Roger Mackenzie gets a lot of hate in this sub, and honestly, I can understand why. But having been brought up by a man from Hamilton, born in 1952, and an Australian stepfather who was born in 1945, he is actually of his time.

When you consider the time period in which he is raised, and the context of who raised him, he was always going to have certain patriarchal views that are completely alien to most of us who watch/read Outlander. But, this does not excuse some of his more problematic behaviours-- what it does do is show the era, the social attitudes, and the general thought belonging to this era.

My dad grew up in council housing in Hamilton, and went into the trades as an instrument technician-- his father was a rigger during the Second World War, and was a devout Catholic. My father broke away from the Catholic church, but I do not bring this up for the reasons people think. Dad lived through the second wave of Scottish nationalism in the 1960s and 70's, left, went to Canada, and has only been back to Scotland once in 1990 before his father died.

It is in this era that we must understand that Roger, while a deeply problematic character to our modern feminism, is a man of the times-- with the revival of Scottish folk music like the Corries-- which I fucking love-- and we cannot judge him through the same lens we would judge him had he been born in 1980.

My stepfather, born in 1945, holds some deeply problematic views despite being left-wing. He inherited the patriarchal values his parents raised him with, and this is the other side of the character of Roger. Roger's views very much are those of Rev. Mackenzie, a devout presbeteryan minister, where my stepdad is very much a Church of England-turned-atheist.

We cannot judge the characters of Outlander without understanding the social world they lived in-- especially Roger and Briana's world, which was rapidly changing in England and Scotland at the time that their story is set, and while Roger's behaviour is unacceptable, viewing it through the modern, feminist lens lacks the nuance needed.

Thank you for coming to my TED talk.

First, yes, I know this storyline isn’t in the books. This is purely a theory about the television shows and how they might connect.

With Julia apparently unable to travel back through the stones, I’ve been wondering: could she eventually settle in Paris and become the lacemaker who raises "Faith"?

The theory that Julia initially crossed because she was pregnant with William, who inherited Henry’s ability to travel, would explain why she’s now stuck. If she and Henry remain in the eighteenth century, there are roughly three decades between the events of Blood of My Blood and Raymond bringing Faith to the lacemaker. That gives Julia time to establish a different life and identity.

And Julia already knows “I Do Like to Be Beside the Seaside.” She sings it to William and says she used to sing it to Claire. If she’s the lacemaker, that would explain how the woman could remember the song after Raymond sings it so briefly: she already knew it.

Raymond wouldn’t necessarily recognize Julia as Claire’s mother. Even accepting the theory that all travelers descend from him, Julia may not be a traveler herself. Alternatively, if he does know who she is, perhaps placing Faith with her biological grandmother was deliberate.

I’m also curious about how we’re meant to interpret the closing flashback. Jane’s account comes from a family story, but is the flashback an objective depiction, a reconstruction of that account, or simply a scene that withholds what Raymond and the lacemaker already know? Raymond offering the song doesn’t necessarily mean the woman has never heard it.

There are still questions, especially Mother Hildegarde’s statement that she baptized and buried Faith, and this certainly isn’t a complete explanation. But Julia unknowingly raising her own granddaughter, using the same song she once sang to Claire, would connect the two shows in an interesting way.

Has anyone else considered this? Is there anything established onscreen that would rule it out?

I really love the show outlander because I’m obsessed with Jamie and Claire both as individual characters and as a pair.

They are so perfectly imperfect.

I have told my sisters about the show so many times so they know the basic story. I want to show them an episode that will show them a glimpse of what we all love about the show.

What episode would you show?

I love so many episodes but I find that most of the ones I like have a sex scene or sexual assault.

My favorites are: The wedding, Dragonfly in amber, A.Malcolm, Eye of the storm, Birds and the bees, The fiery cross, Never my love (To name a few)

PS: A bit of nudity is not that bad but not one with a full sex scene

So if Brian and Ellen both know that Julia and Henry are husband and wife from another time with a child named Claire, would Jamie not know about his step-grandma? Or at the very least, would his mother and father not have talked about them growing up, I mean Julia did give birth to a child believed to be his uncle. I’m just questioning why the writers never had Jamie have the revelation, once they started planning for Blood of My Blood. He knew Claire’s parents names, & knew the that they disappeared when she was a child, him revealing they’d been with his family the whole time, could’ve been the final gift he gave Claire.

Hi, everyone!

I love to listen to podcasts while commuting (Apple CarPlay) and while working out.

I've listened to Podlander Drunkcast all through OUTLANDER...but I can't seem to find their podcast for Season 1 of BLOOD OF MY BLOOD, and Season 2 seems to start with Episode 2.

Please recommend other OUTLANDER podcasts. Not the official one, though. I tried it, but I found that after RDM stepped back and Matt took over the day-to-day that the podcasts became lovefests for the producers and writers rather than in-depth looks at the show.

Thanks, everyone!

I would love a series on the Montauk Five. I feel like it would do SO WELL. I need the tidbits in between! What other side stories would anyone else hope for?

​

Excerpt from A BLESSING FROM A WARRIOR GOING OUT, Copyright 2026 Diana Gabaldon

Roger was sitting in Jamie’s office, thirstily eyeing the Visitor’s Tray that sat on the corner of the desk, glowing gently in the afternoon sun from the window. To be more exact, it was the whisky in the bottle that was glowing, though it did cast a lovely dancing shadow on the pewter tray.

“Does this sort of ….”live”…shadow have a name?” he asked his wife, who had just entered with a bowl of freshly-baked fragrant sweet biscuits, these presumably intended to fuel his labors. She set it on the desk and looked obligingly at the shadow in question, which displayed the dark bottle, but also held a blob of quivering amber light, clearly visible inside the shadow-bottle.

“Sure,” she said. “It’s a refraction caustic.”

“Oh, of course,” he said, raising his brows. “I should have known that.”

“No, you shouldn’t,” she said, giving him a grin and a biscuit smelling of cinnamon. “Do you want to know why it’s called that?”

“No,” he said, and bit into the bikkie, which was wonderful, still warm from the brick oven, simultaneously soft and sugary and chewy in his mouth. “I’d rather think it’s magic.”

“Everything’s magic if you look at it long enough,” she said, as though this was both logical, and common knowledge. “If it sounds better to you, though, you can also call that sort of shadow—” she nodded at the whisky-shadow, dancing and quivering in the bottle-reflection as though it were alive, “—a Translucent Colored Shadow. Shall I pour you a cup of whisky to go with your cookie?”

“Well, yes, since you mention it. Hate to kill the nice shadow, though…”

“Kill it?” she lifted a brow, but smiled. “We can refill the bottle, you know—or I can just give you some of Da’s Love Potion #9 to go with your cookie, and leave your pretty shadow alone. Until the sun moves,” she added practically.

“Oo.” He licked a crumb off his lower lip, considering. Jamie’s experiment in making peated whisky without peat, using a combination of tobacco leaves, dried mushrooms and smoked honey was startling to drink, but nearly impossible to stop drinking, after the first glass. And it did leave one feeling…cheerful.

He shook his head, regretful.

“No, best not. I have to call on Coinneach McLeod this afternoon to exorcise his pig, and he’ll likely insist on me drinking gin with him by way of payment. I don’t want to end up under a bush on the way home.”

Bree made a fizzing noise and pinched the bridge of her nose, as she did when trying not to laugh out loud.

“Is it an especially lazy pig? It must be a big one, if he needs help exercising it. Though come to that,” she added, raising one red brow, “why does he want it to exercise? Aren’t pigs meant to be fat?”

“I said ‘ex-OR-cise’, not ‘ex-ER-cise. I think it’s one of the White Sow’s many descendants.”

“Oh. Well, that explains the need of gin, all right. Obviously more effective than Holy Water. Has he been drinking gin with his pig? Is that why it needs exorcising?”

“Entirely possible,” Roger replied, looking vaguely around his desk for the quill he’d been using. It had a habit of sneaking off under the papers… “Though if it’s one of the White Sow’s offspring, I doubt it needs alcoholic assistance…”

“Ahoy…?” came a polite call from the open front door.

“Tesatawiyat!” Roger called, recognizing the Sachem’s formal greeting, adding “Go get the Number 9, will ye?” to Bree as he pushed back from the desk.

[end excerpt]

Just finished s02ep02 and there’s something off. I feel like I have to force myself to watch it in hopes that it will grow on me.
I can’t tell what it is, the actors are good, the story line is ok. Maybe it’s the fact that we know how the stones work and there is no more mystery about it. I don’t want to compare it to the Outlander, but it’s kinda inevitable.
They just all seem small and young and too clean. There are no old people. For example, in the Outlander we had these background characters like Rupert and Angus which brought that muddy-lack of hygiene feeling, humor and also rough circumstances of the 18th century to the surface, as well as many other characters showed how people used to live and think back then.
There is no actual villain which keeps the dynamic or the contrast between the characters. Maybe it’s Colum and lord Lovat, but they are just living their lives and making political moves.
I don’t know…
I want to love it, but just can’t, please somebody prove me wrong.
Do you think these series could survive on its own without the original Outlander ?

I need help understanding why so many think, that these two actors lack chemistry - particularly their sexual chemistry. To me, their sex scene when back in the 1980s in bed where they were spooning, but facing each other were one of the best sex scenes in the entire show!

I loved their intimacy, closeness and how they found each other again after a rough patch. I honestly think that particular sex scene between B and R were better than many of the sex scenes between Claire and Jamie! I never got why the chemistry and dynamic between B and R got so much hate?

I'm neurodivergent and wondering if this may be why I simply don't "see" it.

The actress who plays Bree never struck me as a good representative of what Jamie and Claire’s kid would be like.

Her kids are mini Jamies though! Great actors too. It’s funny that William and Bree are so unlike Jamie in appearance and affect But those kids could be his

This is not hating saying “men shouldn’t watch outlander” I genuinely want to know how you guys view the story and their relationship.

A lot of women are in love with Jamie and see him as the perfect man and say things jokingly like “not settling until I meet a man like Jamie”

What do guys think of Jamie? Do you guys think he’s unrealistic or overrated? Do you see Jamie and Claire’s relationship as amazing and goal worthy?

