Terry Dresbach

Outlander Costume Designer

On the Objectification of Sam, et al. PART II (added per the request of Terry)

Home Outlander Costuming Discussion Forums General Outlander Discussion On the Objectification of Sam, et al. PART II (added per the request of Terry)

  • Creator
    Topic
  • #5963
    CelticGlamazon
    Participant

    This is a continuation thread of one that is already live and active in the forums. Through some quirk of tech, the thread has become disordered and is at times difficult for new readers to follow. If you have time I recommend browsing some of the wonderful discourse that has occurred there.

    **Link to the original thread**

    On Objectification of Sam, et al

    Terry asked that this link be included in the new thread, because it’s has sparked quite a bit of discussion throughout the fandom this week.

    https://terrizellerwallace.wordpress.com/2015/01/16/the-problem-with-fandoms-aka-the-objectification-of-sam-heughan/

    There have been a few comments in response to this post in The Objectification of Sam, et al Part I. I invite those participants in the older thread to repost their comments in this thread so that we can keep the conversation going in an organized manner.

    Don’t be afraid to participate, even if your input differs from others. I know I’m speaking for everyone here, but we welcome everyone’s respectful discourse and look forward to future discussions. 🙂

Viewing 212 reply threads
  • Author
    Replies
    • #5965
      Terry Dresbach
      Keymaster

      Thank you. I think this is an important discussion.

      • #7431
        Photomom
        Participant

        More ramblings, bear with me…

        When I began to see Sam and Caitriona for themselves and realized what an exceptional gift they were giving me (along with everyone who works so hard to make this a reality). I started looking beyond the characters they portrayed and found Sam to be a genuinely nice, good hearted man who is committed to bringing his best to every scene for us, the fans. I will admit that the healthy female part of me admires his beautifully made male form, is attracted to his extreme masculinity/vulnerability. At the same time I want to tuck him under my wing like a mother hen would her chick and protect him from the “dark” side of human nature coming his way. He appears to me not to know what to do with suddenly being thrust into stardom and all the good, bad and ugly that comes with it. I will be eternally grateful to him for creating My Peak Challenge which got me off the couch on which I had spent the last two years dealing with fibromyalgia. It is astounding to me that he cares so much about the Leukemia Lymphoma research as well as his fans (me) that he would take the time to motivate us(me) into giving/moving and becoming a better me.

        On to Cait, an extraordinarily beautiful person inside and out, separate from her character as Claire. I looked at some of her photo’s when she was modeling and found a stunning woman, strong and self assured, which leads me to believe that she can handle a little bit better than Sam the ugly part of the “fandom” while still retaining her inner beauty. I give Cait major kudos for putting herself out there in the buff, opening herself up to all manner of good and bad criticism. It takes major courage and the ability to be comfortable in your own skin to do it. I don’t know anybody now a day who has a perfect body without being air brushed and hers is gorgeous and real. I love her smile, I love her witty comebacks with Sam, I love her sweetness, her class and most of all her generosity in giving of herself.

        I would like to thank you for giving me this safe place to share my point of view, and I would like to thank Ron for taking the time with his podcasts to go through each episode and explain what went into the writing, filming, production and post production. I have become aware of so many different aspects of film making, things I took for granted or never even came up on my radar. He gave me an immense appreciation for the actor’s dedication, the staff’s discussion and concern for every aspect of the transition from book to film while staying as close to the story as possible. I have a new found respect and appreciation for all that you do, just so I sit down for an hour a week and be able to block out the worries and stresses of my everyday life. Thank you, thank you, thank you.

        This a little off the objectification of Sam topic but I think I manage to address the issue at least a little bit. I have learned that the only actions I have control over are my own and when faced with the chance to inject some good into a situation I will attempt to take it. The only way to counteract the negative is to bombard it with the positive, so this is what I plan to do with the hopes that eventually the negative will drowned out completely.

        • This reply was modified 7 years, 1 month ago by Photomom.
    • #5966
      JB
      Participant

      Thanks for starting a new thread, Crystal! I’m finding the strange disorder thing to be happening on a bunch of the threads, particularly the big General Discussion one, so this is a welcome development! I posted this not too long ago on the previous thread. I’m just gonna paste it, so I have no idea how it’s going to turn out when formatted:

      CelticGlamazon wrote:
      I know that I’m not the only one that’s been sickened by some of the things that have been said in the fandom in the past three weeks, and quite frankly it’s made me question my participation in many fandom related events. I’ve even started unfollowing people that are quite active in the fandom because of the innapropriate discourse they’ve been a part of in reference to all things SH. In many ways, my experience is becoming ‘not fun’ because of constantly coming face to face with fans that are making us all look like sex starved predators.

      I adore this forum and the potential that Terry has given us here to discuss and enjoy something we all like. Thank you all for being respectful and understanding healthy boundaries while allowing us to keep our own sense of humor.

      https://terrizellerwallace.wordpress.com/2015/01/16/the-problem-with-fandoms-aka-the-objectification-of-sam-heughan/

      Yes. Yes, yes, yes.

      I will freely admit to a couple of things:
      1. I have not read all of the older posts in this thread, and
      2. Outlander is my first experience with a fandom.

      Those two things said, what resonated with me about tonight’s post, Crystal, is that I have delved into enough of the online expressions of adoration for the books, the show, the actors, the writers, DG, etc., to feel somewhat ashamed to join them. So much of what is out there does make us collectively look like “sex starved predators.” And that is totally not fun — or fair.

      Another disclosure: I have two degrees in literature, and while I have always read genre fiction, I have never felt the need to apologize for adoring a book the way that I sometimes feel I have to about Outlander — and not because of the content of the book. I have strong reasons (that I’d be happy to share!) about why I am incredibly grateful to have found Outlander when I did, but I really, really don’t want to associate or be associated with most of the heaving fray of Outlander fans. In fact, to be entirely honest, I’m thrilled to have found the people I see posting here because you all seem so reasonable, smart and thoughtful. As compared to the slavering masses I have seen elsewhere.

      I’m rambling, but here’s the cringe-worthy question I have stuck in my head: Why does it feel like it’s almost a given that a majority female fandom like this would tend toward this kind of panting, drooling, desperate behavior?

      And here’s a slightly more highbrow one (and I did notice that someone mentioned this way back when upthread, oh, and also in the comments to the link in the original post tonight): Why, when Diana Gabaldon has written a book that turns gender tropes on their heads and is at least partly about the feminist-ization of a character living in a decidedly non-feminist era, would she sit on a stage with the actor who has been hired to portray that character and tell him he has a really nice ass? (For anyone who missed it, 33:23 here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IioLJ29C2T8.) I have a lot of respect for DG, but this was not cool. (Then again, I think I could go back and forth for days about the cult of Diana Gabaldon. Anyone wanna start a thread?)

      • #5971
        conniebv
        Participant

        The only person that can address Diana’s comments properly is Diana, and she tends to do so pretty decisively. I suggest putting that question to her directly on her FB if you want an honest answer, because she’ll give it, and all we could offer is speculation.

        Also, I haven’t seen this behavior in the majority of the fandom. I feel like we’ve been tainted by a few women who have become legend, like the famous Thru the Stones woman who tired to look under GMcT’s kilt. I was at that event, and it was late and a bunch of people (and staff) had gone to bed. A bunch of us went and told the dude who was running “security” and he said that they didn’t have a person looking after him because Graham was a man and “could handle himself.” Now I helped organize events for The Smithsonian, and that freaking killed me, because it was not OK. What happened to him was wrong. They both should have had a dedicated person (ideally two) to crowd-manage. This drunk lady was acting out prior. She should have been taken out before this. As it is, she is banned from all future events, but now she lives in infamy as an example of that event, when so much other good stuff happened there.

      • #6029
        WatchrTina
        Participant

        I recall the interview where Diana made that comment about Sam’s arse. It was the 92nd Street YMCA panel. Going strictly from memory (I watched it via live streaming) my recollection is that Sam & Cait were asked about the difficulties of doing nude scenes / sex scenes (a frequent question for them) and in that discussion Diana mentioned that she had seen the dailies from the wedding episode and that Sam and Cait had done a great job. Then she said “Honesty compels me to mention that you have a great arse.” Unless I’m mistaken, Sam’s reaction was to laugh and then high-five her. They later left the stage walking side-by-side, with his arm around her, chatting. It was clear to me that they get along very well and Sam wasn’t troubled in the least by that comment. To my mind, the most disturbing moment of that panel came from the audience when someone, noting that Sam and Cait had to do a screen test of their “chemistry” together, asked if Tobias and Sam also had to have a “chemistry” test. I think it was meant as a joke — people laughed — but if you know what transpires between Jamie and Black Jack near the end of book one, that question was in incredibly poor taste.

        One more example of the relationship between Diana and Sam. I recall Diana tweeting to Sam a few months ago saying words to the effect of “Hey Sam, you remember how people kept e-mailing me random photos of you when you were first cast? Well now they are sending me photos of your arse with random tattoos photoshopped on.” To which Sam replied “Yeah? Like what?” and the inimitable Diana replied, “Well, you asked for it <grin>” and tweeted — to Sam and all her followers — a photo of Sam’s arse with a fake tattoo.

        Based on all that, I have no problem with Diana’s comment in that panel. It’s pretty clear to me that Sam didn’t have a problem with it either.

      • #6042
        barbc624
        Participant

        I personally don’t have a problem with the comment between friends in a non public forum. But…what if Ron had made that same comment about Caitriona that night? Can you imagine the ensuing outrage? That is my problem with it being so easily excused.

        That said, I think CelticG makes a great point about Diana not being used to being in such a large public eye at that point in time and having since taken a stand about objectifying the actors. I don’t read her Facebook for much the same reasons as CelticG stated so I hadn’t seen that, while I have seen her original comment used as an excuse for poor behavior. Unfortunately nothing ever disappears on the Internet – a lesson to us all about what we post.

      • #7343
        jackie
        Participant

        Hi, I have not read every post, in part because my browser seems to be in rebellion with this site, so sorry if you feel this is repetitive. Also, I am trying to reply to “all” or more accurately to the OP rather than to a particular reply or person as I am also responding to a particular recent event.

        I was very disturbed by what happened yesterday, 3/21/15, involving two screen captures of Sam Heughan, not much better quality than paparazzi shots, that were apparently stolen and leaked to the social media world without the Producers’ or the Network’s permission. These included a pretty much frontal nude shot. One of them, the frontal shot, went viral. The female fandom went wild.

        I am active on Twitter and on FB, and hang out on other social media sites, and follow blogs. So, I was pretty bombarded yesterday with the photo. In many cases, once it was understood in the fandom that they were not official, and were likely stolen, people started taking them down. Some groups posted modified versions and felt they had done their due diligence, saying well, until we have heard for sure from someone (?) that they were stolen, they stay up. One secret group I belong to took them down, but members were actively bragging about having saved screen shots and were sharing amongst themselves in DM’s. Some fans still have them up on Twitter. Some are using them as wall paper for their phones. The few little voices that worried about Sam’s feelings or the reaction to the pics were squelched. He apparently had lost his right to care by agreeing to act in the series in the first place.

        So, this is both about objectification, and something else, the line alluded to in earlier parts of this discussion. I think a line was crossed, but do not have a group to discuss this with. I tried in my secret FB group and got ignored: no one was mean to me, it’s a group where people are decent and kind to one another, but mostly I was made gentle fun of and the group moved on.

        The line here, and finally I am getting to my point, has to do with the rules of the game. Generally, when we see a cap or clip, it has been vetted by the producers, the network, it has been directed, it has been edited, it has been choreographed and in a sense, curated. And it very likely is aligned with the agreements made between the actor (or more accurately the actor’s agent and attorney) and the producers regarding how far is too far. I don’t know what Sam’s agent agreed to. I don’t doubt that there was a likely agreement to full frontal under certain circumstances. But we don’t know if this capture represents the end product of all that. It has a Starz logo, but it is not much more to my eyes than raw footage, and distorted raw footage. At least one producer has tweeted that it was never meant to be a screen shot and was not released by Starz.

        I feel a line has been crossed. (Warning: possible accurate terms for physical parts of people ahead.) It isn’t just that women are openly drooling over a man’s penis in public forums, or discussing its size, women who would likely be horrified if men were drooling publicly over a woman’s mons pubis, and sharing illegally acquired photos of it widely and wildly over the internet, but these are not approved pictures. Outlander is a show where there are almost nude shots, sex scenes, near rapes, rapes to come, and likely full frontal nudity. But the scenes the fandom slavers over I think should be the ones that were vetted and released. Because presumably everyone had a say in it: the producers, the studio, the agents, the lawyers, the DP’s, the editors, and so on. It is a finished work of art. So, I am struggling a bit with the line that I feel has been crossed and would like to chat with someone about it.

        Any takers?

        Thanks,
        Jackie

      • #7355
        Katie (@bunnums)
        Participant

        Jackie,

        I was also disturbed by the photos leaked yesterday. To be honest, no so much the actual content of the photos but the manner in which they were distributed. Media/reviewers have had episodes 9-13 for a while now, presumably with an embargo on discussing the contents of those episodes. (I work in PR and handle embargoed content regularly, though I do not and have never worked in the entertainment industry.) It is a huge violation, in my experience, to allow embargoed content out.

        I am going to assume that the contracts for the actors have clauses about nudity and that everyone involved agreed to those terms. However, it’s one thing for that kind of salacious content to be out there after it’s been released by the production (ie, in the context of the episode on its air date). It’s quite another for it to be leaked by some unnamed source completely out of context. And that bothers me to no end.

        There’s also another discussion to be had about why the production felt it necessary to have Jamie stand in thigh-deep water instead of waist-deep water (as, I believe is the case in the written text). Standing in water waist-deep with the red boxers floating off would give the exact same information, but without the seemingly gratuitous visual. I will wait to pass final judgement on that until I see the scene *in context* (I’m guessing it’s in the Lallybroch episode) but I’m hoping against hope that it’s not just to give female viewers a screenshot to squee over. I know, I’m the eternal optimist. 🙂

        Katie

    • #5967
      Theresa
      Participant

      I read the article and agree with the points. I decided to leave my comments here, rather than on the other blog due to the protected nature if this forum. I, too, have chosen to unfollow some groups and people, due to objectification (and also due to blatant copyright violations, which seems to bother few). Some people claim “what the harm?” when joining in rough talk about Mr. Heughan, but the kilt incident with Mr. McTavish is a perfect example. I was there and most of us who were nearby assumed she had slipped or something. It wasn’t until after the conference that we learned what really happened. The woman had done it on purpose: dropped to the floor and rolled right under his kilt. She even bragged to others and later tried to defend her actions as harmless. For the rest of us, we grew sick as we realized we had witnessed what amounted to a sexual assault. If the gender roles had been reversed, the police would surely have been called. To his credit, he’s only made a generalized remark about it. That event and it’s aftermath showed me the ugly and scary side of being a ” fan ” of someone. I’m thankful I was a book fan first; that makes it easier to keep things in perspective.

    • #5969
      conniebv
      Participant

      Here’s my original response from the other thread:

      *sigh* Okay, I have a lot of thoughts about this.
      First, let me say that I agree with the basic tenets of this, and have always abided by them: I don’t body shame, I don’t get personal, and I try my best to phrase things in a way that I would accept hearing. My experience in the fandom has been almost 100% positive, and maybe it’s because I try to make people laugh. But there are exceptions.

      What I do get TONS of is other adults telling me their opinions on others’ behavior, and while I agree that we are all entitled to an opinion, I can tell you that if the purpose of that opinion is to open a dialogue where the opposing side thinks your side has any value, articles like this are NOT the way. The first half is fine, and then it takes a turn.

      Don’t write an article speaking about respect and then imply that the women you are speaking about fantasize about the actor or the character because of the state of their marriage. Think about the comparisons you are making to institutionalized sexism and misogyny and maybe don’t oversimplify those very complex issues in service of your argument. Blanket statements like “Don’t kid yourself, you are part of the problem” are more of a slap on the wrist than a respectful invitation to dialogue.

      I’m just a rabid feminist man, and I really wish we would be as respectful of others as we demand. ALL others. Even ones we disagree with, because if we don’t, it will always be us vs. them, where one side gets to be righteous and one is wrong and that’s not a club I want to join. I don’t think in those terms.

      Sorry for the soapbox rant. Ya hit me right in the idealism.

      Edited to add: I wanted to find an article that expressed the complexity of objectification in my thoughts, and I think I found a pretty good one.
      http://everydayfeminism.com/2014/07/men-objectified-by-women/

      • This reply was modified 7 years, 4 months ago by conniebv.
      • #5979
        WatchrTina
        Participant

        This is my first post here. I was relieved to find someone who was a bit critical of the article that sparked all this discussion. Because while I agree with many of the author’s points, I thought she used too broad a brush in her tarring and feathering of other fans.

        I, too, have been disturbed by some of the things I’ve read on the internet from fans of the show. I have blocked a couple of people on PreviouslyTV.com so that I don’t see their posts anymore because of some body-shaming comments they made about Caitriona. Those comments were made in the middle of what had been a very positive, celebratory discussion of The Wedding episode. It was a real shame when it happened — it tainted the whole discussion. But I will confess to having commented, in that board, on how good Sam looked. I have, on more than one occasion, expressed my appreciation for the writers / directors habit of having Claire tend Jamie’s wounds while he is bare-chested, gently lit by fire-light. I cheerfully read the Outlander Anatomy post all about “Jamie’s Chest”. Is that also “Objectifying” Sam? I hope not. I consider myself a true fan. I went to see Emulsion when a local group organized a viewing. I’ve donated to his charity. I’ve posted a lot on various boards about how happy I am with the TV version of these books I love and I’ve specifically written about how delighted I am by the casting of Sam & Cait. I avoid negative comments. But I do, from time to time, say something complimentary about how Sam looks. I used the word “eye-candy” just yesterday when I was writing a compare-and-contrast post about Outlander vs Black Sails, during which I acknowledged that Black Sails does have a couple of actors who look very nice with their shirts off but Jamie’s chest, gently lit by fire-light is still my favorite. Am I objectifying Sam when I say things like that? I hope not. And I doubt if it was posts like mine that the writer of the article was talking about. I think I know the creepy comments she was reacting to. They bother me too. But her article bothered me as well.

      • #5983
        conniebv
        Participant

        WatchrTina, that was beautifully put. I am actually writing my recap for 102 right now and I write about the firelight and praising Jesus for it. I don’t want to remain uncritical of myself, but I don’t feel that it falls into objectification because I am not divorcing the individual from my appreciation. Objectification to me, is more in the realm of posting still pictures of his butt divorced from the performance they were meant to enhance. I think the fact that you question yourself is a great thing, and something we should all do. I did, and it made me commit to never showing their nudity on my blog because I feel like that was not their intent when they showed us their bodies.

        I really appreciate your thoughtfulness.

      • #5987
        rachely
        Participant

        To quote the spectacular Jennifer Lawrence:

        “I didn’t tell you that you could look at my naked body.”

        and

        “Just because I’m a public figure, just because I’m an actress, does not mean that I asked for this,” she says. “It does not mean that it comes with the territory. It’s my body, and it should be my choice, and the fact that it is not my choice is absolutely disgusting. I can’t believe that we even live in that kind of world. ”

      • #7621
        Lizabat13
        Participant

        Well said!!!!

    • #5980
      plaidwoman
      Participant

      The fact that this has to be a topic for discussion makes me nuts! To be a woman with a title of daughter, sister, wife, mother, aunt or friend does not preclude the title of Human Being. I am baffled by some of the SM I read and sometimes wish I could unread the ridiculous and hateful ones. The phenomenon I find really puzzling is how the confrontations of the crude and the righteous turn into mutual bullying. Being right gets in the way of civility. I hardly think that this was the intent of our Foremothers and Forefathers had in mind when the espoused Freedom of Speech.

    • #5982
      MrsParker
      Participant

      I agree, Connie, that the second half of the article gets a little bossy — you’ll lose your audience if you insult them too much.

      The part that jumped out at me was “entitlement.” There is an idea that people are justified in the overt objectification, the touching at events, etc. simply because the person is famous. I think it goes beyond “the price of fame.” Too much privacy is invaded, too much judgement is happening to the person simply based on their job. Acting is a job. Sam and Caitriona do it very well and deserve praise for it, but it doesn’t give the mass public any more rights than anyone else doing their job.

      For example: I make cheese. That doesn’t mean you can touch my goats.

      • #5985
        conniebv
        Participant

        First of all, I would ask to touch your goats politely and abide by your decision, because goats are adorable.

        I agree that entitlement (I like this word for this) is an issue in many fandoms, and what I have seen be most helpful is a strong word from above. Like I’m also a fan of Arrow, and Amell has a strong fan following but he is the first to call someone out on being inappropriate and not owing them his life. So when this happens on Tumblr or Twitter or FB, the rest of the fans who know the deal close ranks and say “Hey dude, not here” and so the status remains quo.

        With that, I don’t mean to say that anyone’s behavior is the star’s responsibility. You’ll always have the fringe elements that think rules don’t apply to them and that acting a fool is cute. But I think it helps to hear over and over, “Hey dude, not here” in a tone of equals. Not in the maternal/paternal tone it sometimes devolves to.

    • #5984
      rachely
      Participant

      I’m gonna repost something I put in the other thread:

      This is address to a generic “you” not a named “you”
      I think the problem lies in making it too much about SH. Unless you all want to form the Society to Preserve Sam Heughan’s Virtue, which I don’t think you do (because it doesn’t have a catchy acronym for starters). But if you pull him out of all the other actors then you are rather attacking people on a personal level because if you’re saying “you shouldn’t do that to Sam” it’s personal to someone who has, in fact, been speaking about Sam.

      Outlander is really just the flavor of the moment, it’s been Harry Potter’s Dick, and Just How Big IS Jon Hamm, Or Alexander Skarsgard in the Snow. It just happens to be that at this very moment Sam is the big thing–at least in the circles that WE are all in. None of my real life friends watch Outlander so they clearly haven’t been discussion Sam’s ass. Remember, when you’re following 100 people who are in some way related to Outlander you’re putting yourself in the center of a very small circle.

      And now I’ll get off my high horse.

      • #5986
        conniebv
        Participant

        There is a curious mothering of Sam that, while I understand in the sense of being a mother and not wanting to hear about overtly sexual aspects of my boys, I don’t get in the sense that women feel they have to rush to preserve the sensibilities of a full-grown man. I am down with respect and not subjecting him to having his taste in women questioned, or asking about his private life, but when there is a thread about the fashion he wore to an event promoting the show and I say “I thought the suit jacket pulled” and I get back “OMG LEAVE HIM ALONE”, I wonder what exactly the heck they are protecting him from.

    • #5988
      hotscot
      Participant

      I’m commenting to the person who looked under Graham’s kilt. I’ve played in a bagpipe band for many years. I’m a tiny, female, petite, cultured physician with a masters degree in literature (in other words, not accustomed to rude behavior from strangers). The minute I put my kilt on & march in a parade, all kinds of strangers- men & women are trying to pick up my kilt, look under my kilt, ask me what’s under my kilt…etc. My son, also a piper was marching in a parade at the age of 9 and some grown woman picked up his kilt to see what was under it. He ran up to me crying and related the incident. Since that time we all wear some sort of athletic short under our kilts. It’s amazing what idiots people can be, but we’re all used to it by now. My usual response to the “big question” is “socks & shoes”. If they attempt to look for themselves my bass drone makes a dandy weapon for whacking them up side the head!

    • #5989
      hotscot
      Participant

      I really enjoy Diana’s books- they are a great diversion. Like others here, I didn’t much care about her comment on Sam’s gluteus maximus. Seemed disrespectful, but maybe it was an inside joke?

      • #5992
        plaidwoman
        Participant

        When taken out of context it sounds awful. It was in NYC at a screening. I also believe there was alcohol involved. They’d all been drinking while the audience was watching ep1. They were all pretty funny that night, relaxed with each other and by the way exhausted from a week at ComicCon.

    • #5990
      conniebv
      Participant

      Oh, and okay, here’s a great example of what I WOULD consider objectification. *sigh*
      http://thats-normal.com/2015/01/how-to-lose-sam-heughan-in-seven-days/?utm_campaign=coschedule&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=Thats_Normal&utm_content=How%20to%20Lose%20Sam%20Heughan%20in%207%20Days

      • This reply was modified 7 years, 4 months ago by conniebv.
      • #5996
        MrsParker
        Participant

        I have a quandary with that blog post. On the one hand, I adore the ladies at That’s Normal. I like their snark, their humor, and they were a part of getting me into Outlander in the first place.

        On the other… this one went a little too far for me. They usually keep their humor and writing centered around Jamie-the-Character, and this one tilts toward Mr. Heughan-the-Person. It also strays from their usual admonishment of over-zealous fandom. *sigh* indeed.

      • #6001
        MrsParker
        Participant

        Ugh, I can’t edit my own post. I think the article was meant to be tongue-in-cheek. It is titled “How To Lose Sam Heughan in 7 Days” and given Julie’s previous posts, I think that’s what she was going for — the creepy, darker side of the fandom. But I think she needed to wrap it up as such at the end.

      • #6023
        conniebv
        Participant

        I was going to say, I largely blame the editor on this one. If this had crossed my desk I would be like, did you mean for this to come across facetious? Because it didn’t. And it blends the line between character and person a bit much, do one or the other. The idea could have been cute, but make it ridiculous, silly.

        So yeah, editing.

    • #5993
      maureenanne
      Participant

      I am stubborn and very late to social media of any form. My daughter encouraged me to join twitter because I was so excited that Outlander was going to be made into a series. I have been a bit taken aback by some of the comments and actions that have been described in this blog directed to the men of Outlander. However, having read through texts, snapchats, youtube videos, vines and twitters that my 22 year old son and 14 year old daughter are exposed to…I am trying to put all of this in perspective. I am a health care attorney and I give annual presentations on the pitfalls of our modern forms of communication. Remember when we would take time to compose a thoughtful letter? In the age of e-mails, texts, tweets etc. we can lose our manners, professionalism, and good sense. Couple that with the artificial nature of social media and now you have a fandom that has easy access to open twitter pages and is of the opinion that there is a genuine relationship between fan and star. I am not sure what to make of the woman who threw herself under Graham M.’s kilt. Perhaps she was drunk and trying to impress her friends. I am also not sure what to make of DG’s comments to Sam H. but she did indicate in another interview that she has a hard time separating Sam and Jamie (I can’t recall the exact words) but perhaps that explains her comments. As for me, I have to confess that I am guilty of a maternal objectification of Sam and Cait. I don’t like to hear that Cait has to have harsh perms to make her beautiful, straight, silky hair a curly mop…(can’t she just wear a wig) and that Sam H. is downing jars of peanut butter (coffee and nut oils bad for the gall bladder) and lifting to become big Jaimie. My husband has a torn rotator from lifting over the years. Forgive me for sharing my silly, irrational thoughts with just this small group. I promise you that I won’t tweet, vine or snapchat any of this… I know that all the stars of Outlander have family that will worry about the care and keeping of them. I’ll close by commenting that I really think Outlander and the Outlander community are unique. I can’t imagine another series where there is anything akin to Terry’s blog where you can get so close to the costumes, design process, and also have a meaningful discussion about the objectification of the men of Outlander. I have to think that we want to share and protect what is fabulous about Outlander world for very selfish reasons. We want the series to go on and on because it gives us pleasure to watch. My thoughts and my confession.

      • #5994
        conniebv
        Participant

        Great, thoughtful post. I think you hit the nail on the head with what you said about social media and the immediacy (and maybe sometimes resulting thoughtlessness) of our comments.

    • #5995
      gingerlovinmind
      Participant

      I was a little hesitant to come over, because I didn’t want to make anyone uncomfortable. But I heard that this was warm group of fans…so here I am. Please let me start by saying that I am glad that not everyone agrees with me…geez, that would be boring. Also, I am fully aware that I can be preachy, my kids tell me that on a nearly daily basis. I am working on that. (It has been one of my New Years’ resolutions for at least 25 years.) And finally, I have met some amazing and very respectful fans, and (yes) I realize that the are in the majority.

      • #5997
        MrsParker
        Participant

        Welcome! “Uncomfortable” is not an issue on these boards — please explore some of the other threads and topics lately (to flood or not to flood?). I liked your piece and admire you for saying a lot of what many of us feel needs to be said. Hope you stick around!

      • #5999
        gingerlovinmind
        Participant

        Thank you!

      • #5998
        conniebv
        Participant

        Hello! I already commented on your post a couple of times so I appreciate you continuing the conversation. Welcome! I’m new here, too.

      • #6000
        gingerlovinmind
        Participant

        *Waves* Yes! I appreciated your input. Thank you!

      • #6016
        barbc624
        Participant

        I’m so glad you came over. This is a great group and we have very interesting discussions. But what I think you will find is that even though we all don’t always agree, we keep it respectful and I have found everyone here open to listening to what others say, and then responding thoughtfully. I know I have learned a lot from everyone here, probably the most from those who come at things from a different perspective. If you read some other threads you’ll find we sometimes refer to ourselves as the “Pushy Bitches” but it’s meant in a good way as in the posters here are strong women who respect ourselves and others and who are willing to put ourselves out there for what we believe in.

        As I have said before, I find the obsessive personal attention paid to Sam on Twitter to be very uncomfortable. I don’t quite get how following Sam’s tweets translates to having a personal relationship that allows a fan to say whatever they please to and about him, but that seems to be a pretty widespread perception out on the Twitterverse. Maybe it’s my sense of boundaries and privacy that I would want for myself that makes me feel that way. Maybe Sam and Starz subscribe to the theory that any publicity is good publicity and Sam just ignores the stuff that is in poor taste. He is an adult and can take care of himself – as pointed out he can say to the fans that there are limits as did Steve Amell. Or, he can mute the fans who offend so he won’t even see their tweets. They won’t know and he doesn’t have to see it – maybe he does that.

        My concern is that as a woman I hate hate HATE to see other women perpetuating the behavior that we call men out on. If we don’t want to be treated that way, or want our daughters to be treated that way, then we cannot turn around and do the same thing to men. That right there, demolishes our arguments against the behavior. If we expect men to treat us with respect than we must do the same to them. That is the crux of why I believe it needs to be called out when we see it happening.

        The other thing I see happening in the fandom that I really dislike is the competition among fans to be recognized by the actors and/or those associated with the show. I feel like there are those fans who actively pursue the OL team’s notice by responding to every single tweet Sam, or Cait, or Terry, or Diana, or Matt Roberts, or whoever, makes, no matter what the subject and the fans actual interest in it. Then, when the object of their response favorites or responds back, there is a public jubilation ceremony to make sure everyone knows about it. Hello, the people you are tweeting to are people like you. Very talented and nice people, but they aren’t any better than that friend you’ve known for 20 years who is a stay at home mom, or maybe a hard working professional in some non glamourous profession. If you have a real interest in common with them then go for it ( e.g the costumers and knitters who want to converse with Terry for the sake of her techincal knowledge and her willingness to share it with them, not just because she is the costume designer for OL).

        Maybe this topic also needs it’s own thread because I seem to see this happening more and more and I’ve been in a fandom that was pretty much torn apart by fan wars. I don’t want to see that happen in OL and things can get out of hand really fast if left unchecked. There are already several fan sites I won’t go near with a ten foot pole and people I have blocked on Twitter. Maybe that’s the nature of a fandom that is so large – there will be divisions and various sites for people who have different beliefs or reasons for being there but there needs to be a mutual respect among fans for those who have a different viewpoint and a common agreement that attacks on those who think differently will not be tolerated by anyone.

        So that’s my soapbox for the day. Thanks for putting up with me.

        • This reply was modified 7 years, 4 months ago by barbc624. Reason: My abysmal typing skills
      • #6025
        conniebv
        Participant

        Barb, a lot of good stuff there, and two points I’d like to comment on specifically.

        My concern is that as a woman I hate hate HATE to see other women perpetuating the behavior that we call men out on. If we don’t want to be treated that way, or want our daughters to be treated that way, then we cannot turn around and do the same thing to men. That right there, demolishes our arguments against the behavior. If we expect men to treat us with respect than we must do the same to them. That is the crux of why I believe it needs to be called out when we see it happening.

        I agree that we should not and treat men this way. I have two boys, and I constantly tell them that they need to think of every debate we have ever had before they reduce any woman to a body and discount her mind. That said, I don’t think another person’s behavior gives permission for or excuses anyone to disrespect me and discount my personhood. Not sure if that is what you were saying, but I wanted to put it out there.

        The other thing I see happening in the fandom that I really dislike is the competition among fans to be recognized by the actors and/or those associated with the show. I feel like there are those fans who actively pursue the OL team’s notice by responding to every single tweet Sam, or Cait, or Terry, or Diana, or Matt Roberts, or whoever, makes, no matter what the subject and the fans actual interest in it. Then, when the object of their response favorites or responds back, there is a public jubilation ceremony to make sure everyone knows about it. Hello, the people you are tweeting to are people like you. Very talented and nice people, but they aren’t any better than that friend you’ve known for 20 years who is a stay at home mom, or maybe a hard working professional in some non glamourous profession. If you have a real interest in common with them then go for it ( e.g the costumers and knitters who want to converse with Terry for the sake of her techincal knowledge and her willingness to share it with them, not just because she is the costume designer for OL).

        Yeah… this one hits home for me. I am Twitter friends with both types. When I started doing my recaps, there were people who BOMBARDED the cast with them, and then came to tell me and I cringed, because really, I don’t want to be a bother. I love and appreciate it when Diana tells me I am funny so I post links to her page so she knows they’re out there, but then I just withdraw into my cave. I know several just like me, we just tweet each other and are pretty happy.
        I also know fans that are relentless and I have spoken to them about how it’s okay if they don’t get retweeted that week or day or whatever, that the cast is busy, that they are already really engaged… I have a lot of feeling for them, they love the show so much. Sometimes it is the one bright spot in an otherwise dull life, the thing that gets them out of bed and so I don’t want to judge, but I do worry for them.

        It’s hard. I don’t want to preach, so I just try to be supportive. In Spanish we say, caras vemos, corazones no sabemos. We see faces, but we don’t know hearts.

      • #6080
        DJN
        Participant

        Somehow this did not go where I had intended..reply meant for gingerlovin….

        Glad you’re here. I was very happy to find Terry’s invitation to join the discussions here (thank you Terry)and look forward to participating in conversations with people who understand civility and respect. I would also like to thank you again for starting this conversation and it appears there are many others who agree. M

        • This reply was modified 7 years, 4 months ago by DJN.
        • This reply was modified 7 years, 4 months ago by DJN.
    • #6003
      barbc624
      Participant

      As requested a rpost of my comments on the other thread.

      I saw this as well and in fact invited the author to come over here and join us. I’m pretty selective about who I follow on Twitter so I guess I miss a lot of the drama, thank goodness. Although I did stumble onto a twitter dialogue once about Sam that made me shudder and creeped me out. I got out of there fast and am sorry to say I didn’t engage, but the tone of what was going on was just too nasty and it seems others who had tried to dialogue were really harassed over it. I just didn’t have time to deal with that right then. I’m sorry to hear this stuff is rearing it’s ugly head once again.
      Maybe it’s time to reread some of the excellent posts on here about how to try to open a dialogue and maybe make some of the ones who do this realize how they are coming across.

      …and i try always to think about Edmund Burke’s quote “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” If we don’t stand up against the act of objectification we are condoning it. As long as we don’t judge the person, we can and should judge their actions and behavior that are wrong. That is an important distinction.

      I’m just glad we have this safe space and such great participants in it – thank you again Terry!!

      Barb

    • #6005
      gingerlovinmind
      Participant

      I have had several people inform me that this is not just a “Sam” phenomenon. Yes. I understand that. The main reason that I used those examples was that they were what got me thinking more about the issue. If I had known about the whole Graham/kilt story (God bless him!), the post might just as easily been about objectifying HIM! Just…wow!

    • #6006
      maryjomalo
      Participant

      Yes, just read the article myself. I’m glad this is being re-Tweeted throughout fandom this week, since so many women are oblivious to their own being objectified as well as to what they are doing to Sam & Cait. So much ground has been lost in the battle for enlightenment on so many fronts in the last couple years. It’s almost as if the progress we made in the 60’s and 70’s is being reversed…

    • #6007
      CelticGlamazon
      Participant

      [quote quote=5995]I was a little hesitant to come over, because I didn’t want to make anyone uncomfortable. But I heard that this was warm group of fans…so here I am. Please let me start by saying that I am glad that not everyone agrees with me…geez, that would be boring. Also, I am fully aware that I can be preachy, my kids tell me that on a nearly daily basis. I am working on that. (It has been one of my New Years’ resolutions for at least 25 years.) And finally, I have met some amazing and very respectful fans, and (yes) I realize that the are in the majority. [/quote]

      I’m glad that you came over to join the discussion. It’s great to have new perspectives to add to our, sometimes strange (seriously, we’ve discussed nipple hair), discussions.

      I know that it doesn’t need to be said, but I’m playing Capt. Obvious today…these issues aren’t just about behavior towards the male cast members but the entire crew.

      Is anyone else disgusted with the lack of tact that happens when anyone OL tweets something, then the flood of “look at me…look at me” tweets start to fill up the replies…replies that have nothing to do with the initial tweet? There have been so many occasions that I’ve refrained from responding at all to avoid being lumped in with the “attention” tweets. I know that’s just part of social media, and a huge reason I left facebook.

      I’m terrified that I’ll look back at this moment in my Fandom history, and feel the way I do about my time in the Twilight fandom. I met some great people, then things got weird, and then even weirder…then I started asking myself why I actually enjoyed the books to start with. Someone mentioned the etymology of the word fan being fanatic…and well…that really is an accurate explanation for the issues that have brought about this discussion. I’m determined to keep my participation in fandom positive and productive, and appreciate everyone here for doing the same.

      I’m doubly grateful for Connie’s input towards Terri’s blog post, because it was said in a very respectful way to remind us that it is even more important for our critical discussion to be inclusive and open to debate if we want to make a positive impact on the issues at hand. That is not to say that I expect everyone here to be a part of any social movement, but that being critical of how we respond to negative or hurtful behavior can be the great equalizer in this discussion.

      So I guess this is my ” I love you guys ” post. /group hug

      • This reply was modified 7 years, 4 months ago by CelticGlamazon. Reason: because I can't spell gud
      • #6019
        barbc624
        Participant

        [quote quote=6007]Is anyone else disgusted with the lack of tact that happens when anyone OL tweets something, then the flood of “look at me…look at me” tweets start to fill up the replies…replies that have nothing to do with the initial tweet? There have been so many occasions that I’ve refrained from responding at all to avoid being lumped in with the “attention” tweets. I know that’s just part of social media, and a huge reason I left facebook.

        I’m terrified that I’ll look back at this moment in my Fandom history, and feel the way I do about my time in the Twilight fandom. I met some great people, then things got weird, and then even weirder…then I started asking myself why I actually enjoyed the books to start with. Someone mentioned the etymology of the word fan being fanatic…and well…that really is an accurate explanation for the issues that have brought about this discussion. I’m determined to keep my participation in fandom positive and productive, and appreciate everyone here for doing the same.

        I’m doubly grateful for Connie’s input towards Terri’s blog post, because it was said in a very respectful way to remind us that it is even more important for our critical discussion to be inclusive and open to debate if we want to make a positive impact on the issues at hand. That is not to say that I expect everyone here to be a part of any social movement, but that being critical of how we respond to negative or hurtful behavior can be the great equalizer in this discussion.

        So I guess this is my ” I love you guys ” post. /group hug[/quote]

        Gah – you are in my head!! I just posted on the same topic which to me runs hand in hand with the objectification thing.

        Hugs!!

      • #6026
        conniebv
        Participant

        That is not to say that I expect everyone here to be a part of any social movement, but that being critical of how we respond to negative or hurtful behavior can be the great equalizer in this discussion.

        That is not to say that I expect everyone here to be a part of any social movement, but that being critical of how we respond to negative or hurtful behavior can be the great equalizer in this discussion.

        So I guess this is my ” I love you guys ” post. /group hug

        Hey, that is progress! This is exactly how progress happens. Any movement is just people, and even if you don’t openly join, expressing and passing on these attitudes helps make the world better. That is my “Love you too.”

        • This reply was modified 7 years, 4 months ago by conniebv.
    • #6011
      Katie (@bunnums)
      Participant

      I don’t really have much to add to the subject of the discussion, but I do have to say that I’ve never been in another place (online or IRL) where such meaty, thoughtful conversations happen in such a respectful, though-provoking way even though we clearly don’t all agree with each other (and that’s certainly okay!). I’ve learned a helluva lot here and have been blown away by the lovely people who take the time to contribute. And I can’t wait to see where we go next!

      🙂

      Katie

      • #6021
        sonyakhanum
        Participant

        Hear hear, Katie! I don’t have much to add and have been a silent observer lately since life has been pretty busy (I hope that doesn’t seem creepy). This forum is one of my favourite places to visit and participate in. It’s incredibly warm, inclusive, intelligent, and interesting. Thank you all.

