I love this season with all the different story lines. Especially liked Bree's interview scene. I had someone ask me in an interview if I could keep up with the job with 2 small children. I pointed out that several male colleagues had small children too and they seemed to be doing just fine. He then said "yes, but you're a.... " then stopped. I got the job AND worked directly under him- he said he liked my backbone. Ended up being a good boss. Stand up for yourselves ladles!!
We've seen Jamie know better than his stupid military superiors before, during the Jacobite Rising. And we've seen Claire deal with misogyny at her being a physician in BOTH centuries. So we know they can handle it well enough. I've seen a lot of people on twitter complaining that this episode spent so much time on Bree and William's stories with barely any time on Jamie and Claire, but to be honest, Bree and William's stories are more interesting right now BECAUSE they are not as experienced as Jamie and Claire. Bree had her mother as an example on how to deal with misogyny in the workplace, but she has to find a way to handle it herself in her own situation. And William is SO much more sheltered than Jamie was at his age, so he's making quite a few more missteps than Jamie did back in season 1, and he is very much learning the hard way what constitutes honor, what deserves respect, what it actually means to be a protector, etc. I recognize that in the context of the time, and how English society works, Jamie and John and the Dunsanys thought it best that William be raised as an Earl with no knowledge of his true parentage, but I really think it was detrimental to William's growth. John did a pretty good job raising him, but I can't help but feel like Jamie's somewhat ruthless parenting style would have been more effective for William's natural personality. The best example I can think of is the scene where Jamie very callously made it clear to Bree that there is no way she could have fought off her rapist. He could have told her more gently, and maybe with a lot of repetition, she would have understood, but he knew that showing her would make her see it faster and get her to stop beating herself up about it. John would be the type to teach gently, and that really wouldn't make much of an impact on William with his stubborn will. And my heart breaks for Jem. How confusing it must be for him to have spent his earliest formative years in the 18th century, but he's now expected to act like a 20th century boy. That's on top of the grief of missing his grandparents, looking out for his baby sister, and he's observant enough to perceive the issues his parents are dealing with.
Completely agree with you about William and if he was raised by Jamie. I do love seeing Charles portray William and seeing elements of LJG and of Jamie. Poor Jen, completely agree. It would have been such a culture shock to be in the 20th century and to get in trouble for speaking Gaelic, poor kid. I loved this storyline in the book, so it’s so exciting seeing it brought to life
@@nica7587 I haven't been able to watch the season as I don't have Starz so I ussually watch it on Netflix. What's the issue with speaking gaelic, anyway? Does it have to do with the time period, setting,etc?
Seems like Willaim has NO CLUE what he got himself into even though he was so excited to "fight for the Crown". Had Jamie stayed or atleast had more contact and could have talk him more lessons, even if it was as more of a teacher than parent. He for sure wouldn've been better prepared. Like you said, Dunsanys HAD NO CLUE what ACTUALY WAR was like and honestly, LJG was probably too patient and easy. William wasn't exposed to the violence of war or what type of War was/wasn't honorable. Glad he got a taste in this episode.
