PTSD and Mal. Really?

POSTED BY: Bytemite
UPDATED: Monday, January 27, 2020 20:08
VIEWED: 36442
PAGE 8 of 12

PREV PAGE 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 NEXT PAGE

AGENTROUKA

Monday, March 23, 2009 10:04 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by mal4prez:
I still don't know if I'd say that's due to war damage or an unhealthy attachment to Mal. Like, if the Independents had won, or at least lost in a less ugly way, would she be into settling at a wholesome homestead somewhere? Would she not be close to Mal? Or is it just her nature to want to be near the action? (I mean the action of the jobs on Serenity, not the action of Mal LOL!)

Oh, but you assume that the trauma of defeat at the end would be to blame for their PTSD in the first place. I think it's the war in its entirety, because it was such a brutal and ugly war all the way through. (Where IS Zoe's family, anyway? Dead, likely.) I think you are right in assuming that the seeds for Zoe's behavior pobably lie in her childhood, but I believe that the unhealthy degree to which she takes it are due to war damage, and that even in the case of a victory, she would have had greater issues connecting to people and letting go of Mal than she would have without the war.

Quote:

I guess I like the challenge of her unusual relationship with Mal, and I balk at writing it off as unhealthy. If the character of Zoe was the same loyal second-in-command but male, would this be such an issue? (This is not meant to be a rhetorical question - I'd need to think a lot before I decided one way or another myself.)

Oh, it'd definitely be an issue for me! The same way Mal and Inara's conflict about her job is a big issue for me. If Zoe was a guy and in a gay marriage with Wash, or with a female Wash, and their dynamics were the same, I'd be grumbling about the guy who expects his woman to live her life in second place after his overt attachment to his war past, asking her to have children on a boat she thinks is too dangerous for that life.

Quote:

Also, I know she has options besides going to the Core (back East in the Wild West analogy) but I don't think any of those options are safe. Maybe safer than straight up doing crime, but on the Rim there's always slavers and hill people and crooked lawmen and gangsters like Niska around. Serenity could be one of the safest places for her.

That's only the places we've seen because the crew has criminal business there. They wouldn't exactly represent the average solid settlement. I don't claim the Rim is a happy suburb, nor would Zoe be happy in one, but there have to be places that are comparatively safer for a toddler than a rusty ship with regular violence and crime, danger of law enforcement, crazy mobsters and just plain disrepair. To claim Serenity would be safer is a bit of an optimistic stretch.

Quote:
You know, if the crew stuck to the bobbly-headed doll capers.

But with Simon and River on board, how likely is that? Zoe makes zero mention of changing this lifestyle to reassure Wash, which would have been the most effective way to try and get him further onto her side. Why not, if this is what she's considering? We also don't know how well the doll-capers pay, comparatively. Considering how she crew is doing without Ambassador Inara to sink to the point where they are in the beginning of the movie, it stands to question how easy the legitimate jobs really are to come by.

RALLEM

Monday, March 23, 2009 12:59 PM

Quote:

But with Simon and River on board, how likely is that? Zoe makes zero mention of changing this lifestyle to reassure Wash, which would have been the most effective way to try and get him further onto her side. Why not, if this is what she's considering? We also don't know how well the doll-capers pay, comparatively. Considering how she crew is doing without Ambassador Inara to sink to the point where they are in the beginning of the movie, it stands to question how easy the legitimate jobs really are to come by.

Why would Zoë reassure Wash about changing their lifestyle? I believe Wash is a pilot and must love doing what he does. I think his excuse at not having children was not a comment on their lifestyle, but rather on the idea of having children. With this said I think the Zoë is not a sufferer of PTSD because she does have the desire to move on and have a family and is working towards that goal. Mal on the other hand is still lost in the woods, and perhaps it’s Zoë’s sense of loyalty which keeps her on board the ship so she can get him out of the woods. In BDM she mentions that in time of war they would never leave a man behind, and Mal responded that may have been why they lost. Maybe that comment stung Zoë’s sensibility about her purpose on Serenity.

http://www.swyzzlestyx.com/index.html

AGENTROUKA

Monday, March 23, 2009 1:36 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by rallem:
[B]
Why would Zoë reassure Wash about changing their lifestyle? I believe Wash is a pilot and must love doing what he does. I think his excuse at not having children was not a comment on their lifestyle, but rather on the idea of having children.

Well, let's look at the dialogue and judge again.