    • #6013
      gingerlovinmind
      Participant

      I am especially disturbed by the number of comments that I have seen on Twitter lately (unrelated to Outlander…just in general) by those who are engaging in revenge objectification–as if they are justifying their actions by pointing out that it has been done to them. Bad behavior does not justify more bad behavior.

      And also, I have no problems with discussing nipple hair. (Amanda Palmer calls them nip-lashes.)

      • #6032
        conniebv
        Participant

        I really dislike the term “revenge feminism” as coined by Hillary Kelly in her New Republic article. To me it feels as valid as when Rush started calling us “Feminazis,” and it feels like a real weight on the ankle of gender parity. I doubt any true feminist would actually take ownership of male objectification as a valid exercise in empowerment, but of course someone will likely come out of the woodwork to prove me wrong, like this person here. Darn, you internet!

    • #6014
      CelticGlamazon
      Participant

      [quote quote=6006]Yes, just read the article myself. I’m glad this is being re-Tweeted throughout fandom this week, since so many women are oblivious to their own being objectified as well as to what they are doing to Sam & Cait. So much ground has been lost in the battle for enlightenment on so many fronts in the last couple years. It’s almost as if the progress we made in the 60’s and 70’s is being reversed…[/quote]

      I’ve found myself saying something like this, but after taking time to really consider it I don’t think anything has been reversed. We, as a species, have a tendency to glorify the past, the horrible was excessively horrible and the good was immensely great. I know that for many of my family in rural NC, the women’s equality movement was barely noticed due to the social structure of the area they were in. I believe that we are seeing it as a reverse in thinking, because of the implementation of the internet. People whose voices were silenced for so long on, on all sides of the conversation, are now being seen by the world. Social media has allowed all of those women, who never had a voice, to finally find connection with like minded people. However; it has also allowed bigoted/racist/sexist thoughts to be shared as well. The internet is a double edged sword, and has given us a lense to view our society in a way that has never before existed for us. The lack of personal editing added to the anonymity that comes with electronic communication has changed the way we communicate.

      • #6049
        maryjomalo
        Participant

        Mary Jo Malo wrote: Yes, just read the article myself. I’m glad this is being re-Tweeted throughout fandom this week, since so many women are oblivious to their own being objectified as well as to what they are doing to Sam & Cait. So much ground has been lost in the battle for enlightenment on so many fronts in the last couple years. It’s almost as if the progress we made in the 60’s and 70’s is being reversed…

        CelticGlamazon response: I’ve found myself saying something like this, but after taking time to really consider it I don’t think anything has been reversed. We, as a species, have a tendency to glorify the past, the horrible was excessively horrible and the good was immensely great. I know that for many of my family in rural NC, the women’s equality movement was barely noticed due to the social structure of the area they were in. I believe that we are seeing it as a reverse in thinking, because of the implementation of the internet. People whose voices were silenced for so long on, on all sides of the conversation, are now being seen by the world. Social media has allowed all of those women, who never had a voice, to finally find connection with like minded people. However; it has also allowed bigoted/racist/sexist thoughts to be shared as well. The internet is a double edged sword, and has given us a lense to view our society in a way that has never before existed for us. The lack of personal editing added to the anonymity that comes with electronic communication has changed the way we communicate.

        Mary Jo Malo response: The setback I was referring to was definitely not about social media/Internet, since freedom of information is what aids enlightenment and protects democracy from control by special interests. I agree completely with your comments. I was obliquely referring to what has happened in our U.S. and state legislatures by turning back progress for voting rights, human rights, women’s rights, net neutrality, etc. I shouldn’t have conflated the two…

        • This reply was modified 7 years, 4 months ago by maryjomalo. Reason: Tried to clarify who said what :)
    • #6015
      CelticGlamazon
      Participant

      [quote quote=6013]I am especially disturbed by the number of comments that I have seen on Twitter lately (unrelated to Outlander…just in general) by those who are engaging in revenge objectification–as if they are justifying their actions by pointing out that it has been done to them. Bad behavior does not justify more bad behavior.

      And also, I have no problems with discussing nipple hair. (Amanda Palmer calls them nip-lashes.)
      [/quote]

      The noise that just came out of me wasn’t human. YOU’RE an Amanda Palmer fan! OMGOMGOMGOMGOMG I lurve her…I lurve her so hard. We shall commence the squeeing. Feel free to spam me on twitter/tumblr with AFP stuff.

    • #6020
      gingerlovinmind
      Participant

      Amanda Palmer…yes. Just yes. What is not to love? (And Neil, too!) When the spamming commences, just remember you told me it was ok. 😉

    • #6022
      Terry Dresbach
      Keymaster

      [quote quote=6011]I don’t really have much to add to the subject of the discussion, but I do have to say that I’ve never been in another place (online or IRL) where such meaty, thoughtful conversations happen in such a respectful, though-provoking way even though we clearly don’t all agree with each other (and that’s certainly okay!). I’ve learned a helluva lot here and have been blown away by the lovely people who take the time to contribute. And I can’t wait to see where we go next!

      :-)

      Katie
      [/quote]
      YAY!!!!!!!!! I just knew it was possible. Please, please, please keep it up. It really is possible to have CIVIL discussion on the internet. So far, we have not had to throw one person out of here. That says everything about all of you!!
      Thank you all.

    • #6024
      barbc624
      Participant

      [quote quote=5971]The only person that can address Diana’s comments properly is Diana, and she tends to do so pretty decisively. I suggest putting that question to her directly on her FB if you want an honest answer, because she’ll give it, and all we could offer is speculation.[/quote]

      Hi Connie;

      While I agree that Diana is the only one who can answer why she said something, I find it troubling that there seems to be a “don’t call out Diana on anything” attitude that goes on in the fandom. I don’t really care why she said what she did – to me it was inappropriate for the circumstances, just as it would have been inappropriate if it was a fan who said it in that type of forum. Probably even more so as she is a role model for so many. And look at the fall out – I have since seen her comment used as justification for fans to behave and comment in the same way.

      Diana is a talented writer and she has given us a set of amazing books that I love but… she is human, she is not perfect, and she makes mistakes like we all do. If she says or does something that we find troubling I don’t unbderstand why it can’t be noted. Why is it ok to point out the inappropriate behavior of Fan X but not point out the same behavior when it is Diana doing it? I have something of a problem with that and I see that kind of overprotectiveness of Diana happening a lot in the fandom. Like Sam, she is an adult not a child to be wrapped up in cotton and protected from the world. She is just as accountable as any one of us for her actions.

      • #6034
        conniebv
        Participant

        Oh, I don’t say don’t ask her about it. I think you should. And I don’t think anyone is perfect. I am not defending or condemning. What I am saying is that we can conjecture all day long, but if you have that question and it bothers you, she is just a person, and there is a polite way to ask. Something along the lines of, “With all the talk about male objectification lately in the fandom, do you feel a responsibility to curb your behavior or speech (ex: Talking about Sam’s tush) so as to not contribute? Why or why not? Thanks for answering.”

    • #6028
      gingerlovinmind
      Participant

      It seems that we all agree that there IS a line in the sand…some nebulous place where things that are “ok” become decidedly “not ok.” And, I assume, that the line is fluid, and that the line is different for everyone. Maybe it is like that scene from Reality Bites when Winona Ryder tries to described irony…more of an “I know it when I see it” kind of thing. But maybe we SHOULD examine it a little more…if for nothing else than to simply know our own mind in the matter. What do you think? Do you know where your own personal line is?

      • #6035
        conniebv
        Participant

        I think it’s something more people should do, for sure. I am Hispanic, female, and I was born in Peru and raised in Saudi Arabia, the US, Peru, and I have traveled a lot. I speak three languages, albeit two better than the third. I think that trying to think through the perspective of the other has brought me more knowledge than grief, and that it is always worthy to examine perspectives outside your own, if only so you can connect on the commonalities we all have. It’s very easy to be reactive, and less so inclusive, but accepting that other points are valid and people have emotional investment in them is the first step in navigating differences.
        I really love where this discussion went.

      • #6041
        MrsParker
        Participant

        Wait, wait, wait… Amanda Palmer, Neil Gaiman, AND a Winona Ryder/Reality Bites reference? How have we not met before?

      • #6047
        sonyakhanum
        Participant

        I previously posted that I didn’t have much to add…I lied… gingerlovinmind, I love the issue you raise.

        That line in the sand does vary person to person. Our cultural and social experiences can shape our views on when something is or isn’t appropriate. But, like you said, how we personally define our boundaries, definitions, etc. should be examined. Self-critique and self-reflection about our views can be a great way to either affirm them or to improve and hone them into something more positive for ourselves and others affected by our actions and language.

        I praise Sam’s and Caitriona’s beauty and physical attributes and have made comments about their beauty. But, I also comment about their performances and skills. Does making comments about someone’s beauty objectify him/her? Preoccupation with physical appearance can be objectification, and it’s something I have to continually check myself on, especially when dealing with body image issues. To answer your question gingerlovinmind, my personal line is that it’s problematic when praising or appreciating someone’s physical appearance becomes sexual in nature or lacks any recognition that these are real people (like Connie mentioned, divorcing the physical from the individual) whose purpose is not for us to “consume” them for our pleasure.

      • #6048
        barbc624
        Participant

        My line is anything that treats the subject as other than a living breathing person rather than a beautiful/handsome thing put there for others enjoyment.

    • #6031
      CelticGlamazon
      Participant

      [quote quote=6024]

      <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>conniebv wrote:</div>
      The only person that can address Diana’s comments properly is Diana, and she tends to do so pretty decisively. I suggest putting that question to her directly on her FB if you want an honest answer, because she’ll give it, and all we could offer is speculation.

      Hi Connie;

      While I agree that Diana is the only one who can answer why she said something, I find it troubling that there seems to be a “don’t call out Diana on anything” attitude that goes on in the fandom. I don’t really care why she said what she did – to me it was inappropriate for the circumstances, just as it would have been inappropriate if it was a fan who said it in that type of forum. Probably even more so as she is a role model for so many. And look at the fall out – I have since seen her comment used as justification for fans to behave and comment in the same way.

      Diana is a talented writer and she has given us a set of amazing books that I love but… she is human, she is not perfect, and she makes mistakes like we all do. If she says or does something that we find troubling I don’t unbderstand why it can’t be noted. Why is it ok to point out the inappropriate behavior of Fan X but not point out the same behavior when it is Diana doing it? I have something of a problem with that and I see that kind of overprotectiveness of Diana happening a lot in the fandom. Like Sam, she is an adult not a child to be wrapped up in cotton and protected from the world. She is just as accountable as any one of us for her actions.
      [/quote]

      I’ve come to the conclusion, that I believe DG is a brilliant and highly opinionated woman, that has done a lot to portray women in literature as capable strong characters. I love her books, but I can say that I personally don’t care to interact with her on a personal level. I’m sure she’s quite different in person/RL than she is in the public eye of FB, Twitter, Interviews. We are seeing but a glimpse of these individuals and that is never enough to make grand generalizations about character. I was disturbed by the same comment that bothered a lot of other people, but try to remind myself what it’s like to be on stage in front of hundreds of strangers. Sometimes the things that come out of your mouth, make no sense, and it’s even worse when it’s an inside joke. I once stood on stage at an aids awareness fundraiser and joked with the emcee about testicles because I knew she hated to say the word. It’s like I failed to realize that the administration of the college and community leaders were sitting in the crowd watching me. There is something about the blinding light of being center stage that makes it easy to get caught up in a moment and lose sight of what you should filter.

      I have been witness to DG deleting posts that were called out as objectifying, and that speaks to some understanding of the perspective of the greater fandom. Yes, there were many that responded telling her she should have left it up, and that the hurt feelings should shove off, but alienating fans for the sake of crass humor wasn’t a choice she made at the time.

      This is more an attempt for me to become more aware of my own prejudices and knee-jerk responses that to attempt any correction of behavior on anyones part. 🙂 I find that it helps to type it out and let the universe do with it as it will.

      [quote quote=6028]It seems that we all agree that there IS a line in the sand…some nebulous place where things that are “ok” become decidedly “not ok.” And, I assume, that the line is fluid, and that the line is different for everyone. Maybe it is like that scene from Reality Bites when Winona Ryder tries to described irony…more of an “I know it when I see it” kind of thing. But maybe we SHOULD examine it a little more…if for nothing else than to simply know our own mind in the matter. What do you think? Do you know where your own personal line is? [/quote]

      I think that the original thread was full of many of us working to find our line in the sand. I know, like I stated above, that this forum and open discussion with friends has helped me to refine my perspective. I appreciate most, those that are willing to call me on my shit. If it weren’t for those people I’d not know when I’m being obtuse. 🙂 I believe that it is when we allow ourselves to become stagnate in our perceptions that we close ourselves off to the realities of the world around us.

      • This reply was modified 7 years, 4 months ago by CelticGlamazon. Reason: added reply to Terri
    • #6036
      barbc624
      Participant

      [quote quote=6025]arb, a lot of good stuff there, and two points I’d like to comment on specifically.

      I agree that we should not and treat men this way. I have two boys, and I constantly tell them that they need to think of every debate we have ever had before they reduce any woman to a body and discount her mind. That said, I don’t think another person’s behavior gives permission for or excuses anyone to disrespect me and discount my personhood. Not sure if that is what you were saying, but I wanted to put it out there.

      It’s hard. I don’t want to preach, so I just try to be supportive. In Spanish we say, caras vemos, corazones no sabemos. We see faces, but we don’t know hearts.[/quote]

      I

        absolutely

      agree with you that respect for each other is paramount. That is why I try very hard (and don’t always succeed) to make it clear that it is

        not

      the person I am critiquing but the behavior. Good people can and do sometimes behave badly, and often all it takes is for them to stop is to realize it. The hard part in a fandom like this is that there are those who don’t have an understanding of what and why they are doing is problematic, and they encourage behavor that is questionable. Then others get caught up in it without thinking. In that case I see it as the responsibility of those who do see the issues to at least put it out there for thought that maybe what is happening is not a good thing.

      And you are right -it is hard to find the best way to say things without preaching. We had that discussion on the original Objectification of Sam thread and I think the consensus is that we can only try to do our best to have a dialogue that is respectful and open and hoepfully leads to a better understanding on both sides. The internet makes it both more difficult and at once easier than it can be in person so that is a challenge we are all dealing with.

    • #6037
      michellibell
      Participant

      [quote quote=6022]

      <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Katie (@bunnums) wrote:</div>
      I don’t really have much to add to the subject of the discussion, but I do have to say that I’ve never been in another place (online or IRL) where such meaty, thoughtful conversations happen in such a respectful, though-provoking way even though we clearly don’t all agree with each other (and that’s certainly okay!). I’ve learned a helluva lot here and have been blown away by the lovely people who take the time to contribute. And I can’t wait to see where we go next!

      :-)

      Katie

      YAY!!!!!!!!! I just knew it was possible. Please, please, please keep it up. It really is possible to have CIVIL discussion on the internet. So far, we have not had to throw one person out of here. That says everything about all of you!!
      Thank you all.

      [/quote]

      I don’t know, Terry… that Rachely girl has been toeing the line recently 😉

      And gingerlovinmind, I really liked your article. I, for one, did not find it pushy or preachy. Matter of fact, I was singing, “Preach on, sister!”

      And this is the first time I’ve heard the details about the attack on Graham. I heard a woman tried looking up his kilt, but not the specifics…. geez.

    • #6038
      gingerlovinmind
      Participant

      I know that, for me, the kilt thing is definitely firmly in the “Over the Line” category. As is asking Sam to please provide you with audio of him panting and grunting. I have absolutely no issue with people noticing that the actors are attractive. [I would hope that is a given, and I only include it because a few posters on some of the FB sites took to adding “Careful, you might be objectifying!” whenever a photo of the actors was posted.] Rude comments about Cait’s weight or the size of her boob or bum are tasteless, as far as I am concerned. [off to ponder more on my personal “Line in the Sand.]

      • #6064
        sonyakhanum
        Participant

        I would also add continuous, non-stop “grinding yer corn” jokes :)…though I wonder how Graham McTavish feels about them.

    • #6039
      CelticGlamazon
      Participant

      [quote quote=6037]
      I don’t know, Terry… that Rachely girl has been toeing the line recently ;)
      [/quote]

      **Rachel**
      /cough…nipple hair
      /cough…magic scottish penis(even if you didn’t start it,/hint Filmfixation, you started the thread)
      /cough…Someone keeps posting

        bad

      erotica

      Pshh, who am I kidding…this is why I stick around.

      Lurve your face. /hug #sisterfromanothermister

      • #6044
        rachely
        Participant

        Magic Scottish Penis TOTALLY wasn’t me. And the bad erotica (and Gilbert Godfry reading 50 Shades of Grey) were TOTALLY on twitter. Though I may have linked to the Bad Sex Awards ; )

        If it’s about hair, though, it’s probably totally me.

      • #6046
        rachely
        Participant

        To be honest I’m pretty sure I started the orgasm thread that lead to the Magic Scottish Penis comment.

        {slinks away to her corner}

      • #6050
        MrsParker
        Participant

        Oh, come back out, Rachely. This is a safe space. If it weren’t for your Twitter antics I never would have started the DIA thread. Nor would we all have learned so much about post-sex cleaning rituals (or lack thereof).

      • #6053
        rachely
        Participant

        Pfft, you think I can ever shut up?

        (I’m on my way in 5 minutes to a happy hour. I have eaten nothing all day but 5 cups of coffee. god KNOWS what I’ll say later)

        ETA: lordy, most of my tits are in a picture on twitter… no filters, no shame : P

        • This reply was modified 7 years, 4 months ago by rachely.
        • This reply was modified 7 years, 4 months ago by rachely.
    • #6040
      conniebv
      Participant

      I think it’s safe to say that things you can get arrested for are over the line.

    • #6043
      maryjomalo
      Participant

      [quote quote=6014]
      Yes, just read the article myself. I’m glad this is being re-Tweeted throughout fandom this week, since so many women are oblivious to their own being objectified as well as to what they are doing to Sam & Cait. So much ground has been lost in the battle for enlightenment on so many fronts in the last couple years. It’s almost as if the progress we made in the 60’s and 70’s is being reversed…

      I’ve found myself saying something like this, but after taking time to really consider it I don’t think anything has been reversed. We, as a species, have a tendency to glorify the past, the horrible was excessively horrible and the good was immensely great. I know that for many of my family in rural NC, the women’s equality movement was barely noticed due to the social structure of the area they were in. I believe that we are seeing it as a reverse in thinking, because of the implementation of the internet. People whose voices were silenced for so long on, on all sides of the conversation, are now being seen by the world. Social media has allowed all of those women, who never had a voice, to finally find connection with like minded people. However; it has also allowed bigoted/racist/sexist thoughts to be shared as well. The internet is a double edged sword, and has given us a lense to view our society in a way that has never before existed for us. The lack of personal editing added to the anonymity that comes with electronic communication has changed the way we communicate.
      [/quote]

      The setback I was referring to was definitely not about social media/Internet, since freedom of information is what aids enlightenment and protects democracy from control by special interests. I agree completely with your comments. I was obliquely referring to what has happened in our U.S. and state legislatures by turning back progress for voting rights, human rights, women’s rights, net neutrality, etc. I shouldn’t have conflated the two…

      • This reply was modified 7 years, 4 months ago by maryjomalo.
    • #6052
      beth wesson
      Participant

      Glad to see there is some discussion on the TN article. I found it to be an edition to a series of posts I’m calling the “cool kids” posts. I noticed some of the comments following the article came from people who had commented on similar articles and appear to have some connection to TN, like this article The articles spend time snarking about fan behavior, belittling, lumping and judging. And yet,these commenters and bloggers are guilty of the same behavior of which they snark. One of the more disturbing comments dealt with the assumption that objectification of “stars” has been happening forever so, why are the stupid (my interpretation of the snark) Outlander people discussing it? They often cite their credentials as experienced “fan-gurls” of 15 years plus, as some sort of badge of honor and seem to believe their ages ranging in the late 30’s early 40’s somehow make them less “creepy”. I find this elitist and hypocritical attitude to be just as disturbing as the intrusive and entitled behaviors mentioned here. I thought I left the “mean girls” behind in high school, but they appear to be alive and well and just as mean.

      • #6056
        conniebv
        Participant

        I hate to say that I can identify with a lot of what you’re saying. Does that make sense? I don’t want to pile on TN, but I just get where you’re coming from. I’ve felt the same. Maybe it’s because they are insular and validate each other, so maybe the self-examination doesn’t happen? I’m getting up the gumption to start a convo about it. I just don’t know how many more of these I can stomach this week but it’s a damn illness of mine that I can’t leave this stuff alone…

      • #6057
        MrsParker
        Participant

        When the show was running, Roxanne Gay, an author whose previous work I’d liked and respected, did some of the most horrible, objectifying, dismissive-of-book-readers, plot-is-the-thing-that-gets-in-the-way-of-sex-scenes recaps I’d ever seen on Vulture (New York Magazine)’s site. It was an odd fit as Vulture is usually respectful of TV shows and values their place in entertainment news. After a few weeks, the regular forum participants decamped and found new homes on io9 and other places (and that led me to find a lot of interesting new sites, including this one). But there were new commenters who came to Vulture in our stead who liked her work and took up roost.

        I like That’s Normal, but I understand the criticism you’ve laid out. Much like Roxanne Gay’s recaps, it’s not for everyone. I don’t think they have a single managing editor who would set the theme and tone for the overall branding message, so their posts can vary in regard to opinions on fandoms and such.

        With Outlander’s large fanbase, I’m glad that we can find our own places that speak to our tastes and preferences. Out of curiosity, Beth and Connie, are there other sites you recommend?

        • This reply was modified 7 years, 4 months ago by MrsParker.
      • #6066
        conniebv
        Participant

        You know, I don’t read a lot of recaps until I am done with mine, but when I do, Mo Ryan at Huffpost and Donna Dickens at Hitfix usually manage fun, insightful commentary.

      • #6061
        plaidwoman
        Participant

        they aren’t the only ones. A lot of the groups look like the lunch tables in Mean Girls. They’ve taken it from the cafeteria to the Internet. Is it the anonymity of cyber space or the popularity of the follower numbers that egg them on? Those ideas can run parallel in time but maybe not in conscience. Does that make sense?

      • #6059
        gingerlovinmind
        Participant

        Yes, there are mean girls. Dealing with a few myself at the moment. Really enlightening.

        Just going to hang out here for a while. Here is calm. Here is respectful.

      • #6062
        MrsParker
        Participant

        Okay, but I think we can all agree that THIS is the ultimate Mean Girls of Outlander: http://outlandermeangirls.tumblr.com/

        (That Sassenach doesn’t even go here!)

        • This reply was modified 7 years, 4 months ago by MrsParker.
      • #6067
        conniebv
        Participant

        There will never be too many Mean Girl Tumblrs for my taste. NEVER!

      • #6069
        beth wesson
        Participant

        Okay…

      • #6075
        CelticGlamazon
        Participant

        [quote quote=6062]Okay, but I think we can all agree that THIS is the ultimate Mean Girls of Outlander: http://outlandermeangirls.tumblr.com/

        (That Sassenach doesn’t even go here!)
        [/quote]

        I stopped myself from making mean girls references earlier. Damnnit! Oh, the horror…the lost opportunity.

        I can’t even remember who I was going to tell “You can’t sit with us”

        …and on Wednesday’s we wear pink!

        Mean Girls-Harry Potter mash-up wins the internet though.
        http://www.buzzfeed.com/mlew15/x-harry-pottermean-girls-mash-ups-that-are-ju-h0se#.yyx8g0PPJ

      • #6076
        sonyakhanum
        Participant

        Yes! #2 did it for me. Thanks for sharing!

      • #6083
        CelticGlamazon
        Participant

        [quote quote=6076]Yes! #2 did it for me. Thanks for sharing! [/quote]

        Given the fact that the forum is doing quirky things again with post placement…I’m assuming you were responding to my Harry Potter-Mean Girls Mashup post. That being said, this is my happy place. #see attached photo

        🙂

      • #6157
        sonyakhanum
        Participant

        Sorry for the delay in responding, yes I was referring to your Harry Potter-Mean Girls Mashup post. Anything Harry Potter makes my day, especially if it involves Severus Snape (what was Lily thinking?!).

    • #6058
      barbc624
      Participant

      And now I am off to the wineries to do some tasting…

    • #6065
      beth wesson
      Participant

      MsParker I’ve had some conversations on this site and my own blog that have been civil, enlightening and thought provoking. I recently joined a private discussion group and find the folks there to be safe and respectful. This is my first time in a fandom and I’m learning by trail and error what I want to participate in and what I don’t. I agree that it’s all personal preference. TN was one of the first blogs I read when I started this Outlander “thing” and at first found them witty and funny. There certainly are enough blogs, pages and clubs out there for everybody’s taste. At this point, I’ve found a relatively small group of like-minded folks to share my excitement over the show and books. There seems to be some general rules of thumb for a happier fan experience #dontfeedthetrolls #dontgetinapissfightwithaskunk #agreetodisagree #bekind and having said these here is one for me #youdonthavetoexpresseverythoughtyouhave

      • #6068
        gingerlovinmind
        Participant

        Ok, now I want ALL of those hashtags on a shirt.

      • #6071
        maureenanne
        Participant

        Hah! I will share the latter with my 14 year old daughter! Good evening all.

    • #6072
      sonyakhanum
      Participant

      BTW, Happy Martin Luther King Jr. Day to my American neighbours 🙂

      • #6073
        MrsParker
        Participant

        On the topic of MLK Day, I was watching Selma earlier (we have a screener copy). One of MLK’s compatriots caught my attention: Abernathy. I’d not heard of him before, and turns out that he’s often overlooked in the Civil Rights Era history. Huffington Post had an article on him: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/19/rev-ralph-abernathy-civil-rights_n_6482176.html

        But of course it caught my attention because of Joe Abernathy, and I wondered briefly if Ms. Gabaldon had purposely chosen that name for Claire’s 1960s BFF. Who knows? I thought it was a nice tie-in for today.

    • #6074
      wbloak
      Participant

      I haven’t been on TW for long, I don’t follow many people, no one follows me intentionally, and I have no real reason to tweet, but I share your concerns about what has been happening with the OL fandom on TW.
      When I first read OL and joined TW (this past summer), I knew something was different. I tried desperately to analyze it. I wrote a 5-page outline for an “article” on my various obsessions stemming from my immersion in the OL world – the books, the characters, the show, the actors, and Twitter itself. I never wrote the article, but I’ve seen various parts of it throughout your blog posts here.
      I’ve been watching the Outlander universe implode for months. I feel bad for DG and the original book lovers who built it up to be a place where OL fans could find each other. Now it is a random, scary place with hidden and overt insults, whining, catty cliques, and all kinds of stalking. There’s also a bit of judging, mothering, and arm-chair quarterbacking under the guise of being helpful for those who might not know better. I am certainly guilty of the latter, but thankfully not out loud.
      I tried to brave it out, looking at it as a sociology experiment and telling myself how “interesting” it all was. Social media is its own beast and I am not sure that we’re supposed to tame it. But, over the weekend, I finally had enough with feeling bad about myself and mortified by others’, so I decided to just stop watching the Outlander fandom. I do want to get off of TW completely, but it still holds a bit of value for me outside of OL.
      I’ll climb my peak in March (wherein I’ll reward myself with an Outlander re-read), I’ll watch other TV shows while _patiently_ waiting for April (and season 2 in 2016), I’ll get casting news when Starz is ready to tell me, I’ll read a few blogs that have proven to be respectful and fun (that’s you ConnieBV), and I’ll continue to enjoy catching glimpses of the personalities of the people I follow and the business of creating a TV show.
      For those of you with greater fortitude than I have, I appreciate your efforts to understand what is happening, to be good people, and to find ways to continue your love for OL.

      • #6119
        conniebv
        Participant

        First of all, I love the tone of your post and thank you for the compliment.
        Second of all, I had a pretty sucky last couple of days on social media, and it’s hard not to let it taint the water. Gingerlovinmind (sorry I don’t know your real name) has been open and gracious with a perspective that doesn’t entirely mesh with mine, and it is disheartening to finally experience some of the uglier side of fandom. I really appreciate the maturity and tone that everyone strives to keep here!

    • #6078
      michellibell
      Participant

      [quote quote=6039]

      <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>michellibell wrote:</div>
      I don’t know, Terry… that Rachely girl has been toeing the line recently ;)

      **Rachel**
      /cough…nipple hair
      /cough…magic scottish penis(even if you didn’t start it,/hint Filmfixation, you started the thread)
      /cough…Someone keeps posting

        bad

      erotica

      Pshh, who am I kidding…this is why I stick around.

      Lurve your face. /hug #sisterfromanothermister
      [/quote]

      And I’d just like to state, AGAIN, for the record, my husband totally has a Magical Scottish Penis. ::flipshair::

      • #6085
        NWeiss
        Participant

        I’m glad I stumbled on this tread, I’ve been checking in throughout the day and shaking my head in agreement to what everyone is saying.
        Over the brief months I’ve been on TW one thing is certain, in no way would want to be a public figure on social media (or public figure in any way for that matter). I started following a few fans and quickly pushed “unfollow” after seeing the blatant harassment towards Sam and the others, from sexual comments and requests for re-tweets, donations, inappropriate memes etc. People forgetting that they were actual real humans with lives outside of Outlander. I think it is part of the strange world we now live in- the one where we think that “anonymity” of the internet gives us some sort of pass for behaving in a way we would never dream of in the real world. That being a fan of something/someone means they owe us something in return.
        The Graham incident is a good example where things just go crazy. He was participating in an event that is part of his job (his actual honest to goodness paying job) and to have a woman behave as if she was at Thunder From Down Under show. Just because he was wearing a kilt doesn’t give anyone the right to behave like a estrogen filled crazy woman.
        The sad thing is that so many of the fans are amazing and it just takes “a few bad apples…” I love the books and the world that DG has created, I think Jamie & Claire are totally amazeballs. I also realize that Sam is a person and Jamie is fiction. Sam is handsome and charming and those are great characteristics to have, but as much as I enjoy his acting and to watch/read the interviews I’d be a bit delusional to say that I know him.
        It was mentioned before, but I also think it strange that many of these women have husbands and they still objectify Sam/Jamie as this piece of Scottish man-meat-cause frankly most would be peeved if those husbands lusted after a female actor/character in the same way. Because if they are undersexed like it comes off in many of those comments I bet a dollar the hubs in the other room would happily oblige.

      • #6120
        conniebv
        Participant

        I’m afraid I missed out on this phenomenon, Michelle. What makes it magical? Does it time travel?

    • #6086
      JB
      Participant

      [quote quote=6024]

      <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>conniebv wrote:</div>
      The only person that can address Diana’s comments properly is Diana, and she tends to do so pretty decisively. I suggest putting that question to her directly on her FB if you want an honest answer, because she’ll give it, and all we could offer is speculation.

      Hi Connie;

      While I agree that Diana is the only one who can answer why she said something, I find it troubling that there seems to be a “don’t call out Diana on anything” attitude that goes on in the fandom. I don’t really care why she said what she did – to me it was inappropriate for the circumstances, just as it would have been inappropriate if it was a fan who said it in that type of forum. Probably even more so as she is a role model for so many. And look at the fall out – I have since seen her comment used as justification for fans to behave and comment in the same way.

      Diana is a talented writer and she has given us a set of amazing books that I love but… she is human, she is not perfect, and she makes mistakes like we all do. If she says or does something that we find troubling I don’t unbderstand why it can’t be noted. Why is it ok to point out the inappropriate behavior of Fan X but not point out the same behavior when it is Diana doing it? I have something of a problem with that and I see that kind of overprotectiveness of Diana happening a lot in the fandom. Like Sam, she is an adult not a child to be wrapped up in cotton and protected from the world. She is just as accountable as any one of us for her actions.
      [/quote]

      Ok, so I missed the entire conversation today because (my) nighttime is really the only time I have to spend here. I won’t belabor points that were already beautifully made, but I did want to respond about Diana’s “ass” comment since I brought it up.

      When I first watched that interview, I was slightly taken aback, but I won’t say that I was enraged. Clearly, as someone mentioned, Sam didn’t seem offended, and the audience lapped it up. But in the context of the original post in this thread, it really leapt out of my memory, and I thought it was relevant. I do believe that Diana and Sam have the kind of relationship that allows for that kind of jocular exchange. I personally have friendships with men that allow for similar — and worse. In my opinion, when Diana chose to, yes, objectify Sam Heughan on a stage in front of hundreds (let alone online for thousands more to see) of fans, she did two things: 1. As Barb said, she made it okay for others to behave the same way despite the fact that they DO NOT have a personal relationship with Sam, and 2) she highlighted for me the degree to which objectification of males is acceptable. Like Barb said in another post, what if Ron or another of the men one that stage had said something similar about Cait? She probably would have rolled with it, but I’m willing to bet the response would have been a bit more muted, if not more outraged.

      Ultimately, that’s a good thing. As a woman, I was taught from an early age by any number of role models not to let anyone make me feel “less than.” In fact, not wanting to feel “less than” has been a motivating force in my life since I was in elementary school and insisted on playing whatever the boys in my class were playing on the yard. Connie, you mentioned that you teach your sons not to objectify women and reduce them to just a body. But do you teach them not to let anyone else reduce them to just a body? I have a 2 1/2-year-old son, and I can’t imagine ever having to make that part of the conversation, mostly because it just seems impossible that that’s something that he would ever face. And yet, here we are, having a very long conversation about men being objectified in modern society. Again, Sam and Diana are clearly friendly, but beyond that, I wonder how much (if any) of Sam’s response to Diana on that stage was the result of having no clue how to deal with being objectified because it’s not part of men’s cultural or gender conditioning? Or maybe, generally speaking, he simply found it flattering because it doesn’t infringe on his other capabilities precisely because he’s a man and his societal roles are not threatened?

      I have no answers, and these are mostly heady, late-night, stream-of-consciousness questions anyway. I enjoy hashing these things out in my head, guided by all of the thoughtful comments herein.

      And one last thing — regarding the replies on the other thread before it was locked, I want to make it clear that I am NOT interested in bashing Diana. I am a big fan of her books and I am incredibly indebted to her for having written them. However, I would like to talk about some of the things that bother me about those books, just as I have been able to talk about the things that I love about them. So, Rachel, if you’re interested, DM me on Twitter??

      • #6122
        conniebv
        Participant

        Connie, you mentioned that you teach your sons not to objectify women and reduce them to just a body. But do you teach them not to let anyone else reduce them to just a body? I have a 2 1/2-year-old son, and I can’t imagine ever having to make that part of the conversation, mostly because it just seems impossible that that’s something that he would ever face. And yet, here we are, having a very long conversation about men being objectified in modern society.

        Well, I have a 15 year old and a 4 year old. The 15 year old has been in situations where we have had to talk about his body and what is and isn’t acceptable to allow or say, and how people are brains first and without your brain, sex is just like scratching yourself. It came with the sex talk, because I wanted him to know about things like taking control of contraception, taking the condom with him when he leaves, consent before sex even with a girlfriend and also what parts of his body are for sharing in a loving relationship and things that he may want to do to please someone but maybe isn’t comfortable with. That’s all I can think of for now.

        I will tell you that this is not a kid who has any trouble telling anyone anything. He’s had girls tell him he was a fox and catcall him and his response was “They don’t even know me, or they wouldn’t be doing that.”
        I find that my brothers, cousins and nephews are all pretty confident. It’s the girls that lose it, sometime in their tweens, and start to question themselves in relation to others. Of course it is changing over time, but at least my eldest has no problem telling a girl to back off, even if she’s joking.

    • #6088
      barbc624
      Participant

      So as to the last part of your comment that is exactly what I am talking about. The reluctance to say anything that may be perceived as critical about DG and by extension about her books.

      I don’t believe in bashing an author or her writing but I do think that discussion about things we like/dislike about a book is acceptable. Hearing others thoughts has often given me a whole new take on things and made me reconsider some of my reactions. It expands on my reading experience especially the comments that differ from my opinions.

      I believe we have done and can do that here in a respectful way and hope to see more if that going forward.

      • #6089
        Katie (@bunnums)
        Participant

        /*warning – change of subject*/

        Does anyone here listen to The Scot and the Sassenach? A wonderful podcast! Alastair is currently running a literary seminar on the book Outlander (on Youtube live most Tues evenings, available in podcast form after). He does a really fantastic job at talking through the strengths and weaknesses of the story from the literary analysis perspective in a very respectful and thoughtful way. I highly recommend it. I don’t always agree with him, but it’s given me the words to say why I don’t or why I do in a very safe forum.

        And yes, Alastair (the Scot) and his wife Lani (the Sassenach) are both very big fans of both the books and the show. TSaTS podcast and forum available here.

        /*returning to on topic subject matter now*/

        Katie

      • #6091
        MrsParker
        Participant

        Love Scot and the Sassenach. Tuesday nights have been blocked off for his live cast. You can follow along on Twitter with #TSatS. It’s a wonderful close-read of the text and Alastair is a fantastic host. See you there tonight!

        • This reply was modified 7 years, 4 months ago by MrsParker.
      • #6093
        rachely
        Participant

        I can’t talk about books in 140 characters…

      • #6123
        conniebv
        Participant

        Alistair’s a stand-up guy but I can’t listen to that podcast. I want to have a discussion and it’s more like a college lecture.

      • #6130
        barbc624
        Participant

        What you said. I love the discussions we have here – can’t imagine getting “MagicScottish Penis” or “nip hair” fromAlistair <:0

    • #6094
      gingerlovinmind
      Participant

      Home with a sick kiddo today, so I will be in and out. In the interest of fill disclosure: I did another blog post, and I wanted to let you know that I talked about the forums here and that they have been really respectful. Really enjoying this group.

      • #6102
        CelticGlamazon
        Participant

        [quote quote=6094]Home with a sick kiddo today, so I will be in and out. In the interest of fill disclosure: I did another blog post, and I wanted to let you know that I talked about the forums here and that they have been really respectful. Really enjoying this group. [/quote]

        /cough…what’s the first rule of fight club?

        oh wait…wrong forum. 🙂 Carry on.

        [quote quote=6101]
        Just a thought off of this…. is this always going to be an open forum?
        Once I start to get to e-know people, I really let my guard down, and if the crazies start migrating over here, I’m going to need a reminder to keep back some of the personals.
        [/quote]

        I’ve actually thought about the same thing, because I’ve shared some pretty personal tidbits.

    • #6101
      michellibell
      Participant

      [quote quote=6094]Home with a sick kiddo today, so I will be in and out. In the interest of fill disclosure: I did another blog post, and I wanted to let you know that I talked about the forums here and that they have been really respectful. Really enjoying this group. [/quote]

      Just a thought off of this…. is this always going to be an open forum?
      Once I start to get to e-know people, I really let my guard down, and if the crazies start migrating over here, I’m going to need a reminder to keep back some of the personals.

      • #6103
        sonyakhanum
        Participant

        Hence – initiation rituals as rachely mentioned…

      • #6104
        rachely
        Participant

        And I’m totally out of my depth for hazing. My colleges were all Greek free and the only not-so-secret societies I’m in are academic… but I do know the Phi Beta Kappa secret handshake and gang sign. You know, in case I want to identify other overachievers on the Metro.

      • #6105
        rachely
        Participant

        And I’m totally out of my depth for hazing. My colleges were all Greek free and the only not-so-secret societies I’m in are academic… but I do know the Phi Beta Kappa secret handshake and gang sign. You know, in case I want to identify other overachievers on the Metro.

      • #6124
        conniebv
        Participant

        I’m with Michelle.

    • #6106
      gingerlovinmind
      Participant

      I thought twice about putting this group on there (obviously not because I had qualms about your awesomeness), but since someone had already shared the link to the forum in the comments section of the Objectification post I figured it was already out there. If it wasn’t appropriate, I am happy to remove the link.

      • #6107
        rachely
        Participant

        Personally I think it’s fine. It’s not like it’s our forum–we’ve just gotten a little protective of each other over time.

      • #6108
        MrsParker
        Participant

        I believe that link was from Terry herself, and as it’s her site, I’d defer to her opinion on the removal (though if she was the one who placed it there, I would think it’s fine). That being said, I think these boards will continue to attract a certain kind of person, and that person will be discreet, intelligent and pleasant.

        As for hazing, I am ashamed to admit I have some experience with this. How about you must reveal something personal and true about yourself? Many of us already have…

      • #6109
        rachely
        Participant

        I think you’re right. It takes a certain person to weed through our very long posts and care enough to respond.

        And I think I can get anyone new to reveal something personal without even trying, don’t you think? ; )

      • #6112
        barbc624
        Participant

        Rachel, I’m sure you can! 😉

        Seriously, I have a feeling that anyone who is into the “mean girls” mindset would not last on here very long if at all. And maybe we might even do some good with some of them such as the ones who just got caught up in the madness without thinking about what they were doing…

      • #6128
        CelticGlamazon
        Participant

        Terri(gingerlm),
        I don’t have any issue at all with the forum being shared in your post, so please don’t feel like you have to make any changes on my part. Rachel is correct that we’ve all become a bit protective of the sphere of awesome we have found, but I think we all enjoy having new people become involved in the discussions.