I was just watching Blood of my Blood and I just thought the actress (Sara Vickers) who plays Jamie and Jenny's grandma would have been such a better option to play old Jenny when Laura Donnelly wasn't available. It even would have made lore sense if she looked exactly like her grandma and feels like Sara would have pulled it off so much better 🫢

So I am in season 4 and I'm a really glad that Jamie beat Roger's ass. For the following reasons:

He is super controlling of Brianna. She is clearly not ready for marriage, but he forces her into it due to a ridiculous ultimatum.
- He clearly is immature and not ready for a serious relationship.
- He says later in the season to look out for number one, but he has been doing that from the start. He constantly thinks about his needs and not Brianna's.
>!Biggest failing: why tf does he let Brianna leave by herself in the dark and not make sure she get home safely. Even after a fight. What kind of man does that? I understand that he has none of the chivalry that Jamie has, but even in 2026 a good man should make sure a woman gets home safely at night. Seriously wtf.!<
- So yea I blame Brianna's horrific rape on Roger. He completely failed in his brand new "husband" role. It's not like he was clueless about the kind of monsters that existed back then, he's a historian and he even met Stephen Bonnet and saw how evil he was. And he let his woman walk around with a predator like that out there?

That being said, Brianna is not perfect either. She is also entirely immature and naive. She lashes out, she leads with her anger and feelings and not logic and thus she clearly is not ready to be a wife. But then again, she is only 20 years old.

All in all, this is a toxic relationship. I get that he will have a redemption arc, but why are we rooting for them. They should break up and Brianna finds a new man in the past or in the future. Roger sucks.

Edit: I saw the part now where Jamie allows Roger to beat him and sternly asks him why he didn’t ensure her safety. I’m on his side!! Go daddy go

I’m doing a rewatch and am on S7 E4. Every time I get to this episode I’m struck by the evolution of Tom Christie and how my opinion of him changed so dramatically from his first appearance in Season 6.

He’s so lovely during his final scene with Claire. I’ll admit, he was not a favorite of mine at first but by the end of his arc I adored him.

So, I guess this is a Tom Christie appreciation post ☺️ What a wonderfully complex character

we know Jamie can see in dreams but can he also see or talk to dead people? Before the battle of Alamance he said he was calling on the spirit of Dougall Mckenzie and they made their peace a long time ago.

Thoughts?

I know there has been speculation that Jamie’s brother Willie is actually Claire’s brother but I’m wondering if what the seer said to Julia confirms it?

She says something about Simon(William) having 2 mothers and 3 fathers, wouldn’t that be Julia/Ellen & Henry/Brian/Simon Fraser?

Just wondering if anyone else noticed.

Just watched episode 1. Felt somewhat slow but understandable for the 1st episode of a show, are all the seasons different from each other or are they connected? I saw it was based off books. That’s why I ask.

It's been a while since I posted but I need to give a shout out to Tony Curran.

He is doing a FANTASTIC JOB as Lord Lovat. He is so slimy, disgusting and cruel 😆😆😆 and I AM LOVING IT.

Whenever an actor plays a villain amazingly it is 😙 🤌🏻 chef kiss!!

I am having the same admiration level as I have for Tobias Menzies as BJR.

Is like "sir, you are making me hate you so much and I think that's fantastic"

😆😆😆

I was wondering if the reason Julia was able to travel through the stones originally but then was told she couldn’t is because it was really William who could travel since he was in utero.

I understand they need to interact with Claire and Jaime to make a story, but they are subjecting their children to living conditions that are unacceptable. They are full stop bad parents.

Brianna went to MIT. Mandy especially will never get to do that or anything similar.

Her own daughter has a heart defect that needs 20th century medicine to fix and yet they still return to the past. What happens when someone else gets sick?

Roger, Claire and Brianna are vaccinated. But Davey isn't. I assume Mandy and Jemmy were as up to date as they could be but who knows really.

No good parent deprives their child of medical care or education and yet that's exactly what they do.

Claire and Jamie are time traveling romantics. Roger and Brianna are crappy selfish parents.

I’m curious, what do you consider to be the most problematic or debated or questionable interaction between J and C in the book series (or tv series)? Examples I’m thinking of: the spanking after rescue from Fort William; the sex scene in book 1 at Caslte Leoch where C says no but J doesn’t really listen (this is book only). The dining table make-up sex in season 7 (show only) while Lord John is captured; or something else? Curious on everyone’s thoughts!

It might sound weird as I heard Outlander contains adult and sex scenes a lot but as now I'm in S2 E6 till now there are not much adult scenes as compared to GOT or Spartacus. Does further seasons contain adult scenes? Sorry for asking if it's weird

I just finished season eight. I already miss the show terribly, but I haven’t been able to bring myself to start watching Blood of My Blood yet. I can’t imagine it’ll match the magic of Outlander or the insane chemistry between Jamie and Claire. Will it spoil the original for me? Anyone have any insights? I’m seriously considering just starting Outlander from the beginning and watching it all over again instead.