I haven't read the books, so I don't know how it is in the book, but the creators of the series in this episode attributed to Jamie what the Polish general and engineer Tadeusz Kościuszko really did in real life. And I didn't like it since Kosciuszko is in that scene with Jamie when Jamie explains to the commander why the hill needs to be protected and armed. I know that the creators of the series and Diana are playing with history in Outlander, and it's all for pure entertainment and people mostly get it, but I don't know if I like that them/she attributed the merits of a real historical figure to her fictional character. It's just poor treatment of the real person, who lived, said, and did particular things. Since Kosciuszko has been included in this scene and on the show in season 7, they should, according to historical truth, fully show that it was the Pole, whose idea was to arm Sugarloaf Hill. They could have come up with something else for Jamie. Kościuszko came to the American Colonies already as an experienced soldier, because he commanded the uprising in Poland, then enslaved by Russia, Austria, and Germany. Kosciuszko joined the fight for the independence of the Americans Colonies and his first assignment was to advise on the defensive fortifications, among others, at Fort Ticonderoga. It was Kościuszko who recommended that the artillery battery be placed on Sugarloaf Hill, to protect it, yet the commanding general didn't take Kościuszko seriously. Of course, what Kosciuszko predicted happened during the battle, and it was Kosciuszko who later built the brilliant floating log bridge over which the Continental Army escaped. And so Kościuszko became the chief engineer of the war and throughout the American Revolutionary War, he built fortifications, was promoted and decorated, and is, in fact, one of the main founders of West Point. Kościuszko became one of the heroes of the American War of Independence and today streets, buildings, and hills in the United States are named after him. He is also the patron of the West Point. I just didn't like how they attributed this to Jamie, while Kosciuszko did it in real life, and since they put him in the scene, they should have had Kościuszko say it. Because too many people today 'learn' history from tv like this, and later may think Kosciuszko didn't do what he actually DID. If you want to learn abt Koścouszko here is the link to the short video telling his story: ua-cam.com/video/9nqDgnKsf-8/v-deo.html
Nice episode but I strongly disliked one thing. I haven't read the books, so I don't know how it is in the book, but the creators of the series in this episode attributed to Jamie what the Polish general and engineer Tadeusz Kościuszko really did in real life. And I didn't like it since Kosciuszko is in that scene with Jamie when Jamie explains to the commander why the hill needs to be protected and armed. I know that the creators of the series and Diana are playing with history in Outlander, but I don't know if I like that they attributed the merits of a real historical figure to her fictional character. Since Kosciuszko has been included in this scene and season 7 of the show, they should, according to historical truth, fully show that it was the Pole, whose idea was to arm Sugarloaf Hill. They could have come up with something else for Jamie. Kościuszko came to the American Colonies already as an experienced soldier, because he commanded the uprising in Poland, then enslaved by Russia, Austria, and Germany. Kosciuszko joined the fight for the independence of the Americans Colonies and his first assignment was to advise on the defensive fortifications, among others, at Fort Ticonderoga. It was Kościuszko who recommended that the artillery battery be placed on Sugarloaf Hill, to protect it, yet the commanding general didn't take Kościuszko seriously. Of course, what Kosciuszko predicted happened during the battle, and it was Kosciuszko who later built the brilliant floating log bridge over which the Continental Army escaped. Kościuszko became the chief engineer of the war and throughout the American Revolutionary War, he built fortifications, was promoted and decorated, and is, in fact, one of the main founders of West Point. Kościuszko became one of the heroes of the American War of Independence and today streets, buildings, and hills in the United States are named after him. He is also the patron of the West Point. I just didn't like how they attributed this to Jamie, while Kosciuszko did it in real life, and since they put him on the show and in the scene, they should have had Kościuszko say it. Because too many people today 'learn' history from tv like this, and later may think Kosciuszko didn't do anything special while he, in fact, said that the hill should be protected by artillery, and he is the hero of the American Revolution. If you want to learn abt Koścouszko here is the link to the short video telling his story: ua-cam.com/video/9nqDgnKsf-8/v-deo.html
I feel everything is moving so fast. Feels like not as much time and consideration as previous seasons. I understand that you want to get as much information out as possible because there is only one more season. I just wish it could be different. I'm going to miss Outlander after season 8. Thank God I'll have the DVD's.😍
"I don't know if we've ever really seen Jamie Fraser have to follow." Tracey Deer (Director) Are you kidding me?!? How about the entire first season when Jamie had to "follow" Dougal MacKenzie!?! Of course we've seen Jamie have to follow. Read up on the series Ms Director. SMH
I started yelling "that's not true! that's not true!" because all I could think of was the men around the bonnie prince and how Jamie had to deal with all of that too.