        I propose that Rachel should be in charge of the ‘hazing’ because I want to see how she translates a secret handshake into text form for the forum. 🙂 I’m Phi Theta Kappa and I don’t think we have a handshake…I’m seriously disappointed. My life is a lie.

        Crystal aka CelticGlamazon

      • #6136
        rachely
        Participant

        I have a funny story about the PBK induction ceremony, but I really should stop with the constant ‘getting thread off topic’ thing

        ETA: then I realized that just by posting that ^^ I was already off topic. So the PBK ceremony is at about 9:30am, an hour b/f we’re supposed to be robed for the commencement ceremony. There are like 15 of us in this science classroom with our parents/SOs/guests. I’m pretty sure all 15 of us were hungover–at least everyone else looked like I felt. We were totally befuddled because the put the GUESTS up front in the floor seats and we were in the back of the classroom on the steps. I sarcastically (shocking, I know) commented that maybe they needed to teach us the secret handshake and we had to be in back so the guests wouldn’t see. (Seriously, do a bunch of people whose claim to fame is a 4.0 need a HANDSHAKE?!) So, we go through the talking part–the hungover among us struggling. We get our keys, sign the book, go back to our seats. And low and behold the faculty PBKers come back to give us the secret handshake and sign. SERIOUSLY WTF? I don’t get the handshake, we can wear a PBK key around our necks so it’s not like it’s a secret society. the whole POINT of it is to put it on your grad school applications.

        Then my mom came back to give me a hug. And the secret handshake. Awwwwwww. {curtain}

    • #6133
      gingerlovinmind
      Participant

      Geez, I’m rude (I’ll add that to my defect list). I never actually introduced myself. Ahem. Hi! My name is Terri Wallace. I am 42 (but in my head I am still in my 20s). I am a ginger (yeah, hence the gingerlovinmind).

      Crystal, I was a Phi Theta Kappa, too! (I still have my sweatshirt somewhere, though that may say more about my inability to get rid of things than about my sentimentality, although that is pretty pronounced, too.)

      I drink tea, not coffee (feel free to add that to the character defect list, if you wish).

      I have in insane number of food allergies, I actually DO like whisky (especially Laphroaig), I taught myself to knit (but I only know one stitch, so I have a LOT of long scarves but nothing more complicated), and I am learning Gaelic (I can ask you how you are, tell you that I am fine, and say several swear words…you know, the important stuff).

      **why do I feel like this reads like a really bad dating profile?**

      • #6134
        rachely
        Participant

        I think you MAY be the first person who’s introduced themselves around these parts.

        Do you also like long walks in the rain?

        (Glenfiddich 18…my love)

      • #6137
        gingerlovinmind
        Participant

        I DO like long walks in the rain*, but only in the fall, and only if the rain isn’t TOO cold, and only if I am wearing my Wellingtons (because I don’t “do” wet or cold feet), and only if I am walking in a more rural setting–no neighborhood walking. [Okay, so maybe now I can see why my husband tells me that I am high maintenance.]

        (Also, Glenfiddich has a spot of honor in my whisky bar, too.)

        *I do NOT, however, care for pina coladas, please refer to note about whisky preference.)

    • #6135
      gingerlovinmind
      Participant

      Also, I am working on a post talking about the comments I’ve seen stating that Diana Gabaldon “set the tone” for the objectification currently taking place in the fandom. I’ll let you know when it is up, in case you want to wander over and put in your two cents. We might not agree, but I promise that the discussion will stay respectful. (And yes, I am nervous about “going there.”)

      • #6139
        conniebv
        Participant

        Snaps for bravery, Terri. I already cringe at the thought of the response, although I imagine DG will largely brush it off. She doesn’t come across to me as the kind of person to assume responsibility for actions outside her purview.

        Edited to add: I still feel that the best way to bring this to her attention if it is a legitimate concern is to ask her directly, though. The blog posts can come across as an indictment and give vocal torch-bearers a locus. She’s proven she is willing to have these conversations. Just a thought that as you feel she must take the fans into consideration when expressing herself, so must you if you are going to take this question up in a public way.

        • This reply was modified 7 years, 4 months ago by conniebv.
        • This reply was modified 7 years, 4 months ago by conniebv.
    • #6147
      CelticGlamazon
      Participant

      [quote quote=6139]Snaps for bravery, Terri. I already cringe at the thought of the response, although I imagine DG will largely brush it off. She doesn’t come across to me as the kind of person to assume responsibility for actions outside her purview.

      Edited to add: I still feel that the best way to bring this to her attention if it is a legitimate concern is to ask her directly, though. The blog posts can come across as an indictment and give vocal torch-bearers a locus. She’s proven she is willing to have these conversations. Just a thought that as you feel she must take the fans into consideration when expressing herself, so must you if you are going to take this question up in a public way.
      [/quote]

      I agree that that a blog post could appear as an indictment without the preemptive step of asking her outright. I also give you props for undertaking this endeavor. 🙂

      • #6149
        AllisonL
        Participant

        I’ve been reading this thread and thinking about where my “line in the sand” falls. This is a bit random and disjointed, fueled by lack of sleep and lots of coffee, so please bear with me.

        There has been a lot of talk, and writing, about how Outlander in general, and
        “The Wedding” in particular, is groundbreaking because it shows sex from a feminist perspective. We, as women, have been given something we have never had before on television, a beautiful man acting in sex scenes from a feminist perspective, but the biggest discussion about it is our collective guilt over how we are reacting to it. Rather than celebrating the fact that someone finally (Ron!) has respected our POV enough to center an entire series and characters around our experiences, we are wringing our hands and debating male objectification. I’m not talking about the tasteless and mean spirited tweets or trying to look up someone’s kilt, those are inexcusable in any form. I’m talking about giving ourselves permission to acknowledge our own sexuality, in this case by admiring and yes, being aroused by, a beautiful man who is—both in the books and on the series—someone we are supposed to be aroused by.
        Why are so many women of so many ages losing their collectives minds over Sam and the “tush that would stop traffic,” as my favorite recap site said? Women going crazy over men isn’t a new phenomenon (see: Elvis, Beatles, Tom Jones) but this feels different. Part of it is the Internet and the way we can all gather together in forums like this, and those less respectful, to share our proclivities. But maybe it’s also because there’s something going on, a feeling, a movement even, bubbling up in which women are starting to own, and be unashamed by, their own sexuality. So looking at a beautiful, naked man on our 60-inch HDTVs who is presented to us in a way deliberately created to make us look at him, is making many women giddy with newfound freedom to express their feelings. Not always good, though, often horrible, sometimes dangerous and scary. That is not Ever.Right. But just because some tasteless women are behaving badly does not mean that every one of us who watch, and find ourselves a bit breathless and squirmy in our seats, are objectifying anyone.
        One last thought: I may be the only one here to have a different take on the whole DG Objectifying Sam thing: I don’t think she did. I watched the entire video of that event soon after it was posted so I didn’t know that comment was coming. She said out loud what every woman who sees “The Wedding” thinks the minute Claire begins her stroll. That is not objectification, it is sincere appreciation of a beautiful male body, both in Clare’s actions and in DG’s comment. Now, if DG had said, “You have fine ass, Sam, now go put on this lovely Chippendale costume and serve us all coffee so I can see that tush as you bend over in those nice leather chaps,” now, that would be objectification. I have never met DG, but I have always thought she has a very healthy attitude toward sex and sexual matters, and she is comfortable being a sexual being in her own right. It’s informed her writing and made Jamie one of the most sensual male characters in literature, and that didn’t come from a place of objectification.
        I hope my comments don’t come across as mean or combative; it is the last thing I intend. I love this blog and the discussions here, thank you Terry for creating it and for letting us be a part of it.

      • #6152
        plaidwoman
        Participant

        I agree with you Allison, I’m not bothered by DG comment, but I can see why some do. I think the slippery slope took the big dive about the time the series aired. I read a lot of the professional reviews ( Full disclosure I’m a recent retiree with too much time on her hands) they were what I expected, some had read the books and got it and others just panned it because they could. By the time The Wedding aired the woodwork opened up and the bugs came a crawlin’! This was a good six or so weeks after Diana’s comments on Mr Heughan’s arse. The earlier blog posts commented on how the book Claire and Jamie were depicted and now the blogs and comments turned into rants on the stars anatomies and personal lives. It happened so fast, my head was spinning. Opinions are fact and supposition is gospel. I find objectification troubling but I find the intrusion on these people’s lives more problematic. I wont presuppose what they are feeling or want out of life but this cannot be a comfortable way to exist. I’m sticking with the cohorts I’ve met that are more concerned with real life and I look forward to Matt Robert’s photos, Terry’s costume tutorials, Maril’s Heard on Sets, the Whiskey Tastings and a little cast and crew snark. I’m happier there
        BTW my name is Jane and my moniker is about my career and not Outlander 😉

      • #6161
        barbc624
        Participant

        Allison;

        Thank you for a very thoughful post. I would like to clarify my stance on the objectification of Sam.

        Disclaimer: I don’t pretend to speak for anyone but myself.

        The Wedding Night episode was a beautifully done show and I DO NOT IN ANY WAY see it as having objectified Sam Heughan. It was about Jamie and Claire and was sensitively done in a way that perfectly expressed the situation and feelings the two of them were dealing with. It also presented the sex between them not as something gratuitous intended only to titillate, but as the beginning of an amazing love story that will literally span centuries. It was also a wonderful step forward in presenting sex from and for the female view, something we have not seen before. I don’t believe either Sam or Cait were ill used or objectified in any way in that scene. They were not portrayed as objects for the sexual pleasure of the viewers but as two beloved characters in an integral scene from a book I love. It wan’t about the nudity it was about the emotion. The scenes were emotional and sensual and Sam and Cait are most definitely beautiful people but I personally wasn’t seeing them as Sam and Cait – I was watching Claire and Jamie and loved seeing that part of the book come to life in a new way. I certainly didn’t see it as coarse or offensive in any way. I loved the episode and found it to be lovely in so many ways. I and many posters here and elsewhere did celebrate what Ron and company did and were thrilled to see it done so much better than we might have expected. The show left me doing a happy dance when it was over!

        What I DO see as objectification is the subsequent posting of pictures of Sam’s (the person not the character Jamie) ass all over the internet, the accompanying tasteless comments, some of them downright creepy, the obsessing over Sam’s personal romantic relationships, the crass jokes, the “stalking”, and posts I have (unfortunately and unwittingly) seen discussing the size of Sam’s penis,etc etc etc. Those are not about a character.They are about an actor who is doing an incredible job bringing that character to life for us and who has put himself in what is an uncomfortable position (filming sex scenes is not in any way sexy) in order to do the best job he can to bring that character to life. Using the justification, as some do, that “it’s ok because men have been doing it to women for years” is ingenous and dishonest. Just because men have behaved poorly doesn’t mean we as women should do the same.

        In that vein I do believe DG’s comment fueled the fire and gave those who would behave that way implicit permission if not encouragement to do so. I am willing to stipulate that (a)she has a close relationship with Sam, (b) she was in a (new to her) position of public exposure of a size and scope she had not yet become used to and, thus (c) she did not realize the full effect her comment and subsequent tweets on the subject would have. But the fact is that she is in an influential position and like it or not many fans take their cue from her. One of the negatives of fame. Things you can say as a private person, when said in public venues to a worldwide audience (thanks to the internet) can have far reaching repercussions. That puts DG in a position of higher responsibility for what she says than that of an ordinary fan. From what I have heard, she has since discouraged objectification so I would think she has realized that. I don’t feel a need to discuss with her why she did what she did – that is in the past, it is her business, and I don’t have a right to judge her. But I don’t think it is out of bounds to mention that her initial comments did contribute to the atmosphere. That to me is simply a statement of fact.

        So anyway that’s what I’ve got. I know we will not all agree and I will continue to respect the opinions of those who see it differently – after all that’s what keeps life interesting. And I love the posters here and all of your wonderful and thoughful insights and crazy fun discussions. Thank you all for being here and being you.

      • #6176
        conniebv
        Participant

        Allison, you didn’t come across mean or combative. You came across very thoughtful.

      • #7433
        Photomom
        Participant

        con’t from earlier post…

        When I began to see Sam and Caitriona for themselves and realized what an exceptional gift they were giving me (along with everyone who works so hard to make this a reality). I started looking beyond the characters they portrayed and found Sam to be a genuinely nice, good hearted man who is committed to bringing his best to every scene for us, the fans. I will admit that the healthy female part of me admires his beautifully made male form, is attracted to his extreme masculinity/vulnerability. At the same time I want to tuck him under my wing like a mother hen would her chick and protect him from the “dark” side of human nature coming his way. He appears to me not to know what to do with suddenly being thrust into stardom and all the good, bad and ugly that comes with it. I will be eternally grateful to him for creating My Peak Challenge which got me off the couch on which I had spent the last two years dealing with fibromyalgia. It is astounding to me that he cares so much about the Leukemia Lymphoma research as well as his fans (me) that he would take the time to motivate us(me) into giving/moving and becoming a better me.

        On to Cait, an extraordinarily beautiful person inside and out, separate from her character as Claire. I looked at some of her photo’s when she was modeling and found a stunning woman, strong and self assured, which leads me to believe that she can handle a little bit better than Sam the ugly part of the “fandom” while still retaining her inner beauty. I give Cait major kudos for putting herself out there in the buff, opening herself up to all manner of good and bad criticism. It takes major courage and the ability to be comfortable in your own skin to do it. I don’t know anybody now a day who has a perfect body without being air brushed and hers is gorgeous and real. I love her smile, I love her witty comebacks with Sam, I love her sweetness, her class and most of all her generosity in giving of herself.

        I would like to thank you for giving me this safe place to share my point of view, and I would like to thank Ron for taking the time with his podcasts to go through each episode and explain what went into the writing, filming, production and post production. I have become aware of so many different aspects of film making, things I took for granted or never even came up on my radar. He gave me an immense appreciation for the actor’s dedication, the staff’s discussion and concern for every aspect of the transition from book to film while staying as close to the story as possible. I have a new found respect and appreciation for all that you do, just so I sit down for an hour a week and be able to block out the worries and stresses of my everyday life. Thank you, thank you, thank you.

        This a little off the objectification of Sam topic but I think I manage to address the issue at least a little bit. I have learned that the only actions I have control over are my own and when faced with the chance to inject some good into a situation I will attempt to take it. The only way to counteract the negative is to bombard it with the positive, so this is what I plan to do with the hopes that eventually the negative will drowned out completely.

    • #6150
      NWeiss
      Participant

      AlisonL- You are not the only one with the same opinion on the DG Objectifiying Sam thing. I watched the video as well and drew the same conclusion. I’d been trying to find a way to express it.

    • #6151
      rachely
      Participant

      I think for me the DG thing comes down to how we would react if George RR Martin said it about Lena Headey. Tho’ I’m perfectly willing to say that her attitude bugs me ordinarily, so it’s entirely possible that my reaction to this is a reflection of that.

    • #6154
      gingerlovinmind
      Participant

      I haven’t heard anything personally that DG has said that has bothered me. Working on post now, and it will explain more about why. May bounce some of it off you all to get your thoughts/input while I sort it all out in my head, but for now I must go feed kiddos.

    • #6158
      Lori
      Participant

      Hi, I don’t post often, however I really enjoy the respectful, entertaining and enlightening discussion here! Sorry if this is rambling – writing is not my thing!

      I know I come from a very different perspective than most – I was born in 1960, and often feel like a “fossil” among my peers – I guess, at least it is by my choice. I come from a place of preferring face to face conversations, as I have had too many experiences where cell phones, texting, facebook, etc. have contributed to negative experiences.

      It has been my experience that if we are not careful, and deliberate about how we use technology and social media, – for many of the reasons already stated here – it can ruin interpersonal relationships of family, friends and acquaintances. They contribute to many of the problems mentioned including – saying whatever is in your head without a filter, words and pictures out on the web that cannot be taken back, and my particular rant – basically losing relationships with family and friends because you choose not to be on the “latest” hot social media – you are left behind.

      Until recently, I had a flip phone, I still do not have a smart phone and I have only recently joined the ranks of those on Facebook (hence the “fossil” comment) – I have been a hold out – I finally caved because my youngest son was working out of state with poor cell phone and internet access – and I was missing out on the few photos he’d post. I had an interesting discussion with him regarding my issues with Facebook, etc. I told him that I didn’t want to have my personal info, photos, etc. out on the internet with the potential for being passed along to who knows where. He couldn’t relate – his comment was “what do you have to hide?” – I said – nothing and that’s not the point! He’s 19yrs old and a great kid – but wow what a different point of view!

      It is truly amazing to me (in my cave) that so many people are ok with so much about them and their young children (who by the way have no choice about their “cute baby butt pics”) being out on the internet.

      Having said all of the above, I have had a few positive experiences being able to share and learn from people from all over (which is a privilege I appreciate!) – including this one!

      “And I think I can get anyone new to reveal something personal without even trying, don’t you think? ; )”

      Rachel – does this count as personal – so I don’t have to be nervous any more?

      • This reply was modified 7 years, 4 months ago by Lori.
      • This reply was modified 7 years, 4 months ago by Lori.
    • #6162
      barbc624
      Participant

      [quote quote=6151]I think for me the DG thing comes down to how we would react if George RR Martin said it about Lena Headey. Tho’ I’m perfectly willing to say that her attitude bugs me ordinarily, so it’s entirely possible that my reaction to this is a reflection of that.[/quote]

      Yes, or if Ron Moore had said it about Cait. And to be fair I have pretty much the same reaction to DG that you do.

      • #6177
        conniebv
        Participant

        Not that I haven’t thought the same thing, but to me that would add another level because then it’s their boss making the comment. Diana wrote the book, yes, but she isn’t Sam’s boss. I would equate it more with GRRM making the comment about Oh, IDK, Nat Dormer.

      • #6184
        barbc624
        Participant

        You have a good point – I hadn’t parsed it that fine. 🙂 But either way it comes down to, as women are we going to be better than men have been in that way, or are we going to sink to their level and say “Yay, now we can be equal opportunity objectifiers.” I don’t want to be that kind of equal I guess.

        And I do think Sam is a big boy and can take care of himself – it’s not about being protective of him specifically, rather more of a principle because the ordinary male or female subjected to that may not be emotionally able to deal with it and shouldn’t have to.

        Not to say I don’t quietly admire a view of a fine male anatomy, but I pretty much keep it to myself or those close to me. 😉

    • #6164
      Tucsonlady
      Participant

      [quote quote=6029]One more example of the relationship between Diana and Sam. I recall Diana tweeting to Sam a few months ago saying words to the effect of “Hey Sam, you remember how people kept e-mailing me random photos of you when you were first cast? Well now they are sending me photos of your arse with random tattoos photoshopped on.” To which Sam replied “Yeah? Like what?” and the inimitable Diana replied, “Well, you asked for it <grin>” and tweeted — to Sam and all her followers — a photo of Sam’s arse with a fake tattoo.

      Based on all that, I have no problem with Diana’s comment in that panel. It’s pretty clear to me that Sam didn’t have a problem with it either.

      [/quote] I don’t have a Twitter or Facebook account so I was checking in to Diana’s tweets for Outlander news. That was the exact point where I quit going to Twitter because Diana creeped me out with that tweet. If Sam and Diana have a friendship where they can share naked Sam bum tattoos with each other that’s between them but IMO Diana crossed over the line. There have been several incidents recently where I have lost respect for Diana. Personally I think Sam is handling his new found fame much better than Diana.

    • #6165
      JB
      Participant

      [quote quote=6122]
      Well, I have a 15 year old and a 4 year old. The 15 year old has been in situations where we have had to talk about his body and what is and isn’t acceptable to allow or say, and how people are brains first and without your brain, sex is just like scratching yourself. It came with the sex talk, because I wanted him to know about things like taking control of contraception, taking the condom with him when he leaves, consent before sex even with a girlfriend and also what parts of his body are for sharing in a loving relationship and things that he may want to do to please someone but maybe isn’t comfortable with. That’s all I can think of for now.

      I will tell you that this is not a kid who has any trouble telling anyone anything. He’s had girls tell him he was a fox and catcall him and his response was “They don’t even know me, or they wouldn’t be doing that.”
      I find that my brothers, cousins and nephews are all pretty confident. It’s the girls that lose it, sometime in their tweens, and start to question themselves in relation to others. Of course it is changing over time, but at least my eldest has no problem telling a girl to back off, even if she’s joking.
      [/quote]

      This is off topic, so I apologize, but I couldn’t let it go without telling you what a beautiful gift you’re giving your children, Connie.

      And I think you’re right. Before I even read this response, I was reflecting that the messages that I as a parent want to impart to my kids are the same regardless of their sex: Respect yourself and others, know your boundaries, listen to your instincts. I think the best thing they could grow up to be is confident, kind adults.

      Thanks for sharing this!

      • #6178
        conniebv
        Participant

        Thank you for that supersweet post. I think we all worry that SOMETHING we do or don’t will send our kids to the couch, so it’s nice to hear.

    • #6166
      JB
      Participant

      [quote quote=6162]
      Yes, or if Ron Moore had said it about Cait. And to be fair I have pretty much the same reaction to DG that you do.
      [/quote]

      This is exactly the point I was trying to make. I was not personally offended by DG’s comment to Sam. But the part of my brain that is aware of the influence she has (and is also extremely sensitive to artifice of any kind) was ringing loudly when she said it.

      Flipping the sexes around, in my opinion, shows how off-color it was. If we would classify a man making a similar comment to a woman as being in poor taste, then why would we have a different standard for a women saying it to a man?

      Thinking about it briefly, I believe that that actually isn’t a rhetorical question, and the answers involve cultural conditioning — aaaaaand I’ve already gone there, so I’ll shut up now!

      Very much looking forward to reading others’ blogs, etc., on the topic, so I’m hoping the links will be posted here.

    • #6167
      JB
      Participant

      [quote quote=6158] I told him that I didn’t want to have my personal info, photos, etc. out on the internet with the potential for being passed along to who knows where. He couldn’t relate – his comment was “what do you have to hide?” – I said – nothing and that’s not the point! He’s 19yrs old and a great kid – but wow what a different point of view!

      It is truly amazing to me (in my cave) that so many people are ok with so much about them and their young children (who by the way have no choice about their “cute baby butt pics”) being out on the internet.
      [/quote]

      Off topic alert, again! Not sure how strict you guys are about this, so just warning everyone.

      Lori, just a vote of support to you — I am also a cave-dweller (born in 1974) who is desperately uncomfortable with being public on the internet. It is so completely out of character for me to be posting on a forum (using my <gasp> REAL INITIALS, no less), I can’t even tell you. In fact, those two parentheticals are probably the most info I’ve ever divulged about myself online. In short, I am strictly a consumer of the internet’s content. Or was until I read Outlander and became so desperate for conversation that I stumbled on this place.

      My kids seem to have adopted at least some of my wariness. I tell them the story of my last job interview, 5 years ago. My soon-to-be-boss admitted that she had Googled me and couldn’t find a single personal detail about me online, including a photo. I told her that I was very proud to hear that. For me, it comes down to wanting to control what people know about me and when. And the simplest way to do that these days, I find, is not to put anything online.

      Just wanted to wave and let you know you’re not alone!

      • #6183
        AllisonL
        Participant

        I’ve been trying to figure out why I don’t react the same way to a DG/Sam comment as I do a supposed Ron/Cait comment, why a woman saying something like that to a man doesn’t seem to be nearly as negative as when a man does it. I think it boils down to what’s behind those comments, which is, on one side, a thousand years of power, sexism, and control of women vs. well, not. That matters, a lot, to the way we view and react with each other today. I can’t think of how to explain what I mean except with this example. I have a friend in my knitting group, we’re both Downton Abbey fans and we joke all the time about how we’d love to have maids turn down our beds and call us to dinner. Fun, right? I have another friend in the group, who’s also a big DA fan, but I would never joke about this with her because she’s black. Those exact same jokes, said in same way with the exact same innocent, fun intent, are suddenly much different if I said them to her. She’s awesome and I’m sure she wouldn’t take it wrong but there is no way I could go there. It’s the same with the man commenting on woman vs. woman commenting on man thing (Im not equating racism and slavery with offhand comments on a stage; just struggling to find a way to express this difference) The words coming from a woman describing a man just don’t carry the same baggage and weight as do the EXACT SAME words coming from a man describing a woman, no matter how sincere and honest they might be. Does that make sense? Please don’t tar and feather me and throw me out of town (I just finished that part in Breath of Snow and Ashes).

      • #6203
        conniebv
        Participant

        ALL THE PROPS, Allison because what you touched on here is the concept of privilege and you are so so right and damn it every time I see someone make this point it makes me want to cry with happiness.
        Awesome.

      • #6192
        Lori
        Participant

        Oops sorry – off topic…. – although I do think it is relevant to where we all come from to these discussions. Thanks.

        Thanks so much JB – I do appreciate your comments – and am glad to hear from a fellow “cave dweller”! You also put my thoughts into words in a much better way – I think I was desperate for conversation as well.

    • #6185
      rachely
      Participant

      What Connie said. You can’t use Ron as an example. He is the boss not the author.

      • #6195
        barbc624
        Participant

        So use GRRM then. Either way I don’t agree with those type of public comments man to woman or woman to man. I like to think we can be better than that.

        And referring to past history men to women starts to head in the direction of revenge feminism to me.

      • #6196
        rachely
        Participant

        I just want to make it clear that the analogy doesn’t work if you use Ron/Cait. Ron/Tall Ships sign Cait’s paychecks, he is bound by certain workplace laws that DG isn’t. It’s different.

      • #6197
        sonyakhanum
        Participant

        I agree with you Barb about past history, though it does shed an interesting light as to why we may not initially be concerned with such comments.

        I think it’s also important to note that public comments of that type don’t help in the struggle against body image pressures, which is increasingly becoming a problem for boys and men.

      • #6205
        conniebv
        Participant

        I’m not going to legitimize that term by using it, but I think it is important and relevant to question why society as a whole reacts more to one over the other, and that’s a multilayer issue that deals with age, nationality, race, gender and perceptions of power. Analyzing why something happened and trying to understand the conditions isn’t condoning it.

      • #6208
        MrsParker
        Participant

        My SO and I were talking about this last night. If the situation were reversed (male author, much younger actress), we agreed that the male author would come across as a dirty old man with misogynistic tendencies. And much like Alison said, this probably has to do with patriarchal history, etc.

        To further drag the SO into this (paraphrasing as he’s not here at the moment): “There’s something endearing and awesome about an older woman openly finding a younger man attractive. It’s a reminder that she’s still a sexual being and there’s some spunk about her. It’s also not seen as threatening, as the odds of a woman using her power to derail the younger man are pretty slim. Not that she doesn’t have any power, it’s that women don’t come across as willing to do that.”

        I personally was not bothered by the comment or any of the banter between Ms. Gabaldon* and Mr. Heaughan.* They know one another, have a personal as well as a professional relationship and how they wish to conduct that relationship, personally and privately, is simply their business. I laugh at loud at their antics on Twitter, but I never feel that gives me license to participate. I just have a front-row seat to the show.

        Ms. Gabaldon isn’t responsible for the at-times over-objectification of Mr. Heughan. I don’t think it’s fair to put that responsibility on her, as much as I don’t blame the creators of the show for presenting him with so little clothing at times. I’m sure there was much chatter about Mr. Heughan’s assets before that panel occurred. I’m certainly not saying that anyone has to agree with her comments (or their tone), or that Ms. Gabaldon is always perfect (I don’t think this at all), but I do think the actions, words, and antics of some fans is not her fault.

        Allison, if we’re getting tarred and feathered and run out of town, I’ll bring yummy snacks!

        (*because I don’t know them personally I’m employing old-Hollywood standards and using their surnames, I’ll go back to first names soon I’m sure!)

      • #6216
        conniebv
        Participant

        High five for your husband, who is also discussing privilege! Man, I love life today.

    • #6210
      gingerlovinmind
      Participant

      Sigh. Ok. I did it. I went ahead and blogged about it. I am pretty sure that it will put me in the “tarred and feathered” camp, but at least I know that while many of you won’t agree (which I am TOTALLY ok with), at least you will disagree respectfully. *runs to hide*

      • #6211
        MrsParker
        Participant

        Someone (*ahem*Terri*) is too shy to post a link to Terri’s article, so here it is: https://terrizellerwallace.wordpress.com/2015/01/22/diana-gabaldon-is-not-your-mother/comment-page-1/#comment-418

        Join us at the Tar and Feather Party. I’m bringing cheese. ALL the cheese.

      • #6212
        gingerlovinmind
        Participant

        If you bring the cheese, I will bring the whisky (and whatever you want to drink). I imagine tarring and feathering to be painful…I think the alcohol will help.

      • #6213
        beth wesson
        Participant

        This. I was trying to find the words to frame my thoughts and I think you’ve come close. It seems to me there is an odd tolerance for women saying sexually suggestive things. It’s almost as if people find it “cute”. The whole idea that a woman Diana’s age can still be “ornery” is seen as endearing. IMO Less seriousness is afforded innuendo spoken by women. Is because women are not seen as a sexual threat? I was made uncomfortable by her comments to Sam on stage and yet kind of admired her for having the guts to say them. Was she inappropriate? Probably. And yet, everyone laughed. Even after all this conversation, I’m not sure where the line gets drawn!

      • #6218
        MrsParker
        Participant

        Beth, I believe we’re on the same page, so please RSVP to the Tar and Feather party.

        “Is it because women are not seen as a sexual threat?”
        My answer: Yes.

        Reasons:
        1. Women, especially older women, are not as physically threatening therefore we are not as sexually threatening. In other words, we can’t overpower someone to have our way with them.
        2. There’s a shock factor involved. Older women are commonly viewed as mothers and care-givers, and not lusty beings. The reminder that one’s sex drive still exists for oh, say, the rest of your life is surprising to some.

        On a personal note, I’ve never heard my 60+ mother talk about a television show the way she did about The Wedding episode. It was the closest we ever came to an actual conversation about sex.

      • #6219
        conniebv
        Participant

        Oh God, my mother was the 1st person I called after I did it.

      • #6221
        beth wesson
        Participant

        Absolutely no sex talk from my mother! As she had none from hers and I imagine grandma had none from hers…..and so on…. I TRIED to break the tradition!

      • #6222
        NWeiss
        Participant

        The night I meet my mother in law she was introducing me to her dinner party guests- she had trouble putting a label on my status so my husband blurted “we have sex mom!” It may be the best introduction I’ve ever had.

      • #6224
        rachely
        Participant

        *dingdingdig*

        we have a winner.

        I was telling twitter peeps earlier that my mother outed my sister as a lesbian at my grandmother’s funeral. It was so funny.

    • #6217
      conniebv
      Participant

      Terri, I read it, and I am not sure how I feel about it. My mother is quite outrageous, and a lady, and always tells me to put on makeup and heels and do my hair. Everyone’s mom is different. I suppose I agree with it, but it’s sort of difficult to gauge the purpose of it? I feel sort of like you are setting up as the Emily Post of Outlander. Maybe I perceive that because your posts are directed outwardly instead of inwardly. They don’t state your position as much as what you think others should do.

      So I think what I am saying is that while I think you make valid points, this style or focus makes them hard to take. At least for a broad like me that questions being fed viewpoints. Maybe it’s something to chew on if you want to keep on this subject in this fandom.

      Still, props for putting yourself out there.

      • #6225
        gingerlovinmind
        Participant

        I appreciate your feedback. And, no, while it may have come off as seeing myself as the Emily Post of Fandom, it isn’t normally a focus for me. My blog isn’t an Outlander blog, or a fandom blog. It is usually just about me writing stuff, and the process of me writing stuff, and the stuff I do when I am not writing stuff. And in a way these posts are no different. I wrote them in reaction to things I was seeing, and also as a way to sort out my own position. I would not anticipate continuing on the subject, because I think I have pretty much covered what I had in my head, and because there are other topics that I want to explore. But I do respect your thoughts and suggestions very much.

      • #6232
        conniebv
        Participant

        Points for graciousness, as well. I love dialogue, and it’s a bonus to be able to have it so civilly!

      • #6226
        MrsParker
        Participant

        Connie, I hear what you are saying, and I think it has to do with writing style. I had a class a few years ago that said we should always write from a personal view-point, and I don’t agree with that. I feel the fact that it’s on Terri’s personal blog infers that it’s her own opinion, and I’m a fan of writing that uses less “I” statements. Less “I” statements implies that you are speaking from a place of authority and as it’s Terri’s blog she has all the authority.

        I realize that this writing style is a personal preference and one that isn’t utilized on the internet much these days. I would say the same even if I didn’t agree with so much of what Terri is saying. (I also realize that I use a lot of “I” statements on here — that’s so my opinions don’t sound overly bossy and I think it’s better to be this way on a forum.)

      • #6235
        conniebv
        Participant

        Maybe it’s that I’m a middle child, but I usually think of both sides, and I get what you’re saying. I tend to read blogs less as literature and more like op eds, I guess.

    • #6220
      NWeiss
      Participant

      MrsParker-
      Re:#2. during my last read through of the OL series I remembered my grandmother and her extensive collection of harlequin novels shoved in every spare inch of her house. I had never really thought about the content of the books till then and it gave me a new perspective on ol’ grandma.

      Also watched the Wedding episode with my 60 yr old mother (who lives out of town), after it was over she asked to watch it again. She claims she missed some of the talking.

    • #6223
      barbc624
      Participant

      [quote quote=6217]
      I feel sort of like you are setting up as the Emily Post of Outlander. Maybe I perceive that because your posts are directed outwardly instead of inwardly. They don’t state your position as much as what you think others should do.

      So I think what I am saying is that while I think you make valid points, this style or focus makes them hard to take. At least for a broad like me that questions being fed viewpoints. Maybe it’s something to chew on if you want to keep on this subject in this fandom.

      Still, props for putting yourself out there.
      [/quote]

      What Connie said.

    • #6228
      barbc624
      Participant

      I want to apologize to all for bringing DG’s actions into this. That was clearly a mistake on my part as anything implying criticism of DG seems to be a sore spot for many fans. I should have known better.

      That now seems to be obscuring the important issue about objectifying others be they male or female and I am truly sorry I brought it up.

      • #6233
        gingerlovinmind
        Participant

        I really, really, really hope you don’t think I wrote the blog because of something you said. I wrote it because it was something that was repeatedly mentioned in the comments of the other post I did. Of course you should have your opinions, and I would feel horrible if I did anything to make you feel bad, or feel like this wasn’t a safe place to discuss your thoughts. I apologize.

      • #6241
        barbc624
        Participant

        Terri;
        Thank you for that. 🙂 I’m fine, just a bit taken aback by the protectiveness of DG’s fans over anything they perceive as a criticism of her.

      • #6237
        conniebv
        Participant

        Barb, I don’t feel that you need to apologize! Certainly don’t feel bad. All views were expressed politely and were welcome.

      • #6238
        rachely
        Participant

        Pretty sure I brought it up before you did on the other thread.

      • #6242
        barbc624
        Participant

        Thanks to all. I guess I get a bit gun shy based on past internet fandom experiences. Time to move on and get back to the important stuff!! :):)

      • #6243
        rachely
        Participant

        You can’t run from us, Barb, we won’t let you.

        the important stuff!!

        like sex, right? ; )

      • #6245
        MrsParker
        Participant

        I think we just got into a wedge issue on whether DG’s comment validated the overt objectification of SH. Opinion and supporting arguments can differ, it’s all good, and happy to move it all along. Whisky, wine and cheese all around.

        For the record, I don’t believe everything DG says is sacred, nor are the books holy texts 🙂

      • #6257
        cynthia
        Participant

        I am confused by Barbara’s comment. I have read this board and I don’t see where anyone was rude. I am nervous that this will be a place where no one can express an idea that is different from the main commentators. Some people thought Diana was wrong, some people didn’t mind what Diana said. Why is having a discussion about this bad? I am new to posting and I want to know if this is a place where anyone can talk or if I should move along.

      • #6262
        barbc624
        Participant

        No one was rude. This is a great board. I felt a bit uncomfortable because I said someting about DG and felt like it might be creating a divide here which I don’t want to see. All is well here, and this has been and I am sure will continue to be, a safe place to share divergent views. Please don’t go – we really don’t bite!

      • #6267
        cynthia
        Participant

        I want to apologize to all for bringing DG’s actions into this. That was clearly a mistake on my part as anything implying criticism of DG seems to be a sore spot for many fans. I should have known better.

        This says to me that you don’t like when someone has an opinion that is different from yours. I didn’t like DG’s comment either but people can express different. I hope this board doesn’t become one note if main commentators are shutting down opinions that don’t agree with theirs.

      • #6293
        conniebv
        Participant

        If you have read the board the tone should be pretty apparent. We disagree with each other quite often, but as long as you are respectful and don’t make personal attacks, you should be fine. Keep it civil and respectful.

    • #6244
      barbc624
      Participant

      [quote quote=6243]You can’t run from us, Barb, we won’t let you.

      the important stuff!!

      like sex, right? ; )
      [/quote]

      No worries, in the words of Claire “I don’t run away from things”… although there are are times I probaly should!

      Ah sex 😉 🙂 🙂

    • #6246
      barbc624
      Participant

      [quote quote=6245]I think we just got into a wedge issue on whether DG’s comment validated the overt objectification of SH. Opinion and supporting arguments can differ, it’s all good, and happy to move it all along. Whisky, wine and cheese all around.

      For the record, I don’t believe everything DG says is sacred, nor are the books holy texts :)
      [/quote]

      “And ne’er the twain shall meet” so both sides cordially agreed to disagree and moved on to the whisky, wine and cheese party…
      🙂

    • #6247
      Katie (@bunnums)
      Participant

      Oh, I like a whisky, wine, and cheese party! (Though I really do need to find someone to teach me about whisky!)

    • #6248
      barbc624
      Participant

      [quote quote=6247]
      (Though I really do need to find someone to teach me about whisky!)[/quote]

      Me too.

    • #6249
      michellibell
      Participant

      [quote quote=6228]I want to apologize to all for bringing DG’s actions into this. That was clearly a mistake on my part as anything implying criticism of DG seems to be a sore spot for many fans. I should have known better.

      That now seems to be obscuring the important issue about objectifying others be they male or female and I am truly sorry I brought it up.

      [/quote]

      no, no, no…. we’re happy you’re here and we all have opinions. As long as they are expressed in polite terms, which you always do, don’t feel bad or apologize.

    • #6250
      michellibell
      Participant

      [quote quote=6244]

      <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>rachely wrote:</div>
      You can’t run from us, Barb, we won’t let you.

      the important stuff!!

      like sex, right? ; )

      No worries, in the words of Claire “I don’t run away from things”… although there are are times I probaly should!

      Ah sex ;) :) :)

      [/quote]

      So would this be the place I brag about my afternoon delight on my lunch break? 😉

      • #6254
        rachely
        Participant

        we need a sex thread. also i’m jealous, because i have a motherfucking UTI.

        ETA: I was not fucking my mother. (this is like yday when I managed to accidentally tweet about moist panties)

        • This reply was modified 7 years, 4 months ago by rachely.
    • #6259
      Anastasia
      Participant

      De-lurking and registering because this subject hits some really sore spots for me.

      I suspect what I’m about to say will be unpopular, but I feel it needs to be said.

      What friends say to one another in private is very different from what friends say to one another in public. If Gabaldon wants to privately joke about Sam’s body with him and he’s OK with that, that’s their business. But we’re not talking about the private joking between friends. We’re talking about very public statements, made where thousands could witness them. Nor can it be called simply a “slip” as I’ve seen some folks say: if it had been a single outlier comment at one panel, then yes, we could write it off as an “Oops.” But it isn’t one comment – it’s been a regular part of her comments and exchanges with him on Twitter, to talk about his “assets” – and I’m not referring to his acting talents.

      I ask you and everyone else in this forum, would you want a friend of yours to repeatedly and publicly comment with multiple Tweets/Facebook posts, and on a stage with a microphone, about your derriere? Your breasts? Or other intimate parts of your body? I rather doubt it. I know I sure wouldn’t, friend or not. Let’s also be honest – some of her comments have been potentially hurtful. Again, jibes and teasing between friends in a private setting is one thing – but none of this has been a private setting in any way, shape or form. Friends who work together (and this is an indirect working relationship here) know that there’s a time and place for joking (ribald or otherwise), and a time and place to refrain.

      People are giving Gabaldon a pass on her public, objectifying comments – comments which, in a very real sense, amount to sexual harassment of a colleague given the dynamics of their relationship – because it’s difficult to admit when those we admire are at fault. But no woman in an actual workplace making these sorts of comments to a man she worked with would be allowed to get away with them. Friends or not, there are simply some things you do not say out loud in a public space. They are disrespectful and unprofessional.

      Either objectification is wrong, or it’s not. If it’s wrong, it’s wrong no matter who is doing it, their relationship to the victim, how famous they might be, and no matter how much we might admire them. We can’t have it both ways, folks. It’s wrong whether it’s a man objectifying a woman or a woman objectifying a man. Turnabout is not OK, not even because we women have had to deal with objectification more than men. We should be holding ourselves to a higher standard, not sinking down to the lower and saying it’s OK because “haha, it’s our turn!”

      We can’t rightly criticize all those fans out there making objectifying comments, but give Gabaldon a pass. It’s a blatant double standard to criticize them for doing the exact same thing Gabaldon has done, yet say it’s fine when she does it because they are friends. In some respects, it is precisely because Gabaldon went down the road first that has led to others doing the same. Her making these sorts of comments was, to her fans, implicit permission to follow her lead. And it’s snowballed and brought us to where we are now, which is not a nice place (in my opinion) and which I’m finding increasingly distressful and not something I want any part of at all. I don’t even want to call myself a fan of the show or actors, because I don’t want to be associated with the poor behavior going on.

      And it only seems to be getting worse: what I’m seeing now are fans who not only objectify Sam Heughan, but who have crossed the line from enthusiasm into obsession – fans who talk about how they are behind on work, aren’t sleeping, who are neglecting their real lives, all because they are busy being a fan on the internet. That’s not being enthusiastic; that’s being obsessed. I might understand this more were it coming from very young girls (such as what happened with many of the fans of the Twilight movies), but from everything I’m seeing, the majority of fans of the Outlander series are grown adults; this sort of behavior coming from adults has me completely baffled.

      The latest craze is competing to “win” a follow for a week, and all I’m left with is the thought that Sam Heughan is not an object to be competed over and won. He’s not a trophy. Some of the fans involved in this have turned something he offered as a nice gesture into something dehumanizing.

      And to be clear – I believe there’s a difference between appreciation and objectification. I see nothing wrong with telling someone they are attractive/handsome/beautiful! Who amongst us doesn’t want to hear a compliment from someone that we’re attractive? There is, however, something wrong when we can look on Twitter and see Heughan turned into a sandwich (in an actual literal sense), or his image/name inserted into all sorts of sexual situations with sexual innuendo or outright sexual comments on the images. That’s so far from appreciation, it’s not even in the same galaxy!

      The other thing that goes in tandem with this is the insistence on Hollywood for perfection – which has led to comments about how Sam should be getting his moles removed, or hair plugs (because they think he’s losing his hair) or that he needs to be seeing an aesthetician (because they think they saw pimples). It’s a sadly apropos bedfellow to objectification, because Hollywood’s ideal of what people should look like isn’t even human anymore. We have airbrushed and Photoshopped and nipped and tucked our way towards turning people into mannequins. It sickens me, and I hope that none of the actors feel pressured into having to change themselves in such a fashion to suit Hollywood’s ideas about beauty.

      • #6260
        rachely
        Participant

        I don’t even want to call myself a fan of the show or actors, because I don’t want to be associated with the poor behavior going on.

        I’ve said more than once that OL fans make me want to stop watching OL… if it wasn’t for the costumes…

      • #6268
        NWeiss
        Participant

        Off topic rachely–but what have you been making lately?

      • #6269
        rachely
        Participant

        a robe à l’anglaise. Do you follow me on twitter there are pictures? (then you’d know I threatened to set it on fire yesterday). should be more pics yday since I think I’m finally happy with the pleating.

        I’m rachely336 on twitter, same pic.

      • #6270
        barbc624
        Participant

        Ooh pictures please…

      • #6271
        NWeiss
        Participant

        yes, follow you. Saw the pleat post but totally missed the threat to set it on fire. I miss all the interesting stuff…too much junk in my twitter feed.

      • #6273
        rachely
        Participant

        here, new thread for posting what we’re making: https://www.terrydresbach.com/forums/topic/so-whatcha-making/

      • #6263
        barbc624
        Participant

        No arguments here about what you said.

        As for the fandom I’ve seen this happen before resulting in a fandom splitting into opposing camps. That took several years to happen. I wonder if the acceleration this time has to do with Twitter and the 140 character quick messages. That wasn’t around last time – all we had were forums.

        • This reply was modified 7 years, 4 months ago by barbc624.
      • #6264
        rachely
        Participant

        I think the extra long break after very few episodes–and the constant teasing–has made it ugly faster. (teasing from Starz)

        • This reply was modified 7 years, 4 months ago by rachely.
      • #6280
        Tucsonlady
        Participant

        I agree with you Rachel. Starz PR machine also plays a major role in the issue. Here is a link to a newly released article in Elle magazine about Outlander below. It’s fairly typical for the style of publicity that Starz has been pushing since day one. The hotness factor of it’s leading couple has been the primary selling point for Starz. This is one of the reasons why I’m stepping away for season two and going back to the books. Americans are notorious for having short attention spans. In a year’s time the Outlander craze will have imploded or moved on.

        http://www.elle.com/culture/news/a25442/how-to-make-the-perfect-sex-scene/

      • #6285
        JB
        Participant

        Congrats on de-lurking! My vote of support: I agree with everything in your post and think you tidily summed up my feelings about the issues we’ve addressed here.

      • #6291
        maureenanne
        Participant

        Excellent post Anastasia! As I have stated in a previous post I am really new to twitter and social media altogether and so I turn to you thoughtful ladies with a question. Do you know of anyone covering the spiritual aspects of the books and series? I am interested in the unique blend of pagan and Christian beliefs that form the basis of Celtic spirituality. I think Diana did an excellent job in bringing this to life in her books and the series does not seem to be shying away from this. (Thus far!) I would love to see some meaningful discussions on this as the series progresses. Nothing too preachy…just an open dialogue inclusive of all faiths discussing what is such a compelling aspect of the books and Jaimie in particular. What say you?

      • #6292
        maureenanne
        Participant

        I am off to work. Have a great day everyone.

      • #6299
        conniebv
        Participant

        Welcome and congrats on de-lurking. If you have been lurking, I assume you read all the posts on this subject already and so can see that I don’t really see things from your perspective. Your views are actually quite popular. You shouldn’t feel like the exception.

        One of the issues I do have is the internal mothering of other adult fans and externally, of adults like Cait and Sam and Diana. The body issues, objectification and other things that we are repeatedly asked to shield them from are aspects (albeit negative ones)of their jobs. Whether they choose to speak out against or in defense is entirely up to them, not me, to decide, and I choose not to be offended or outraged when neither actor has stated that they were.

        Now if there is a Twitter user or specific person that offends me, I unfollow or block. Solved a lot of issues this past week, I’ll tell ya.

      • #6310
        Anastasia
        Participant

        [quote quote=6299]One of the issues I do have is the internal mothering of other adult fans and externally, of adults like Cait and Sam and Diana. The body issues, objectification and other things that we are repeatedly asked to shield them from are aspects (albeit negative ones)of their jobs. Whether they choose to speak out against or in defense is entirely up to them, not me, to decide, and I choose not to be offended or outraged when neither actor has stated that they were.
        [/quote]

        For the record, I am not mothering anyone – nor am I trying to shield anyone. The problem with saying “Well, they haven’t said anything, so obviously they aren’t bothered by it, so why should I be?” is that if we place all the burden on speaking out on the direct victims (who may genuinely not be bothered by it, or may not feel as though they can speak up, or may not even realize what’s happening), nothing will ever change.

        Objectification and its uglier sibling, rape culture, are so ingrained in our society and culture that many people can’t see it and don’t recognize it when it happens, even if it’s happening to them. It’s that pervasive. It behooves all of us to speak out when we see it – even if the victim does not, even if it seems as though the victim doesn’t mind – because that doesn’t make it any less dehumanizing, and it doesn’t suddenly make it OK and right.

        It’s akin to saying that the woman who is walking down the street and getting catcalled, but who doesn’t turn around and say something, must like it and thus it’s OK for the men to keep doing it. When the truth is that it’s far more likely she doesn’t feel safe in saying anything.

        But, let’s go with the assumption that she does like it! Guess what? The problem is that the men won’t just catcall her – they will catcall every woman walking down the street, many of whom won’t like it and who will be made to feel afraid and humiliated by it. And that’s the crux of the issue – it’s not just about one person, it’s about something far bigger than that.

        And saying it’s just a part of their jobs is in my opinion not only an excuse, but a poor one. You don’t see this same level of insanity in the entertainment industries of other countries. So it’s not a “given” that anyone choosing to be an actor therefore has to just accept and put up with this sort of nonsense.

        The only way this will ever stop is if we speak out – and yes, it can be exhausting, to always be the one going against the grain, to feel like you’re the only voice in a sea of “So what?” and “It’s no big deal.” I’ve been there all my life, as have many others.

      • #6311
        rachely
        Participant

        To me the “mothering” thing that is so weird is the whole ‘tagging Ron, Tall Ships, DG, Terry, EVERYONE to say you don’t think Sam shouldn’t be dating a 22 year old who wears lingerie out of the house’. As long as everyone is an adult and you haven’t seen anything illegal then it’s a little weird that people (not you, Anastasia, just a generic ‘you’) feel this need to run and tell mommy and daddy.

        (I have no idea if this is what Connie meant, just me)

      • #6317
        barbc624
        Participant

        Thanks for two great posts Anastia. You said what I have tried to say so much better than me.

        It seems to me that there are several issues that are being conflated here which is making for confusion.

        1. Private behavior versus public behavior. I haven’t seen anyone here presuming to judge private behavior between friends, myself included. Like it or not, public behaviors, because they impact more than the specific parties involved, can and must be measured differently than behaviors in private that impact only the parties present. Twitter (unless the account is blocked to only friends), Facebook (same thing), media interviews, etc., are clearly public behaviors.

        I firmly believe it is fair to hold public behaviors to a higher standard, especially when those engaging in them serve as role models to the public or group at large. Instead comments made about public behaviors are being taken as criticisms of private behaviors and then dismissed as not justified.

        2. Behavior labeled “mothering” of persons versus comments about behavior that serves to objectify others. Two very different things and frankly, the mothering thing doesn’t even hit my radar as an issue of significance as it doesn’t affect people at large but is something unique to a small select privileged group. Objectification affects everyone – women especially but more and more men as well, and the great majority of those affected are not celebrities but are everyday ordinary people.

        On a personal note, I am a mother and believe me I have no need to “mother” anyone other than my own family, especially celebrities. They are in positions of power and are well able to take care of themselves. Not to mention there are readily available tools they can use on social media to block or mute comments that are distatseful to them. They don’t need fans to guard their tender sensibilities.

        Personally, I haven’t seen anyone saying they are defending Sam’s* virtue against the poor behavior. (Maybe I don’t follow the right people or am naive but I think most fans recognize that he is perfectly capable of defending himself if need be). What I have seen is the point being made more than once that the behavior objectifying Sam* is giving the person commenting (a) a distaste for the people engaging in it and also in some cases towards OL fans and (b) is serving to perpetuate the same sexist behavior from women towards men, that we as women have been decrying when coming from men towards women, i.e a double standard on our part. (Haven’t we as women been screaming about double standards for decades now? I don’t get it.) Unfortunately I have too often seem those comments quickly being categorized and thus deligitimized as “Mothering”.

        *Sam is being used for illustrative purposes, could be any male OL who has been subject to the behavior in question.

        The result of this is that there has been a diversion from the discussion of the very real problem of objectification of others, to discussions about “mothering” of celebrities and the rights of people to behave as they wish privately, which I don’t believe has ever been in contention.

        I’m not saying this is being done deliberately, but simply that it is what I have observed happening. I hate to see that happen because I think objectification of others is an ongoing and very real problem, as Anastasia so clearly outlined, and it won’t stop anytime soon if we don’t feel able to call out the behavior of whoever happens to be doing it (or enabling it) no matter who they are or what their position.

      • #6332
        conniebv
        Participant

        For the record, I am not mothering anyone – nor am I trying to shield anyone. The problem with saying “Well, they haven’t said anything, so obviously they aren’t bothered by it, so why should I be?” is that if we place all the burden on speaking out on the direct victims (who may genuinely not be bothered by it, or may not feel as though they can speak up, or may not even realize what’s happening), nothing will ever change.

        And the perception that they are victims is your perception. I don’t see it that way and I haven’t seen anything that says they do, so we aren’t starting out from the same assumption. That’s what I am pointing out.

        Objectification and its uglier sibling, rape culture, are so ingrained in our society and culture that many people can’t see it and don’t recognize it when it happens, even if it’s happening to them. It’s that pervasive. It behooves all of us to speak out when we see it – even if the victim does not, even if it seems as though the victim doesn’t mind – because that doesn’t make it any less dehumanizing, and it doesn’t suddenly make it OK and right.

        This is a HUGE leap. Really, to me, rape culture is the Godwin’s of feminism. Suffice it to say that while I am an outspoken feminist, I don’t believe that I am endorsing rape culture by not assuming that Sam or Cait view themselves as victims of objectification in the cases we have discussed here, which is the subject. Other extrapolations are so varied and subjective as to be meaningless for purposes of this discussion.

        It’s akin to saying that the woman who is walking down the street and getting catcalled, but who doesn’t turn around and say something, must like it and thus it’s OK for the men to keep doing it. When the truth is that it’s far more likely she doesn’t feel safe in saying anything.

        But, let’s go with the assumption that she does like it! Guess what? The problem is that the men won’t just catcall her – they will catcall every woman walking down the street, many of whom won’t like it and who will be made to feel afraid and humiliated by it. And that’s the crux of the issue – it’s not just about one person, it’s about something far bigger than that.

        Everything I said above applies here.

        And saying it’s just a part of their jobs is in my opinion not only an excuse, but a poor one. You don’t see this same level of insanity in the entertainment industries of other countries. So it’s not a “given” that anyone choosing to be an actor therefore has to just accept and put up with this sort of nonsense.

        It’s a good thing I’m not excusing it, then. Also, I have lived in four other countries and I will tell you right now in South and Central America at least, it is MUCH MUCH worse. And I never said they had to put up with it. That’s an incorrect inference. I said it was an aspect of the job, however unwelcome.

        The only way this will ever stop is if we speak out – and yes, it can be exhausting, to always be the one going against the grain, to feel like you’re the only voice in a sea of “So what?” and “It’s no big deal.” I’ve been there all my life, as have many others.

        And here we can agree, that the only way that we can stop inequality against women, LGBT, people in positions where they are treated in a subhuman manner, where their voice is continually silenced, ignored. They absolutely need advocacy. I don’t believe the situations we have discussed here require that. Mike Brown? Absolutely. Leelah Alcorn? Hell yes. An author telling the star of her show that he had a fine tush? Not great. I wouldn’t have done it. But to raise it to this level is something I just won’t do.

        So that’s our disagreement, and it’s fine. The difference between mothering and having an opinion (to me) is trying to make others act according to your conclusions, and I’m okay if no one acts according to mine. They’re just for me. And now I’m off to take my 4-yo to the MD because 102 fever is no fun. Thanks for keeping me busy while my car warmed up. 🙂

      • #6346
        cynthia
        Participant

        Michiel Huisman on Game of Thrones had a scene where we see his backside. In a recent article, his wife said they were at a PTA meeting for their daughter’s school. One of the fathers there was a GoT fan and said to him, “By the way, great ass!” In the article his wife said, “Okay…” and laughed. Because it is a little weird when a stranger comments on your backside. So it happens elsewhere, and it’s not just women who are doing it. Male nudity on television is a relatively new thing. We’re seeing more of it (amen!) and it’s a topic of conversation. What is acceptable to say about it will get sorted out along the way.

      • #6417
        Terry Dresbach
        Keymaster

        [quote quote=6310]It’s akin to saying that the woman who is walking down the street and getting catcalled, but who doesn’t turn around and say something, must like it and thus it’s OK for the men to keep doing it. When the truth is that it’s far more likely she doesn’t feel safe in saying anything.[/quote]

        Powerful statement, powerful post.

    • #6286
      cynthia
      Participant

      I have looked for a rules page for this forum but I can’t find one. Can someone explain? The main topic of discussion was shut down because Barb didn’t like when someone disagreed with her and then another off-topic personal discussion begins. Please explain what the rules are so I know not to offend Barb and the other moderators.

      • #6301
        conniebv
        Participant

        Nope, the main topic was shut down because the thread was malfunctioning and responses were getting lost and confusing due to its length.

      • #6312
        barbc624
        Participant

        Hi Cynthia;

        I’m not a moderator – just a participant and the topic is still being discussed with various voices on both sides being heard. Feel free to voice your thoughts -as you can see this is an ongoing discussion (2 threads so far) and probably will continue to be since it’s not an easy issue to tackle.

    • #6302
      michellibell
      Participant

      [quote quote=6286]I have looked for a rules page for this forum but I can’t find one. Can someone explain? The main topic of discussion was shut down because Barb didn’t like when someone disagreed with her and then another off-topic personal discussion begins. Please explain what the rules are so I know not to offend Barb and the other moderators. [/quote]

      No, the main topic was shut down because it was too long and we couldn’t wade through all the posts to keep things straight.
      Celtic started a new thread (per request by Terry) just to try and organize things.

      Barb might have disagreed with other posters, but in no way was that the reason anything was closed. As a matter of fact, several of us commented on how nice it was that we can all disagree and stay polite.

    • #6339
      barbc624
      Participant

      [quote quote=6332]

      For the record, I am not mothering anyone – nor am I trying to shield anyone. The problem with saying “Well, they haven’t said anything, so obviously they aren’t bothered by it, so why should I be?” is that if we place all the burden on speaking out on the direct victims (who may genuinely not be bothered by it, or may not feel as though they can speak up, or may not even realize what’s happening), nothing will ever change.

      And the perception that they are victims is your perception. I don’t see it that way and I haven’t seen anything that says they do, so we aren’t starting out from the same assumption. That’s what I am pointing out. [/quote]

      Call them the the recipients if that makes a difference. And my concern, I will repeat once again, is NOT on their behalf. It is about the trickle down effects of the enablement and even encouragement of objectification by people who are in the public eye and act as role models to their followers.

      After all, if it’s ok to publicly objectify an actor, then it must be ok to publicly objectify the hot guy/girl you see walking down the street. Like it or not, people imitate what they see their idols do in their own daily lives. Thus the example of the public figure who publicly objectifies another gets repeated on a more ordinary daily level (ie in this case by fans on Twitter) and eventually becomes an accepted thing to do.

      So my concern, is about the ultimate results of public behavior by someone who is looked up to by many others. It’s about the effects on the ordinary women and men who are then subjected to objectification because someone is copying their idol’s behavior, and it’s also about the effects on the people who do it. Objectification encourages us to dehumanize the object of it in our own minds and encourages behavior that ultimately can injure the objectivizers (is that a even word?) own self esteem.

      My question to you is “Do you believe that objectification of anyone is something that as an ethical and humane society we would like to see end, or is it something that’s not a big deal and can be ok depending on who is doing it and to whom?”

      And whatever your answer to that is, and whether we agree or disagree in the end, I’m really happy we can have a civil conversation about this because in my mind the first step in changing things is bringing them into the light and questioning them. If we don’t question them there is no hope of them ever changing. 🙂 🙂

      [quote]And now I’m off to take my 4-yo to the MD because 102 fever is no fun. Thanks for keeping me busy while my car warmed up. :)
      [/quote]
      Awww, I hope she/he is okay. We have a nasty measles outbreak going on in CA right now which is kind of scary for those with young children.

      Edited to add. You say that mothering is trying to make others behave the way you want them to. That may be your definition, and is true in the case of very young children. But as the mother of two grown adults, I have always believed that once they were old enough to reason my real (and much more difficult job) was to teach them to think for themselves and learn how to make decisions based not only on their own self interest or on the opinions of others, but on how their choices would affect others. Others in this case being not only others that they knew personally but “others” on a more global basis which includes not only people but the other life forms that we share our world with. On the whole I think I’ve succeeded fairly well, as evidenced by the sometimes passionate discussions we have as a family on various issues. And no, we don’t always agree but we do come out of it with new ideas and viewpoints to ponder.

      • This reply was modified 7 years, 4 months ago by barbc624.
    • #6342
      cynthia
      Participant

      So my concern, is about the ultimate results of public behavior by someone who is looked up to by many others. It’s about the effects on the ordinary women and men who are then subjected to objectification because someone is copying their idol’s behavior, and it’s also about the effects on the people who do it.

      Please note that upthread you wrote you were sorry to bring up DG because some fans can’t hear anything against her. But you keep circling back to this point and trying to hide it in different language and it is clear that you do hold her responsible for the behavior of some people. You say it many many times. You want the thread to stay on the topic of objectification but you keep returning to this point. This is what I mean about you not accepting that others disagree with this.

      Just because “someone who is idolized” says that “a celebrity” has a fine backside doesn’t mean I’m going to say the same to “a celebrity” on Twitter or to his face, and it doesn’t mean I will start saying it to strangers on the street. As Connie says, you are making a big leap in logic.

      It’s not always black-and-white. What some people say to one another is fine as long as both parties consent and know when there is joking. On Twitter, there is no consent for SH because the fans don’t know him on a personal level. That’s why it is not okay there.

      “Do you believe that objectification of anyone is something that as an ethical and humane society we would like to see end, or is it something that’s not a big deal and can be ok depending on who is doing it and to whom?”

      Your definition of objectification seems to be strident. If you mean that all anyone can see about SH is his backside, then it’s wrong. If you can see his other fine qualities, such as his humor and willingness to interact with fans and his acting skills and take that all into account and appreciate his body at the same time, I don’t see the problem. He’s more than a fine backside. But it’s okay to note that he has one.

      • #6345
        barbc624
        Participant

        Edited because my post was cut off.

        • This reply was modified 7 years, 4 months ago by barbc624.
    • #6349
      barbc624
      Participant

      [quote quote=6342]

      Please note that upthread you wrote you were sorry to bring up DG because some fans can’t hear anything against her. But you keep circling back to this point and trying to hide it in different language and it is clear that you do hold her responsible for the behavior of some people. You say it many many times. You want the thread to stay on the topic of objectification but you keep returning to this point. This is what I mean about you not accepting that others disagree with this.

      You have a point. I should have stuck to what I believe in and I didn’t because I didn’t want to offend anyone. That was wrong on my part. By the way I am not the only one referencing her behaviors which are a very legitimate part of the topic of objectification.I think Anastasia in her posts makes the point better than I did.

      As to your comment that I don’t accept disagreement. I have more than once agreed to disagree with others on this. Does that mean that when I believe that someone as misinterpreted something I have said that I am not allowed to try to clarify what I said? I am supposed to say “we agreed to disagree so I can’t say anything anymore ?” I don’t quite understand how that helps for understanding of each other and for opening up new ideas. That applies to both parties to a discussion by the way.

      Just because “someone who is idolized” says that “a celebrity” has a fine backside doesn’t mean I’m going to say the same to “a celebrity” on Twitter or to his face, and it doesn’t mean I will start saying it to strangers on the street. As Connie says, you are making a big leap in logic.

      You may not, but others are following that example and in significant numbers.

      It’s not always black-and-white. What some people say to one another is fine as long as both parties consent and know when there is joking. On Twitter, there is no consent for SH because the fans don’t know him on a personal level. That’s why it is not okay there.

      I agree that it’s not okay on Twitter. Where we differ, is that I don’t believe it’s okay for anyone to do on Twitter not just for fans. Twitter is a public venue not a private one and I don’t believe that public objectification is ok no matter who is doing it even if the parties involved have a personal relationship. How they interact in private is their own business and I have no interest in that.

      Your definition of objectification seems to be strident. If you mean that all anyone can see about SH is his backside, then it’s wrong. If you can see his other fine qualities, such as his humor and willingness to interact with fans and his acting skills and take that all into account and appreciate his body at the same time, I don’t see the problem. He’s more than a fine backside. But it’s okay to note that he has one.

      [/quote]

      I don’t understand what you are saying here. Why is my definition of objectification strident? My definition is pretty simple – it’s the treatment of a person as an object rather than as a living, breathing, feeling human being.

      I don’t have a problem with you or anyone else appreciating both the mental and physical aspects of someone at all. It is the public expression of some of those appreciations in an inappropriate manner that bothers me. I don’t believe I am alone in that.

      I’m really not sure where this is all going and I’m not sure why I seem to bother you so much, but my beliefs are my beliefs and just as you don’t think others should be made to change theirs for me (which I happen to agree with) I don’t think I should have to change mine because they bother you.

    • #6358
      conniebv
      Participant

      Great debate, folks. It’s been elucidating. I feel like I’ve said everything I could on the subject and we’re each holding pretty fast to our corners, so moving along to another thread.

      • #6390
        maureenanne
        Participant

        I agree. I would be interested in discussing the spiritual aspects of Outlander…I think that is why the novels and series are so powerful, why men like Outlander….my husband has just started watching the series I think to make me happy but we will see where that goes, or sex in Outlander….is the series getting it right, did the book get it right? Not sure if any of these topics are thread worthy but I thought I would put this out there in Terry’s blog universe. Thanks for your consideration.

      • #6393
        CelticGlamazon
        Participant

        [quote quote=6390]I agree. I would be interested in discussing the spiritual aspects of Outlander…I think that is why the novels and series are so powerful, why men like Outlander….my husband has just started watching the series I think to make me happy but we will see where that goes, or sex in Outlander….is the series getting it right, did the book get it right? Not sure if any of these topics are thread worthy but I thought I would put this out there in Terry’s blog universe. Thanks for your consideration. [/quote]

        Marueenanne,

        Everyone is welcome to start new topics, and I’m sure there are several people that will be interested in participating in a thread on that topic. I look forward to the new thread. 🙂 If you need help doing that, let us know…I’m sure we can walk you through the process.

        Crystal

      • #6396
        maureenanne
        Participant

        Thanks Crystral! Let me work on these ideas a bit and I will definitely take you up on your offer.

    • #6399
      dghatsnw
      Participant

      It’s interesting that at least the elephant in the room is being discussed. Obviously, whoever runs the Facebook page for Outlander has no problem with the idea.
      https://www.facebook.com/OutlanderTVSeries.starz/photos/a.530180260374521.1073741830.524783437580870/820349128024298/?type=1&theater

      • #6423
        sonyakhanum
        Participant

        I’ve seen that picture, but I think it was a totally different one that only showed Jamie/Sam from the hip up, without exposing anything underneath the kilt. Was there another one?

        I just wanted to add a comment about the kilt and the inappropriate nature of the comments and actions of people regarding the kilt (eg. comments made about what’s underneath, people attempting to get a look underneath, etc.). It’s a thought that just occurred to me while thinking about the issues surrounding the picture that Starz posted and how some have reacted to it.

        The kilt is a cultural and traditional clothing and symbol. I’m not Scottish and don’t have a Scottish background, so I’m not in the best place to be able to speak about this issue, and I’d be interested to hear the thoughts of anyone who may be in a better place. I have a concern about how a cultural garb can be sexualized. It’s not only just an issue about the objectification of these actors, but it there’s also the sexualization of a cultural piece. It may not be a concern to those to whom the kilt culturally belongs, so it may not be an issue at all. As an Iranian woman, I’ve experienced the sexualization of Middle Eastern cultural pieces and expression that can be quite problematic (though, I guess, in that situation we’re dealing with an entirely different dynamic involving “East” and “West” relations, and the sexualization and negative representation of Middle Eastern culture). It’s just a thought that I’ve had and I would hate it if some men felt like they couldn’t express themselves and their culture through the kilt because of fear of harassment.

      • #6434
        rachely
        Participant

        sexualization of a cultural piece.

        I think that kilt ship might have sailed with the Catholic Girls School skirt and related sexual fantasies.

        The Scottish men I know KNOW we find their kilts sexy and enjoy it to an extent. As long as no one is looking under. And they’re all totally used to being asked what’s under it. Then they get asked what Clan it is and most of them say “eh, the Victorians made that up, I picked one I liked”

      • #6435
        MrsParker
        Participant

        I think that kilt ship might have sailed with the Catholic Girls School skirt

        Hey, don’t knock the Catholic school girl kilt, it got me out of a couple speeding tickets 20 years ago. 🙂

        It’s unfortunate, but cultural symbols get adapted and adopted all the time. I’ve seen rosaries worn as necklaces and other iconography used to meet fashion and beauty and political trends. As Rachely says, and as Terry D has said in her podcasts, the idea of the brightly colored kilt associated with a specific clan was a construct of the Victorian era. What’s underneath is between the wearer and whomever he chooses to share that with and no one else.

    • #6400
      Ami
      Participant

      Hello all! I’ve been lurking for awhile and have thoroughly enjoyed reading the different perspectives. What an articulate and respectful group this is, so refreshing! In fact I’ve been a bit intimidated to post for fear I would come across a bit simple, but here goes nothing…

      I certainly agree that no one, male or female, should be reduced to the objectification of their bodies. I think RM and co. Have done an excellent job thus far of avoiding this. As far as the fans go…I personally appreciate the way Sam and Caitriona look, but I am in awe of their ability to bring to life characters that have been with me for over a decade. I have a feeling this is also the case for many others, even if they havent thought of a more appropriate way to express than through a vocal appreciation of external beauty.

      My problems arise when a few of these fans take it too far, ie attempting to look under GMT’s kilt while in a druken stupor, or Twitter fans basically stalking every known associate of these actors and becoming personally offended when photos of SH in the company of a girl (who is NOT them) surface.

      I know this has all been said, but I wanted to add my two cents because this seems like such an amazing group of woman, and I want to be part of it!

      Hopefully this was semi coherent. I’m currently a SAHM, and unable to work due to chronic migraines that started after the birth of my son. In my previous career I was a multi-store manager in higher end retail. When not caring for my 6 year old I do all types of yarn Art (knit, crochet, Tunisian crochet, needlepoint, cross stitch, etc.) and learning to sew. Name is Ami, BTW, I case you didn’t get that from my screen name:)

      EDIT: I also wanted to comment on the body hair question…I am all for historically accurate period pieces, however I am firmly in the camp of NOT wanting things like body hair to reflect the period in which the story is told. I also have a hunch that it’s better for Starz, Ron, Terry, etc. if the series appeals to a broad an audience as possible. Based on a (very) informal poll I conducted amongst those I know who watch the series, it was unanimous that Caitriona was perfect as she is, and arm pit hair would either detract or at the very least be a distraction! Please don’t hate me for this!

      • This reply was modified 7 years, 4 months ago by Ami. Reason: Wanted to share view on body hair
    • #6414
      Terry Dresbach
      Keymaster

      [quote quote=6399]It’s interesting that at least the elephant in the room is being discussed. Obviously, whoever runs the Facebook page for Outlander has no problem with the idea.

      [/quote]
      what is #MCM??

    • #6415
      MrsParker
      Participant

      #MCM = Man Crush Monday.

      The Vikings PR team tweeted an image with that hashtag yesterday as well. It was the primary male leads, hanging out in a hotel room, fully dressed. And all were still very good looking, it was blessedly less overt.

    • #6416
      Terry Dresbach
      Keymaster

      [quote quote=6286]I have looked for a rules page for this forum but I can’t find one. Can someone explain? The main topic of discussion was shut down because Barb didn’t like when someone disagreed with her and then another off-topic personal discussion begins. Please explain what the rules are so I know not to offend Barb and the other moderators. [/quote]
      Terry here. I asked that the discussion be continued in another thread. We don’t censor here. The only rule is that posters debate civilly. If posters are rude, disrespectful, or aggressive, they will be banned. Other than that, anything goes.
      Barb is not a moderator.

    • #6418
      Terry Dresbach
      Keymaster

      [quote quote=6339]

      For the record, I am not mothering anyone – nor am I trying to shield anyone. The problem with saying “Well, they haven’t said anything, so obviously they aren’t bothered by it, so why should I be?” is that if we place all the burden on speaking out on the direct victims (who may genuinely not be bothered by it, or may not feel as though they can speak up, or may not even realize what’s happening), nothing will ever change.

      And the perception that they are victims is your perception. I don’t see it that way and I haven’t seen anything that says they do, so we aren’t starting out from the same assumption. That’s what I am pointing out.

      Call them the the recipients if that makes a difference. And my concern, I will repeat once again, is NOT on their behalf. It is about the trickle down effects of the enablement and even encouragement of objectification by people who are in the public eye and act as role models to their followers.

      After all, if it’s ok to publicly objectify an actor, then it must be ok to publicly objectify the hot guy/girl you see walking down the street. Like it or not, people imitate what they see their idols do in their own daily lives. Thus the example of the public figure who publicly objectifies another gets repeated on a more ordinary daily level (ie in this case by fans on Twitter) and eventually becomes an accepted thing to do.

      So my concern, is about the ultimate results of public behavior by someone who is looked up to by many others. It’s about the effects on the ordinary women and men who are then subjected to objectification because someone is copying their idol’s behavior, and it’s also about the effects on the people who do it. Objectification encourages us to dehumanize the object of it in our own minds and encourages behavior that ultimately can injure the objectivizers (is that a even word?) own self esteem.

      My question to you is “Do you believe that objectification of anyone is something that as an ethical and humane society we would like to see end, or is it something that’s not a big deal and can be ok depending on who is doing it and to whom?”

      And whatever your answer to that is, and whether we agree or disagree in the end, I’m really happy we can have a civil conversation about this because in my mind the first step in changing things is bringing them into the light and questioning them. If we don’t question them there is no hope of them ever changing. :) :)

      And now I’m off to take my 4-yo to the MD because 102 fever is no fun. Thanks for keeping me busy while my car warmed up. :)

      Awww, I hope she/he is okay. We have a nasty measles outbreak going on in CA right now which is kind of scary for those with young children.

      Edited to add. You say that mothering is trying to make others behave the way you want them to. That may be your definition, and is true in the case of very young children. But as the mother of two grown adults, I have always believed that once they were old enough to reason my real (and much more difficult job) was to teach them to think for themselves and learn how to make decisions based not only on their own self interest or on the opinions of others, but on how their choices would affect others. Others in this case being not only others that they knew personally but “others” on a more global basis which includes not only people but the other life forms that we share our world with. On the whole I think I’ve succeeded fairly well, as evidenced by the sometimes passionate discussions we have as a family on various issues. And no, we don’t always agree but we do come out of it with new ideas and viewpoints to ponder.

      [/quote]

      Great post!! I couldn’t agree more.

    • #6419
      Terry Dresbach
      Keymaster

      [quote quote=6317]Thanks for two great posts Anastia. You said what I have tried to say so much better than me.

      It seems to me that there are several issues that are being conflated here which is making for confusion.

      1. Private behavior versus public behavior. I haven’t seen anyone here presuming to judge private behavior between friends, myself included. Like it or not, public behaviors, because they impact more than the specific parties involved, can and must be measured differently than behaviors in private that impact only the parties present. Twitter (unless the account is blocked to only friends), Facebook (same thing), media interviews, etc., are clearly public behaviors.

      I firmly believe it is fair to hold public behaviors to a higher standard, especially when those engaging in them serve as role models to the public or group at large. Instead comments made about public behaviors are being taken as criticisms of private behaviors and then dismissed as not justified.

      2. Behavior labeled “mothering” of persons versus comments about behavior that serves to objectify others. Two very different things and frankly, the mothering thing doesn’t even hit my radar as an issue of significance as it doesn’t affect people at large but is something unique to a small select privileged group. Objectification affects everyone – women especially but more and more men as well, and the great majority of those affected are not celebrities but are everyday ordinary people.

      On a personal note, I am a mother and believe me I have no need to “mother” anyone other than my own family, especially celebrities. They are in positions of power and are well able to take care of themselves. Not to mention there are readily available tools they can use on social media to block or mute comments that are distatseful to them. They don’t need fans to guard their tender sensibilities.

      Personally, I haven’t seen anyone saying they are defending Sam’s* virtue against the poor behavior. (Maybe I don’t follow the right people or am naive but I think most fans recognize that he is perfectly capable of defending himself if need be). What I have seen is the point being made more than once that the behavior objectifying Sam* is giving the person commenting (a) a distaste for the people engaging in it and also in some cases towards OL fans and (b) is serving to perpetuate the same sexist behavior from women towards men, that we as women have been decrying when coming from men towards women, i.e a double standard on our part. (Haven’t we as women been screaming about double standards for decades now? I don’t get it.) Unfortunately I have too often seem those comments quickly being categorized and thus deligitimized as “Mothering”.

      *Sam is being used for illustrative purposes, could be any male OL who has been subject to the behavior in question.

      The result of this is that there has been a diversion from the discussion of the very real problem of objectification of others, to discussions about “mothering” of celebrities and the rights of people to behave as they wish privately, which I don’t believe has ever been in contention.

      I’m not saying this is being done deliberately, but simply that it is what I have observed happening. I hate to see that happen because I think objectification of others is an ongoing and very real problem, as Anastasia so clearly outlined, and it won’t stop anytime soon if we don’t feel able to call out the behavior of whoever happens to be doing it (or enabling it) no matter who they are or what their position.
      [/quote]

      Please keep contributing to this forum!

    • #6420
      Terry Dresbach
      Keymaster

      [quote quote=6415]#MCM = Man Crush Monday.

      The Vikings PR team tweeted an image with that hashtag yesterday as well. It was the primary male leads, hanging out in a hotel room, fully dressed. And all were still very good looking, it was blessedly less overt.
      [/quote]

      Really???? Blech. I am examining my own comments of late about whatisname on Vikings. I do think he is hot, but probably don’t need to contribute to that reduction of actors, to nothing more than their genetic attributes.

      • #6446
        Tucsonlady
        Participant

        I’ve said previously on the Vikings thread that Ragnar is the sexiest man on television today. I meant it too. That’s in reference to the character Ragnar Lodbrok not Travis Fimmel the actor. There is a difference although with some Outlander fans that line has become blurred.

        I’m ambivalent on the issue of Sam’s objectification. Actually I just don’t care enough to formulate an opinion. The current Outlander PR campaign hype bores me. Outlander’s story has been subverted by the cult of Sam and Cait. I’m an Outlander fan not a Sam or Cait fan. SH will never be my Jamie Fraser nor will Cait Balfe ever be my Claire. What has been totally lost by Starz executives is that Outlander’s story can stand on it’s own without this relentless attention on Sam’s physical attributes. DG should have been explaining that to Starz instead of compounding her mistake by making public statements about Sam Heughan’s appearance.

        Both Sam and Cait are adults who signed contracts knowing that nude scenes come with this job. Once the nude photos are out on the internet that genie isn’t going back into the bottle no matter how personally uncomfortable it is for Sam and Cait. The good news is Americans are known to have notoriously short attention spans and will soon be off commenting on Sam’s replacement as hunk du jour. Starz will be off promoting its next new series and DG will be left to put the pieces back together of her decimated Outlander community.

      • #6453
        rachely
        Participant

        I’ve said previously on the Vikings thread that Ragnar is the sexiest man on television today. I meant it too. That’s in reference to the character Ragnar Lodbrok not Travis Fimmel the actor. There is a difference although with some Outlander fans that line has become blurred.

        oooo, thanks for giving words to what I feel. I find Sam’s Jamie sexy. I find SH the opposite of sexy.

        So, I’ve had a trip to Scotland planned for over a year. I have until the end of this week to cancel it, which I’ve been considering doing because I’m so damn afraid someone is going to think I’m one of those fans.

    • #6421
      dghatsnw
      Participant

      Perhaps Mr. Heughan can protect/defend himself from unwanted behavior, but why should he have to and why would he want to have to? I remember walking through Manhattan to a photo shoot for a show with a lovely actress and the amount of comment she got from men on the street horrified me. Obviously an everyday occurrence for her and I was too shy to ask her about how she felt about it (I’m over that now and would ask in a heartbeat). She wasn’t provocatively dressed, and just in street make up. It felt like a barrage. Now, she may be used to it, actors egos aren’t quite the same (in my experience), some women are flattered by it. Still, it felt yucky on a gut level.

    • #6422
      CelticGlamazon
      Participant

      [/quote]

      [quote quote=6420]

      <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>MrsParker wrote:</div>
      #MCM = Man Crush Monday.

      The Vikings PR team tweeted an image with that hashtag yesterday as well. It was the primary male leads, hanging out in a hotel room, fully dressed. And all were still very good looking, it was blessedly less overt.

      Really???? Blech. I am examining my own comments of late about whatisname on Vikings. I do think he is hot, but probably don’t need to contribute to that reduction of actors, to nothing more than their genetic attributes.
      [/quote]

      Makes me wonder if #FFF Fierce Female Fridays is going to become a thing? If not we should make it a thing, one that empowers women. #Wise Women Wednesdays? Talented Male Thursdays? Tricorne Wearing Thursdays (That one’s for Ned)

      I am thankful for the discussions we have here, because they have allowed me to examine my own perspectives/language and how those can negatively impede successful discourse.

      • #6425
        sonyakhanum
        Participant

        I love those hashtags and we should totally make them a thing! Great idea. I especially appreciate the love for Ned and honouring him <3.