Quote taken from here: http://www.twiztv.com/scripts/firefly/season1/firefly-113.htm

WASH
All I'm saying is we're living pretty deep in the rough and tumble, and I don't see that changing any time soon.

ZOE
Nor do I.

WASH
Well, I'm not sure now is the best time to bring a tiny little helpless person into our lives.

ZOE
That excuse is getting a little worn, honey.

WASH
It's not an excuse, dear. It's objective assessment. I can't help it
if it stays relevant.

ZOE
I don't give a good gorram about relevant, Wash. Or objective. And I'm not so afraid of losing something that I won't try havin' it. You and I would make one beautiful baby. I want to meet that child one day. Period.

Wash is arguing about nothing BUT their lifestyle and Zoe's disregard of his opinion is actually worse than I remember. It's a nice soundbite ("I'm not so afraid of losing something I don't try having it") but if you approach parenthood with the attitude of "I don't care about anything that might imply changing anything about my life", then you're. not. ready.

Quote:

With this said I think the Zoë is not a sufferer of PTSD because she does have the desire to move on and have a family and is working towards that goal.

Working how? She married a great guy - decent first step. But that's where her "working" stops. Which shows a pretty substantial disconnect from her plans and wishes and her ability/willingness to actually work toward them. Which is one of the things prompting suspicion of PTSD.

BYTEMITE

Monday, March 23, 2009 2:27 PM

Looking at Zoe after losing Wash and her chance for children with him may have some insight into this issue.

I can't imagine a scenario where Zoe could recover and heal from Wash's death while on Serenity. Too many memories. And I suspect she might hold onto that hurt as long as she could out of some kind of loyalty to Wash.

But I also doubt Zoe would leave Serenity to heal unless Mal asked her too. And she'd try to fight it.

I think, maybe, she might be clinging on to whatever threads she can to keep going on. After the war, Mal, Wash, and her hopes for a baby, those were her threads.

MAL4PREZ

Monday, March 23, 2009 3:33 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by rallem:
From what I wrote, did you think I was saying Ecstasy was a cause of PTSD?

"Are they now going to precribe Ectasy for victims of rape? Wouldn't that be a form of PTSD?"
I wasn't sure if that could have referred to the prescribing of E to rape victims, since the rest of your posts have been very anti-drug use. (Yes, I am that literal sometimes.

) I also didn't think you were asking about rape as a cause of PTSD because the article I linked to plainly discussed rape as a cause of PTSD, and I figured you'd read the article. You know, since you were commenting about it. (Yes, I'm also a smart ass sometimes.

)

"It was mentioned that in someone's opinion there was no difference from the recreational drugs and the prescribed drugs, but there are differences."

Whose opinion? I haven't seen that said on this thread. Did I miss it?

"Personally I think the doctors who are helping our young soldiers and other victims of PTSD deal with their trauma want the victims to not take any form of mind altering medicine so the patients would be lucid while trying to sort out their issues."

But doctors do give mind-altering medicines to PTSD patients. I think a point you’re overlooking is that prescribed drugs ARE mind altering. Alcohol is too, as are cigarettes, as are many kinds of food. Mind altering is a regular part of our lives, and sometimes a very healthy one. It's only a small minority that take it to the extent that you seem to be assuming, that of teenagers at raves or hippies the woods, tripping their brains out on anything they can find. I'm not talking about that. I never was.

The main difference between legal and illegal drugs, to me, is that legally prescribed drugs have a carefully controlled content. The patient knows exactly what’s in them, and the doctor can provide safety guidelines as to reactions with other drugs, side effects, etc. Legal drugs become illegal when the same substance is concentrated or mixed with other things, so that the control, the safety factor, is lost. But it's the same chemical. It alters the mind either way.

Anyhow, the article I posted mentioned some interesting bits about brain chemistry and the “cuddle chemical” oxytocin, which also came up in the article Katesfriend posted. Clearly, PTSD is a problem with the chemistry of the brain, and some studies are finding that chemical treatment helps. This may include chemicals currently tested and approved as well as those that aren't.

So, Rallem: keep an open mind my friend. If everyone refused to consider new kinds of treatments, we'd still be in the dark ages torturing sick people and wondering why they don't get better.

-----------------------------------------------
hmm-burble-blah, blah-blah-blah, take a left

MAL4PREZ

Monday, March 23, 2009 5:08 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AgentRouka:
Oh, but you assume that the trauma of defeat at the end would be to blame for their PTSD in the first place.