While that's true, he was still young then. We haven't seen him have to follow after so many years in a leadership role. Relearning how to follow when older is a different thing. Not sure that's what the director meant, but it's a way to look at the story.
@@checksanity You're reading a lot into a simple statement from the director. I responded directly to her actual statement. Ever heard the statement/phrase KISS? And before you try to respond, I'll make if obvious to you... that was a rhetorical question.
I liked how we didn't spent most of the ep in the near present with Brie/Roger. Those eps feel to soap opera imho. I wish we got more time at the fort to be honest as they built up to it and then it felt like we rushed through it?
Tout d'abord Strarz, je trouve que vous ne prenez pas assez en considération les publics autres que américains ou canadiens anglophones. Beaucoup de fans européens ou sud américains aimeraient avoir accès à des sous-titres afin de profiter de vos "teaser". Ensuite, je comprends que vous parliez de saison "massive" en effet, le fil de la narration n'existe plus et les personnages s'agitent frénétiquement sans que les non-lecteurs des romans comprennent pourquoi. Par exemple la mission de William dans ce marais. Il est interpellé par on ne trop qui pour aller porter un courrier à on ne sait trop qui. De même Jamie est interpellé par un individu qui le réquisitionne pour aller se battre et l'instant d'après on le voit marchant sur un sentier apparemment en direction de Ticonderoga. De même Ian découvre tout à coup son fils, alors qu'en fait la ressemblance n'apparaîtra que plus tard dans la saga. Bref, les actions s'enchaînent à toute allure, donnant une impression de bouclage précipité. Malgré cela je reste une fan de la série et j'espère de tout cœur que nous n'aurons pas droit à une fin dans le style "Game Of Trône" ce serait tellement dommage.
😢 at some point Jamie is going to switch to the British side. He's said several times he will never fight against family on the battlefield again. In the previews for this season Jamie & Claire are running towards each other from different sides. He's going to go to the British side to protect William. ❤ the Rachel-Ian-William love triangle is obviously coming 👻 I'm starting to think Buck is not the person haunting Lallybroch. Have we all forgotten the Irish snuggle was buried right where the rubbish was?
have you forgot Jamie can leave his body when he sleeps even though they haven't just said it yet? promise you the kids are seeing there grandfather in spirit
This was a good episode, but it's moving forward too fast; i know that s7 was thought to be the last. Its almost too much to digest 2 books in 1 season. We should have had 2 more seasons to get together everything to process Jaime's more of a leader by nature, but grew up in the shadows of Dougal and Collum. He knows how to follow, but be an independent thinker. He's wise enough to know the difference. And, knows when to be what he needs to be, and do. William needs to understand what he wants for honor and what's up with the real world, but it's so complicated. He's in for a huge awakening of many different ways. Charles is the best for his role. He could pass for Jaime's real son with Geneva. She was such a conniving bitch in entrapment. It's good to see the development in B&R relationship together and as parents. The best quotes from Bree is the Penis and knickers comments. Underwear has to be s foreign concept after hoing commando for all the 1700s years.
I hope this show doesn't involve with any activist's stuff because I love this show and the books so much. Just mentioning that more seasons pass, the more I feel sort of women's are the hero vibe and their husbands just being weak. Some women just wants to be feminine and support for their significant others and why is that kind of set as wrong in this society... I think Roger is the best example of men from current era though, and Richard does the perfect representation of that acting very well and I loved that this show decided to include Roger had struggle with Bree's career success. I'm not saying that current men or women should be weak. I just think that the current society and all the activists stuff making a lot of man's life difficult.