      • #6426
        MrsParker
        Participant

        I’ll be honest: I had to look up #MCM when I saw it tweeted a few times yesterday. I’m just not that hip.

        I’ve seen Woman Crush Wednesday (#WCW) a few times, most recently for Tatiana Maslany from Orphan Black. Those tend to be more respectful and focus on talent rather than physical attributes.

        As for the Starz Marketing Team, on the one hand I have to give them credit: they’re keeping the buzz going through a very long hiatus (to the point where I’m getting exhausted with it). On the other hand, I feel they’re creating a false premise of the show. Roxane Gay writing for NYMag was clearly expecting a sexy romp and every week wrote how she was let down because of the “plot that kept getting in the way of the sex.” I saw a lot of comments on that site along those lines. Sending out a tweet of what amounts to an up-kilt shot felt not only disrespectful of the lead actor but also to the show itself. I said on Twitter I found it alienating because that’s not why I watch this show. YMMV.*

        *YMMV = your mileage may vary

    • #6427
      barbc624
      Participant

      [quote quote=6426]I’ll be honest: I had to look up #MCM when I saw it tweeted a few times yesterday. I’m just not that hip.

      I’ve seen Woman Crush Wednesday (#WCW) a few times, most recently for Tatiana Maslany from Orphan Black. Those tend to be more respectful and focus on talent rather than physical attributes.

      As for the Starz Marketing Team, on the one hand I have to give them credit: they’re keeping the buzz going through a very long hiatus (to the point where I’m getting exhausted with it). On the other hand, I feel they’re creating a false premise of the show. Roxane Gay writing for NYMag was clearly expecting a sexy romp and every week wrote how she was let down because of the “plot that kept getting in the way of the sex.” I saw a lot of comments on that site along those lines. Sending out a tweet of what amounts to an up-kilt shot felt not only disrespectful of the lead actor but also to the show itself. I said on Twitter I found it alienating because that’s not why I watch this show. YMMV.*

      *YMMV = your mileage may vary

      [/quote]

      Yes to the above.

    • #6428
      barbc624
      Participant

      [quote quote=6425]I love those hashtags and we should totally make them a thing! Great idea. I especially appreciate the love for Ned and honouring him <3.

      [/quote]

      We so should start using them. Maybe we can start a new trend.

      Even #MCM could be positive if it focused on other than physical attributes.

      • #6429
        maureenanne
        Participant

        Mighty capable men? Not sure I am feeling very creative at the moment. How about Tuesday Tantalizing Threads? Crystal, I would be interested in exploring the following thread:
        1) Honor – DG has given us a modern day fairy tale set in factual times. This is such a departure from many of the contemporary stories we enjoy come to life in TV or movies. I am thinking of the Narnia movies, Game of Thrones, Once Upon a Time, or Hunger Games. With Outlander, there is no need for an explanation of secular humanism or Christian imagery as in the Narnia stories. Here, we have a love story/fairy tale that does not shy away from Celtic beliefs or Christian beliefs. Jamie’s self esteem and self awareness are closely tied to his faith. Would we find Jamie as compelling if he was not such a strong spiritual presence? I don’t think I would. Well, I am off to keep the popcorn from burning and then pick up daughter from volleyball. Good Night!

      • #6430
        maureenanne
        Participant

        Meant to also add that I enjoyed the sneak peek. So far series not shying away from Jamie’s spiritual side. Thanks!

    • #6431
      CelticGlamazon
      Participant

      [quote quote=6429]Mighty capable men? Not sure I am feeling very creative at the moment. How about Tuesday Tantalizing Threads? Crystal, I would be interested in exploring the following thread:
      1) Honor – DG has given us a modern day fairy tale set in factual times. This is such a departure from many of the contemporary stories we enjoy come to life in TV or movies. I am thinking of the Narnia movies, Game of Thrones, Once Upon a Time, or Hunger Games. With Outlander, there is no need for an explanation of secular humanism or Christian imagery as in the Narnia stories. Here, we have a love story/fairy tale that does not shy away from Celtic beliefs or Christian beliefs. Jamie’s self esteem and self awareness are closely tied to his faith. Would we find Jamie as compelling if he was not such a strong spiritual presence? I don’t think I would. Well, I am off to keep the popcorn from burning and then pick up daughter from volleyball. Good Night! [/quote]

      How to post a new topic:

      From the main page

      General Outlander Discussion

      Scroll to the very bottom of the page and look for the attached image. After that it’s just like replying to a thread inside a topic. Hope that helps.

      Crystal aka CelticGlamazon

      Ps If you want to add tags that will help search for the topics, and try to make the title as obvious as possible that way people really see what it’s about from the main page. 🙂

    • #6439
      Terry Dresbach
      Keymaster

      [quote quote=6423]I’ve seen that picture, but I think it was a totally different one that only showed Jamie/Sam from the hip up, without exposing anything underneath the kilt. Was there another one?

      I just wanted to add a comment about the kilt and the inappropriate nature of the comments and actions of people regarding the kilt (eg. comments made about what’s underneath, people attempting to get a look underneath, etc.). It’s a thought that just occurred to me while thinking about the issues surrounding the picture that Starz posted and how some have reacted to it.

      The kilt is a cultural and traditional clothing and symbol. I’m not Scottish and don’t have a Scottish background, so I’m not in the best place to be able to speak about this issue, and I’d be interested to hear the thoughts of anyone who may be in a better place. I have a concern about how a cultural garb can be sexualized. It’s not only just an issue about the objectification of these actors, but it there’s also the sexualization of a cultural piece. It may not be a concern to those to whom the kilt culturally belongs, so it may not be an issue at all. As an Iranian woman, I’ve experienced the sexualization of Middle Eastern cultural pieces and expression that can be quite problematic (though, I guess, in that situation we’re dealing with an entirely different dynamic involving “East” and “West” relations, and the sexualization and negative representation of Middle Eastern culture). It’s just a thought that I’ve had and I would hate it if some men felt like they couldn’t express themselves and their culture through the kilt because of fear of harassment.
      [/quote]

      Excellent point.

    • #6440
      Terry Dresbach
      Keymaster

      [quote quote=6421]Perhaps Mr. Heughan can protect/defend himself from unwanted behavior, but why should he have to and why would he want to have to? I remember walking through Manhattan to a photo shoot for a show with a lovely actress and the amount of comment she got from men on the street horrified me. Obviously an everyday occurrence for her and I was too shy to ask her about how she felt about it (I’m over that now and would ask in a heartbeat). She wasn’t provocatively dressed, and just in street make up. It felt like a barrage. Now, she may be used to it, actors egos aren’t quite the same (in my experience), some women are flattered by it. Still, it felt yucky on a gut level.
      [/quote]

      Thank you for the post. In all my years of dealing with actors, my observation is that they really are not that different than a broad spectrum of most people.
      MOST people, who are actors, are uncomfortable with overt attention to their bodies or looks, especially if it is sexual. Same with actors. Unfortunately, part of their job is to be gracious about it.
      Like most people, they don’t get confrontational, which doesn’t mean it is comfortable.
      I have never spoken to Sam about this, because it is a sensitive topic, and it feels like an invasion of his privacy.
      I am only speaking about discussions with other actors over the years.

    • #6442
      Terry Dresbach
      Keymaster

      [quote quote=6426]I’ll be honest: I had to look up #MCM when I saw it tweeted a few times yesterday. I’m just not that hip.

      I’ve seen Woman Crush Wednesday (#WCW) a few times, most recently for Tatiana Maslany from Orphan Black. Those tend to be more respectful and focus on talent rather than physical attributes.

      As for the Starz Marketing Team, on the one hand I have to give them credit: they’re keeping the buzz going through a very long hiatus (to the point where I’m getting exhausted with it). On the other hand, I feel they’re creating a false premise of the show. Roxane Gay writing for NYMag was clearly expecting a sexy romp and every week wrote how she was let down because of the “plot that kept getting in the way of the sex.” I saw a lot of comments on that site along those lines. Sending out a tweet of what amounts to an up-kilt shot felt not only disrespectful of the lead actor but also to the show itself. I said on Twitter I found it alienating because that’s not why I watch this show. YMMV.*

      *YMMV = your mileage may vary

      [/quote]

      The plot kept getting in the way of the sex???????? I just don’t get it.

      • #6443
        rachely
        Participant

        The plot kept getting in the way of the sex???????? I just don’t get it.

        Between the fans, starz, people who have review copies (eonline) why would you think otherwise?

        At this point female gaze seems to mean something totally gross.

    • #6444
      barbc624
      Participant

      [quote quote=6442]

      <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>MrsParker wrote:</div>
      As for the Starz Marketing Team, on the one hand I have to give them credit: they’re keeping the buzz going through a very long hiatus (to the point where I’m getting exhausted with it). On the other hand, I feel they’re creating a false premise of the show. Roxane Gay writing for NYMag was clearly expecting a sexy romp and every week wrote how she was let down because of the “plot that kept getting in the way of the sex.” I saw a lot of comments on that site along those lines. Sending out a tweet of what amounts to an up-kilt shot felt not only disrespectful of the lead actor but also to the show itself. I said on Twitter I found it alienating because that’s not why I watch this show. YMMV.*

      *YMMV = your mileage may vary

      The plot kept getting in the way of the sex???????? I just don’t get it.
      [/quote]

      There seem to be a lot of tv fans who are acting out of the same perception. That’s why I don’t follow a lot of people on Twitter – I don’t even want to see the comments that are out there.

    • #6447
      barbc624
      Participant

      [quote quote=6440]

      <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>dghatsnw wrote:</div>

      Thank you for the post. In all my years of dealing with actors, my observation is that they really are not that different than a broad spectrum of most people.
      MOST people, who are actors, are uncomfortable with overt attention to their bodies or looks, especially if it is sexual. Same with actors. Unfortunately, part of their job is to be gracious about it.
      Like most people, they don’t get confrontational, which doesn’t mean it is comfortable.
      I have never spoken to Sam about this, because it is a sensitive topic, and it feels like an invasion of his privacy.
      I am only speaking about discussions with other actors over the years.
      [/quote]

      Terry you make a very good point.

      One of my daughter’s good friends is an aspiring actress. She is a beautiful, smart, girl and very sweet, but she is completely insecure about her looks and her acting ability. She did a short web series with my daughter and a friend and I heard every week, either from my daughter or her personally, about how “fat” she was and how “terrible” she looked or how poorly she played her role. She didn’t even want to watch the videos. In reality this young woman is nowhere even close to being overweight, and she is adorable on screen. She would never admit her insecurities to anyone she is not close to, and she puts on a very confident air which probably fools others, but she is an actress after all.

      So I could very easily see her being badly affected by sexist comments made about her, and being completely unable to deal with them or react to them. Given what my daughter tells me, her friend is very typical of many actors in her insecurities.

      • This reply was modified 7 years, 4 months ago by barbc624. Reason: Commas don't like me
    • #6452
      barbc624
      Participant

      [quote quote=6446]I’ve said previously on the Vikings thread that Ragnar is the sexiest man on television today. I meant it too. That’s in reference to the character Ragnar Lodbrok not Travis Fimmel the actor. There is a difference although with some Outlander fans that line has become blurred.

      I’m ambivalent on the issue of Sam’s objectification. Actually I just don’t care enough to formulate an opinion. The current Outlander PR campaign hype bores me. Outlander’s story has been subverted by the cult of Sam and Cait. I’m an Outlander fan not a Sam or Cait fan. SH will never be my Jamie Fraser nor will Cait Balfe ever be my Claire. What has been totally lost by Starz executives is that Outlander’s story can stand on it’s own without this relentless attention on Sam’s physical attributes. DG should have been explaining that to Starz instead of compounding her mistake by making public statements about Sam Heughan’s appearance.

      Both Sam and Cait are adults who signed contracts knowing that nude scenes come with this job. Once the nude photos are out on the internet that genie isn’t going back into the bottle no matter how personally uncomfortable it is for Sam and Cait. The good news is Americans are known to have notoriously short attention spans and will soon be off commenting on Sam’s replacement as hunk du jour. Starz will be off promoting its next new series and DG will be left to put the pieces back together of her decimated Outlander community.
      [/quote]

      I don’t disagree with any of the above and I’ve seen the disintegration happen with online fan communities before. But for me the books will still be there, and I consider myself a book fan first with the tv series being an added bonus.

      But to me the objecification issue isn’t about Sam personally. It’s about the overarching issue of objectification in our culture. I feel that in America (since I don’t have experience of living anywhere else, I can’t speak to other countries) we have become a culture that is driven by appearance rather than by substance. We glorify actors and sports figures and people who look pretty and have lots of material things, and self centeredness and self absorption seems to be the order of the day.

      Instead, I wish we would look up to people who actually do things that are not about themselves and how much stuff they have. We don’t respect teachers and scientists and even the everyday people who are out there working hard and doing their best in a society that is stacked against them. Even in the film industry, most workers are contract workers who get no benefits, and work ridiculously long and hard hours for not a lot of money and no recognition. It’s no different from the rest of our society.

      Getting back to here, maybe we should get away from the emphasis on Sam since that seems to be a stumbling block for many,(and seems to make people defensive) and rename these threads as “On objectification of Actors and Others”.

      • #6470
        Tucsonlady
        Participant

        Barb I agree with everything you wrote. I can’t find any place where we disagree. This is my first (and last) trip into fandom. What a wild and crazy ride its been. I don’t do Twitter or Facebook so most of the outrageous fan behavior is unknown to me other than what I read here. I only visit one other Outlander website and it focuses on the books not the television series.

        The thread name change is not necessary but I’m thrilled to read your clarification knowing that it relates to more than just Sam. There are actors out there who haven’t signed up for the treatment they received. Personally I feel that Sam and Cait went into this one with their eyes wide open. So I have less patience relating to complaints for Sam and Cait. If you get paid to appear naked you better learn to develop a tough hide because people are going to comment. Where I have an issue is much of this fan insanity is driven by Starz. Look at the most recent Outlander photo release of Sam in his kilt. That up the kilt shot of Sam was so over the line. Good heavens I don’t want to know what’s inside Sam Heughan’s kilt. Ugh! I have said before that DG should have waited on HBO to do Outlander.

    • #6454
      Katie (@bunnums)
      Participant

      [quote quote=6453]
      So, I’ve had a trip to Scotland planned for over a year. I have until the end of this week to cancel it, which I’ve been considering doing because I’m so damn afraid someone is going to think I’m one of those fans.
      [/quote]

      Why can’t you go and enjoy everything that the country/culture/people has to offer? Doesn’t have to have anything to do with a tv show.

      • #6455
        rachely
        Participant

        Probably because all the scotland travel sites keep posting OL stuff.

      • #6459
        JB
        Participant

        This makes me sad. I completely understand your concern about not wanting to be one of “those fans.” I don’t want that for myself, either, and I’m actually finding that the Starz publicity onslaught and the OL fandom as it’s expressed in places other than here is starting to detract from my enjoyment of the books and series.

        But Scotland is the most fabulous place. I urge you not to let your concerns get in the way of experiencing it. You can very easily find your way around to OL sites or non-OL sites without buying into the tourist machine. I lived in Scotland 15-plus years ago and haven’t been back in about five years, so I can’t speak to whether it’s been overrun by Outlander-mania in the meantime (though I highly doubt it). But if you go and find you are indeed overloaded by twee OL experiences, head to Glasgow. It is the most down-to-earth city and I can’t see its inhabitants ever getting swept away by those “bonny Scotland” visions.

      • #6468
        JB
        Participant

        You know what else? I’m replying to my own post because the very act of “not wanting to be one of ‘those fans'” means we’re not one of “those fans”!

        I like what Barb said below — who cares what anyone else thinks?!

    • #6456
      sonyakhanum
      Participant

      [quote quote=6453]
      So, I’ve had a trip to Scotland planned for over a year. I have until the end of this week to cancel it, which I’ve been considering doing because I’m so damn afraid someone is going to think I’m one of those fans.
      [/quote]

      Nooooo, go! Don’t cancel it because of OL! Maybe make a point of visiting non-OL related sites so that people realize that Scotland has more to offer? I know how you feel though. We’re going to Scotland later this Spring and despite the fact that I’ve always wanted to go since I was little (and especially to visit the Shetland Islands), anytime we bring up our trip, I get comments like “Oh, you’re going because of your Outlander show and Harry Potter!” 🙁

    • #6457
      Anastasia
      Participant

      [quote quote=6455]Probably because all the scotland travel sites keep posting OL stuff.[/quote]

      I hear you! I’ve loved Scotland ever since I was a little girl – to the point I’ve spent most of my life desperately wishing I could emigrate there. (Probably should mention I’ve been once, long before I ever knew Outlander existed – incidentally, I’ve only read the first book of the series, so I’m not even sure I can rightly be called a fan) But that doesn’t seem to be possible. Yet I hesitate to ever talk about visiting/wanting to move there these days, because I don’t want to be associated with certain parts of this fandom.

      • This reply was modified 7 years, 4 months ago by Anastasia.
      • #6465
        khenlow
        Participant

        Oh rachely, go! It’s a lovely, amazing place.

        My husband studied abroad at the University of Glasgow in college (he has Scottish ancestors) and he had a memorable time. Years later, when we got engaged, he surprised me with a trip to Scotland to celebrate. We went to Glasgow, Edinburgh, Iona, and all over the Highlands. It was magical. And, I hadn’t discovered Outlander yet! I can’t recommend it enough — and this is from someone who would love to go back.

    • #6463
      barbc624
      Participant

      I’ve wanted to go to Scotland for years to see the country and to research my family history. My grandfather was a Gordon Highlander who was wounded in the trenches in WWI and ended up in Canada, as they mistook him as being a member of a Canadian Scots regiment. He made his way to New York City where he met my grandmother, and he never returned to Scotland. He never became a US citizen because he had no birth certificate – when he was born his birth was recorded in the parrish church registers but he had no paper proof. We think he had brothers and sisters, and my oldest brother has recently managed to trace the exact names of his parents and find out where he was born, but to learn more, someone has to go to Scotland and do some research in the physical archives there.

      The other part of my history is Irish (my dad) and I’ve been to Ireland but never made it to Scotland. But now, if I say I want to go (and I do plan to in the next few years) the reaction from some is “Oh yeah, because of that Outlander show right?”. Sigh.

      But rachely don’t let what other people think stop you. Let them think what they want, they will anyway. Go and enjoy the country and people in your own way.

      • #6464
        JB
        Participant

        Barb, what a fascinating family history. It’s so interesting to me how porous borders and immigration rules used to be. Of course, war disrupts all kinds of things, but I just can’t see anyone these days winding up in a totally new country by serendipity — and then left to go!

        Plus, the fact that his birth was only recorded in his parish birth register is so reminiscent of the historical sleuthing that Roger does at the beginning of DiA. I truly hope you go dig in those Scottish archives one day — and let us know what you find!

      • #6466
        barbc624
        Participant

        It is fascinating. He died before I was born from lung damage due to mustard gas, but my mom had his full dress kilt outfit. Unfortunately in one of many family moves it was damaged and now my brother can’t even find it. He is trying so that we can see if what is left can be restored. My mom used to say that I had a full complement of Scots stubborness and a temper to match, as did she. My dad on the other hand had the charm of the Irish and the gift of blarney – one of my brothers took after him, and the other two were a mix of both.

        My Irish history is a bit more known but not quite as inspiring. My dad’s ancestor came over during the Potato Famine and ended up in Boston. We believe that he was a younger son who was sent to market to sell the family’s last remaining cow during the famine. He sold it but used the money to emigrate rather than bringing it home. (I guess every family has its black sheep.) We haven’t successfully traced any remaining family members left in Ireland but I found it to be an extremely beautiful and mystical country. I’d like to return there as well one day after I have made my Scotland trip.

        • This reply was modified 7 years, 4 months ago by barbc624.
      • #6469
        JB
        Participant

        I dunno, I think the Irish story is equally interesting! You could weave quite a piece of historical fiction out of that germ — can you imagine how your ancestor’s family felt when they realized he wasn’t coming back with the money? I wonder if he felt guilty and how that guilt informed his life. How did you dig up those details?

        I have remarkably little interest in my own family history (though I’m technically only second-generation American — my grandfather was born in Kiev), but I could listen to others’ in-depth.

      • #6472
        barbc624
        Participant

        Ooh I love that idea. Never thought of it and I do write. I’m definitely going to think more on that.

        I can’t take the credit for any of the research so far – my oldest brother is the genealogist in the family. He has done his research by mail and online since he can’t really travel due to health reasons. That’s why the Scotland research will fall to me when I go.

        Your family history sounds like it could have some very interesting stuff in it as well. I love history and it is fascinating to me to learn that family members have been part of some well known historical events. As another example, my brother recently told me that my mom’s great great grandfather on her mother’s side (not exactly sure how many greats there are) was in Sherman’s Army in the civil war and took part in the March to the Sea. My brother has his saber (again not sure if that’s the correct terminology – it’s some kind of sword!) hanging on his wall.

    • #6474
      Tucsonlady
      Participant

      “oooo, thanks for giving words to what I feel. I find Sam’s Jamie sexy. I find SH the opposite of sexy.

      So, I’ve had a trip to Scotland planned for over a year. I have until the end of this week to cancel it, which I’ve been considering doing because I’m so damn afraid someone is going to think I’m one of those fans.

      Rachel that’s a most profound distinction you just made about Sam. The queen of short and succinct nails it again. You are a better person than I. I can’t get past Sam’s physical appearance. I’ve seen a brief glimpse once (the wedding episode when he walks out in his wedding finest) but SH isn’t my Jamie. I canceled my Starz subscription and plan to watch the next eight episodes with friends. They have the next eight episodes to convince me this is a viable series.

      Please go to Scotland. It looks beautiful in the Outlander scenery shots and unless you ask someone to direct you to Craigh na Dun you can always deny you know anything about Outlander. (snort)

      • This reply was modified 7 years, 4 months ago by Tucsonlady. Reason: word omission
      • #6489
        rachely
        Participant

        You are a better person than I. I can’t get past Sam’s physical appearance.

        I think I’m lucky in the sense that when I’m reading I never imagine what people look like–or I don’t create pictures of them in my head–I am much more word-oriented than picture-oriented. Makes adaptations easier to watch.

      • #6495
        Susan53
        Participant

        I’m the same way Rachel. I get strong emotional imprints of the person, but not really visual ones. It surprised me when others shared that the chosen Outlander actors were “not my Jamie, not my Claire.” Not that they shouldn’t have, just surprised me that others’ reading process included such strong visual images. We bring so much of ourselves to the reading experience, our history, preferences, styles . . . it’s really quite an individual event, imo and why sharing our impressions about the same content with others can be so fascinating and fun!

      • #6503
        Tucsonlady
        Participant

        Thanks for the timely reminder that we don’t all process information in the same way. I’m definitely a visually oriented person. As I read a book I see it unfold in my head like a movie. While I read the movie plays. I see the details from the book as clearly as if I were sitting in a movie theater watching the film. Where it gets really freaky (cue the Twilight Zone music) is I discovered Outlander via watching the television series. After the fourth episode is when I bought the book. So originally when I first started reading Outlander Sam and Cait did star in my head as Jamie/Claire!

      • #6504
        maureenanne
        Participant

        Rachel I agree with much of the above. You really hit it! I agree SH does a fantastic job bringing Jamie to life. I greatly respect him for this. I too don’t really imagine what the characters look like. I thought I was alone with that. I hear their voices but all else is a blur. Maybe that is because I am an attorney? I’m not sure. As for the true and personal appeal of SH, I have no idea. That is up to the folks who have a true and personal relationship with him.
        I’ve only been to Inverness (in the winter) and it is haunting and beautiful and so I hope that and you go to Scotland (and keep a travel journal that you can share).

      • #6535
        barbc624
        Participant

        I’m a little of both. I am primarily a visual thinker so I do have pictures in my head most of the time. A lot depends on the skill of the writer in describing things well enough for me to see them clearly in my head. If they can’t/don’t do that then I make my own pictures of characters. I first read OL so long ago that I can’t really remember how I first “saw” Jamie and Claire.

        I do know that for visual adaptations my being able to reconcile the characters on screen as opposed to in my head from the book depends on several things.
        (a) Sometimes the casting is so dead on visually to my picture that that’s it, (assuming the person cast can also act).
        (b) If the casting isn’t exactly how I pictured the character but the actor is able to embody the character for me I’ll be perfectly happy to go with that. This is the case with OL. Sam out of costume really doesn’t look like my picture of Jamie at all. But Sam in costume

          and

        in character is definitely Jamie. A big part of that is not his looks, but his attention to the details of Jamie – I love when he taps his finger against his side when he is nervous or thinking hard – straight from the book. And his little “mmpphmm” is perfect. Cait is definitely not how I pictured Claire – mostly her eyes and height since those characteristics were so emphasized in the book but she does nail Claire’s personality so I’m good with her as well.
        (c) If looks and acting both are off then I’m done. I probably won’t be watching.

    • #6506
      rachely
      Participant

      I’ve been pondering this all day. Was reading another book and trying to figure out what I see in my head. And it’s nothing. I don’t make any pictures at all. If I try to make a picture I’ll make a picture of a person the right general size and coloring, but the face is just a blur. But that’s only if I force myself to make a picture.

      Also, I ALWAYS have something in my lap when I’m watching TV, sewing, needlework, anything. My husband always says I can’t tell him what anyone looks like on any of HIS shows on TV, since I never look up. I could tell you the plot, quote lines, but never see anyone. Even OL, where I”m in it for the costumes, I’ll look up, see the costume. Try to see it with a character standing still and moving, and then I look back at whatever is in my lap.

      (Husband used to watch some anime show and I was so befuddled by the plot, until I figured out that two of the voices were so similar I thought it was the same character talking and he was bipolar)

      • #6517
        JB
        Participant

        I’m somewhere in between. I don’t really see faces when I read, but other elements, like hair or clothing, I do see. And I certainly pay close attention to and visualize descriptions of where people and things are and how they move through space, which is why the occasional continuity errors in OL and DiA were so jarring to me. Those are the kinds of things that will jolt me right out of the book and back into real life.

      • #6521
        maureenanne
        Participant

        I always read myself to sleep and so last night I read a chapter of All the Light We Cannot See…great book so far. There is incredible description of people fleeing France at the time of the occupation. I could picture the overall chaos and could make out the clothing and bodies of the characters. I just can’t create in my mind a face I have never seen before. I could make the characters look like actors I am familiar with or people that I know or pictures that I have seen. Strange.

      • #6522
        rachely
        Participant

        Ugh, me too, but we’ve talked about that. I fail to understand how some editor can’t notice that, say, the date above Lallybroch’s door changes.

      • #6531
        JB
        Participant

        I know, but I can talk about this stuff all day long! Mostly because I really can’t figure out how a major publishing company can employ editors who make that degree of mistake or how a writer of DG’s caliber can let it slide. I guess not everyone’s as anal as I am!

      • #6532
        rachely
        Participant

        I want a job where I get paid to edit something crappily! : )

      • #6534
        JB
        Participant

        I’ll admit I’m making a big leap here, but that doesn’t strike me as something you’re capable of!

      • #6541
        rachely
        Participant

        No, no I can’t. Almost got me fired once b/c I told the Really Big Boss that she couldn’t send the million dollar donors “complementary” books, unless the package also included a matching scarf.

        (Don’t get me started on women “delivering” babies. FLAMES. Flames, on the side of my face)

      • #6542
        JB
        Participant

        I think books should absolutely come with complementary scarves. Genius marketing idea!!

        My issue is that I have never met a copy editor who is not completely insane (in the best possible way) about style, continuity and spelling. So it’s hard to believe that a major publishing house has one or more blasé copy editors on staff. There has to be some other explanation, but I can’t figure out anything else that’s plausible. (I may be spending too much time thinking about this.)

    • #6529
      rachely
      Participant

      Though, for someone who doesn’t “see” characters when I watched Rent I couldn’t figure out why the didn’t save the actor who played Torcall to play Master Raymond.

    • #6530
      Tucsonlady
      Participant

      Wallace Shawn would be my first choice to play Master Raymond. I don’t see him in my head as Master Raymond but he is absolutely hysterical playing those types of character roles.

      • #6540
        rachely
        Participant

        ugh, that would just be never-ending “indubitably” jokes.

    • #6533
      JB
      Participant

      [quote quote=6521]I just can’t create in my mind a face I have never seen before. I could make the characters look like actors I am familiar with or people that I know or pictures that I have seen.[/quote]

      I’m the same. I think it’s because I don’t really know what it means to have “broad cheekbones” or a “long nose.” I have no clue what that translates to in human anatomy.

      One thing I realized is that I often root scenes in places that are familiar to me. Like when I was reading the scenes in OL when Jenny, Ian, Jamie and Claire are spending cozy nights chatting in front of the fire (or the one when Jamie’s recovering from being shot in Voyager), I suddenly realized that in my head they were sitting in the den in the house I grew up in. It’s a tiny room with no fireplace, but somehow that’s what I was visualizing.

    • #6538
      gingerlovinmind
      Participant

      I find the comparison of our visualizations to be incredibly interesting. For instance, I don’t imagine SH when I read, but I DO hear his voice (same for Cait). When I read the books, I only get a *sense* of the person. When DG talks about Jamie’s hair, I see it…but only the hair, never the whole. But I see the hair very vividly–the colors and tones, the texture, whether it is kept or unkept. But I don’t see the totality of the person. (I have no problem seeing places, apparently I just do this with the characters). I have no idea why.

      I was trying to explain this to my husband, and he thought it was weird, since whenever I have dreams they are nearly always third person omniscient. Like I am hovering up above viewing the dream.

      I see scenery and location this way when I read (great, sweeping overviews), but when it comes to characters apparently my gaze only goes where directed.

      ADMISSION: So, really, the characters are (overall) not what I could have envisioned (because, well, I just have an assortment of random bits in my head). That being said, recently I was leaving work and heading to my car. I was riding in a filthy parking garage elevator and I saw a guy reach to press the floor button with his big hands covered in a sprinkling of downy ginger hair, and I *might* have hissed to my friend, “Oh, my Gosh! He has JAMIE HANDS!”

      *hangs head in shame*

      • #6539
        rachely
        Participant

        yup, yup exactly.

        and when I was skimming Voyager to write my thoughts for Terry I found it interesting that I don’t plug SH or CB into the series. They remain as blurs with hair and clothes. And like you said, JB, I have no idea what “too long nose” means, so I never see it.

        Other actors people do end up stuck in my head. For me Daniel Day Lewis IS Hawkeye (even if the book isn’t remotely like the movie) and he IS Cecil in Room with a View when I reread those books.Maybe that’s why I have such a sad, long, unrequited love for him (which in NO WAY means I want to see what’s up his kilt).

        I’m going to have to ponder this some more–it is really interesting.

      • #6543
        JB
        Participant

        But did you read Mohicans and Room before or after seeing the movies? For me, whatever comes first tends to dominate. Though because I only really have a vague sense of characters’ faces when I read the book first, the actor in any adaptation can kind of take over, I guess.

        This is why I was initially not sure I wanted to even watch OL the Series. I knew from seeing the promos that SH and CB did not quite fit my vague sense of what Jamie and Claire look like, and I didn’t want that vagueness replaced by their faces. I can get pretty protective of my book visions. But then I caved. And actually, I am often impressed by SH’s acting and how much he seems like a 23-year-old goober. He definitely becomes “Series Jamie” for me, though I still revert in my head to vague “Book Jamie” when I read the books. (I think CB is also doing a fabulous job, but somehow the shoes she had to fill weren’t as big.)

        I think this actually contributes to me being able to enjoy the series as the series and the books as the books and not needing them to match up perfectly.

      • #6544
        rachely
        Participant

        read them first. i rarely see anything that was a book without reading the book first.

      • #6548
        JB
        Participant

        That’s my personal policy, too.

    • #6555
      Susan53
      Participant

      Just shaking my head at how all this works. Outlander Starz has been pushing the “Jamielicious” (I can not believe I just typed that) factor with their posts/tweets this past week. From the under the kilt shot, to the “does it ever stop” clip to “because we can never get enough Jamie” clip for today. I’m not suggesting that this is an objectification of Jamie, just pointing out that some of this approach to marketing the show doesn’t help things. Reminds me of what someone here said earlier, that they’d read complaints about the “plot getting in the way of the sex.”

      I suppose they’re (Starz/Sony) certainly in their rights to drum up attention for the show, however they see fit. And certainly, more viewers will help ensure more seasons. But . . . it just makes me feel weird. Like I’m out of step with the whole thing. Hmm . . . not sure. Still thinking.

      • #6557
        maureenanne
        Participant

        Someone posted earlier about how HBO does a more professional job promoting their series. Jamielicious and I suppose Clairlicious must appeal to many people. For me it cheapens the story. I could go into the dummying down of our society but then I would sound like Sean Hannity and he gets on my nerves so I will stop.

      • #6561
        barbc624
        Participant

        The irony is that HBO’s promotion may be less sexy but of the two shows I find GOT’s approach to sex much more mainstream. The sex is there to sell the show to the male gaze.

      • #6562
        JB
        Participant

        What I see is a mainstream corporate marketing machine that was not familiar with the books before this project landed on its collective desk. So the marketing team did some research and found that the fandom consists of like 95% women and decided that the marketable assets are Jamie’s physical attributes, Jamie’s sex appeal and how Jamie makes Claire feel. So that’s what they’re using to sell the show. It seems like classic outsider reductionism at play to me.

        What I wonder now is more of a chicken-and-the-egg type question. Did the trends toward objectification we’ve noticed and commented on at length above inform the direction that Starz is now taking (because their posts, including the “up-kilt” shot, feel a bit more seedy lately) or did Starz’s promotional material inform (and inflame) the fandom’s response?

      • #6570
        Katie (@bunnums)
        Participant

        Makes me wonder how many in the marketing/pr group for Outlander are male vs. female. Pushing Jamie’s sex appeal is certainly the low-hanging fruit but it’s just not that interesting a PR story, IMHO. I actually work in PR (though not in entertainment) and there’s so much here to attract viewers. It’s a really good, very rich show full of nuance, but marketing at the moment is all about the sex appeal. It’s too bad.

    • #6564
      JB
      Participant

      [quote quote=6561]The sex is there to sell the show to the male gaze.[/quote]

      Great point, Barb. It crystallized for me the idea that the Starz marketing team is employing traditional (and therefore masculine) methods of selling the sex in Outlander to the female gaze. All those candlelit shirtless-Jamie photos, the up-kilt photo, the mid-sex GIFs — those are things that, if gender-reversed (candlelit scantily-clad woman, dark upskirt photo, etc.) would be used to draw male viewers. And that could explain why a lot of what Starz is doing right now feels off to so many of us. It’s not just that it’s not true to the books, but that it’s not true to the audience.

      • #6565
        Susan53
        Participant

        [quote quote=6564]

        <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>barbc624 wrote:</div>
        The sex is there to sell the show to the male gaze.

        It’s not just that it’s not true to the books, but that it’s not true to the audience.
        [/quote]

        Thank you JB and Barb. I think you hit the mark for me with this.

      • #6566
        maureenanne
        Participant

        At least not this audience. I do think it appeals to the romance novel fans.

    • #6568
      Susan53
      Participant

      [quote quote=6566]At least not this audience. I do think it appeals to the romance novel fans.
      [/quote]

      Yes, I would think that is true. Yet, I find myself very curious about what else might appeal to those fans as well. Romance novel fans (for whatever that means) aren’t typically drawn by what appeals to the male gaze. I mean, I suppose I’m questioning the need for skin if the underlying characterization of the romance hero is still there. Doesn’t a lot of the research say it’s more “tell don’t show” for women?

      • #6571
        maureenanne
        Participant

        I could see a picture of Jamielicious on the cover of a romance novel so I do think those highly sexualized images sell books.

    • #6573
      Susan53
      Participant

      [quote quote=6571]I could see a picture of Jamielicious on the cover of a romance novel so I do think those highly sexualized images sell books. [/quote]

      Or at least we’ve been told that they do. Wonder if they’ve ever tried “not.”

    • #6576
      barbc624
      Participant

      [quote quote=6564]
      It’s not just that it’s not true to the books, but that it’s not true to the audience.
      [/quote]

      Yes. You’ve said it perfectly. At least as far as the original audience of book readers goes.

    • #6577
      barbc624
      Participant

      [quote quote=6562]
      What I wonder now is more of a chicken-and-the-egg type question. Did the trends toward objectification we’ve noticed and commented on at length above inform the direction that Starz is now taking (because their posts, including the “up-kilt” shot, feel a bit more seedy lately) or did Starz’s promotional material inform (and inflame) the fandom’s response?
      [/quote]

      I think Starz has been marketing it this way from the beginning, just not as explicitly. Remember “The Kilt drops” ads and promo’s last summer? What I think has happened, is that this type of marketing appeals to a certain type of viewer (i.e. “the story is interfering with the sex” viewers) who have then reflected it back to Starz through their social media response to it (doctored shots of Jamie’s ass, doctored “up the kilt” shots, suggestive posts etc.) At the same time, I think the viewers who are there for the story not primarily the sex, and who dislike the objectification, are getting drowned out/are pulling back from social media concerning the show (I know I have). Thus the voices of the fans who are into the sex/objectification become more magnified as they reflect back to Starz, which in turn encourages Starz to up their game. It has become a classic feedback loop.

      The sad part of it is that the image now being presented may put off potential new viewers who aren’t interested in just another cable sexfest, and who may not even give the show a chance. That’s a shame because the show is so much more than what Starz PR seems be leaning toward as their marketing strategy.

      • This reply was modified 7 years, 3 months ago by barbc624.
      • #6580
        cynthia
        Participant

        The relationship between Jamie and Claire is the heart of this show, and that does include the sex. Show me a hit television show that isn’t marketing itself with sex right now. I understand the anger and frustration that some fans cross lines when speaking of (or Tweeting at) the cast, but it’s undeniable that this is a sexy show — a SMART sexy show, an ADVENTUROUS sexy show but there is sex on this show. Barb if it offends you, you can always watch with the picture off but I doubt it would be as fun.

        And that’s okay for it to be a sexy show. Is there a call now to stop the camera from showing SH at all? Should Terry change the costumes so the cast doesn’t look as good as they do? Should the make-up and lighting people go home? We are human and we like to look at pretty people. And we can do that and still appreciate the acting work that goes with it, along with all the other craft work on the show.

      • #6592
        Tucsonlady
        Participant

        I’ll give you examples of two series that include sex but have not been advertised in the manner Starz is doing. Neither Vikings nor Game of Thrones is marketed in this manner. While the History Channel may show a smoldering shot of Ragnar Lodbrok they haven’t stooped to shooting up his tunic yet. I couldn’t find a single photo of Ragnar in bed with anyone on History Channel’s website. I haven’t seen any Viking television ads showing any naked skin either. http://www.history.com/shows/vikings I also went to HBO’s website and not a naked body to be found for GOT season 4. http://www.hbo.com/game-of-thrones#/

        The constant Jamelicious marketing theme (I do like that word) just brings an ugh factor. It’s disrespectful to the actors and to DG. DG’s writing could easily carry Outlander for eight seasons but Starz has chosen to advertise it using the lowest common denominator-sex. In the end this unwise marketing campaign will shorten the run of the series. Stressing the quality of the show would shift it from a sexy fad to a strong drama. All the effort that has been put into Outlander to see it cheapened via this tacky advertising campaign is sad.

        • This reply was modified 7 years, 3 months ago by Tucsonlady.
      • #6600
        MrsParker
        Participant

        Vikings and Game of Thrones are marketed toward male audiences. As Outlander is in the “romance” category they’ll market it toward females and that means a lot of the male lead. I’d like to see more of Ms. Balfe as she carries the show, frankly.

        We are human and we like to look at pretty people. And we can do that and still appreciate the acting work that goes with it, along with all the other craft work on the show.

        I totally agree, Cynthia. The discussion was started because of fan behavior toward Mr. Heughan, and I don’t think it’s intended to be a censor or critique of the show itself. I like the sexiness of it all, too.

      • #6586
        JB
        Participant

        [quote quote=6577]I think the viewers who are there for the story not primarily the sex, and who dislike the objectification, are getting drowned out/are pulling back from social media concerning the show (I know I have). Thus the voices of the fans who are into the sex/objectification become more magnified as they reflect back to Starz, which in turn encourages Starz to up their game. It has become a classic feedback loop.[/quote]

        Yes, this is exactly what I was trying to put my finger on. It does seem to have become an ever-escalating cycle of titillate and be titillated. And there does seem to be a faction of fans who are enjoying that. More power to them. I personally feel that it’s underselling the show.

      • #6588
        Katie (@bunnums)
        Participant

        The “The Kilt Drops” tagline always bothered me. I much preferred the “Damsels Don’t Distress” one they were testing out at the same time.

        Some of the Starz PR people are on Twitter, and I’ve had some short conversations with the social media manager. I’m thinking I may put together a short, and very polite, bit reminding them that there’s so much more to work with to sell Outlander. While all the sexy doesn’t necessarily have to go away in the marketing, there is so much substance to this show that isn’t getting any mention either.

      • #6594
        JB
        Participant

        Great idea, Katie. I encourage you to reach out and would love to hear if you get a response!

      • #6611
        sonyakhanum
        Participant

        Great idea. Maybe when communicating on social media, we all could emphasize other aspects of the series that we enjoy (eg. for the show – the costumes, the cinematography which was fantastic in The Gathering and Rent, and Claire’s character development). I think also a continuing the use of “Damsels Don’t Distress” (which I too loved), through hashtags, etc. could help. It might not have much, if any effect, but it’s something.

    • #6579
      Anastasia
      Participant

      [quote quote=6573]

      <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>maureenanne wrote:</div>
      I could see a picture of Jamielicious on the cover of a romance novel so I do think those highly sexualized images sell books.

      Or at least we’ve been told that they do. Wonder if they’ve ever tried “not.”
      [/quote]

      Yes, there is a reason that romance covers are they way they are – it’s an instant visual cue that the book is a romance. Covers that don’t follow the trend tend to have a much harder time (especially if they are by a new author) gaining traction. It’s not impossible by any means, but fast/instant big sales is less likely.

      It might be argued that one of the reasons Outlander didn’t do very well when it first came out (despite winning the RITA award for that year, the book was never on the NYT bestseller list until after the TV series came out) was because of the original cover, which gave no indication that it was a romance. And it really is a romance – romance novels don’t necessarily stop after the couple gets together. The real core aspect of a romance is a focus on a relationship – and Outlander does that in spades.

      The entire Outlander series is best classified as a romance – one might further classify it as an historical paranormal romance given the other two elements, but a romance it is indeed.

      Outlander proves that a romance with an atypical cover can do well – it just takes a little longer, as a lot of its success needs word-of-mouth until it reaches critical mass. It’s also helped by the fact that she ended up writing a series – and series are a great way to increase interest in all of the books that are a part of it.

      • #6595
        maureenanne
        Participant

        I really enjoy the Ken Follett novels Pillars of the Earth and World Without End. They had romance and sex set against the backdrop of medieval England. They had lots of political and religious intrigue. What makes his novels fiction but Diana’s romance? Is it the time spent on Jamie and Claire? Is there a tipping point with literary critics where one book is determined to be fiction and another…romance? In our local bookstore they just have a separate section for the Outlander books so I have never really thought about this before.

      • #6596
        barbc624
        Participant

        Maybe the gender of the author? Just sayin’…

      • #6612
        sonyakhanum
        Participant

        I was thinking the same thing Barb and was reminded of Jodi Picoult’s (I haven’t read her books, but she raises an interesting issue) comments about the treatment of female authors: http://jezebel.com/jodi-picoult-says-fuck-you-to-lit-world-sexism-and-nic-1663713091

        From the link:

        “If a woman had written One Day [by David Nicholls], it would have been airport fiction. Look at The Marriage Plot by Jeffrey Eugenides. If I had written that, it would have had a pink, fluffy cover on it. If Jenny Eugenides had written it, it would have had a pink fluffy cover on it. What is it about? It’s about a woman choosing between two men. What is The Corrections about, by Jonathan Franzen? It’s about a family, right? And I’m attacking gun control and teen suicide and end-of-life care and the Holocaust, and I’m writing women’s fiction? I mean, I can’t tell you. When people call The Storyteller chick-lit, I actually break up laughing. Because that is the worst, most depressing chick-lit ever.”

      • #6619
        barbc624
        Participant

        Thanks for the link. I am now officially in love with Jodi Picoult and I am going to have to give one of her books a try.

      • #6597
        rachely
        Participant

        I think it depends on how you define “romance” and that hasn’t been the same throughout history. And now we tend to look down on them as ‘those trashy books with Fabio on the cover’.

        Jane Austen wrote some of the first “romance novels”, but we now categorize them as “real” novels. I read Austen in my freshman year “Romance Novel” class defined romance novels as had a happy ending and were written, primarily, by women for women (that was the class where the prof was in the midst of a bitter divorce and it colored her view of the whole thing).

        I think we just bring our own prejudices into the discussion of what’s a romance novel.

    • #6601
      Susan53
      Participant

      [quote quote=6580]Is there a call now to stop the camera from showing SH at all? Should Terry change the costumes so the cast doesn’t look as good as they do? Should the make-up and lighting people go home? We are human and we like to look at pretty people. And we can do that and still appreciate the acting work that goes with it, along with all the other craft work on the show.
      [/quote]

      I don’t think that’s been suggested, and feels like a bit of a leap to me, but maybe that’s intentional to make your point? 🙂

      I agree we like to look at pretty people and I enjoy it tremendously as it supports the passion that is a part of Jamie and Claire’s relationship (and not gratuitous). I was just questioning whether the chosen marketing of the show might have contributed to the objectification issue we’ve been discussing.

    • #6603
      cynthia
      Participant

      Hi, Susan. Yes it was to make a point, which is that this is a sexy show and a majority of the audience is going to look at and admire SH. The show is shot in such a way that we can see him at his best.

      The image that was sent out was a still from the show, that anyone can see when they pause their DVRs. The intended targets of the image were those people who follow #Outlander on Twitter and Facebook, so the audience knows what they are in for. It’s not as though the Starz Marketing Team took this image, lightened the shadows so you can see more of SH (that was something a fan did and it got passed around) and then ran banner ads with it across the internet. The picture was sent to people who are most likely already watching the show.

      At times the objectification of SH convos on here steer towards we should feel bad for looking at SH at all, and I don’t feel we should. He’s a gorgeous man, he works hard to keep his body in shape, and I enjoy seeing him on my TV screen. I follow him on Twitter. I see what some other people on Twitter say to him and I think it’s obnoxious, but I don’t think that means he should never appear on TV again in an undressed manner. I hope not.

      • #6622
        Tucsonlady
        Participant

        [quote quote=6616]Terry
        I just saw your thread on TW asking for opinions on the acceptance of sex on the show. The answers are quite diverse and truly reflect a broad base of age as well as readers vs. non readers. I would venture to say that it might be hard for the Starz PR to pinpoint the demographics they need to appeal to except for one little fact. Every sexy picture of either Sam himself or Sam as Jamie gets 10’s of thousands of hits/likes/comments. His follower numbers far out weigh Caitriona’s. PR is going with the numbers. I can’t say as I blame them I would however ask them to take another hard look at those demographics and do some multi level marketing to the rest of us.
        A few weeks ago I saw someone post a sarcastic depiction of I think 10 different Outlander fan types and how they behaved on SM. They were spot on with their type descriptions albeit a little too crude and nasty on their behavior analysis. My point is there are at least 10 or more groups of opinions as to sex/no sex; less nudity/more nudity; more Jamie/more Claire; Droughtlander caused by Starz greed/mismanagement; etc etc etc. I also remember Ron saying he found the comments interesting but this was not a democracy and he would be telling the story the way it should be told. I do believe he has the degree and experience to see this through! My faith is in all of you that strive to make this series a great experience. I hope and pray that the “noise” dies down. It’s distracting and unpleasant to have to have discussions about butts, objectification and diplorable fan behavior. That last sentence is probably naive on my part and PR will continue on their path regardless of my opinion and there will be more bad behavior. sigh….[/quote]

        Okay now I’m really confused. I think there must be two parallel topics going on at the same time. No one on this thread has mentioned wishing to alter the sex scenes or the amount of clothing worn on air by the two stars. DG doesn’t shy away from sex with Jamie and Claire and neither should the television show. The topic of this thread is the objectification of Sam on social media with some really outrageous fan behavior. I know what I was referencing in my previous post was that Starz marketing campaigns have contributed to the bad fan behavior. I haven’t read a single comment on this thread wishing to alter sex/nudity or anything else on the series itself. My wish is that Starz alter their marketing campaigns to a more professional level (more like Vikings and GOT) does with their hit series. If I have led anyone to think otherwise I apologize. I have no issues with the amount of nudity or sex on Outlander itself.

      • #6623
        plaidwoman
        Participant

        Tuscan Lady
        I was replying to Terry’s thread on Twitter today.

    • #6604
      Susan53
      Participant

      [quote quote=6603]I see what some other people on Twitter say to him and I think it’s obnoxious, but I don’t think that means he should never appear on TV again in an undressed manner. I hope not.
      [/quote

      God, I hope not, too. But I don’t believe that’s what’s being suggested, luckily. 😉

    • #6610
      barbc624
      Participant

      [quote quote=6604]

      <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>cynthia wrote:</div>

      I see what some other people on Twitter say to him and I think it’s obnoxious, but I don’t think that means he should never appear on TV again in an undressed manner. I hope not.
      [/quote

      God, I hope not, too. But I don’t believe that’s what’s being suggested, luckily. ;-)
      [/quote]

      I’m in agreement with you Susan. 🙂 The presentation of the sexual relationship of Jamie and Claire on this show has been called groundbreaking, and I agree that it is. The sex and nudity is organic and is just one aspect of a wonderful relationship, as opposed to throwing in a bunch of naked women every so often in order to titillate (GoT and other shows). I certainly won’t say I don’t admire Jamie’s physical attributes, but they aren’t the primary reason I watch. There is so much more to Sam than a pretty face and sexy body, and I think his acting has been underrated the first half of the season due to the subtlety of his characterization.

      And as Anastasia said the other half of that is Catriona who has really had a tough job having to be in pretty much every scene and has really carried the show so far.

      The marketing of the show however doesn’t reflect any of that.

      • This reply was modified 7 years, 3 months ago by barbc624. Reason: Hit submit by accident. Had to finish my thoughts. :)
    • #6615
      Maggie
      Participant

      Hello. Long time lurker, first time poster. I have to say that while there are some nice intelligent conversations that go on here, I’ve been afraid to post on this thread.

      At times the objectification of SH convos on here steer towards we should feel bad for looking at SH at all, and I don’t feel we should. He’s a gorgeous man, he works hard to keep his body in shape, and I enjoy seeing him on my TV screen.

      Thank you, Cynthia. I couldn’t agree more. From an outside viewpoint of this thread, it does sound like we, as women, should never notice a beautiful man because that would make us bad people. No, it makes us human! I am happy to see a show on my screen that is made for ME. I enjoy Game of Thrones but the sex scenes are for my husband’s enjoyment.

      This thread does seem strange because on the one hand some are shaming us for enjoying Sam Heughan and then go to another thread extolling the joy of sex. I know it’s not everyone but there are some who seem to shout again and again that by taking note of Sam Heughan’s physical appearance we are not honoring him as a person. I disagree and wish the same argument was not repeated by the same poster every time someone says that looking at Sam Heughan is a pleasant experience. Some fans do take it too far, it’s true, but the rest of us shouldn’t be shamed into watching TV in dark.

    • #6616
      plaidwoman
      Participant

      Terry
      I just saw your thread on TW asking for opinions on the acceptance of sex on the show. The answers are quite diverse and truly reflect a broad base of age as well as readers vs. non readers. I would venture to say that it might be hard for the Starz PR to pinpoint the demographics they need to appeal to except for one little fact. Every sexy picture of either Sam himself or Sam as Jamie gets 10’s of thousands of hits/likes/comments. His follower numbers far out weigh Caitriona’s. PR is going with the numbers. I can’t say as I blame them I would however ask them to take another hard look at those demographics and do some multi level marketing to the rest of us.
      A few weeks ago I saw someone post a sarcastic depiction of I think 10 different Outlander fan types and how they behaved on SM. They were spot on with their type descriptions albeit a little too crude and nasty on their behavior analysis. My point is there are at least 10 or more groups of opinions as to sex/no sex; less nudity/more nudity; more Jamie/more Claire; Droughtlander caused by Starz greed/mismanagement; etc etc etc. I also remember Ron saying he found the comments interesting but this was not a democracy and he would be telling the story the way it should be told. I do believe he has the degree and experience to see this through! My faith is in all of you that strive to make this series a great experience. I hope and pray that the “noise” dies down. It’s distracting and unpleasant to have to have discussions about butts, objectification and diplorable fan behavior. That last sentence is probably naive on my part and PR will continue on their path regardless of my opinion and there will be more bad behavior. sigh….

      • This reply was modified 7 years, 3 months ago by plaidwoman.
      • #6620
        Maggie
        Participant

        It’s distracting and unpleasant to have to have discussions about butts, objectification and diplorable fan behavior.

        Well said, Plaidwoman! I enjoy this show so much and there’s so much negativity on the board about how other people are approaching it. I hope we can get back to discussing what we like about the show. I don’t want to be shamed for enjoying both lead actors (and Graham McTavish and the rest of the supporting cast).

      • #6621
        barbc624
        Participant

        There is a lot of diversity on this board and not every thread is for everyone. Why not start a thread on a topic you are interested in discussing? It’s fun to see what different people come up with. 🙂

      • #6627
        Susan53
        Participant

        Hi Maggie,

        I do believe there’s a difference between enjoying the actors and objectifying them, which is what we’ve been digging into here and what this topic and thread is specifically about. If this isn’t something you’re interested in discussing please start a different one–would love to see what you’d like to explore! 😉

      • #6630
        Maggie
        Participant

        I do believe there’s a difference between enjoying the actors and objectifying them, which is what we’ve been digging into here and what this topic and thread is specifically about.

        I thought that I was doing this when I responded to Plaidwoman’s post. This was my first time posting and I was joining in the discussion in process.

        If this isn’t something you’re interested in discussing please start a different one

        I’m obviously interested in discussing it as I’d been responding to Plaidwoman’s post. If you disagree with what I’m saying, why not discuss it instead of telling me to get out of the thread? Why am I being asked to leave immediately and not Plaidwoman who posted the original comment? If new people are not welcome I suggest you make a private thread.

        Hi, Maggie. I’m sorry no one has welcomed you yet. Welcome! As per Terry, Barb is not a moderator so feel free to post and join the discussion.

        Thanks, Cynthia, and thank you for the Welcome. I’m sorry you are being shouted down, I think your opinions are valid and should be valued more.

    • #6624
      cynthia
      Participant

      Well said, Plaidwoman! I enjoy this show so much and there’s so much negativity on the board about how other people are approaching it. I hope we can get back to discussing what we like about the show. I don’t want to be shamed for enjoying both lead actors (and Graham McTavish and the rest of the supporting cast).

      Hi, Maggie. I’m sorry no one has welcomed you yet. Welcome! As per Terry, Barb is not a moderator so feel free to post and join the discussion.

      I hope and pray that the “noise” dies down. It’s distracting and unpleasant to have to have discussions about butts, objectification and diplorable fan behavior.

      Thanks for posting this, Plaidwoman. I think the topic has gotten out-of-hand, too, with many people being shouted down for not agreeing with a few. Like Maggie and others on here, I don’t want to be shamed by other viewers for enjoying this show, which includes Sam Heughan. I also don’t want to be ashamed of the fans of the show, or associated with ones that post lightened photos to see up his kilt or comment on his personal life. I hope this dies down when the show returns in April and that all this is due to the very long break in the season.

      • #6629
        Susan53
        Participant

        [quote quote=6624]
        Thanks for posting this, Plaidwoman. I think the topic has gotten out-of-hand, too, with many people being shouted down for not agreeing with a few. Like Maggie and others on here, I don’t want to be shamed by other viewers for enjoying this show, which includes Sam Heughan.
        [/quote]

        I’m at a bit of a loss. I have yet to experience any “shouting down” or “shaming.” Only people expressing their opinions and/or respectfully disagreeing. 🙁

    • #6625
      Anastasia
      Participant

      I think the crux of the issue is that the marketing has, when it comes to Sam, had a heavy focus on him not as an excellent actor putting in a fantastic performance, but as beefcake. Most of the reviews you see barely mention anything about him other than his physical attractiveness. Some of them don’t even mention him by name – or get his name wrong. Why? Because that’s what Starz keeps pumping out. The show has been marketed as soft porn – which is why at least one reviewer made a comment about the “plot getting in the way of the sex.” They weren’t expecting a show with a strong plot – they were expecting sex, and lots of it.

      That objectification of him has created a monster, fed by a smorgasbord of inappropriate comments. They have glutted Outlander-related Twitter feeds, Tumblr and other social media with objectifying/dehumanizing images (I wasn’t kidding when I said there was an actual image of Sam as a sandwich out there), sexual innuendo and other comments. The monster just keeps on feeding itself, over and over.

      The expectation that Starz has created with its marketing campaign is that the show’s primary focus is sex, not romantic historical drama. It’s not the sex on the show that’s the actual problem – plenty of shows out there have a lot of sex. It’s all about the marketing message. As someone who works in social media and marketing, I have cringed watching the marketing campaign for this show.

      I don’t think anyone on this thread has tried to shame people for appreciating the actors’ physical attractiveness. There’s a very big difference between appreciation and objectification in my mind and it’s the latter this thread is about, not the former.

      • #6628
        plaidwoman
        Participant

        Anastasia
        I was confused by the message as well because the real meat of the story for me was Claire as a strong woman for both centuries! The Claire and Jamie relationship is paramount to the story and he certainly holds my interest, but first and foremost it’s about Claire’s journey. PR and others have not stressed enough that Caitriona was in practically every scene; nor are they giving her enough attention. Sam is doing a great job but could we please see a little more Claire “love”.

    • #6626
      Tucsonlady
      Participant

      [quote quote=6540]ugh, that would just be never-ending “indubitably” jokes.[/quote] Inconceivable!

    • #6631
      Susan53
      Participant

      [quote quote=6620]

      It’s distracting and unpleasant to have to have discussions about butts, objectification and diplorable fan behavior.

      Well said, Plaidwoman! I enjoy this show so much and there’s so much negativity on the board about how other people are approaching it. I hope we can get back to discussing what we like about the show. I don’t want to be shamed for enjoying both lead actors (and Graham McTavish and the rest of the supporting cast).

      [/quote]

      Maggie,

      I’m not suggesting you leave, and I’m sorry if that was the impression I gave you. When I suggested starting a new thread, I was responding to your comment above, that we “can get back to discussing what we love about the show” because that’s not what this particular topic/thread is really addressing. That’s all I meant, nothing more than that.

      Susan

      • This reply was modified 7 years, 3 months ago by Susan53.
    • #6633
      barbc624
      Participant

      [quote quote=6628]Anastasia
      I was confused by the message as well because the real meat of the story for me was Claire as a strong woman for both centuries! The Claire and Jamie relationship is paramount to the story and he certainly holds my interest, but first and foremost it’s about Claire’s journey. PR and others have not stressed enough that Caitriona was in practically every scene; nor are they giving her enough attention. Sam is doing a great job but could we please see a little more Claire “love”. [/quote]

      Terry started a topic about Claire a while back:
      Your Favorite Claire Moment
      It has some wonderful stuff about Claire. I’d love to see your take on her. 🙂

      • This reply was modified 7 years, 3 months ago by barbc624.
      • #6640
        Maggie
        Participant

        I was responding to Plaidwoman’s comment about objectification being the topic of conversation amongst the fandom, which falls under the topic of “The Objectification of Sam.” I think that is clear, but both Barb and Susan give the impression “if you don’t like it go somewhere else.” I’ve read through this thread and it’s gone wildly off-topic at times and the conversation has varied. But as Cynthia and others have said, it seems a few posters control the boards. Funny, upthread this board is nice with people like Rachely, CelticGlamazon, ConnieBV and GingerLovinMind, with new people being welcomed into the conversation. I suppose it’s my fault for not participating earlier.

      • #6642
        MrsParker
        Participant

        Hello, Maggie. I’m sorry you didn’t receive a warmer welcome for your first posts. Please note that there in no moderator here and the only person who can ask you to leave is Terry, as it is her site. She doesn’t tolerate rudeness here and I’m sorry you experienced some last night. This is the proper place to talk about your views on the objectification factor of the fandom.

        And I agree, the topic has dominated over the past week, mostly due to the latest image from Starz. Perhaps all the people protesting such imagery will get to their marketing team and they will dial it back.

        I hope you’ll stick around, Maggie. Even if your opinion is a minority one, all opinions have the right to be heard.

    • #6643
      rachely
      Participant

      I’m not a moderator–there is no moderator here–but if I may interject for a moment (and feel free to ignore me. I’m pretty much impossible to offend)

      As I see it we have:

      PROBLEM THE FIRST:

      Ganging up on people. I’m not naming names. In fact, I don’t care all that much except that I like it here and I don’t like seeing blood on Terry’s nice carpet. If you’re not getting along with another poster then might I suggest you consider walking away or no longer engaging. We all have people we don’t get along with or agree with in real life and on the Internet. Stating your same opinion multiple times to different posters isn’t going to change anyone’s mind.

      PROBLEM THE SECOND:

      I’m going to apologize to the new folks. We’ve gotten a little insular around here since it’s been the same 10-15 of us in here since September. Please forgive us. All new voices are welcome and we hope that you’ll stick around and play with us crazy people. I think I can speak for Terry in this at least: as long as you are polite you have a home here.

      PROBLEM THE THIRD:

      Yes, we go off topic, a lot. And we can’t change thread titles, which makes it hard sometimes. And then people like me decide that we need new threads so that things don’t get out of control and too long. If I hadn’t been fighting with these MoFuing sleeves I would have done this already with this one–because I am a controlling PITA. We need a thread on PR and a thread on nudity/sex on the show.

      This thread started a hundred years ago in the other thread that was locked, because people were getting a little oogied out by the way SH was being treated. It got messed up and out of order so this one got started and that one closed. No one got silenced, no one got in trouble–it was a technological snafu.

      I think if people wandered around you’d find plenty of discussion on how we are humans, genetically programmed to find people attractive, and that’s not the problem. Most of us do not shy from looking at Jamie/SH in the Wedding episode. I don’t think anyone said we shouldn’t because other places we totally have.

      BUT, since we find ourselves here let’s try to work it out.

      I know this is hard for new people–especially when the “main thread” is about 3000 posts long, unreadable on a phone, and full of dissembling. But I suggest newbies go give it a glance. It’s funny, it’s sad, it’s very enlightening and often will give you a good feeling of where people are coming from.

      Now I’ll stop because I haven’t had enough coffee yet and my computer just imploded and I have a gown that will never be authentic 1771 unless I get sleeves on it all on top of the fact that my husband is a Patriots fan and our satellite dish just stopped working on today of all days.

    • #6644
      WatchrTina
      Participant

      Please ignore. Apparently I have to post if I want to un-check the “Notify me of follow-up replies via email” box.

    • #6645
      barbc624
      Participant

      [quote quote=6620]

      It’s distracting and unpleasant to have to have discussions about butts, objectification and diplorable fan behavior.

      Well said, Plaidwoman! I enjoy this show so much and there’s so much negativity on the board about how other people are approaching it. I hope we can get back to discussing what we like about the show. I don’t want to be shamed for enjoying both lead actors (and Graham McTavish and the rest of the supporting cast).

      [/quote]

      Hi Maggie;

      I’m sorry you took my response to your post as saying you should leave. That certainly was not the intent. What I said was:

      “There is a lot of diversity on this board and not every thread is for everyone. Why not start a thread on a topic you are interested in discussing? It’s fun to see what different people come up with. :)”

      You seemed upset about what you perceived as negativity on the boards towards the show and what I said was my(obviously poor) attempt to let you know that there are lots of positive threads here and everyone is encouraged to start new ones if the ones existing aren’t their cup of tea. I personally have said my piece about the objectification issues and since I have no control over Starz or other fans’ actions I have moved on from it. There are too many good things about the story I’d much rather discuss.

      I hope you will take some time to look around and find some topics (or start new ones) that you will enjoy. As with any existing group we tend to get into ruts here and new voices with new ideas are very welcome.

      Have a wonderful day – hope to see you joining in with this crazy group. 🙂

    • #6649
      Lady Gwynedd
      Participant

      Hello all. I’m relatively new here and have enjoyed reading through the posts and hearing all sorts of opinions being expressed by the people who post here. You are all an impressive bunch.

      I’d like to add to the brilliant Rachely’s (I think I must know her from another fandom because her name is so familiar) list of problems, if I could be so presumptuous.

      PROBLEM THE FOURTH:

      Just because someone (or several someones) disagrees with your opinion, doesn’t mean they are ganging up on you. It’s just that everyone has a right to their own point of view and on this board they have the right to express it as long as they are polite about it.

      I do believe that commenting on the fineness of Sam’s butt is the same as commenting on the firmness of Cait’s boobs. Diana misstepped when she publicly commented on it and she, as well as the Starz marketing gurus, set the example for the fans to follow. In watching the clip of that interview, I saw Sam flinch at first and then graciously “go along” with it. When the Anglophile interviewer commented upon Episode 107 by saying she had seen both Sam and Cait in their altogether, the expression on Sam’s face wasn’t one of pleasure, that’s for sure. After the first beat, they both reacted professionally, as always, but I think he was a little aghast. To say that Sam must not mind these sorts of comments because he spends so much time in the gym is the same as saying a woman must not mind the catcalls she gets because she spent so much time getting ready. There is no difference.

      I think the people behind Outlander have done a superlative job. Diana, first for conceiving and writing such a compelling saga, and then Ron and his folk for presenting the story in a way that honors Diana’s labor of love, as well as honoring the loyal fans as well. I, for one, am grateful.

    • #6650
      Anastasia
      Participant

      [quote quote=6649]
      I do believe that commenting on the fineness of Sam’s butt is the same as commenting on the firmness of Cait’s boobs. Diana misstepped when she publicly commented on it and she, as well as the Starz marketing gurus, set the example for the fans to follow. In watching the clip of that interview, I saw Sam flinch at first and then graciously “go along” with it. When the Anglophile interviewer commented upon Episode 107 by saying she had seen both Sam and Cait in their altogether, the expression on Sam’s face wasn’t one of pleasure, that’s for sure. After the first beat, they both reacted professionally, as always, but I think he was a little aghast. To say that Sam must not mind these sorts of comments because he spends so much time in the gym is the same as saying a woman must not mind the catcalls she gets because she spent so much time getting ready. There is no difference.
      [/quote]

      Very well said.

      Many times, people “go along with” someone else’s inappropriate behavior not because they like it or don’t have a problem with it, but because they are either trying to be polite/gracious, or because they are afraid/worried – either because the person making the comments is in a position of power and they don’t want to cause friction or make their relationship with the person suffer, or because they truly fear for their safety.

    • #6651
      Tucsonlady
      Participant

      Lady Gwynedd wrote: I do believe that commenting on the fineness of Sam’s butt is the same as commenting on the firmness of Cait’s boobs. Diana misstepped when she publicly commented on it and she, as well as the Starz marketing gurus, set the example for the fans to follow. In watching the clip of that interview, I saw Sam flinch at first and then graciously “go along” with it. When the Anglophile interviewer commented upon Episode 107 by saying she had seen both Sam and Cait in their altogether, the expression on Sam’s face wasn’t one of pleasure, that’s for sure. After the first beat, they both reacted professionally, as always, but I think he was a little aghast. To say that Sam must not mind these sorts of comments because he spends so much time in the gym is the same as saying a woman must not mind the catcalls she gets because she spent so much time getting ready. There is no difference.

      I am horrified to say that I never bothered to look at Sam’s face when DG made her comment. I was so stunned that I was watching HER. I went back and watched the video again and you are absolutely correct. In both instances Sam’s face initially shows his reaction to the comments. Then his mask goes up and he graciously ignores his own discomfort. That makes me sad. As females we have all encountered similar situations and it’s not pleasant. I can’t imagine being forced to sit, smile, and graciously accept that type of behavior. The video has done more to clarify the issue than all the comments and blogger articles. All I can say is Sam Heughan you have my utmost apology. Thank you Lady Gwynedd for pointing out the obvious.

    • #6653
      Lady Gwynedd
      Participant

      Anastasia said: Many times, people “go along with” someone else’s inappropriate behavior not because they like it or don’t have a problem with it, but because they are either trying to be polite/gracious, or because they are afraid/worried – either because the person making the comments is in a position of power and they don’t want to cause friction or make their relationship with the person suffer, or because they truly fear for their safety.

      Tucsonlady Said: Sam’s face initially shows his reaction to the comments. Then his mask goes up and he graciously ignores his own discomfort. That makes me sad. As females we have all encountered similar situations and it’s not pleasant. I can’t imagine being forced to sit, smile, and graciously accept that type of behavior.

      I well remember being accused of not being a “good sport” or not being able to take a joke or a compliment when some man made an inappropriate comment on my appearance. I don’t think it is an act of feminism to do the same to Sam.

      I’m not trying to make anyone feel shamed for having the opinion that Sam is a handsome man, though. I, myself, think Sam is incredibly appealing and he’s simply a very gorgeous human being, but that’s not all he is. He’s an incredible actor, and seems to be a generous, kind person as well. Those aspects of his character outshine the rest, to me.

      • This reply was modified 7 years, 3 months ago by Lady Gwynedd.
    • #6655
      jwellington
      Participant

      Hi. I’m new as well and after reading this thread with some fascination for a while I feel compelled to speak.

      Most threads on this site are great and people are generally kind and respectful to one another. Except for this one. I think this subject hits home for many posters on here and there are strong opinions, and some don’t like to be disagreed with. Thus this thread has been taken over by a few voices that drown out the rest.

      Rachely, I appreciate you taking the time to write your excellent post. Newcomers are not welcomed on this thread the same way they are on others (unless they come in guns blazing agreeing with main posters), which to me demonstrates that this thread in particular is very insular.

      Just because someone (or several someones) disagrees with your opinion, doesn’t mean they are ganging up on you. It’s just that everyone has a right to their own point of view and on this board they have the right to express it as long as they are polite about it.

      From what I’ve seen, if disagreements had been conducted this way, there would not be problems here. The subject of Diana’s comments is coming up again. The last time this happened there was a debate as to whether Diana is responsible for the behavior of some fans (her actions set the tone of the fandom). When a few people said she wasn’t, there was this comment:

      I want to apologize to all for bringing DG’s actions into this. That was clearly a mistake on my part as anything implying criticism of DG seems to be a sore spot for many fans. I should have known better.

      This came from a poster who is on here so often that some thought she was the moderator. “Anything implying criticism?” This threw me off a few weeks ago and kept me from posting at all. Because this said to me that even if I, like some others on here, don’t hold Diana responsible for the actions of her fans, I’m not allowed to say that here. If I do, I’ll be smacked down with “You can’t take anything said against Diana.” I am an adult with my own opinion and thoughts, and I don’t blindly follow the author of a book. Please respect me and the others who disagree a little more.

      I would also say that if you’ve made your argument and find yourself repeating the same comment over and over, whether it’s to a new poster coming here or someone who is readily participating, you are not furthering discussion. And this prevents new voices from being heard.

      So sadly, I think this thread is now an echo-chamber of the same voices saying the same things over and over. New voices are not welcome (see newcomer Maggie being shut out last night), unless you cow-tow to the opinions of five people on here. I would like to discuss this topic more but I don’t feel that I would be made welcome here due to the disrespect and insulation infecting this thread.

      • #6757
        conniebv
        Participant

        Just wanted to stop in and say hey to the new folks, hope you’ll look around and comment on other stuff, too.

    • #6659
      Lady Gwynedd
      Participant

      Wow, Jwellington, I must have missed the nastiness. I’ll have to go back and reread. The first time I read it through, I only saw people disagreeing with each other. (Some people got a little touchy but that was smoothed over, I thought) But you say people where shut down? I don’t think that was the desired intent. I know some people feel there must be a consensus in all discussion, but that’s not reality, unless people are truly shut out and that would make this a bully pulpit rather than a forum.

      Can’t people with differing view points express those views? I don’t see anyone kowtowing. I just see people disagreeing.

      I just reread this thread and, honestly, I don’t see the nastiness. I must be obtuse.

    • #6660
      Maggie
      Participant

      Hello, Maggie. I’m sorry you didn’t receive a warmer welcome for your first posts.

      Thanks, Mrs. Parker. The two people who suggested that I leave have given passive apologies. I must say that was a jarring entrance, but rather than making me leave I want to stay and say my peace. I have not edited my posts from yesterday but I’ve noticed that others have.

      I rewatched the clip mentioned and I think people are reading into it. The only person who knows how Sam Heughan felt was Sam Heughan, and he’s not talking. Along those lines, Sam has been retweeting the Starz marketing and such. We can say the objectifying marketing of Sam makes US uncomfortable, but when we start to assume how Sam feels about it, we get into the mothering of Sam problem. Terri Wallace had a blog post about this. I know she posts here but her it is in case you missed it: https://terrizellerwallace.wordpress.com/2015/01/22/diana-gabaldon-is-not-your-mother/

      I’m also put off by the blame landing at Diana’s feet, and now the Starz marketing team. The marketing team is doing their job which is getting as many people as possible to watch the show. I would like to see more of Caitriona and more of the adventure aspect. I’d like it to look less like a “woman’s show.” But for now, Sam Heughan is what is selling this and they are in the business of selling. As for Diana and her remarks, I think it’s fine to not like her comments, I think it’s fine to say that made you feel uncomfortable, but to say that her comments are the cause of weird photoshopping and up-kilting and all the rest of the stuff on Twitter that makes you squirm is far-fetched. Everyone is responsible for their own actions. I blame their mothers for teaching them better.

      Last night I was responding to a post that said the topic of objectification was taking over the fandom. I’ve seen this on other sites. I fully understand that this thread is about the objectification of Sam and I am staying on that topic. I think a larger issue of objectification in general is beyond the scope of this thread topic and as Rachel says maybe a general one should be started.

      I think if there weren’t issues with this thread we wouldn’t have had today’s post from Rachel.

    • #6661
      Lady Gwynedd
      Participant

      Well, for the record: I don’t feel like I’m Sam’s mother. I don’t feel like I’m Diana’s mother, either. However, usually I can read body language and what I saw in Sam’s reaction was discomfort. Others may not. Again, that’s a difference of opinion and we are entitled to have them.

      By the way, I don’t blame Diana for other people’s foibles but I do think she’s a revered role model, and therefore what she says has gravitas. Caesar’s wife and all that.

    • #6675
      patriciatrish
      Participant

      I believe the topic of Diana’s wrong-doing or lack thereof has been discussed ad naseum here. It distracts us from the real topic of objectification.

      Stating your same opinion multiple times to different posters isn’t going to change anyone’s mind.

      This is very good advice. Some people are saying the same thing over and over every time someone posts. Might be time to walk away for a bit and let others speak. Not every one who disagrees with you is attacking you so no need to respond to everything.

      Topic? Objectification is bad. People who harass Sam on Twitter are bad. We shouldn’t do it. No one else should do it. But tearing apart other people because they lean slightly to the left or right of this issue isn’t going to help anything, nor is it helping to try to blame Diana or Starz or anyone else for it. The best course of action is to have moderators shut down that talk. Twitter doesn’t have a policy on this so hopefully Sam found the “mute” button there. Comment on articles and say that this isn’t appropriate. Comment on Starz Facebook page and say that this isn’t appropriate. You may get shouted down but at least you are not contributing to the problem.

      I think we’re in agreement on objectification=bad so we should be able to get along here and not take every slight disagreement as a personal attack, nor should you feel you have to respond to every single one.

      -PT

    • #6706
      CelticGlamazon
      Participant

      I believe that many others have shared the sentiments that I would on the direction that this thread has taken, but the one thing I feel the need to point out is quite simply the title of this and the previous thread. It was titled “On the objectification of sam et al”. That being said, it seems that et al needs to be clarified. The English translation of et al. is simply and others. These threads were never intended to be strictly about the objectification of Sam, but the existence of objectification that we’ve seen towards anyone in the fandom.

      Thank you Rachel for taking the time to point out some things that may help to assist in healthy dialogue here and in any other thread. Terry has given us a place to have open discussion about things we are passionate about, and the reality of that is the existence of conflict and disagreements. I, personally, appreciate the efforts that many have undertaken to keep things copacetic and productive. I apologise if my stepping away from the conversation was seen as negative to anyone, but for those that have taken the time to read the HUGE first thread you will know that I’ve shared a lot about my own perspectives already. The existence of that thread, may have made it seem to the new posters (that may have been unaware of it’s existance) like we’ve veered off topic quite a lot, but many of these conversations were just continuations of dialogue that has been happening since September.

      Going forward, I hope that we can all work to keep things respectful. To my knowledge we are all grown adults, and shouldn’t need the policing of a moderator to make everyone here feel welcome. Sometimes we just need to agree to disagree and move past it, and that may mean focusing your attentions into a different thread,there are many here to choose from.(This is NOT meant to force anyone away from this thread or any other, just as a recommendation to possibly avoid conflict) Seriously, we have a thread that revolves around nipple hair and another for the ever elusive Magic Scottish Penis. There’s something here for everyone. Don’t be afraid to start a new thread, because it may not be as popular as this one you never know when you may pique someone’s interest.

      I’ve enjoyed getting to know everyone here and look forward to what the future holds here in Terry’s playground. Love ya, mean it.

      Crystal aka Celtic Glamazon

    • #6756
      TerriP
      Participant

      I realize I’m not going to be very popular for suggesting this, but I am really bothered by the fact that most of the comments here cast Mr. Heughan as an unwilling victim and I don’t think that’s realistic. I am not happy with the rank objectification I’ve seen but I recognize that he has encouraged it (kind of mad at him for that actually) however unwittingly. Surrender to patriarchy isn’t feminism. I do not consider someone like Miley Cyress a feminist. She’s selling her body on purpose – clearly. Sam Heughan has done something a little more subtle but just as anti-feminist. He has sent the message via his twitter account that he sees nothing wrong with objectifying women. My brother’s immediate response to Mr. Heughan’s frolicking pool time video was to give one those male porn chuckles and say, “Look world – here’s my sex kitten.” My heart sunk because that is what that video said. It did not say, “look world (the reason you post on twitter at all) this is a woman I love.” He wouldn’t have dreamt of presenting his daughter(someone he loves and values as a person – not just a body) to the world like that. In my head I’m thinking, “goddammit, another Hollywood train wreck of a man who doesn’t know the difference between love and lust.” A man in love doesn’t do that. A man who lusts after and objectifies women does. And all those people on twitter who are into objectification themselves heard his tune – the siren call blared across the interwebs. It was like the pied piper blew his flute. That poor woman was called a whore thereafter – because that’s how he presented her to the world (why the f&^% would he do that to her?). The truth is, he does send out the message that he is fine with objectification. Remember, he also said “wow,” raised his highbrows suggestively, and and high fived Diana when she commented on his rear.

      Some would say that I’m victim blaming, but I would argue that you are defending someone who doesn’t deserve it. And, you’re hurting him by doing that. I do not know the man so I can’t say that I like him or not, but I do see his confusion and I am human being. It concerns me if he doesn’t know what objectification is, how unhealthy and dangerous it can be, how important it is that you don’t confuse it with love… I don’t want to see another Hollywood train wreck especially not connected to my favorite book series and favorite producer. He will never learn what he’s doing wrong if people don’t tell him. (Of course, for all I know he does know and doesn’t care). The truth is, he is getting back what he sent out. Further, I think it’s splashing onto the other men, specifically Graham, as well as the show itself. Terry, if he doesn’t realize what he’s doing and you value Sam you will get him some instructors. Cause he really isn’t doing okay.

      There is nothing I would like better than to see the star of this show get it. I feel confident that if he did and conducted his life accordingly the objectification issue could be a valuable topic of discussion. But it really isn’t now because the objectivists appear to be right when they say he likes it. You can discuss objectivism all you want but you won’t get anywhere until you acknowledge this part of it. The discussion has to be honest in order to be productive. Sam could be a very good spokesman for the feminist cause (if he understood and lived it). Terry, ask him – would Jamie Fraser post a video of Claire like that? Diana wrote a love story. Sam should maybe read it.

      • #6761
        pattycake
        Participant

        TerriP,

        I have been lurking here and just reading for a couple of days. Your post prompted me to register. I for one agree with you. Thank you!

      • #6776
        Draper
        Participant

        Like Pattycake, I’ve registered just to comment on this post. Like her, I agree with you.

        Saw the pool video and thought ‘someone take his iphone/ipad/laptop away asap and give him some advice’. Not advocating babysitting or censorship – just get him some advice. He might not have realised the implications and this level of fame is new for him. He’s an actor (and a good one) not a PR expert or a psychologist and for his own sake I think he perhaps needs to be more wary of social media.

    • #6787
      Lalou
      Participant

      I love this topic : lots of very different opinions. It shows that we all react in very different ways when we see a naked body, maybe because it bring us back to something visceral and very private.

      What Terri said brought up a point that made my mind up to step in the discussion.

      I’m always bothered with the actors’ narcissism. I think they’re never completely innocent with the objectification they experience. They are eager to expose themselves. You don’t accept to expose your (naked) body to millions of viewers’ eyes if you are not ok with consequences, even if at first you couldn’t exactly figure out what the consequences might be. I never bought the statement of actors swearing they are shy persons and don’t like the idea of being unveiled to the audience. If so, they’d better choose an other job because it’s not part of this one. Physically as well as mentally, an actor has to use what he is to build a character, he’ll be the showcase of it and he is the person/the body the audience will see. So don’t tell he/she is not comfortable with that.
      Of course I am totally upset with the attitude of the fans toward Sam and with any kind of objectification. But I am even more disturbed with a behaviour that encourages this kind of excess. I think that at the moment Sam plays with his recent stardom, but he may understand with time that it is a dangerous game.