Not really. In fact, I've written some pretty damned traumatic events for her during the war. But I still see the effect on her as very different from Mal because of their upbringings. That’s not to say that Zoë has no damage, but I don’t see hers as being the driving force of her life, and I don’t see her taking her anti-socialness to as unhealthy a degree as Mal does. That may just because I view the baby situation so differently than you do. (More on that below.)

Quote:
If the character of Zoe was the same loyal second-in-command but male, would this be such an issue?
Quote:
Oh, it'd definitely be an issue for me! The same way Mal and Inara's conflict about her job is a big issue for me.

But what about Zoë’s attachment to Mal? Consider a man who loves being a Marine and wants nothing to do with civilian life. He wants his wife to move to a base in Japan (or wherever) because the Corps is his life and he wants to stay with his Regiment. Yes, he may be selfish, but would you say he’s *damaged*?

Setting aside the danger-to-baby issue for a moment, I see Zoë’s attachment to Mal in that light. She likes a military structure. She has to have things that way, similar to how a painter *needs* to paint or an explorer *needs* to climb Everest. Are these people selfish? Sure. Can they live without doing their thing? Absolutely. But, to them, living any other way would not be living. It would be hugely unselfish for you to move to India and serve the poor for the rest of your life, but would it be satisfying for you with your upbringing and your needs? Does it make you damaged that you choose to live your way instead?

Quote:
That's only the places we've seen because the crew has criminal business there.

I’ve interpreted the criminal element as being pretty much everywhere, because the crew so regularly encounters normal people trying to live normal lives but always having to carry guns and deal with outlaws. The local law has very little power and the Alliance isn’t interested, (Train Job) so it makes sense to me that crime and danger would be everywhere. Gels with Mal’s picture of life on the Rim, how settlers get dropped off with just a few supplies, and some of them make it. (Some of them.)

Quote:
But with Simon and River on board, how likely is that? Zoe makes zero mention of changing this lifestyle to reassure Wash, which would have been the most effective way to try and get him further onto her side.

No doubt, Zoë is selfish, but I think not in an uncommon way, nor in a way that has to be attributed to psychological war damage.

In the conversation you posted between Zoë and Wash, the way she dismissed his argument is, I think, not because she’s not considering his feelings, but because they’ve gone through it before. (“That excuse is getting a little worn, honey.”) And I think she has a point. How many people keep putting off a scary step because their situation isn’t perfect? Granted – “not perfect” for Wash and Zoe is pretty damned not perfect. But, again, their world is not our world.

The fact that Serenity has such a hard time finding jobs that are both legal and profitable is a pretty good argument for why it’s a better place for Zoe. How likely are she and Wash to find a legal and profitable job elsewhere? Not very, and then they’d be poor and stuck in one place, where I believe they’d be more easily victimized by the dregs of the Rim or sickened by things like Boden’s.

Yeah, I see that as their choice: stay on Serenity, or go look for a job in a mine that might end up killing them and their kids. Every option has risk. At least on Serenity she knows her risks, and has some control over them.

Wow, long post. Good thread! I haven't been this chatty about Firefly in a long time!

-----------------------------------------------
hmm-burble-blah, blah-blah-blah, take a left

BYTEMITE

Monday, March 23, 2009 5:27 PM

Ooh, I like that, if there's trauma to be found, keep it to whatever violence that bothers her, and whatever lifestyle choices she makes, leave 'em as lifestyle choices/upbringing.

>_> Can I steal that theory to use in my writtings? Pretty please?

EDIT: Something else occurs to me. the baby thing, as of HoG, is still in the argument/planning stages. I think Zoe is fully aware that there are issues she's going to have to confront on the path to having a baby. I mean, I don't she'd go ahead and have a baby without letting Mal know about it. Then there'd be fighting there, and she'd eventually have to reach a compromise with Mal AND Wash about issues of safety. I think that all she's trying to do, as of HoG, is to get Wash to consent to maybe having kids in the first place, and that they'll work out the hurdles together as they come up.

AGENTROUKA

Monday, March 23, 2009 6:22 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by mal4prez:
That’s not to say that Zoë has no damage, but I don’t see hers as being the driving force of her life, and I don’t see her taking her anti-socialness to as unhealthy a degree as Mal does. That may just because I view the baby situation so differently than you do. (More on that below.)

It's not just the baby situation that has me taking this view of Zoe, although it is the culmination. But, I guess, if you don't see it, I'm not going to try and convince you.