What do you mean by "activist's stuff" exactly? How do strong "hero" women make men weak? How exactly are the husbands being shown as weak? Jamie isn't "weak", nor is Roger or Fergus. If anything, having strong women, shows how much stronger the men are, no? The show repeatedly demonstrates the give and take of partnership in the main romantic relationships. Roger has been an example of showing the bumps of learning to adapt to the times. He had a similar storyline in season 5 of figuring out what his calling was, but also how to provide for his family. What that looked like in the 18th century is different than in the 20th. Also, all of the women on the show are feminine and support their partners. The fact that they can do that *and* follow their interests outside of the home/family isn't unusual and yet it seems to be difficult for some people to wrap their mind around. The underlying thought for those people seems to be the belief that "women couldn't possibly because they're weak(er)" or they shouldn't because of some religious reasoning. Regardless, even though there are some women who prefer to focus entirely on homemaking, that doesn't mean *all* or even *most* women want that, yet historically the entire gender has been limited to that. It's made women's lives difficult, as well as men's, because it also limits men. Would Roger be having as much difficulty with Bree's career success, if it was socially/culturally acceptable in the 70s to choose being a stay-at-home father?
@@checksanity I actually agree with a lot of things that you are saying. Like the other person, I love the book version. In fact I've been trying to understand the show version to make sense in my mind even though some of the lines have been totally changed. I was only saying that because most of the current modern shows (even the period drama like Bridgerton) seems like they have to put trans, feminism, historically inaccurate nationality casts in the shows and movies because of the activists which I think it's ridiculous. Although, one of the reasons I love about the show has been more period accurate than other shows. I want them to keep doing what they have been doing in earlier seasons.
I love this season with all the different story lines. Especially liked Bree's interview scene. I had someone ask me in an interview if I could keep up with the job with 2 small children. I pointed out that several male colleagues had small children too and they seemed to be doing just fine. He then said "yes, but you're a.... " then stopped. I got the job AND worked directly under him- he said he liked my backbone. Ended up being a good boss. Stand up for yourselves ladles!!
So proud of you 👏
We've seen Jamie know better than his stupid military superiors before, during the Jacobite Rising. And we've seen Claire deal with misogyny at her being a physician in BOTH centuries. So we know they can handle it well enough.
I've seen a lot of people on twitter complaining that this episode spent so much time on Bree and William's stories with barely any time on Jamie and Claire, but to be honest, Bree and William's stories are more interesting right now BECAUSE they are not as experienced as Jamie and Claire. Bree had her mother as an example on how to deal with misogyny in the workplace, but she has to find a way to handle it herself in her own situation. And William is SO much more sheltered than Jamie was at his age, so he's making quite a few more missteps than Jamie did back in season 1, and he is very much learning the hard way what constitutes honor, what deserves respect, what it actually means to be a protector, etc.
I recognize that in the context of the time, and how English society works, Jamie and John and the Dunsanys thought it best that William be raised as an Earl with no knowledge of his true parentage, but I really think it was detrimental to William's growth. John did a pretty good job raising him, but I can't help but feel like Jamie's somewhat ruthless parenting style would have been more effective for William's natural personality. The best example I can think of is the scene where Jamie very callously made it clear to Bree that there is no way she could have fought off her rapist. He could have told her more gently, and maybe with a lot of repetition, she would have understood, but he knew that showing her would make her see it faster and get her to stop beating herself up about it. John would be the type to teach gently, and that really wouldn't make much of an impact on William with his stubborn will.
And my heart breaks for Jem. How confusing it must be for him to have spent his earliest formative years in the 18th century, but he's now expected to act like a 20th century boy. That's on top of the grief of missing his grandparents, looking out for his baby sister, and he's observant enough to perceive the issues his parents are dealing with.
Wow, such astute comments!
Completely agree with you about William and if he was raised by Jamie. I do love seeing Charles portray William and seeing elements of LJG and of Jamie.
Poor Jen, completely agree. It would have been such a culture shock to be in the 20th century and to get in trouble for speaking Gaelic, poor kid. I loved this storyline in the book, so it’s so exciting seeing it brought to life
@@nica7587 I haven't been able to watch the season as I don't have Starz so I ussually watch it on Netflix. What's the issue with speaking gaelic, anyway? Does it have to do with the time period, setting,etc?
Seems like Willaim has NO CLUE what he got himself into even though he was so excited to "fight for the Crown". Had Jamie stayed or atleast had more contact and could have talk him more lessons, even if it was as more of a teacher than parent. He for sure wouldn've been better prepared. Like you said, Dunsanys HAD NO CLUE what ACTUALY WAR was like and honestly, LJG was probably too patient and easy. William wasn't exposed to the violence of war or what type of War was/wasn't honorable. Glad he got a taste in this episode.
I haven't read the books, so I don't know how it is in the book, but the creators of the series in this episode attributed to Jamie what the Polish general and engineer Tadeusz Kościuszko really did in real life. And I didn't like it since Kosciuszko is in that scene with Jamie when Jamie explains to the commander why the hill needs to be protected and armed.
I know that the creators of the series and Diana are playing with history in Outlander, and it's all for pure entertainment and people mostly get it, but I don't know if I like that them/she attributed the merits of a real historical figure to her fictional character. It's just poor treatment of the real person, who lived, said, and did particular things.
Since Kosciuszko has been included in this scene and on the show in season 7, they should, according to historical truth, fully show that it was the Pole, whose idea was to arm Sugarloaf Hill. They could have come up with something else for Jamie.
Kościuszko came to the American Colonies already as an experienced soldier, because he commanded the uprising in Poland, then enslaved by Russia, Austria, and Germany.
Kosciuszko joined the fight for the independence of the Americans Colonies and his first assignment was to advise on the defensive fortifications, among others, at Fort Ticonderoga. It was Kościuszko who recommended that the artillery battery be placed on Sugarloaf Hill, to protect it, yet the commanding general didn't take Kościuszko seriously.
Of course, what Kosciuszko predicted happened during the battle, and it was Kosciuszko who later built the brilliant floating log bridge over which the Continental Army escaped.
And so Kościuszko became the chief engineer of the war and throughout the American Revolutionary War, he built fortifications, was promoted and decorated, and is, in fact, one of the main founders of West Point. Kościuszko became one of the heroes of the American War of Independence and today streets, buildings, and hills in the United States are named after him. He is also the patron of the West Point.
I just didn't like how they attributed this to Jamie, while Kosciuszko did it in real life, and since they put him in the scene, they should have had Kościuszko say it. Because too many people today 'learn' history from tv like this, and later may think Kosciuszko didn't do what he actually DID. If you want to learn abt Koścouszko here is the link to the short video telling his story: ua-cam.com/video/9nqDgnKsf-8/v-deo.html
To me this is THE BEST season. I love all the new characters, and how close to the books the episodes are is a cherry on top!
i loved so much this episode, you are the best, this tv serie is the best, i feel every single feeling when hard choices has been taken
the story is so good, it can't stop with season 8.. :D its maybe potentially the best series out there. And it keeps getting better..
Nice episode but I strongly disliked one thing. I haven't read the books, so I don't know how it is in the book, but the creators of the series in this episode attributed to Jamie what the Polish general and engineer Tadeusz Kościuszko really did in real life. And I didn't like it since Kosciuszko is in that scene with Jamie when Jamie explains to the commander why the hill needs to be protected and armed.
I know that the creators of the series and Diana are playing with history in Outlander, but I don't know if I like that they attributed the merits of a real historical figure to her fictional character. Since Kosciuszko has been included in this scene and season 7 of the show, they should, according to historical truth, fully show that it was the Pole, whose idea was to arm Sugarloaf Hill. They could have come up with something else for Jamie.
Kościuszko came to the American Colonies already as an experienced soldier, because he commanded the uprising in Poland, then enslaved by Russia, Austria, and Germany. Kosciuszko joined the fight for the independence of the Americans Colonies and his first assignment was to advise on the defensive fortifications, among others, at Fort Ticonderoga. It was Kościuszko who recommended that the artillery battery be placed on Sugarloaf Hill, to protect it, yet the commanding general didn't take Kościuszko seriously.
Of course, what Kosciuszko predicted happened during the battle, and it was Kosciuszko who later built the brilliant floating log bridge over which the Continental Army escaped.
Kościuszko became the chief engineer of the war and throughout the American Revolutionary War, he built fortifications, was promoted and decorated, and is, in fact, one of the main founders of West Point. Kościuszko became one of the heroes of the American War of Independence and today streets, buildings, and hills in the United States are named after him. He is also the patron of the West Point.
I just didn't like how they attributed this to Jamie, while Kosciuszko did it in real life, and since they put him on the show and in the scene, they should have had Kościuszko say it. Because too many people today 'learn' history from tv like this, and later may think Kosciuszko didn't do anything special while he, in fact, said that the hill should be protected by artillery, and he is the hero of the American Revolution. If you want to learn abt Koścouszko here is the link to the short video telling his story: ua-cam.com/video/9nqDgnKsf-8/v-deo.html
You forgot Roger and the kids...
Yes! I loved the scene with Roger and Jem.
@Georgia7Pap Yes, it was a lovely scene there. Got a look at Jem's character and relationship with Roger.
I feel everything is moving so fast. Feels like not as much time and consideration as previous seasons. I understand that you want to get as much information out as possible because there is only one more season. I just wish it could be different. I'm going to miss Outlander after season 8. Thank God I'll have the DVD's.😍
"I don't know if we've ever really seen Jamie Fraser have to follow." Tracey Deer (Director)
Are you kidding me?!? How about the entire first season when Jamie had to "follow" Dougal MacKenzie!?! Of course we've seen Jamie have to follow. Read up on the series Ms Director. SMH
Can't say Fraser properly, either. How is that possible working on the show?
@@onesixteenth 🤣🤣🤣
I started yelling "that's not true! that's not true!" because all I could think of was the men around the bonnie prince and how Jamie had to deal with all of that too.
While that's true, he was still young then. We haven't seen him have to follow after so many years in a leadership role. Relearning how to follow when older is a different thing. Not sure that's what the director meant, but it's a way to look at the story.
@@checksanity You're reading a lot into a simple statement from the director.
I responded directly to her actual statement. Ever heard the statement/phrase KISS? And before you try to respond, I'll make if obvious to you... that was a rhetorical question.
Não assisti a 7 temporada foi retirada da netflix
I liked how we didn't spent most of the ep in the near present with Brie/Roger. Those eps feel to soap opera imho. I wish we got more time at the fort to be honest as they built up to it and then it felt like we rushed through it?
Tout d'abord Strarz, je trouve que vous ne prenez pas assez en considération les publics autres que américains ou canadiens anglophones.
Beaucoup de fans européens ou sud américains aimeraient avoir accès à des sous-titres afin de profiter de vos "teaser".
Ensuite, je comprends que vous parliez de saison "massive" en effet, le fil de la narration n'existe plus et les personnages s'agitent frénétiquement sans que les non-lecteurs des romans comprennent pourquoi. Par exemple la mission de William dans ce marais. Il est interpellé par on ne trop qui pour aller porter un courrier à on ne sait trop qui.
De même Jamie est interpellé par un individu qui le réquisitionne pour aller se battre et l'instant d'après on le voit marchant sur un sentier apparemment en direction de Ticonderoga.
De même Ian découvre tout à coup son fils, alors qu'en fait la ressemblance n'apparaîtra que plus tard dans la saga.
Bref, les actions s'enchaînent à toute allure, donnant une impression de bouclage précipité.
Malgré cela je reste une fan de la série et j'espère de tout cœur que nous n'aurons pas droit à une fin dans le style
"Game Of Trône" ce serait tellement dommage.
