances in which circumstances beyond producers' control (allotted time slots, etc.) require them to cut sequences they would prefer to keep.
You continue to insist on some bizarre, sexist ideal of a "chaste" woman, in spite of there being zero evidence in favor of it.