      • #6797
        gingerlovinmind
        Participant

        I’m afraid that I’m going to have to respectfully disagree with you Cocolalou…

        I think they’re never completely innocent with the objectification they experience. They are eager to expose themselves. You don’t accept to expose your (naked) body to millions of viewers’ eyes if you are not ok with consequences, even if at first you couldn’t exactly figure out what the consequences might be. I never bought the statement of actors swearing they are shy persons and don’t like the idea of being unveiled to the audience.

        I don’t think that actors are guilty of anything other than pursuing their craft. They are not necessarily “eager to expose themselves.” They are artists who WANT to act out things that are emotional, and difficult, and complex. For instance, Outlander has sex in it. That does not mean that it is just about sex. I doubt that the actors involved read the script and thought “WOO HOO a chance to show the world my arse!” I think that they read the script and thought about how amazing the story was, and the characters, and they decided that they simply HAD to play that role and if it had nudity in it, so be it.

        Of course actors can be shy, and reclusive, and nervous, and awkward…just like anyone else. Just because they undertake a profession that puts them in the public eye does not automatically mean they are a narcissist. Those in the public eye often develop a persona in order to cope with the public/personal divide. The playful Sam seen on social media could well be the persona used to keep the PR going, to appear charming and affable. I wouldn’t presume to know what he is like personally, but most public figures find ways to cope with it and their private self often bears little resemblance to their public persona.

        Some of the comments I have read seem perilously close to that slippery slope where individuals are blamed. I don’t believe that is your intention, but it reminds me of when people talk about woman who wear revealing clothing/go out alone in a bad part of town/drink in public/etc. must want to be cat-called or groped or whatever.

        Appearing in a TV show that includes nudity does not mean that you forfeit your right to respect and dignity.
        And actors shouldn’t have to “choose another job” because viewers and fans can’t distinguish the actor from the role he/she plays.

        This is not just about Sam, or whether he likes or dislikes the attention, or whether he encourages it. Although, I doubt that he would remain a “fan favorite” for long if he actually put some of the rabid fans in their place for their extreme behavior. Whatever his own thoughts might be, he has to try to keep the fans happy, keep the publicity machine going, and try to do so with whatever grace and dignity he can. (Not an easy task when people are trying to check out what is under your kilt.)

      • #6808
        TerriP
        Participant

        I agree with your assessment regarding the assumption of narcissism on the actors part. However, there is a fine line between self promotion and self objectification. I’ll confess my foolish past here… When I was seventeen I had this resentment about not being able to go topless like men. I considered the breast issue similar to the ankle issue – if a bunch of us just start going topless the men will get used to it and stop sexualizing our breasts. Makes sense, right? I was driving on a freeway in Wyoming. It was August and very hot – no air conditioner. I went there. I took off my shirt. Little did I know that the largest truck stop in the U.S. was just down the road. Further, I didn’t know that the way highway prostitutes solicit customers is to take off their top on the freeway. I don’t know if you can imagine how scary it is to be boxed in by hundreds of semi’s on a freeway, the drivers of which are being extraordinarily suggestive, but I can assure you it’s hard to adequately describe. In an ideal world, I wouldn’t have been objectified like that but I realize now that I crossed the line between self promotion and self objectivization. My heart was in the right place, but I was not paying attention to context – and that matters. What happened was my fault and I accept full responsibility for having been dumb. I did not ask anyone for reimbursement for the expense of replacing my undercarriage after escaping down a cattle path. One has to take responsibility for ones personal safety.

        Something similar happens with domestic violence victims. They are not responsible for the abuse, but the only way to empower them to escape it is to educate them on what they are doing wrong. Usually, buying the lie that he’s going to change. At some point you have to take responsibility for what is happening to you. It’s a dance. It isn’t one sided. You have to stop setting yourself up for victimhood and take charge if you want out.

        The point is, Sam Heughan crossed that line when he presented himself as an objectifier of women on twitter. He’s not a victim anymore. He says he’s fine with objectification. I have to believe him. He’s in the visual arts. He knows what elements, context, and symbols are. I can only conclude it was deliberate and that makes this whole conversation pointless. The ladies will tell you, if you ask them, why they are trying to look up kilts. Instead of complaining about their answers you need to listen to them. Some of their reasons are connected to the show and are therefore not valid but Sam himself is providing plenty of other reasons for them to believe that on a personal level via social media. Sam Heughan has sent the message that he is a sex kitten kind of guy so he’s getting sex kittens (do that to a woman… I do not feel sorry for you). The ladies can give you a whole bunch of examples of him saying just that to them implicitly and explicitly. If that’s not right then he needs to come up with a way to correct the impression he gives. Until then I’m assuming that’s the personality he wants to project. He likes sex kittens who are into objectivization, fine. Just don’t complain about them. (Btw he isn’t complaining – you are) It did spoil the whole feminist vibe for me but oh well! MEN – what are you going to do?

        The bottom line is that one video was horrible. It caused damage. The context of releasing it on social media made it ugly. It did not represent grace or dignity. It represented misogyny. It crossed the line. It was childish, gratuitous, insulting, and it provoked the crazies. If gave them permission and man did they go for it. If one wants respect one needs to give respect – always. That’s a well established rule. I sat there and watched it in real time. That video hit social media and the shit hit the fan before I could say “Oh God” and its never been the same since. There is no question in my mind who is responsible. He’s not a victim and he does have the power to fix it if he wants to take responsibility. He can acknowledge that releasing that video was wrong. That objectification is wrong and he’s sorry. It’s been a while so I don’t know how well that would work, but it would be a beginning. It would at least give us something to say to the crazies.

      • #6812
        Draper
        Participant

        “Some of the comments I have read seem perilously close to that slippery slope where individuals are blamed…”

        Not intentional. Just think he might want to be more circumspect about what he puts on the internet in future- it’s a mean, nasty world out there.

        Completely different subject: thank you to whoever decided to put untranslated gaelic in the show. It’s so good to hear it!

        I’ve family on Lewis, my cousins were taught gaelic but are embarrassed to speak it and won’t teach their children, my parents generation are completely bilingual, the generation before that understood English but didn’t speak it much. (To have a proper conversation with my great aunt who died in 1987 we needed my uncle to translate for us both.) The language needs to be heard, spoken and enjoyed (not just at the mods) and millions are now hearing it because they’re watching the show. Maybe some will want to learn it…who knows? It’s got to be good for the language. Thank you!

        And thank you also for the costumes which are what brought me to this forum. It’s the everyday ones that are catching my attention, the practicality of them and all the rough edges.

        That is my second and FINAL post – can see this could become addictive.

    • #6809
      Lady Gwynedd
      Participant

      I’m a little confused TerriP. Are you speaking of the vine that Sam retweeted that Faye Thomas posted that showed Sam tossing his friend in the pool?

      • #6813
        TerriP
        Participant

        yes

      • #6814
        NWeiss
        Participant

        Glad you asked Lady Gwynedd, I was confused too why those conclusions were drawn about that video. The video was taken by a friend, of two adults dressed appropriately for a pool, acting appropriately in that pool. I’m not sure how that is objectifying her no matter the relationship they have.

      • #6822
        TerriP
        Participant

        The problem is, you can’t say there was nothing wrong with it simply because you personally don’t think so. I saw the reaction. It was immediate and huge. Everyone reacted the same way as far as interpreting the message Sam intended to send and it wasn’t the way you interpreted it. Some responded with enthusiastic dirty talk, others with disappointment, and many with disgust. The latter two groups seem to have pealed off. They walked away. He’s left with the dirty talkers now. Other than a reference to “Dirty Dancing” (did not help) no context was given. It was Sam throwing a mostly naked woman at a camera. My brother loved it and I don’t like to think what he does with his phone when he goes to bed. The objectification was clear.

        I believe some of them even took the time to click the link to her twitter account, that Sam provided, and started harassing and threatening her on twitter. That is indication enough that she objectified in that image. Objectification does tend to elicit a particular response after all.

      • #6961
        Julia
        Participant

        Terri P. I remember that one-second video clip and have to say I sure didn’t see what you saw at all. This is what I saw: a man and a woman playing around in a pool, both dressed in normal bathing clothes. The woman is a very old friend of the man’s and they are horsing around and he picked her up a bit and then let her fall back into the pool. I saw totally innocent, friendly play between friends. Now, what some fans chose to read into it (imo, of course) is not SH’s fault.

        Sure is interesting how different people’s impressions of things can be.

        As far as DG’s comments during the 92Y panel goes–I didn’t read his initial reaction as anything worse than a bit surprised and then he played along with it. I have no idea if he felt wronged in any way and I don’t think we can tell by his reaction. I do think the context of such comments or actions matter a great deal. And I also think that many, if not most people have trouble taking those context factors into consideration, if only because it requires a bit of nuanced thinking that not everyone likes to do.

        The scene at the Anglophilia awards with the interviewer talking about “seeing them in the altogether”? I saw his reaction as being playful and mocking when he did that quick eyebrow raise and wide-eye thing.

        I guess I just don’t interpret his behavior as damning in any way. Has he overtly discouraged women’s attentions? Probably not, afaik. But, he’s walking a bit of a tightrope here and has to be careful.

        TBH, I thought the comments about Shiels in the wake of that clip were atrocious but I didn’t blame SH for them and I doubt she did either.

    • #6823
      Lady Gwynedd
      Participant

      I respectfully disagree as well, Terri P.

      That video was innocent. I’ve seen people do the same as they in pools and at beaches the world over. They were horsing around. And what makes Sam’s friend a sex kitten? The fact she is lovely? That’s rather unfair, isn’t it? Her bathing suit is typical of those found at any pool or beach across half the world. Sam wasn’t touching her salaciously and didn’t call her anything suggesting he saw her simply as an object. It wasn’t sexual, it was playful.

      But there was an uproar over the video, you’re right. But as I remember, it was over the fact that for the first time the world saw Sam with another woman who wasn’t Caitriona and they didn’t like it. The more crazed fans behaved badly by vilifying the poor woman and stalking her (and worse) on social media. All that speaks more to some elements of the fandom that are delusional rather than Sam’s treatment of his friend.

      Probably, it would have been more prudent had they kept the video private, though. At this moment in time, they probably wished they had done so.

      • #6829
        TerriP
        Participant

        You do not understand. It doesn’t matter what YOU thought. It matters that he shared it on twitter with hundreds of thousands of people he doesn’t know. That’s what makes it objectification. Let me give you an example, it’s perfectly fine to video your child wearing nothing but underwear and share that video with friends through private e-mails. It is not okay to share a video of your child in nothing but their underwear on twitter or Facebook because your child’s video will not be seen as innocent in those forums. It would be seen as you objectifying your child because if you post it in a public forum you ARE assuming that your innocent video will seen by pedophiles. You have effectively published your child as on object of desire. You are cyber pimping. It’s the same as making your child strip in the middle of a store. Sam cyber pimped that woman. Men all over the world are liking Sam’s little present in private if you get my meaning. He had to know they would.

        When you create film you do create scenes that are going to be used that way, and you know that. But, the purpose isn’t to do that. The purpose is to create a film that tells a story. Sam’s post did not have that element. He just offered her up on a platter.

        Internet safety is important. You have to be careful. But beyond that, as an advocate for victims of domestic violence and sexual assault, I have to say that the objectification of women online absolutely leads to death in the real world. It creates a climate. It produces a mindset. They get to sharing images of women with each other online and before you know it you’ve got men who aren’t thinking of women as people anymore. It’s a huge problem.

        Pay attention. Be outraged. Call it out.

        Add to that the reaction of some of the women who saw what Sam did. I hold no illusions that abuse is limited to men on women. I’ve lost four clients to murder and one was a man. It’s a little different with abusive women. They’ve often been conditioned to respond to being chronically objectified by objectifying men but the sexual impulse that underlies it is suffused with a peculiar rage. It’s intelligent. She isn’t going to attack physically. She’s going to use stealth. If more men understood this they would stop objectifying women tomorrow. It’s a bad, bad cycle. By objectifying that woman on twitter, however innocently, Sam set himself up to be objectified himself. And that’s a dangerous thing to do.

    • #6830
      CelticGlamazon
      Participant

      [quote quote=6829]The bottom line is that one video was horrible. It caused damage. The context of releasing it on social media made it ugly. It did not represent grace or dignity. It represented misogyny. It crossed the line. It was childish, gratuitous, insulting, and it provoked the crazies. If gave them permission and man did they go for it. If one wants respect one needs to give respect – always. That’s a well established rule. I sat there and watched it in real time. That video hit social media and the shit hit the fan before I could say “Oh God” and its never been the same since. There is no question in my mind who is responsible. He’s not a victim and he does have the power to fix it if he wants to take responsibility. He can acknowledge that releasing that video was wrong. That objectification is wrong and he’s sorry. It’s been a while so I don’t know how well that would work, but it would be a beginning. It would at least give us something to say to the crazies.[/quote]

      As someone who has worked with victims of abuse, I can respect your perspective on this topic. What I’m hearing you say is that based solely on the fact that she was wearing a bikini and was being videotaped being tossed into the pool by a friend, that the action of sam uploading said video is objectifying her? That somehow the sexualization of a non-sexual event is sam’s fault, and that you feel he should have “known better” than to share something innocent because of the sick people on the internet that would pervert that thing? The supporting evidence for your perspective feels a awful lot like victim blaming, and the forced idea that women aren’t allowed to be sexual beings because they are asking for it if they do. It is easy for all of us to inadvertently transfer our own emotional responses to past experiences onto something that we see outside of our own experience, and I think that it’s important for both sides of this discussion to avoid doing that. As someone who identifies as a feminist, I believe that womens bodies are their own to express in any way they wish, just as a man’s is. It is not healthy to repress our own sexuality or self identity, and by doing so we empower the patriarchal system that has oppressed women for hundreds of years. Feminism isn’t Us vs them…it’s equality for all because feminism isn’t just a women’s issue.

      • #6838
        conniebv
        Participant

        I’m with the Glamazon, and I think we could all benefit from some education surrounding these issues. I want to take it away from objectification a bit and focus on why it might be difficult for us to wrap our head about this, and why it gets so heated, but frankly I don’t want to get snapped at.

    • #6835
      barbc624
      Participant

      [quote quote=6830]
      As someone who has worked with victims of abuse, I can respect your perspective on this topic. What I’m hearing you say is that based solely on the fact that she was wearing a bikini and was being videotaped being tossed into the pool by a friend, that the action of sam uploading said video is objectifying her? That somehow the sexualization of a non-sexual event is sam’s fault, and that you feel he should have “known better” than to share something innocent because of the sick people on the internet that would pervert that thing? The supporting evidence for your perspective feels a awful lot like victim blaming, and the forced idea that women aren’t allowed to be sexual beings because they are asking for it if they do. It is easy for all of us to inadvertently transfer our own emotional responses to past experiences onto something that we see outside of our own experience, and I think that it’s important for both sides of this discussion to avoid doing that. As someone who identifies as a feminist, I believe that womens bodies are their own to express in any way they wish, just as a man’s is. It is not healthy to repress our own sexuality or self identity, and by doing so we empower the patriarchal system that has oppressed women for hundreds of years. Feminism isn’t Us vs them…it’s equality for all because feminism isn’t just a women’s issue.
      [/quote]

      Well said.

      • #6970
        TerriP
        Participant

        No one would argue against that Barb. What I’m saying is that images of healthy human sexuality have to be given context and kept under control or they will be corrupted. You lose control of anything you post on twitter. For the guys who surf twitter for pics of women in bikini’s Sam is now “a player” and the lady is on object (a factual statement – doesn’t matter what he intended). And you do have to take responsibility for what you put out because there will be consequences you’re gonna have to deal with. This is not the ideal world. I still can’t go topless like I want to. I mean, I guess I could, but I cannot expect to go unmolested because folks don’t look at my breasts the way I do. Twitter has rules and it has ruined the lives and careers of those who violate them. Be safe.

    • #6840
      patriciatrish
      Participant

      You do not understand. It doesn’t matter what YOU thought.

      In the context of this forum, what I think does very much matter. You’ve made your argument — more than once in fact. Just because people disagree with you and state their reasons why does not mean they are attacking you or that their opinions are invalid. Comments such as this are why this particular thread has a reputation for rudeness.

      Well said.

      I agree, it is, but I for one would love to see some expansion on why you agree rather than copying an entire post without adding to the discussion. I know it’s hard, I wish I could upvote many of the posts here, but this stalls out conversation, takes up space and adds nothing new. From what I’ve seen you have many interesting things to say.

      It is not healthy to repress our own sexuality or self identity, and by doing so we empower the patriarchal system that has oppressed women for hundreds of years.

      This is where the general topic of objectification can get a bit touchy. Attention can quickly shift to the what the objectified party did to exacerbate the situation, rather than focusing on the actions of those who did the actual objectifying. No one should be called out for having a body that exists in space, whether that space is private or on a public-accessed forum.

      • #6845
        barbc624
        Participant

        I have been accused of “shouting people down” here and made the decision to step away from this topic as I felt I had said what I had to say about it, and to persist didn’t add anything to the conversation.

        But I do agree with what Celtic and others have said about the video and I don’t think I could have said it any better.

        The bottom line for me is that objectification of anyone, regardless of gender or status in society, is a bad thing for both the objectified and the objectifier. Maybe the one being objectified did do something unwise, or maybe an individual’s perception is that they did. That to me is immaterial. We can only take responsibility for our own actions and I choose not to practice objectification and not to excuse or condone it regardless of what the subject of it did.

        The one being objectified may or may not like it and may or may not be hurt by it. I can’t know that unless they are a close friend or family. What I can and do know is that the act of objectifying another hurts me. It diminishes me and makes me into someone I don’t want to be. That is the real danger of objectifying others – the damage it does to one’s self. In a culture where objectification is routine and deliberately practiced by our mass media it is easy to get caught up into doing it especially for those who have grown up with that culture. So I understand it but it still makes me sad to see it happening. And yes I do agree that feminists should and must call it out when they see it happening no matter who the subject is.

        • This reply was modified 7 years, 3 months ago by barbc624.
      • #6848
        maureenanne
        Participant

        I’m here cause I don’t want to be fined…

        I suspect that SH and CB have certain expectations paced on them regarding the marketing of the series. I think the marketing of the show can be improved. Some of the aspects of the current marketing efforts could have led or lead to objectification of the characters. I would love to see a thread devoted to this. I think this could result in thoughtful recommendations back to STARZ.

        I don’t think that an actor posting a friendly video of a friend in a pool rises to the level of objectification or negates their right to be treated with respect or their right of privacy. But your thoughts TerriP are valuable because your comments do illustrate that social media is a brave new world and there are no clear lines between our professional lives and personal lives.

        I suspect that the nasty and overreaching responses back were lesson enough for SH to find another way to communicate with and still protect his friends and family.

      • #6862
        TerriP
        Participant

        Marketing is a tough nut to crack. It always devolves into a chicken and egg quandary. Are they creating the objectification in society? Or, are they responding to it? I look at history. Women’s bodies were reduced to body parts long before marketing became prevalent. I think marketers are correct when they say that they merely giving the public what they want. To me, it makes sense that if you want to change the climate in marketing one has to begin with oneself. One cannot blame others. One must educate oneself and be introspective about it. This is why I tend to reduce conversations about objectification to a personal appeal based upon the most basic human need affected by it – as well as the one that is most motivative. One should want to do this self examination (it will be brutal) because ones understanding of it will determine whether or not one ever finds the love of ones life.

        I tell perps who come to me for advice 9and they do – most are confused and hurting) all the time, if you make a habit out of viewing women’s body parts online its going to effect your ability to see the love of your life when you finally meet her. The chances are high that you won’t see her cause you’re consumed with butts. (Then I smile and say: You will also be called a misogynist ass by me but that’s how you’re acting. Garbage in garbage out!.. just to lighten the mood). It does tend to motivate them when they understand it like that.

        Objectification is so prevalent in our society that it is the norm, not the exception, to mistake it for love. When women react to the sight of man objectifying a woman by objectifying him, as in this case, its because objectification is love to them. It’s what they know.

        Objectification reverberates. It’s all connected.. domestic violence, sexual assault, stalking, harassment, eating disorders, sexual disfunction, depression, anxiety, divorce, child abuse,… even drug use. If you could see objectification as sound you would see the echoes bounce off the walls and crash into each other – splintering, and bending, and morphing into bizarre monsters. Whether you are a man or a woman you want to be careful not to ring that bell. You do not want to be in that room.

        I find it a little disconcerting that I have had to spend so much time explaining that what Sam did objectified that woman. I get that you want to think the best of him. To be clear, I don’t less of him because he made a mistake on social media that reveals something a little worrying about his level of consciousness. I don’t think he’s a “bad person.” I just think well meaning people need to get out of the way and let him learn. I am not going to add to the cacophony. I’m going to encourage focus on what I know to be the source.

        The marketing is only a reflection. It will only change when the subject changes. If Matt Damon can do it, so can Sam – if he wants to. But, its going to take some serious introspection on his part… I’m not victim blaming – I’m trying to liberate the victim. I’m going to give him back his sense of control. When you tell someone they are a victim they are a victim.

        I am a four time survivor of rape (among other abuses). One does not survive wracking up that kind of record until one learns the difference between a victim and a survivor (finally – its possible I’m a little stubborn). A victim carries no responsibility for what happened and therefore does not have to change anything about themselves. A survivor figures out what part their own actions played. I don’t judge myself for not having known what I was doing wrong, but I allow myself to know what I was doing wrong. Now I’m in control.

        Sam Heughan can take control if he doesn’t like what is happening. Stop telling him he is a victim or he’s likely to stay one. (whispers – it’s not pleasant and its doubly bad for for a man as it insults his manhood which typically causes them to go hyper-masculine and objectify more women and just it all gets ugly) He can take it. He will feel a lot more respected if you are bluntly, if not brutally, honest and direct with him.

      • #6864
        patriciatrish
        Participant

        I find it a little disconcerting that I have had to spend so much time explaining that what Sam did objectified that woman.

        I find it disconcerting that while many people have replied to your repeated argument with respectful disagreement, you can not seem to do the same for your fellow posters. Talking down to us and repeating over and over that you and only you are correct is not going to make your argument more appealing. This has become less a discussion on objectification and more a personal vendetta on you being told that you are correct. Your opinion is your opinion and is not a set fact. I respect your opinion and your right to it, but I can not respect you repeating it over and over here, not listening to others and you telling others it doesn’t matter what we think, because you and only you are in possession of the facts.

        Sam Heughan can take control if he doesn’t like what is happening.

        I am taking this slightly out of context, but this is a place where I agree with you. I don’t totally agree with your suggested course of action, but I do agree the situation is in Sam’s control: he can mute unruly followers or choose not to participate in social media. I wouldn’t blame him if he chose to do this. We have no right to his personal life and for myself I only ask that he keep entertaining me as he has been doing.

        I understand that this is a passionate topic for you TerriP but the way you present it and repeat it makes it difficult for discussion to continue. Discussion — not echo chamber. Discussion — not personal sounding board. Please listen to others and respect that their viewpoint might be different than yours.

    • #6867
      Lalou
      Participant

      If I can remember, Sam didn’t post the video himself. It was a friend photographer who took the video that posted it on his twitter page. And the second video was posted by the same person. I don’t even think he totally agreed with this indiscretion revealing openly who he is dating, but once it was on his page it was too late.

      • #6958
        TerriP
        Participant

        I believe he retweeted it. Videos of men displaying women in bikini’s is a whole genre on twitter. It attracts a certain kind of attention and certain assumptions are made of those who do it. It would have attracted the same kind of attention whether or not Sam was in Outlander (just not that magnitude). It just happened to have been posted at the end of the airing season so it contributed to an impression that Sam was okay with a lot of intimacy. It also exacerbated the bleed through between character (a highly sexualize literary object) and the actor that fans were already dealing with.

        It was combined with marketing that apparently wasn’t consistent with the actor’s comfort zone. When the audience saw the actors walk out onto on elevated stage and sit down in directors chairs I think it was assumed that the producers were inviting accidents on purpose as part of the advertising and the actors were okay with the risk. Part of the culture of the kilt is does he or doesn’t he. According to my kilt wearing uncle, going authentic, taking that risk, is seen as a mark of not just manhood but a signal that the man is comfortable with being seen as “available” to women (or men). That’s apparently the source of the excitement. He doesn’t have any sympathy for those who complain about peekers (but then he’s of the sort no one wants to peek at – he’s a wishful man). Being a woman, I tend to disagree but I acknowledge that that is part of the current kilt culture. Had the actors been wearing bloomers the audience wouldn’t have been confused about their comfort level. I know you want to go authentic in your promotion of the project but I think an understanding of the full risk of doing so should have been considered. That in a culture where every man wears a kilt, “its an insult to ask what he wears under it,” makes sense. But in a culture where only men who want to advertise their availability go authentic it doesn’t make sense to expect people not to ask or try to sneak a peek.

      • #6959
        Lady Gwynedd
        Participant

        Honestly, I don’t think it is fair to continually ascribe motivations to Sam when you only have your own, admittedly extreme, reaction to go on.

        Both the young lady in that video and the person who took it posted it on their twitter pages, tagged Sam, who then retweeted it. We don’t know why he chose to do it. Maybe he was just doing what those ladies asked, perhaps?

        Look at it this way: Since Hollywood is a numbers game, maybe the women felt being associated with an actor who has had huge upsurges in his “numbers” (i.e., his bankability in the box office due to the fandom) would be a good thing for their own careers. I don’t really know. I don’t think it is fair to the individuals to assume we do.

        All we can be in control of is our own reaction. We can respect the actors’ privacy. We can appreciate their talent. And we can reaffirm to ourselves that Sam is not Jamie except when he’s on the screen, which is what he wants.

        As far as wearing a kilt, there are traditional ways of wearing a kilt and non-traditional ways. It is not traditional to wear undergarments with a kilt. (It is not traditional to wear a bra with stays, either.) I think most kilt wearers feel they are honoring their heritage when they try to be authentic as possible. For them, it isn’t a means of advertising their sexual availability, it is a means of declaring that they are Scotsmen and are proud of it. Again, it isn’t a good thing to declare we know what other people’s motivations are unless they’ve told us themselves.

        • This reply was modified 7 years, 3 months ago by Lady Gwynedd.
    • #6869
      Maggie
      Participant

      patriciatrish
      I find it disconcerting that while many people have replied to your repeated argument with respectful disagreement, you can not seem to do the same for your fellow posters. Talking down to us and repeating over and over that you and only you are correct is not going to make your argument more appealing.

      I understand that this is a passionate topic for you TerriP but the way you present it and repeat it makes it difficult for discussion to continue. Discussion — not echo chamber. Discussion — not personal sounding board. Please listen to others and respect that their viewpoint might be different than yours.

      Patricia, thank you for saying this. This attitude infects this thread so much, whether it’s insisting that Diana was WRONG WRONG WRONG and should by lynched for her remark, Starz Marketing is consistently horrible, and now it’s how Sam chooses to act on social media. Make your argument, maybe debate for a post or two, respect what someone else is saying, and move along, as Rachel said earlier. New voices are drowned out and shut out by the constant posting of a few.

      There was a comment on another site by someone who claimed to be in the biz. She noted that when Sam is asked a question, he defers to Caitriona and allows her to answer first. And for all these questions that come up, he is actually very careful about his personal life. He deflects the answers away from himself (not that he’s trying to put Caitriona in the hot seat). What do we really know about him and how he spends his day? Only what he’s willing to show us, and while there are rumors and maybe some crazy people have stalked his movements, there’s no verification of these things. He’s smarter than some are giving him credit for.

    • #6873
      conniebv
      Participant

      One of the issues raised recently was that if Sam did choose to speak out, perhaps this would result in followers leaving him, but I want to present as examples both Stephen Amell and Orlando Jones. Both have a really solid social media presence and are considered ambassadors to their shows… and both are SUPER quick to shut down anyone who is being inappropriate or disrespectful. I mean, Amell is a god among men but in my two years of fandom I only ever heard of one fan incident where someone crossed a line and he shut it down.
      Now granted that show is probably better known than this one, with a more established fan base, and it doesn’t excuse the behavior, but I do think it is very useful to have the stars set the tone.

      • #6943
        TerriP
        Participant

        Thank you! Setting the tone. I love it. Now I can go on. In a perfect world where there were fandom incidents even when the actor’s involved were very careful with their tone I think we would possibly be discussing the objectification of the fictional character, Jamie Fraser. I think by now we would have recognized that for a lot of the book fans Jamie Fraser et al exists (God bless their husbands). It happens when you read books. We also would have already recognized that in the books Diana does make reference to the both Claire’s fascination with Jamie’s kilt and the size of the anatomy beneath it. I’ve seen fans react to pictures of Jamie Fraser (played by Sam) with comments like, “he is well hung…” Who is she talking about? She has no idea what the actor has because it isn’t shown. The comment wasn’t about the actor. The comment referenced the character he’s playing. In the books, Jamie is. She was talking about Jamie. She’s a reader – not a film fan. If you go to online groups that are run as book clubs with quotes from the books instead of pictures of the show you will see comments like that – a lot. Most Outlander’s fans are book people – not film people. The rules are different with book people and their minds are not in the same place. The truth is, the ladies have been discussing Jamie’s junk for years – long before Sam was cast.

        They’ve been discussing the kilt too. The kilt in real life is different from the kilt in Outlander. Those of us with Scottish uncles know this. It’s not sexy. It’s usually somewhat obnoxious (I do not want to see that uncle). But not everyone has a Scottish uncle. They see the kilt through Claire’s eyes.

        I caught my own mother researching our family tree back to the Carolina’s to find the Fraser’s while reading these books. She’s in her seventies, she’s read all her life, and she’s never done that before. (I am concerned.) There is something about these books that makes that line between fantasy and reality very blurry. Bringing them to life was always going to be kind of scary especially for the actor who plays Jamie. There was always going to be a certain amount of bleed through between the character and the actor in the fans minds. It was always going to be important for the actor to set the right tone to deflect the Jamie splash as much as possible… dammit. If I was him I’d hire a communications expert to teach him what he needs to be projecting and how to do it effectively. Social media is no place to fly by the seat of your pants especially when you are playing the most sexually objectified male character in modern literature.

      • #6948
        conniebv
        Participant

        [quote quote=6943] If I was him I’d hire a communications expert to teach him what he needs to be projecting and how to do it effectively. Social media is no place to fly by the seat of your pants especially when you are playing the most sexually objectified male character in modern literature. [/quote]
        Somewhere, Robert Pattinson is quietly sobbing into a silkscreened Twilight hankie.
        I don’t get the allure of the kilt. I’ve had people jump all over me for this before, but it’s not sexy to me. Neither are shorts. I guess knees just don’t do it for me.
        As for the media training suggestion, I would think this would be de rigeur for anyone in the public eye and if it were me and it wasn’t offered, I would run to get it. More education is never bad.

    • #6944
      Lalou
      Participant

      Sometimes all this confusion between the actor and the character makes me think of Clark Gable in “Gone with the wind”. After his casting as Rhett Butler, would people ever see him as the man he was. Actually it was even easier for me as I mostly knew him for that character, having only discovered his other movies long after that one. I think it happens when an actor fits so well with a litterature icon.

    • #6947
      MrsParker
      Participant

      Sometimes all this confusion between the actor and the character makes me think of Clark Gable in “Gone with the wind”.

      Hooray for old movies! I’m reminded of Rita Hayworth. After “Gilda” she was such a sex symbol, yet was unlucky in love. She said (paraphrase): “Men wanted to go to bed with Gilda but ended waking up with Rita Hayworth.” I feel that way about Mr. Heughan, that because he was not well-known to many audiences, this is the only character we’ve seen him play and thus there’s a blurry line between the actor and the character. I think he’s doing a wonderful job portraying Jamie, but outside of that, he doesn’t do much for him. He comes across as very nice, funny, snarky, playful, etc. but he’s just not my type. Maybe that’s why there’s that separation for me.

      (From Connie): One of the issues raised recently was that if Sam did choose to speak out, perhaps this would result in followers leaving him, but I want to present as examples both Stephen Amell and Orlando Jones.

      I follow Orlando Jones and I love the way he will smack down the inappropriate chatter. I’ve seen a few of the bigger names do this, too. JMO, but Mr. Heughan’s fame is new and maybe a bit fragile at this stage. The show needs this large fanbase to keep going. This may explain the ANYTHING GOES! mindset of the marketing team and why they’re being quiet on the obnoxious fan front.

      (From Connie again, she’s just fabulous!): I think we could all benefit from some education surrounding these issues. I want to take it away from objectification a bit and focus on why it might be difficult for us to wrap our head about this, and why it gets so heated, but frankly I don’t want to get snapped at.

      Connie, I would like to explore this as well, and maybe we together we can withstand the snapping! It’s interesting that this thread is a volatile one and that some people really dig in their heels and insist that their viewpoint must be the correct one. Everyone agrees objectification is wrong, but we don’t agree on what objectification actually is. Some think it’s anytime you look at person, some think it’s when you comment on a person’s appearance, and some think it’s when you say anything overtly sexual in a public space.

      The majority (okay ALL) of this thread is female and I think we’ve all had to deal with objectification to varying degrees at some point in our lives. We have to balance being a sexual creature with uninvited attention and commentary. Sometimes it’s fun to objectified — at times I like walking into a room with my high heels and little black dress and knowing that I look good. It’s part of my power (and yes, I know I am just as powerful in my workboots and flannel shirt when on the farm). Sometimes it stinks, like when I used to work in a “real” office and someone would lean over my desk just to get a look down my shirt and I would shrink into myself and just try to get my work done as fast as possible.

      So, I think because we’ve had to deal with moments of being uncomfortable, threatened, or even attacked simply for being a sexual creature (meaning: human being), it makes the empathetic amongst us sensitive to whenever it happens to someone else. Depending on your experience with being objectified, your emotional response may vary.

      I’m not sure we need to reach an overall consensus. I think there needs to be more listening and less pontificating, less monologues and more dialogues. All opinions here are valid, even those that don’t jive with your own experiences.

      Snap away!

      • #6950
        conniebv
        Participant

        [quote quote=6947] Connie, I would like to explore this as well, and maybe we together we can withstand the snapping! It’s interesting that this thread is a volatile one and that some people really dig in their heels and insist that their viewpoint must be the correct one. Everyone agrees objectification is wrong, but we don’t agree on what objectification actually is. Some think it’s anytime you look at person, some think it’s when you comment on a person’s appearance, and some think it’s when you say anything overtly sexual in a public space.

        The majority (okay ALL) of this thread is female and I think we’ve all had to deal with objectification to varying degrees at some point in our lives. We have to balance being a sexual creature with uninvited attention and commentary. Sometimes it’s fun to objectified — at times I like walking into a room with my high heels and little black dress and knowing that I look good. It’s part of my power (and yes, I know I am just as powerful in my workboots and flannel shirt when on the farm). Sometimes it stinks, like when I used to work in a “real” office and someone would lean over my desk just to get a look down my shirt and I would shrink into myself and just try to get my work done as fast as possible.

        So, I think because we’ve had to deal with moments of being uncomfortable, threatened, or even attacked simply for being a sexual creature (meaning: human being), it makes the empathetic amongst us sensitive to whenever it happens to someone else. Depending on your experience with being objectified, your emotional response may vary. [/quote]
        Okay, I’m gonna dip my toe back into it.
        I guess like you I wonder how much of our assumptions about people’s motives and actions have to do with our experiences and how we would react. It’s hard not to project your perspective as the right one because it’s the one that makes sense to you, but it may not make sense to the person you are considering.

        I discussed the Sam/Diana butt comment with both my husband and teenager, and they both had different takes (Husband would have only said something if it continued out of fear that the author could have influence on his job, and the comment about the rape scene would have bothered him more than the butt one. Teen would have said something backstage so as to keep it private but thought he was in his rights to express himself, no fear of reprisal.) Then I brought up a situation where I felt harassed (recently lost a lot of weight and this dude hugged me without consent, and I couldn’t push him off) and they had the exact same opinion about it (why did you let him, why didn’t you knee him.) It was trippy to try to figure out what was being affected by age and what by gender. One thing I did get from them is that they both felt really secure and capable of their course, where I feel I would have waffled more. I wonder how much of this is me being socialized to take the whole village into account, and to never think of hitting a man unless I wanted to be beaten to a pulp.
        Anyone else discuss this with a dude?

      • #6952
        Maggie
        Participant

        I discussed with my dude. He said if a female friend told him he has a great ass he’d be thrilled and do a little dance. (He may not be the best test case for this.) I did press him further and he said it’s different if the woman is his boss or if she announced it on stage at a company meeting. He did keep going back to that he doesn’t have a job where part of the reason he was hired in the first place was because he has a good face and a good butt and such. I finally got him to say that if it DID bother him, he’d say something privately to the person backstage but would try to not make a huge deal out of it.

        I will try to find a wider sampling of dudes.

    • #6949
      patriciatrish
      Participant

      Mrs. Parker, well-written as always with you.

      I shy away from saying objectification is whenever you dehumanize a person. Sexuality is a human trait. Humans will look at and admire what they see as beautiful and desirous.

      When it gets bad/creepy: looks that leer too long, unwarranted comments, solicitations, and vocal expressions that border on violence. I’d add entitlement in there too, whether it’s male entitlement or in this case fan entitlement.

      Perhaps we can unpack this idea of fan entitlement, too. (cue Mrs. Parker’s dramatic organ music). What is owed to us as fans of this show? What is the fan expectation of Sam Heughan outside his work on this show?

      • #6951
        conniebv
        Participant

        Fan entitlement is a great one. I think that it actually comes back directly to why you watch the show. If you are a fan that read this book decades ago, you may feel you are owed fidelity to the story as you remember it. If you are a fan who has only ever watched the show, you may experience some difficulty with the let’s say um, vintage views that will be expressed. If you are active on social media, you may feel that you are owed interaction when you produce content to promote the show. Some people are now selling chapbooks with their memes! I have also had conversations online with people crushed when Sam doesn’t follow them or respond to their daily tweets. I don’t want to be unkind because for some, fandom is a motivating force that helps alleviate depression and that’s great, but I can’t wrap my head around the idea that they owe us personally and individually for their success, even if they do owe the fandom as an entity.

        I’ve said it before, and I’ll repeat it here. I personally have zero expectations and I am really thrilled when anything good happens to me as a result of my fandom. Hell, the day Diana told me I was funny I squealed like a little girl, and I remember every favorite or RT with happiness. But I also never tag the cast on anything because I’m not trying to self-promote. I just really love this damn show and I’m grateful for it.

        I wonder if any of it has to do with folks being on Twitter now that don’t have an idea of basic etiquette, and just go nuts?

      • #6955
        Susan53
        Participant

        [quote quote=6951]I’ve said it before, and I’ll repeat it here. I personally have zero expectations and I am really thrilled when anything good happens to me as a result of my fandom. Hell, the day Diana told me I was funny I squealed like a little girl, and I remember every favorite or RT with happiness. But I also never tag the cast on anything because I’m not trying to self-promote. I just really love this damn show and I’m grateful for it.

        I wonder if any of it has to do with folks being on Twitter now that don’t have an idea of basic etiquette, and just go nuts?
        [/quote]

        Ah, Connie. This is why I (devotedly) follow you on Twitter. Love your perspective about all this. 🙂

    • #6953
      MrsParker
      Participant

      [quote quote=6951]I wonder if any of it has to do with folks being on Twitter now that don’t have an idea of basic etiquette, and just go nuts?
      [/quote]
      I think Twitter and social media in general has a lot to do with it. Social media can create a false sense of intimacy. A person can feel that they have a personal and direct connection to someone they admire, and there’s less censoring of thoughts that were once only confessed amongst friends that you see face to face. It’s all out there for everyone to see.

      For the celebrity that is active on social media, there’s more access than ever. Publicity machines have existed since the film industry started in the 1920s. But the mass public only saw what was in magazines, newspapers, news reels and then television appearances. There were personal appearances then as now, but there were more barriers. Social media has offered open access to celebrities (should they choose to be on social media) that is much more intimate.

      I personally keep in mind that this much access is a privilege. I like seeing the production of the show, I like that Ron and Terry have opened up so much of this world for us to see. I’m not as interested in the actors personal lives so while I follow them on Twitter I tend to skim it unless it’s directly about Outlander. I never tag them and I don’t even read the responses to them anymore because that can be a scary place. But it is a privilege and it can easily be revoked if it becomes problematic for the participants.

      • #6954
        patriciatrish
        Participant

        I wouldn’t go as far as saying it’s a privilege. Ron, Terry, Sam et. al are in the business of selling a product. Social media is a fact in marketing any product. I will say that they are generous with their time and their work, and let’s face it, they are generous with their fans. I don’t think their generosity should be taken for granted. (Mrs. Parker, can we still be friends even though I disagreed with you on a fine point? I love cheese!)

        Topic? Social media has pulled back the curtain on the production and the actors. I agree we have unprecedented access to them and some fans are greedy and want more. But still, these are not people that you know outside of social media and if they never speak to you directly, let’s not try to touch them or photoshop yourself into pictures of them or tell them your deepest darkest fantasies of what you’ll do to them if you ever get them alone in the dark. That’s not fandom, that’s just crazy.

        Connie, I love your tumblr, thanks for sharing! I’m glad Diana has noted your humor. It’s not creepy, and even when it’s snarky it’s in good taste. I’d call you an example of an active fan who knows good boundaries.

    • #6957
      Susan53
      Participant

      [quote quote=6953]
      I personally keep in mind that this much access is a privilege. I like seeing the production of the show, I like that Ron and Terry have opened up so much of this world for us to see. I’m not as interested in the actors personal lives so while I follow them on Twitter I tend to skim it unless it’s directly about Outlander. I never tag them and I don’t even read the responses to them anymore because that can be a scary place. But it is a privilege and it can easily be revoked if it becomes problematic for the participants.
      [/quote]

      Yes, thank you for this. This is my first dip into any sort of “fandom” and I’ve found myself amazed at the amount of access we have to the process itself due to social media. It’s enhanced the experience in many ways–what a joy to be able to share in “real time” our enthusiasm for all the different elements this show and books make available for us.

      But I do so with the awareness that I know I will flinch from time to time at my own discomfort of witnessing the stepping over of boundaries in “real time” more than I would have before. The immediacy makes it all the more unsettling. The access is a privilege, and I can’t help but wonder if, in a way, it makes us feel more accountable for each other (and therefore more critical) for fear that one bad apple ruin it for the whole barrel?

    • #6962
      Maggie
      Participant

      I personally keep in mind that this much access is a privilege.

      I will say that they are generous with their time and their work, and let’s face it, they are generous with their fans.

      Not to sound wishy-washy but I think it’s both. The show needs to have an active involved fanbase, especially as they are relying on cable subscriptions and not advertising dollars. I think this explains why there’s been no push-back on the fanbase. On the other hand, fans need to remember that the actors are people and beyond talking about the show, they owe us nothing. Nada. Not one little thing beyond that.

      Getting back to what Mrs. Parker says, social media does make you feel closer to the action and you do feel like part of the family. A few weeks back Caitriona tweeted that she was home watching Transparent (this was right after the Golden Globes win). I was doing the same thing at the time and nearly tweeted her back, until I remembered that I didn’t really know her and that I had never spoken with her on Twitter. There she was in my feed, just like all my other non-celebrity Twitter friends, doing something perfectly normal. If it was just another friend I would have tweeted her back. So I think the line can get fuzzy sometimes and people forget themselves.

    • #6978
      MrsParker
      Participant

      [quote quote=6954]I wouldn’t go as far as saying it’s a privilege. Ron, Terry, Sam et. al are in the business of selling a product. Social media is a fact in marketing any product. I will say that they are generous with their time and their work, and let’s face it, they are generous with their fans. I don’t think their generosity should be taken for granted. (Mrs. Parker, can we still be friends even though I disagreed with you on a fine point? I love cheese!)

      PatriciaTrish, no worries. I have many friends who are wrong, err, I mean disagree with me. That’s why I keep a variety of cheese handy – not everyone likes the same kinds.

      Keeping up with the fan entitlement discussion, I wonder if the advent of social media has made fans more demanding. As PT says, social media is now a fact for any show (product) and the open access and the sheer volume of events, award shows, online voting for popularity contests, appearances, etc. have created a more active fan base. Fans are making more effort to BE engaged with the show, not just simply watching it and discussing it on- and off-line. People usually want to be seen and awarded for their efforts and work, whether it’s a photoshop meme, constant online voting, or standing online outside of an event for hours on end. There’s an expectation that such actions lead to more access, more personal contact, and an acknowledgement of those efforts. When they feel they’re not being heard, they become more shrill and more outrageous in their demands. It’s a beast that demands to be fed. Starz Marketing feeds it with up-kilt shots, the fans lighten the image to reveal more than what was intended, the image gets passed around as people jump on the bandwagon.

      And of course this doesn’t speak for every actively engaged fan. Connie is a great example – she does something fun and creative that many people enjoy but does not expect any more attention from it. When she gets it, it’s thrilling, but she doesn’t demand more of it.

      Again, I think it’s great that the production team and the cast and even Diana are so willing to show us so much and engage with us, but sometimes I wonder if it’s more than they bargained for. And I wonder if we’re soon going to hit a tipping point and we’ll be left saying “this is why we can’t have nice things.”

    • #6984
      patriciatrish
      Participant

      As far as I can tell, we’re discussing two different things here in terms of Sam Heughan.

      1. The Objectification of Sam Heughan
      There are two subcategories here:
      a) The marketing of Sam as the sex object of the TV show, via Starz Marketing who has released few, if any images of Tobias Menzies or Caitriona Balfe in the same manner
      b) How the TV show itself has invited the viewer to objectify Sam Heughan the actor (as opposed to the character of Jamie) with the lingering shots of his naked torso, his buttocks, etc.

      2. The Harassment of Sam Heughan
      Has the selling of Sam Heughan as the sexy male lead of the TV show, with so many revealing photos and scenes and cheeky interviews, created this online deluge of inappropriate behavior by some fans? Has social media contributed to this and made the harassment worse? Has Diana Gabaldon?

      And here’s where I’m going to get slapped on this board. Objectification is defined as treating a person as an object rather than a person. I would argue that we’ve been invited many times to objectify Sam Heughan, to gaze, to ogle, to enjoy his physicality. Within the context of the TV show, I’m fine with this. Because it’s happening within the TV show, and the objectification comes with an appreciation of Sam’s talents in bringing the character of Jamie to life, along with the talents of the directors and writers and costume designers and the production team. They’ve worked to create a piece of art to be admired and Sam Heughan and the other actors are a part of this piece of art.

      Now for the Harassment of Sam Heughan. This is not okay. We were invited to look and admire, we were not invited to touch, to even attempt to touch, or to directly speak with this man. We can say that social media brings us closer to the actors than ever before but that doesn’t mean we are entitled to know them off-screen as we would our friends and lovers in real life. For all that’s been said on here about Diana’s comments and how they impacted the fan reaction to Sam, she’s also said many more loving and supportive things about him, his craft and his work as an actor, and I find it odd that people are hanging onto one thing she said and accusing her of starting a firestorm.

      I find it silly to say that you must separate the character from the actor, but it seems a few bad apples have a hard time understanding what the separation really is. Yes, I objectified Sam on my TV screen. No, I don’t think that because he was naked on my TV screen I am allowed to send him direct messages and participate in sharing of doctored photos of him. I don’t think that because he entertains me and that I’ve paid good money for a cable subscription that he must interact with me.

      I know most of you, if not all, share this feeling regarding the harassment of Sam Heughan, and I’m attempting to break down within the context of this particular actor and this show why it’s gotten out of hand, to the point where the marketing makes me downright uncomfortable. I personally feel this show is about more than sex. Within the 8 hours we’ve seen, there’s been very little actual sex (well, we’ve seen zero actual sex, as this isn’t porn). There’s been sexual tension and build-up, but mostly there’s been an amazing story. Does Starz have so little faith in this show that they feel they can’t market it otherwise?

      Sorry if this disjointed, it’s a lot of thoughts to sort out, and I’m hoping you smart people can help sort it out.

      • #6991
        maureenanne
        Participant

        Well said Patricia!

      • #6992
        Katie (@bunnums)
        Participant

        The discussion has gotten quite convoluted, hasn’t it? Thank you for trying to pick apart the threads. Nicely said and done!

    • #6993
      patriciatrish
      Participant

      [quote quote=6991]Well said Patricia![/quote]
      Thanks, Maureen. While I appreciate the support, I would love to hear your thoughts so we can continue the discussion. Can you expand? In other words, don’t just agree with me, argue back! You have such good things to say!

    • #6994
      Lady Gwynedd
      Participant

      While Diana has said and done many wonderful things for and about Sam (as well as her fans) she did say that one thing–to Sam, not Jamie–several times. From your statement, Patricia, you think the good she’s done and said outweighs the bad and we should ignore it when she steps over the line? Making public personal comments is in that ballpark, don’t you think? She’s already said she, herself, has trouble sometimes separating Sam and Jamie. The fact she can’t bear to call Sam “Sam” because her son’s name is also Sam, illustrates this.

      Diana is simply having the same trouble many fans do with their cinematic idols. It’s a human thing, you know?

      • This reply was modified 7 years, 3 months ago by Lady Gwynedd.
    • #6996
      Maggie
      Participant

      May I also add my well said to Patricia?

      I find it odd that people are hanging onto one thing she said and accusing her of starting a firestorm.

      I do too. Just because Diana said something to someone she counts as her friend doesn’t mean the fans in general should follow suit. That’s for her and Sam to sort out, not us. If people are saying that it’s okay for them to flirt with and harass Sam just because Diana does it, I would respond: you are not Diana and you do not have that relationship with Sam.

      Lady Gwynedd, you’ve posted about this many times. Were you the one who said Caesar’s wife must be above reproach? Diana’s not Caesar’s wife. She’s Caesar. I mean that it’s her story that’s being transferred to screen and she’s not some matriarchal figure that must be followed no matter what (or patriarchal). Now I think it’s fine to say that her comment made you uncomfortable, that you wouldn’t like that same comment said to you, or that you think it’s inappropriate. But the repeating over and over that it’s wrong and jumping on anyone who thinks differently is the problem in general with this thread – a stubborn unwillingness to entertain other viewpoints. I don’t want to get stuck on this again but here we are.

      Back to Patricia’s post

      Has the selling of Sam Heughan as the sexy male lead of the TV show, with so many revealing photos and scenes and cheeky interviews, created this online deluge of inappropriate behavior by some fans? Has social media contributed to this and made the harassment worse?

      I say yes, it’s made the situation worse. I also think while their target market is female, they are ignoring the parts of the show that will attract male friends. My husband likes the Scottish history element, the male bonding, the Clan intrigue, those nasty Redcoats, antique pistols and the sword fighting. These are important drivers of the story. How about selling some of those aspects, Starz? Make it much-watch TV for couples, not just for ladies!

    • #6997
      Lady Gwynedd
      Participant

      Mags, I was just responding to Patricia. She asked for discussion. She brought up Diana’s faux pas, not me. I believed I was mentioning something that was relevant to the new point that Tricia brought up… that DGs foible should be ignored because she has said so many other wonderful things. And it tied in further with Tricia’s point that people mix up the actors with their characters and that, of course, is inappropriate.

      But you do illustrate the very thing you were trying to chastise me for. You’ve basically asked me to to stifle my opinion because it disagreed with yours. For the record, I spoke to the DG issue once, and then responded to two people who responded to me. I didn’t jump on anyone who disagreed with me on that matter. I just voiced a different opinion a different point of view. That’s what we’re going for here, aren’t we? Or despite what several people claimed, this really isn’t a place for different opinions, just for people who agree with each other?

      (BTW the Caesar’s wife reference simply refers to anyone who is in a higher hierarchical position. Diana, as author of the saga, is very revered, and thus, in this case is Caesar’s wife.)

      • #6998
        Maggie
        Participant

        Actually you’ve posted 4 times on the Diana comment and Patricia has posted on it once. You can click on her name to see a person’s posts. That’s what I mean about new voices saying something new on the topic and others repeating themselves. I’m not attempting to stifle your opinion, I’m saying your opinion has been stated already and this thread is full of the same people repeating their same opinions.

        There’s nothing else you care to discuss? I think Patricia and the posts above have opened some interesting new dialogues on the impact of social media, Starz marketing, why this topic is so heated, etc. I don’t see why we keep coming back to this one and saying the same thing over and over again. Really, I think you’re a smart lady and would like to discuss any of these further.

    • #6999
      Lady Gwynedd
      Participant

      As I said, I spoke to the issue once and responded to others who had commented to me three times. You can count that as four times, if you’d like. I thought I was just conversing with others who were conversing with me but evidently, that was jumping on others who have a different opinion. I wouldn’t have even replied to Patricia, but she ASKED for different opinions as as I had one, I thought I could participate. (edited to add) I responded to the new aspects Patricia mentioned in her post, that I hadn’t seen mentioned before in this discussion. I guess she really didn’t mean my point of view?

      I have many thoughts on Outlander series but, to tell you the truth, I do hesitate to bring them up here because, frankly, I am now a little gun shy.

      • This reply was modified 7 years, 3 months ago by Lady Gwynedd.
    • #7000
      MrsParker
      Participant

      And this is why we can’t have nice things.

      May I suggest we take a break from the Diana comment for a bit? I’m not a moderator, I’m not trying to control the board, but it seems to be a touchy subject. This thread was going at a nice pace with some interesting new discussions and I would I love to see that continue.

      Within the 8 hours we’ve seen, there’s been very little actual sex (well, we’ve seen zero actual sex, as this isn’t porn). There’s been sexual tension and build-up, but mostly there’s been an amazing story. Does Starz have so little faith in this show that they feel they can’t market it otherwise?

      THIS! So much this. It’s a sexy show, with attractive leads, but overall there hasn’t been that much nudity or sexy times. It could be the whole “female gaze” thing that is sending the marketing team over the edge, and thinking it’s the strongest selling point. I don’t think it is. The SO likes the show as much as I do – it’s got sword fights and guy swagger and guy bonding and hey, he thinks the female lead is attractive, too. Diana’s publishers didn’t know how to categorize the first book, and it seems Starz is having the same issue.

      But why not broaden the scope? Why limit yourselves? You can showcase your attractive male lead in a non-creepy way that will still get new people watching. Black Sails has a weaker plot IMO and there’s plenty of things to objectify there but it’s sold as an adventure. It just seems a very narrow mindset to me.

    • #7001
      Susan53
      Participant

      Please disregard.

      (Need to create a post to turn off notifications, it seems.)

    • #7003
      Lady Gwynedd
      Participant

      Please don’t mind me. (turning off notifications)

    • #7004
      patriciatrish
      Participant

      May I suggest we take a break from the Diana comment for a bit? I’m not a moderator, I’m not trying to control the board, but it seems to be a touchy subject. This thread was going at a nice pace with some interesting new discussions and I would I love to see that continue.

      I’m sorry I bought it up. I’ve said my peace and I’m happy to move on. I know you’re not a moderator Mrs. Parker but I do thank you and some of the other lead posters for helping to keep the thread on track.

      Topic? I don’t tend to notice when a TV show is marketed directly to me, a woman. Why do I notice it so much with this one? The marketing feels like “For Ladies Only, Look at Our Male Lead! No Men Allowed!” I heard the audience for the show is 47% male, so are they all being forced to watch by their wives?

      I do think this contributes to the objectification/harassment issue that I bought up earlier. If we’re bombarded with these images and taglines from the marketing team, it reinforces the idea that Sam Heughan is there to be looked at as a single object, rather than part of this whole experience. It’s not the sole reason for the boundary-crossing antics of a certain set of the fandom but I think it does play a role.

    • #7005
      barbc624
      Participant

      Disregard – turning off notifications

    • #7022
      conniebv
      Participant

      First of all, I didn’t even know we could turn notifications on. Live and learn.

      Second, I’ll pile on to the group that isn’t 100% comfortable with how Starz markets this show. Hopefully the back half’s darker tone will knock that particular angle out of the running. In my mind, they should market it like GoT (I think someone mentioned that). It is a saga, an adventure.

      • #7037
        maureenanne
        Participant

        Yes, saga, adventure…
        I have seen some recent press that the show is sexy, smart and stirring. I really like the term stirring and I think the musician responsible for the sound track is using this as well in his marketing efforts.

        Separate from reading the books, the visual aspects of the story are at times very cozy and then quite menacing. I’m not certain if the cozy side is what prompted the term Outlander World? The menacing side is BJR and he is such a fascinating and tortured soul.

        We all need entertainment as escape and so it could be that Outlander World is where we need to escape to? I really respond to that term because of the sets and costumes but others may relate differently. I am not a marketing professional but in the states we really respond to history, revolution, freedom which is what the Jacobite rebellions are all about…and culminate at Culloden. Yes the battle was lost but not entirely in vain. The spirit of rebellion and revolution lived on in Europe and the states and DGs novels illustrate how some Scots enjoyed freedom finally in the US. Wow, I am on a tangent. Sorry. But I think this conflict is very compelling from a marketing perspective.
        I also like the marketing references to honor, morality and the breathtaking beauty of Scotland. I would also like to see redemption, fidelity, and spirituality developed.

    • #7038
      patriciatrish
      Participant

      Ah, today Starz released an image that I actually like. It’s creepy in all the right ways.

      I am not a marketing professional but in the states we really respond to history, revolution, freedom which is what the Jacobite rebellions are all about…and culminate at Culloden. Yes the battle was lost but not entirely in vain. The spirit of rebellion and revolution lived on in Europe and the states

      Maybe you should be a marketing professional, Maureen. I’m all for pushing these elements of the show.

      • #7040
        Katie (@bunnums)
        Participant

        I am in PR/marketing (though nothing related to the entertainment industry). And I love love love the Black Jack image they released today. It’s the relationships and tension and interactions between the characters that’s one of the stars of this show.

      • #7041
        maureenanne
        Participant

        Oh, that is good…Is it black and white? Going to go check.

      • #7043
        JB
        Participant

        Ah, today Starz released an image that I actually like. It’s creepy in all the right ways.

        Yes! I agree. This image is so much more in line with what they should be promoting. It’s intriguing, forboding and hints that there’s much more to the story than Jamie and Claire.

        I wonder if the long break was difficult to navigate for the Starz team, too, so now that April is less than two months away, we’ll start to see some thoughtful marketing pieces. Or maybe they’ve been listening to us! 🙂

      • #7051
        maureenanne
        Participant

        Love the BJR image but then I saw a valentine of Jamie and all I can think of is teenage crush, heartthrob, Ick. Wrong demographics I think.

      • #7052
        JB
        Participant

        a valentine of Jamie

        Yeah, the one with Laoghaire? I was rolling my eyes nonstop at that. It just seemed to sum up so much of what we’ve complained about. Plus, the comma doesn’t belong where they put it, which drives me even more crazy.

      • #7061
        rachely
        Participant

        I had to go look for it. Now my eyes are bleeding from painful comma usage.

      • #7064
        JB
        Participant

        Now my eyes are bleeding from painful comma usage.

        Sorry. Should have added a trigger warning.

    • #7053
      MrsParker
      Participant

      JB, you had me at misplaced comma.

      The Valentine’s promo, just a few hours after the excellent BJR promo, was a disappointment. As there’s no release of new material or product for February 14th, I wish that if they insisted on putting this out there, they’d saved it for the actual date. *sigh*

      • #7055
        JB
        Participant

        Oh MrsParker, you just made my heart go pitter-patter. I’ve been making occasional grammar googly eyes at Rachel on Twitter, but now I’ll have to add you to my list.

        I hadn’t seen that other Valentine, but yeah, looks like more of the same. Those pieces feel like they’re marketing to existing fans. Whereas the BJR image works for both — people who know what’s coming can be in on the joke, and people who aren’t existing show-watchers could be lured in. Which is really what good marketing is, right?

    • #7057
      MrsParker
      Participant

      Are you objectifying me?

      I do have the best cheese, but I do warn you that following both me and Rachely on Twitter could make you nuts. We can get weird there. Proceed at your own risk. (Although cheese, whisky, nuts and grammar wars sounds like the makings of a good night.)

      • This reply was modified 7 years, 3 months ago by MrsParker.
      • #7062
        JB
        Participant

        Are you objectifying me?

        Never! Only enjoying the thrill of finding a fellow grammar fanatic.

        So is it bad to admit I already follow you and Rachely (and much of the rest of the crew) on Twitter? The only reason I haven’t delurked yet is because I tend not to peek at my Twitter feed for long stretches of the day, which means I miss all the cheese-, whisky- and grammar-related hijinks in real time. I promise I’m not objectifying any of you!

    • #7069
      Anastasia
      Participant

      I keep wanting to send my CV in to Starz, with a cover letter saying, “Please, for the love of all that’s holy, hire me to do your Outlander marketing and social media, because your current plan isn’t up to snuff.” *chuckle*

    • #7072
      Draper
      Participant

      No sign of ‘The Kilt Drops’ marketing campaign in Australia. The first person to talk to me about the series was a man who liked the short promo ad and suggested to his girlfriend they watch it instead of a Game of Thrones repeat. He said by the end of episode 2 they were hooked. They’ve never read the books.

      They won’t use that Kilt Drops marketing campaign in the UK. It would be met with utter derision.

      (Third post. Damn.)

    • #7073
      conniebv
      Participant

      Getting back to why these things hit us so hard, I have to say that aside from the Sam/Jamie issue I noticed that Geillis, Laoghaire and Claire go out and about in daylight with their cleavage showing and in front of strangers. Now what I know I learned from a tour guide in Williamsburg, but she said that colonial women would have covered their cleavages during the day with a fichu or a neckerchief because to walk around otherwise would have marked them as having loose morals.

      Now there might be some differences between Colonial US and Scotland in the 1740s, and I have talked with others who made a good point that Leoch was a noble house and the women might very well not be as obsessed with modesty as a women in lower classes, but it’s still a line of demarcation between these three characters/actresses and the other actresses, at least visually for me.

    • #7080
      Melissa
      Participant

      The new Claire promo released today is nice — another play on words and a lovely picture of Caitriona Balfe. I never thought I’d say it because I adore Jamie and Sam, but it’s nice to see Starz focusing on the other actors and characters for once. The hiatus promos have been very Jamie-centric.

      • #7082
        maureenanne
        Participant

        Yes…Claire looks strong and with resolve! I hope this is a trend and that all the characters will be featured this way.

    • #7143
      Tucsonlady
      Participant

      The moderator for Paleyfest has a new Outlander article out.

      “Hottest Sex Scene Ever?! Watch This New Outlander Footage and Just Try Not to Feel All Tingly Under the Kilt”

      http://www.eonline.com/news/624773/hottest&#8230;?cmpid=emn-021315-enewsletter-button-latest-4

      Outlander has become 50 Shades of Plaid and that’s not a compliment.

    • #7344
      jackie
      Participant

      Oh dear I tried to post at the end as I am writing on March 22, 2015 about what just happened in fandom with stolen pics of Sam H. but my post ended up deep in the middle. Is there an admin or forum dweller who can tell me how to move it to where it should be properly? Thanks in advance! (And I don’t even know where it is but somewhere in January.)
      Jackie

      • This reply was modified 7 years, 2 months ago by jackie.
    • #7346
      jackie
      Participant

      Hi, I have not read every post, in part because my browser seems to be in rebellion with this site, so sorry if you feel this is repetitive. Also, I am trying to reply to “all” or more accurately to the OP rather than to a particular reply or person as I am also responding to a particular recent event.

      I was very disturbed by what happened yesterday, 3/21/15, involving two screen captures of Sam Heughan, not much better quality than paparazzi shots, that were apparently stolen and leaked to the social media world without the Producers’ or the Network’s permission. These included a pretty much frontal nude shot. One of them, the frontal shot, went viral. The female fandom went wild.

      I am active on Twitter and on FB, and hang out on other social media sites, and follow blogs. So, I was pretty bombarded yesterday with the photo. In many cases, once it was understood in the fandom that they were not official, and were likely stolen, people started taking them down. Some groups posted modified versions and felt they had done their due diligence, saying well, until we have heard for sure from someone (?) that they were stolen, they stay up. One secret group I belong to took them down, but members were actively bragging about having saved screen shots and were sharing amongst themselves in DM’s. Some fans still have them up on Twitter. Some are using them as wall paper for their phones. The few little voices that worried about Sam’s feelings or the reaction to the pics were squelched. He apparently had lost his right to care by agreeing to act in the series in the first place.

      So, this is both about objectification, and something else, the line alluded to in earlier parts of this discussion. I think a line was crossed, but do not have a group to discuss this with. I tried in my secret FB group and got ignored: no one was mean to me, it’s a group where people are decent and kind to one another, but mostly I was made gentle fun of and the group moved on.

      The line here, and finally I am getting to my point, has to do with the rules of the game. Generally, when we see a cap or clip, it has been vetted by the producers, the network, it has been directed, it has been edited, it has been choreographed and in a sense, curated. And it very likely is aligned with the agreements made between the actor (or more accurately the actor’s agent and attorney) and the producers regarding how far is too far. I don’t know what Sam’s agent agreed to. I don’t doubt that there was a likely agreement to full frontal under certain circumstances. But we don’t know if this capture represents the end product of all that. It has a Starz logo, but it is not much more to my eyes than raw footage, and distorted raw footage. At least one producer has tweeted that it was never meant to be a screen shot and was not released by Starz.

      I feel a line has been crossed. (Warning: possible accurate terms for physical parts of people ahead.) It isn’t just that women are openly drooling over a man’s penis in public forums, or discussing its size, women who would likely be horrified if men were drooling publicly over a woman’s mons pubis, and sharing illegally acquired photos of it widely and wildly over the internet, but these are not approved pictures. Outlander is a show where there are almost nude shots, sex scenes, near rapes, rapes to come, and likely full frontal nudity. But the scenes the fandom slavers over I think should be the ones that were vetted and released. Because presumably everyone had a say in it: the producers, the studio, the agents, the lawyers, the DP’s, the editors, and so on. It is a finished work of art. So, I am struggling a bit with the line that I feel has been crossed and would like to chat with someone about it.

      Any takers?

      Thanks,
      Jackie

      PS. You may see a version of this post somewhere in a January thread and I don’t know where it is now. Sorry. I asked for help moving it but decided to give another try to posting properly.

      • #7348
        plaidwoman
        Participant

        Jackie
        I was traveling yesterday and only had sporadic access to the Internet so when I saw the photos, I had a couple of hours to ponder my thoughts on the pictures. First I was shocked that Starz posted but then thought, no they wouldn’t, just wouldnt. It wasn’t the style of PR I’d seen. Second I was disturbed (but not surprised) that it had taken off virally. It’s just wrong on so many levels not the least of which is piracy and the most of which is it is demeaning to all of the artists who have worked really hard to bring a story to life and not isolated pictures that depict the story as only about sex and/or nudity. There are parts of SM I really like but between this type of behavior and the insane Twitter and FB wars about who’s right and who’s wrong and who’s dating or sleeping with whom makes me sad. I’ll still watch and I’ll still cheer but I will continue to mute, delete, block and unfriend those that I opine as out of line. Nothing I write or discuss will affect their thought process because it’s all about being right even in this forum! Irregardless it seems to be a safer place not to get crucified for thinking out loud.
        Jackie, I’m not disagreeing with your thoughts. They’re valid and tjought provoking. I just wanted to share my thoughts as well. Have a great Sunday.
        PS I’m writing on my phone so it’s a bit disjointed.

      • #7349
        jackie
        Participant

        Hi, Thanks so much for taking the time to reply. I really appreciate your thoughts, they were far more eloquent and on point than mine. And also validating.
        J

    • #7350
      Tucsonlady
      Participant

      I have Outlander exhaustion. I’ve closed my Outlander books and put them on a shelf. I won’t be back in April. I’ve discovered author Marie Force. I love MF’s strong female lead character Lt Sam Holland in her Fatal series. I also prefer Cole Langsdon (Everyone Loves a Hero) and Michael Maguire (Love at First Flight) to JAMMF. Outlander has gone from a great romance story to being overshadowed by all the drama surrounding the television series. This is also my post so I no longer receive notifications.

      • This reply was modified 7 years, 2 months ago by Tucsonlady.
      • #7352
        rachely
        Participant

        Hey, Tucsonlady, if you happen to check back in know you’re not alone. I too have dropped Outlander and have no desire to see or hear any more about it.

        There’s a few of us on Twitter who are the same, if you want come find me at rachely336 (or Crachel) and we’ll be glad to have you come sit at our table!

        Also turning off my notifications 🙂

      • #7359
        Nicka
        Participant

        Oh, no! I think it is a terrible shame to abandon a wonderful show, which is masterly adapted, because some of the fans are out of hand. That is beyond throwing out the baby with the bathwater, that’s burning down the whole damn house!

        I can see how aggravating it is to “align” yourself in liking a show that some fans are obnoxiously obsessed over. BUT…but, but, but…its a fabulous show! I adore the adaptation, the characters, the acting, and the magnificent world-building. I found this blog because I was fascinated at the level of detail and creativity that went into making this show. As much as I like the story, I like the art of creating the show- and the costumes are essential to the characterization and the world-building, as essential as the setting of Scotland itself. I wouldn’t want to abandon that appreciation and enjoyment because some girls are overly excited by Mr. Heughan’s rear!

        I hope you can look at it a different way, if that works for you. Not that I’m telling you what to do, of course. But I do hope the lunatics don’t take over the asylum and fans choose to give up something so great because of a few foul voices. In fact, I think the show runners and actors would probably appreciate the support of the respectful fans even more. I think to “punish” the amazing creators of this show- the network, producers, actors, creative staff- because of the actions of fans seems both sad and unfair.

        Just my 2 cents. Cheers!

      • #7360
        rachely
        Participant

        …and…let’s try that notifications off thing again.

        (Both TusconLady and I have other problems with the show that we’ve talked about other places on these forums. I can’t speak for her, but neither ‘fan issues’ or ‘sam issues’ have nothing to do with my being done with OL).

        • This reply was modified 7 years, 2 months ago by rachely. Reason: spelling fail
    • #7356
      TerriP
      Participant

      I have not seen the photo and have no desire to look for it. I’m 53. I’ve seen one or two. I’ve limited my social media contact with the show to one Facebook page. I don’t think its fair to punish the show for what has been going on on social media. The problem of the photo isn’t limited to Sam Heughan or Outlander. A lot of people have had naked photo’s they didn’t authorize published on social media. Prosecutions need to happen.

      As a new technology social media has clearly been a problem for the entertainment industry. It is an industry that is used to operating in a certain way – promoting practically everything in a sexual manner. That marketing strategy is something that works on television because television provides its own distance. Fans can’t interact with television. Social media is a different animal. The contact between fan and celebrity is far more immediate, direct and intimate. The actor, on twitter for example, is literally interacting with people who could be watching a sexy youtube video of that actor as he tweets in real time and the actor doesn’t always think about that. Cheeky, flirty comments are not a bad thing in and of themselves but one has to remember that one is making contact with hundreds of thousands of people one does not know where ever they are (bodily and in their minds) at that moment – not where the actor is or where the actor’s mind is. The fans don’t know him. Further, obsessive fans have always existed but social media gives them a way to connect with one another even as they connect with the object of their desire. They give each other permission to act badly and support one another in doing so. This phenomenon is not limited to Outlander. You will see it again unless and until the industry itself figures out how to use social media better.

      The drama surrounding Mr. Heughan’s private life was ridiculous on several levels. But then again he’s the one who messed up there. That was his bad. He slipped it in himself. Consequences are a bitch? I told you so?… He’s taking his knocks and hopefully learning from it and moving on. Again, don’t punish the show. It doesn’t take away from the hard and good work he’s put in and it certainly shouldn’t effect everyone else who has worked so hard and so well to bring the show to life.

    • #7358
      AllisonL
      Participant

      I’m not on twitter (causes too much brain clutter) and had no idea about the photos until I read about them here, just now. If the photos were stolen by an individual who hacked into STARZ or SH’s account, that person should be tracked down and prosecuted-no question. It’s clear from the forums here that everyone is going through droughtlander exhaustion, myself included. I suspect things will pick up once the series starts again, though. The series is too good to abandon it because of some crazed fans who have lost their collective minds over an attractive man. I’m very much looking forward to see how Ron and Co. have done the rest of book 1, I trust his team that it will be as well done and respectful as the first half. As for as frontal nudity of Jamie, I agree with Jackie. Of course Jamie will be nude if they are to be faithful to the story; if SH has a contractual obligation to perform ffn, I am confident that, if it’s done, it will be respectful and honest. The way I see it, there would be an even bigger outcry from the book fans if they didn’t do the sex in the same way as it is done in the books. Just look at the blowback when they didn’t do the “slippery as water weed” scene after the raid in episode 8. I’m also looking forward to discussing each episode with the women here on this forum, you are so amazing and it is the only place I’ve found where I can share my admiration for DG and the series freely.

    • #7363
      maureenanne
      Participant

      I miss several women who have turned off notifications as I really enjoyed their comments. Time will tell if droughtlander split season was a mistake. Did the need to keep Outlander relevant from a marketing perspective lead to the release of a nude photo? If so, I’m disappointed for many reasons. It’s just not professional. For me the timing of droughtlander is off. I could have used the distraction/entertainment of the coming 8 episodes when I was snowed in multiple times. Between spring break/summer travels and warmer weather, we are never in the house to watch TV. I’ll binge watch the second half of the season along with game of thrones, Orange is the New Black end of summer when kids are back in school. I do want to keep checking Terry’s site for new costumes and discussions. I don’t care if there are spoilers, I’ve read the books. I’m not well versed in social media and so not exposed to the fan silliness. This forum is as close as I am going to get to identifying with an Outlander fan base. I agree with Allison’s kind words above and I think those words can be applied to many of the people who post here. I will miss Rachely and so will try to figure out how to use twitter and join her discussion threads as well.

    • #7364
      Maggie
      Participant

      I’ve been trying to distance myself from Outlander, since there’s no real news and I’m tired of all the scraps they throw us and watching the fandom attack itself. I just popped in here to see if there was discussion about the pics.

      If you want to continue talking to the fun people here, follow them on Twitter.
      Mandy, Moderator of the Site and Super OLer: @rtidwell730
      Connie, Queen of Recaps: @ConnieBV
      Mrs. Parker, Cheese Goddess: @curdherder
      Rachely, Thread Starter: @rachely336

      All of them have open accounts so you don’t need to sign up for twitter to see them. Those are the ones I’ve found so far. I’ll see if I get some interest back when the show returns. Bye bye for now.

      • #7365
        jackie
        Participant

        Hi Maggie and others: That is an interesting comment about watching the fandom attack itself along with another poster’s question about whether breaking the season was wise. I would have loved to hear your thoughts on the reaction to the pics but understand that you along with some others have distanced yourselves a bit. I actually read all of the books after the show aired, so it is much more immediate and new to me. I have never in my life been part of a fandom so that is new and sometimes pretty shocking. One or two of the people you mention who are on twitter share followers with me (and I with them). So, that is interesting too. I am always most surprised when I discover that my political twitter friends are also fans of Outlander. My sense is that those who responded here and in the mystery place where the original version of my post went somewhere in the thread…are pretty much in agreement on the issue of illegal pics and how they are being treated or dealt with by many fans. I really appreciate this site and hope I can get to know some of you here in what seems a pretty safe place when the mid-season break ends in April.

    • #7421
      AllisonL
      Participant

      For anyone still checking this thread, I’ve started a second half discussion over in the General Discussion forum. I miss our thoughtful posts, come join us there!

    • #7430
      Photomom
      Participant

      I started with the Outlander books less than a year ago and blew through all 8 books in less than 6 months. I fell in love with Jaime and Claire and all their extended family, as I read I was pulled into the story (which is a tribute to Diana and her storytelling/writing skills). I laughed and cried for and with all the characters but especially Jaime and Claire. When I saw Outlander was being turned into a television show I was enthralled. I could not believe that the characters I so loved were being transformed into flesh and blood. I was immediately immersed in the “rabid fandom” and soon realized from what I was seeing that I had to take a step back give myself the “Denozo/Gibbs slap” and remember that Jaime and Claire are just characters in a book and that the actors are a separate entity. I will post more later in an effort not to bore you with my ramblings.

    • #7440
      TerriP
      Participant

      I saw the recent interviews with Sam discussing social media and I wanted to drop a note acknowledging Sam’s efforts given that I am the one who brought the subject up. I have never attempted to contact a public person regarding their social media habits, or for any other reason actually, simply because I thought I would be ignored. Goodness knows there are plenty of public people who deserve to hear some honest talk. I guess they just don’t think that what they do on social media has an effect on not only their lives, but the lives of people they don’t know as well as the cyber collective as a whole.

      I want Sam to know that I appreciate that he has the courage to be honest and address his social media issues publicly and I hope he realizes that his actions in this regard do benefit more than just him. He’s helping to reset the online climate to one of respect. As a woman, that’s important to me. The treatment of woman online in general and the daily sexual harassment, from graphic offers to outright threats, (I’m 53 and a Grandma for God’s sakes) I receive personally are often overwhelming and leave me feeling constantly angry. Not that it stops me of course. I’m not dead yet. But every aware man who speaks up helps. Please thank Sam – even if he’s only doing it to keep it from reflecting back on him. It helps the cyber collective and it does make me feel better that he responded.

      Often, since I first commented on February 3rd I’ve been afraid that I struck too hard. I’m used to confronting very confrontational people. Further, I was having a “goddammit” moment while trying to be productive and wasn’t sure if I’d managed the right balance. I hope there are no hard feelings. There certainly aren’t on this end. I just wanted Sam to take responsibility, take charge, and do the right thing and to my utter effing amazement – he did. Duly impressed.

      Oh, and I really, really, really liked that scene by the river. The acting is just out of this world breathtaking.

      Terri Prince
      on Facebook

    • #7702
      jackie
      Participant

      Hi, I am curious about the last post from Terri re: Sam’s comments on social media and backing off a bit. I have been avoiding Sam interviews and Sam pics because I have been overwhelmed — and imagine he has too. I know there are thousands of women (or maybe just 10 who feel like thousands) copying him on every tweet they tweet and writing to him constantly. It is bizarre.

      But right now, I am grappling with something that I think crosses a serious line with no place to talk about it. I suspect that “dis is da place” if there is such a place.

      Currently, in a secret FB group, with 700 members, maybe two of whom are male, there is an on going series of images of Sam/Jamie and Jamie plus Claire being posted by one member that I feel cross a line. I want to talk about the kind of images and see if I can get feedback here. (There are by the way many totally cool members of that group with whom I have fun, silly discussions. I don’t want to have to leave it; I’d like to make it better.)

      Here is the issue: you know all those screen caps distributed by Starz? Well, routinely and increasing in frequency there is a person posting collages of Sam/Jamie’s body parts (also Sam’s IRL body parts) chopped up into pieces and re-assembled. My question is, how does one know when much is too much? Stop. I know when much is too much. But how does one articulate that? communicate it to the admins or to the group? I haven’t the words.

      Imagine screen caps of the love making scenes in The Reckoning – and Starz put a lot of them out there. Now imagine if you took big scissors to the screen caps, and cut them up into jagged approximately triangular or other polygonal shapes, most sort of irregular, rather like the jagged pieces of a shattered mirror. Then you reassembled them into a collage and shared them on social media sometimes with descriptors of body parts included. Is this pornography? If it isn’t pornography, what is it?

      I would imagine that most of the women in the secret group or the legions who are fans of the show would, if they stepped back, see there is something wrong. Certainly if they saw pics of say Jennifer Lawrence’s headless nude or semi-nude body chopped up and reassembled into collages of body parts and shared by men on social media, they would be horrified. How does one point to what is being done to Sam in the same way by women and put a name to it? I know there was a Supreme Court Justice who said about pornography, to paraphrase, I know it when I see it. But, what is the name of what I am seeing? Any ideas?

      Hope this makes sense and is seen as worthy of a response by members of these forums.

    • #7703
      TerriP
      Participant

      Jackie I really don’t know how one would define pornography in that context not having seen the pics but it is classic dehumanization at the very least. If you feel that the pics cross the line you should simply report them, and the group, to Facebook. You can report them as posting pornography or stolen material.

    • #7704
      jackie
      Participant

      You are right, it is dehumanization. But people seem to think they are cute. (I should clarify that the screen caps are not stolen but from clips released by Starz so the “artist” is simply manipulating the images freely available on the Internet.) Sorry I didn’t do a better job of explaining the images.

    • #7706
      AllisonL
      Participant

      Secret FB groups? Wow, I’m more out of the loop than I thought. 🙂 As far as the collages go, having not seen them, I think I’m with you in the “this is uncomfortable to look at” realm. Not sure if it’s pornography in the strictest sense, but certainly distasteful. And just to expand on your example, men don’t have to cut up photos and make collages of women’s bodies because media already does it for them. How many times have you seen an ad, for, well, any product marketed to men, with an image of some part of a woman’s body, with the head/arms/whatever, not visible. Not that that makes what this woman did to the Outlander images any less creepy. Both are wrong. If I were you I’d post a comment sharing your discomfort. If that person can post those images you can post a reply. I would expect a lot of people would share your feelings. If you don’t speak up, that person will assume that what she’s doing is fine.

    • #7707
      TerriP
      Participant

      If I were you I would begin by reminding them that the unauthorized altering of copywrited images is illegal and posting them on social media is a darn good way to lead the cops right your door. Folks who do that sort of thing are not likely to respond to right and wrong arguments but they may stop if they know they’ll get caught.

    • #7709