Irks me that the director said "Frasier" and not "Fraser."
😢 at some point Jamie is going to switch to the British side. He's said several times he will never fight against family on the battlefield again. In the previews for this season Jamie & Claire are running towards each other from different sides. He's going to go to the British side to protect William.
❤ the Rachel-Ian-William love triangle is obviously coming
👻 I'm starting to think Buck is not the person haunting Lallybroch. Have we all forgotten the Irish snuggle was buried right where the rubbish was?
have you forgot Jamie can leave his body when he sleeps even though they haven't just said it yet? promise you the kids are seeing there grandfather in spirit
Nope
she probably got separated/kidnapped at some point, again
Pena não ser traduzido. Legendado.
This was a good episode, but it's moving forward too fast; i know that s7 was thought to be the last.
Its almost too much to digest 2 books in 1 season. We should have had 2 more seasons to get together everything to process
Jaime's more of a leader by nature, but grew up in the shadows of Dougal and Collum. He knows how to follow, but be an independent thinker. He's wise enough to know the difference. And, knows when to be what he needs to be, and do.
William needs to understand what he wants for honor and what's up with the real world, but it's so complicated. He's in for a huge awakening of many different ways.
Charles is the best for his role. He could pass for Jaime's real son with Geneva. She was such a conniving bitch in entrapment.
It's good to see the development in B&R relationship together and as parents. The best quotes from Bree is the Penis and knickers comments. Underwear has to be s foreign concept after hoing commando for all the 1700s years.
I didn't like that military stuff that was all made up you took away the ship stuff and now you have to make up stuff
I hope this show doesn't involve with any activist's stuff because I love this show and the books so much. Just mentioning that more seasons pass, the more I feel sort of women's are the hero vibe and their husbands just being weak. Some women just wants to be feminine and support for their significant others and why is that kind of set as wrong in this society... I think Roger is the best example of men from current era though, and Richard does the perfect representation of that acting very well and I loved that this show decided to include Roger had struggle with Bree's career success. I'm not saying that current men or women should be weak. I just think that the current society and all the activists stuff making a lot of man's life difficult.
What do you mean by "activist's stuff" exactly?
How do strong "hero" women make men weak? How exactly are the husbands being shown as weak?
Jamie isn't "weak", nor is Roger or Fergus. If anything, having strong women, shows how much stronger the men are, no? The show repeatedly demonstrates the give and take of partnership in the main romantic relationships. Roger has been an example of showing the bumps of learning to adapt to the times. He had a similar storyline in season 5 of figuring out what his calling was, but also how to provide for his family. What that looked like in the 18th century is different than in the 20th.
Also, all of the women on the show are feminine and support their partners. The fact that they can do that *and* follow their interests outside of the home/family isn't unusual and yet it seems to be difficult for some people to wrap their mind around. The underlying thought for those people seems to be the belief that "women couldn't possibly because they're weak(er)" or they shouldn't because of some religious reasoning. Regardless, even though there are some women who prefer to focus entirely on homemaking, that doesn't mean *all* or even *most* women want that, yet historically the entire gender has been limited to that. It's made women's lives difficult, as well as men's, because it also limits men. Would Roger be having as much difficulty with Bree's career success, if it was socially/culturally acceptable in the 70s to choose being a stay-at-home father?
Pretty sure youre watching the wrong show. Claire doesnt want to be anything like that. Also VERY sure shes amd activist.
@@checksanity I actually agree with a lot of things that you are saying. Like the other person, I love the book version. In fact I've been trying to understand the show version to make sense in my mind even though some of the lines have been totally changed. I was only saying that because most of the current modern shows (even the period drama like Bridgerton) seems like they have to put trans, feminism, historically inaccurate nationality casts in the shows and movies because of the activists which I think it's ridiculous. Although, one of the reasons I love about the show has been more period accurate than other shows. I want them to keep doing what they have been doing in earlier seasons.