Quote:

Quote:
If the character of Zoe was the same loyal second-in-command but male, would this be such an issue?
Quote:
Oh, it'd definitely be an issue for me! The same way Mal and Inara's conflict about her job is a big issue for me.

But what about Zoë’s attachment to Mal? Consider a man who loves being a Marine and wants nothing to do with civilian life. He wants his wife to move to a base in Japan (or wherever) because the Corps is his life and he wants to stay with his Regiment. Yes, he may be selfish, but would you say he’s *damaged*?

It's not an attachment to a job, or profession, though, it's an attachment to a specific situation, a daily reenactment of a deeply stressful time with the person with whom she shared that time.

And if that marine would place his wife and children in danger to pursue this reenactment life, ask her to move to a volatile wilderness to have children there, then absolutely would I consider him damaged, because I'd be wondering where this disconnect between reality and wishful "want it all" came from.

Quote:

Setting aside the danger-to-baby issue for a moment, I see Zoë’s attachment to Mal in that light. She likes a military structure. She has to have things that way, similar to how a painter *needs* to paint or an explorer *needs* to climb Everest. Are these people selfish? Sure. Can they live without doing their thing? Absolutely. But, to them, living any other way would not be living. It would be hugely unselfish for you to move to India and serve the poor for the rest of your life, but would it be satisfying for you with your upbringing and your needs? Does it make you damaged that you choose to live your way instead?

I don't really think that these things are comparable, though, because your examples lack the quality of hanging on to a highly stressful and traumatic time.

If a person lost their entire family in a climbing accident and then continued to climb dangerous rocks every day, I'd say some damage, but whatever. If they packed their baby and dragged their only semi-skilled spouse along to climb dangerous rocks, I'd say serious damage.

Quote:

Quote:
That's only the places we've seen because the crew has criminal business there.
I’ve interpreted the criminal element as being pretty much everywhere, because the crew so regularly encounters normal people trying to live normal lives but always having to carry guns and deal with outlaws.

Regularly, normal people, really? I think there is probably a far wider spectrum of environments on even the Rim, than we have seen in those 14 episodes. I'm certain we've mainly seen the extreme end of lawlessness and poverty because those environments support the crime the crew do. Mal's example of Rim settlement could apply to recently terraformed places while ignoring an array of more established places because no one needs to drop people there.

Quote:

Quote:
But with Simon and River on board, how likely is that? Zoe makes zero mention of changing this lifestyle to reassure Wash, which would have been the most effective way to try and get him further onto her side.
No doubt, Zoë is selfish, but I think not in an uncommon way, nor in a way that has to be attributed to psychological war damage.

You could assume she has always been selfish and short-sighted, that she has always been wired to cling to another person's life choices to replicate a military structure instead of entertaining the thought of chan

AGENTROUKA

Monday, March 23, 2009 6:33 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:

I think Zoe is fully aware that there are issues she's going to have to confront on the path to having a baby. I mean, I don't she'd go ahead and have a baby without letting Mal know about it. Then there'd be fighting there, and she'd eventually have to reach a compromise with Mal AND Wash about issues of safety. I think that all she's trying to do, as of HoG, is to get Wash to consent to maybe having kids in the first place, and that they'll work out the hurdles together as they come up.

But she outright refutes the idea of change.

"I don't see things changing" "Not do I."

Plus the "I don't care about objective" thing.

None of this sounds like someone out to convince Wash of having a baby in general, or any thought to the realities of change involved.

If that was the point of the conversation, it would be completely different, methinks. Something like, "I know we would need to make changes, but.." instead of "you're making excuses, and I'll ignore them."

What about that conversation gives you the impression that Zoe is looking to compromise and work with Wash? I'm honestly a little confused.

MAL4PREZ

Monday, March 23, 2009 6:36 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
Ooh, I like that, if there's trauma to be found, keep it to whatever violence that bothers her, and whatever lifestyle choices she makes, leave 'em as lifestyle choices/upbringing.

>_> Can I steal that theory to use in my writtings? Pretty please?

Sure, especially since I'm not entirely sure what you mean LOL!

I agree re Zoe and Mal, btw. I don't see Zoe's stance to be: let's do it right now dammit! I think she's aware of the danger of the Tams situation and the need to talk to her boss about her maternity time and all that.

-----------------------------------------------
hmm-burble-blah, blah-blah-blah, take a left

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME