Would Zoe be a good mother?
POSTED BY: Bytemite
UPDATED: Sunday, December 11, 2011 16:00
VIEWED: 26237
PAGE 4 of 7
I was mostly bugged by the implication that if I don't make some babies or whatever that I'm as alive and human as the people who were afflicted by the Pax. Protip: pretty sure the non-Reavers died of thirst and starvation LONG before they died from not gettin' any sugar candy.
Simply put, humanity doesn't ALL have the drive to procreate, ergo, it is not universal or necessarily inherent, but rather a product of environment, opportunity, upbringing, chemical balance, and interest.
But anyway, MidWesterner is right in that my personal life is not the point of this discussion, regardless of whether or not I'm miffed by those comments.
I think they might get back together for one last job EVENTUALLY, after they've had enough time apart to develop the part of them that is not "one half of Mal and Zoe" and "stuck in the war with no way out."
After that job, they might retire to roughly the same world and hang out after work or on weekends. Until then, I think that time is crucial to both their development and also Zoe's chance to raise her child as fitting.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
To clarify...
I wasn't trying to bring your personal life to this thread, and you are entirely entitled to your own opinions.
My reference to the Pax was that it was mentioned by the researcher that they stopped procreating, tacitly identifying that as one of the biological drives that Pax over-rode. If it wasn't an issue, it wouldn't have been mentioned as an anomaly.
It had no context to you, at least I didn't intend to imply it. I am sorry if you inferred it.
But calling my comments hetero-centric in a negative connotation aroused my suspicion that your evaluation of Zoe's situation could be clouded by your own choices, not what we know about Zoe Washburne. I don't much care what your choices are, as long as you aren't trying to visit my intentions, either.
But a discussion about Zoe is about Zoe, not about your choices, or my choices.
BTW a biological drive doesn't need to be entirely without exception to still be very much true to fact. Extension of the species is a biological drive with ANY life form, and is part of the scientific DEFINITION of a life form. A choice to over-ride that biological drive is only possible in a sentient being where cognitive reason can over-ride innate behavior.
Over-riding a biological drive does not disprove said drive. Someone can fast, and decide not to eat, despite the drive for sustenance. Someone can hold their breath, despite the drive to aspirate. Someone can isolate themselves socially despite the drive to be social organisms, which humans are. Someone can choose to abstain from sexuality, despite the drive to procreate.
Zoe Washburne hasn't had children, but obviously made a comment about it being on her mind. The biological "clock" is a euphemism for the drive she is feeling the effects of.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
But calling my comments hetero-centric in a negative connotation aroused my suspicion that your evaluation of Zoe's situation could be clouded by your own choices, not what we know about Zoe Washburne. I don't much care what your choices are, as long as you aren't trying to visit my intentions, either.
Nah. I was just pointing out that the comment could be (and was) taken the wrong way by someone who is not straight, and therefore not able to conceive with their preferred partner (or lack thereof). I don't think you were even THINKING about that, which is why I called it "hetero-centric," as in the comment was made without an awareness of the non-hetero situation.
Quote:
Someone can choose to abstain from sexuality, despite the drive to procreate.
You still aren't quite accurate. In some people, either because of chemicals, hormones, fetal development, they actually LACK a libido. And then this is also still not quite accurate with homosexuality, because while they might pair up, obviously they can't procreate.
Because it's entirely optional and sometimes not even present, it's not at all remotely on the same level as the drive to eat, or sleep, or drink, or eliminate, or breathe. I wouldn't even call it a drive, I'd call it an inclination.
The difference between the pacified Pax victims versus the aggressive Reavers, well, it's kind of a dopamine and HPA axis thing. While, yes, I'm sure that Joss made his word choice for impact, Dr. Caron was also describing symptoms.
Quote:
Zoe Washburne hasn't had children, but obviously made a comment about it being on her mind. The biological "clock" is a euphemism for the drive she is feeling the effects of.
Okay. I never said she wasn't, and that's not what the conversation was about. The conversation was about her emotional stability in regards to her ability to properly care for the (inevitable) child and make objective choices for her child's welfare.
Ah, look. I posted this conversation not because I wanted people to agree with me about whether or not Zoe is fit at the moment for motherhood (she may or may not be, it depends on her choices), but because I was interested in what people thought. I'm not really arguing one way or another whether she'll leave.
Though I do think that it's unfeasible to have octogenarian Firefly. Eventually, they're all going to have to find something else.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
Fair enough, but to not procreate is not death, and also to say it is a drive for everyone IS generalizing, and untrue.
There are plenty of nonsexuals out there (they use the term asexual, but I dislike it for the reasons you give), I'm one of them.
Actually, in a macro sense... organisms that don't procreate... DO die. I spoke on biological drives already, lets move on to the next point.
Quote:
You shouldn't speculate about the motives of people you don't know. I'm fine with her having children and people having children. I don't particularly like kids, nor like stories about kids, but it's none of my business whether other people decide to procreate or not. I have no say, particularly in Zoe's case. It's been all but decided, I can deal with that storyline and event.
I agree about visiting people's intentions, and I am sorry if I intruded on your motives. I also spoke about that in a previous post.
Quote:
There isn't just one way to live this life, though there are more dangerous, tragic, and unfortunate ways to live this life. I'd hope the crew of Serenity don't have to live that, though this is a Joss Whedon story we're talking about.
Kaylee once told Simon: "What must you think of those who choose it? [this life]"
The point is that there are more than one way to live, it isn't just in an isolated colony, or living the high life on the core worlds... Living the life that the Serenity crew leads, is one option, and I don't live that way... but I can see some appeal in it, as well as some danger.
