Lassies of Lallybroch - SPOILERS

[MistressFraser]

New thread to discuss both the TV series of Outlander and the books by Diana Gabaldon. Discussion of spoilers allowed, if not positively encouraged.

Tbh as long as we see loads of Jamie I don't mind how/when they do the reunion.........

I would also drop Mr.w he is such a terrible racist stereotype the only reason to include him is for the acupuncture needles but seeing as they've never made a big deal about Jamie's seasickness in the show they don't even need him for that.
Also hate the Geneva story it's clear DG doesn't think she wrote it as Jamie raping her even though he clearly did. They'll have to change it in the show if they want to keep him a sympathetic character.

All they have to do really is leave the bit out where she says no (which I think they will). It's a bit of a contrived plot in itself though, with all the blackmail stuff and everything.

It will be weird seeing Jamie with someone else but to all intents and purposes, Claire is dead. I think we can forgive him some minor indiscretions.

Still have problems with Laoghaire though. She's such a two dimensional, screeching harridan. I definitely think the show have to make her more sympathetic, a bit like how they tried to flesh Frank out in S1.

Morning Lassies

Morning Sam

Lovely hair don't you think?

Remember, bitches like it curly.

Beautiful hair, must say I prefer it really red, though. He should keep the dye job for ever. Surely we all like it red and curly!

Good evening ladies

Ah swoon at delicious pictures of SH! I'm cracking on with Voyager audiobook and just got passed the Geneva part but on the whole I'm really enjoying the book. How is everyone else fairing through 'droughtlander'.... has anyone started a formal countdown to Poldark yet?

Hey lassies. Completely agree that we need a nice tense build-up in S3 to make the reunion that much sweeter between C and J. We need to feel all the feels of J being with someone else.

It took me until the second read-through of Voyager to realise that J did actually rape Geneva. I can't obviously justify anything like that bc it's sick and wrong. But then I just can't feel the injustice of the position that she put him in and taking absolutely all of his power and rights away with the blackmail that it almost feels ok that he took that power back. I could see her going through with the blackmail if he actually listened to her and didn't go through with it and she would end up feeling ashamed and embarrassed. I dunno. It's all just really fucked up in the end, isn't it?

Correct me if I'm wrong, I think Claire was late 40s early 50's when she went back, right?

She's 49, he is 44.

The Geneva thing is for table, certainly, but I just can't bring myself to feel sorry for her or disillusioned with jamie because she was such a manipulative wee besom who totally abused her position and took away all his power and freedom

I can accept that Geneva was horrible, manipulative etc. I can forgive Jamie for having sex either her and whatnot. What I can't and won't forgive, is DG writing what is essentially rape porn in the middle of it. There was no need for that bit at all.

Geneva was a young girl, however you want to look at it. Jamie was a lot older and a man of the world. A so called 'King of Men' would not be a rapist.

I think DG has some issues around consent, to be honest, there are so many rape/attempted rape scenes, some of them very harrowing, in the books. I think, as well, that there is much more understanding of consent now than even 25 years ago when the books came out. TBH, I and lots of the girls I grew up with had experiences not unlike Geneva s, without the blackmail and subterfuge. I think given historical context, consent want something that would have been considered. Not that I'm justifying rape, I think DG has real problems with consent.

Yy less. Some of the scenes between Jamie and Claire are quite rape porn in the book.

There's a sentence somewhere by j about how a man is a good husband if he doesn't beat his wife.

Yes DG is far too fond of women saying 'no when they really mean yes'. I think it's of its time though. It's clear in later books Jamie doesn't think it was rape and by extension I don't think DG does either.

Given marital rape was only made a crime in the UK in 1991, when the book was published, I'm sure neither Diana nor Jamie would class his speech to claire about not being able to stop once he started on their wedding night as at all problematic.

Had Geneva not said no, the sex would've been possibly been assault on her part under current uk law, as Jamie arguably did not have the freedom to not consent, given she was threatening his family.

You're absolutely right, Jacquetta. Historically, even in quite recent history, it wouldn't have been rape for all sorts of reasons, one being that consent by the woman wasn't really important and the fact that Geneva had forced him to her bed in the first place would play out very badly for her. As for J and c, she is his property, distasteful as that may be to modern sensibilities, and he doesn't need her consent at all. In fact, one of the ways that marriage could happen was for a man to force himself on a woman, that woman then effectively became his wife.
I don't think of the stuff with J and c as rapey, tbh, she is always as desperate as he is, a lot of their sex is quite rough, though. It's more the other rape scenes, beginning with Black Jack assaulting both of them and finally raping Jamie repeatedly, through Brianna and Stephen Bonnet, then the violence in the Beardsley's marriage, Claire being gang raped... It goes on and on.

I don't think j&c is intended as rapey and I don't think Claire ever takes it that way, but there's a few "he held me down and I struggled" moments that are non-consensual IMO

Not liking the sound of the later books at all.

Need to finish the book I'm reading not DG and get on with DoA

I think Claire quite enjoys being overpowered by Jamie. In. the scene where. he has.her pinned. against a tree,. for instance, she is very aroused by the fact that he. is so much stronger than. her and. could. do anything. he wanted to her. There's also. the bit where he. is exacting a forfeit from her and it is quite clear the he is going to. tie her to the bed.

Apologies,. my. Keyboard is acting up and inserting random full stops..

Dry the later books are good. Is not all. rough. sex and. rape. Don't be. put. off,

Claire gets gang-raped?! Whaaaat??!

There is far too much rape in the books as a whole. I've only read up to The Fiery Cross and so far, nearly every main character has been raped in one way or another.

It's tedious* and unimaginative. I think DG clearly has some issues she needs to discuss

• that was wasn't meant to belittle or trivialise anyone's experiences btw, just DG's use of rape as a plot device.

Yes, Claire gets kidnapped and gang raped in, I think, Snow and Ashes. Then Jamie, Roger, Fergus and the men of the Ridge rescue her with much slaughter and mayhem.

There is a lot of rape/dubious consent, I truly think DG has issues. Some of it can be put down to the historical position of women, some to the fact that consent issues, even recently, were not as clear cut as they are now, but some of it must surely be down to how DG sees sex.

I think that a lot of what happens to the main characters is kind of tit for tat. J is raped, so Claire is too: J almost dies after being poisoned by by a bite from a snake in the long grass but "chooses" not to die (NDE), Claire almost dies, but chooses not to, after being poisoned by a very human snake in the grass (NDE): J almost dies on battle, repeatedly and has to be operated on with only laudanum to kill the pain, Claire is shot in battle and is operated on under the same circs: Jamie remarried while Claire was gone, presumed dead, Claire remarries while Jamie is gone, presumed dead, the difference being that Claire was gone for almost 20 years, Jamie was only gone for a few days! After discovering said remarriages there is violent, angry make up sex. All very tit for tat. If I didn't love the books ( and Jamie) so much, I couldn't be bothered with them at all

Sounds like the show writers have their work cut out.....

Less love the full stop frenzy, v funny....

Think the full stop thing has fixed itself. I hope!
The show will have a lot to think about if they take it further than DOA. They handled the Wentworth stuff really, really well, but I don't know how much rapine a TV audience would put up with. The thing is all those scenes are pivotal to main plot lines that carry across more than one book, so they can't just miss them out or play them down.