Being tied down to a house and a work place "in the world" rather than out in the black, has it's own issues, and even non-monetary costs.
Part of me can see how life on Serenity with a crew that look out for each other, which one can argue is a form of familial love, is a better life than some live by more traditional means.
Quote:
My issue with Zoe is about whether she's objective and emotionally whole enough to assess the dangers of her own life. When she has that conversation with Wash in Heart of Gold, she's not. I concede it might have been the heat of the moment, she was having an argument and not being entirely rational at the moment.
She shows a better sense of objective reality and responsibility later, in the comic books and movie.
I think she is more in tune with assessing danger, and knowing what is possible through dangerous situations than most.
Your opinion that she's not suited when she made those comments, I disagree with, and that is the pin-point of where I was wondering if you are ascribing your own thoughts as those of Zoe Washburne.
Wash was trying to be the counter-point, and his points were valid... but Zoe realized that there is more to it than circumstance, and that circumstances occur no matter where you are, or what you are doing. If you wait for circumstances to be just right, life will pass you by while you wait. She knows the fear of death, and is in touch with mortality. She knows about circumstance, and survival. What she has gotten past, is FEAR of those things.
Quote:Quote:
Out Of Gas seems to suggest that at least Mal is fine with living out his days doing what he is doing, and going his own way. And going down with the ship if that is what is what it takes.
It is NOT necessarily his PREFERRED option. I'd really have to recommend you read the supplemental material if you haven't. It'd be interesting what you might make of it.
Of course going down with the ship is ABSOLUTELY not Plan A. But it sure seemed like making sure that the shuttles weren't over-loaded, and that the others had the best chances of survival was on his mind... and that leaving serenity, possibly permanently as she was on the drift... was not something he felt the need to do, and that he had no where else he'd rather go, even to save his own life. That doesn't
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Actually, in a macro sense... organisms that don't procreate... DO die. I spoke on biological drives already, lets move on to the next point.
Yeah. They also eventually die if they DO procreate. The concepts are not correlated, unrelated, one has little to no impact on the other. Macro scale.
I'm willing to move on if you are.
Quote:
Being tied down to a house and a work place "in the world" rather than out in the black, has it's own issues, and even non-monetary costs.
True. On the other hand, there's also much safer options for spaceships lifestyles than a fifty year old Firefly that's been taken apart and put back together half a dozen times, and there's also safer jobs than what they do. Though, I admit having fugitives aboard does limit their options a little.
Quote:
which one can argue is a form of familial love, is a better life than some live by more traditional means.
Hmm. I don't disagree, but I might wonder if all of the crew would necessarily think that way. Some of them had a very traditional upbringing, and in Zoe's case (she was raised shipside) as much as anyone else, you do what you know.
That was a part of the argument between her and Wash over kids, two very different backgrounds.
Quote:
I think she is more in tune with assessing danger, and knowing what is possible through dangerous situations than most.
I think she's more likely to dismiss dangerous situations as "not dangerous." It's fairly common among veterans. Imagine Simon (or Wash's) reaction to a situation versus Zoe's reaction to a situation. One of the two is more desensitized to violence and danger.
Quote:
I disagree with, and that is the pin-point of where I was wondering if you are ascribing your own thoughts as those of Zoe Washburne.
Hey. What did I say about motives? We were going to leave that behind. What I am has NOTHING TO DO with the conversation we're having.
Quote:
Zoe realized that there is more to it than circumstance, and that circumstances occur no matter where you are, or what you are doing. If you wait for circumstances to be just right, life will pass you by while you wait.
True.
Quote:
She knows the fear of death, and is in touch with mortality. She knows about circumstance, and survival. What she has gotten past, is FEAR of those things.
Um. Not Good?
Consider this for a second. She is going to be a mother. The continuing life of her child is going to be foremost on her mind.
What does "not being afraid of death" imply? Her dying? The child dying? That's really, REALLY bad.
That's why when she was having that conversation with Wash, she was not showing sound judgment or reasoning.
She gets better later, and post movie, she might be emotionally ready. We'll have to see how it goes and what she does. Though I've seen some post movie stuff that brings up other concerns for me as well - she seems to consciously be trying to be safer, but on the other hand, she has some troubling expectations for her kid.
Quote:
Of course going down with the ship is ABSOLUTELY not Plan A.
Okay.
Quote:
But it sure seemed like making sure that the shuttles weren't over-loaded, and that the others had the best chances of survival was on his mind... and that leaving serenity, possibly permanently as she was on the drift... was not something he felt the need to do, and that he had no where else he'd rather go, even to save his own life.
He didn't have another option. There was nothing around they could go to before life support ran out. They were in the middle of nowhere in space. He figured they were all dead, he just wasn't saying it (except to Inara).
Quote:
That doesn't lead me to believe that he is just pining as he prepares for a quiet stationary retirement somewhere.
Like I said, you should read some of the supplemental material, it could go either way.
Quote:
No, safety of a child is not whimsy... but a child might not be any more safe on a world somewhere, without aNOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:Quote:
Actually, in a macro sense... organisms that don't procreate... DO die. I spoke on biological drives already, lets move on to the next point.
Yeah. They also eventually die if they DO procreate. The concepts are not correlated, unrelated, one has little to no impact on the other. Macro scale.
I'm willing to move on if you are.
Not quite yet, evidently, as you keep bringing up erroneous information.
You are still thinking on an individual level. Everything I have been talking about is the nature of biology on a MACRO scale, not individual.
An individual exception as a medical disorder, such as lack of libido due to brain chemistry, an infertility disorder, is an exception to the RULE of a biological drive, and a species perpetuating itself.
An exception is just an exception, it doesn't deny the existence of the rule at large.
The encyclopedic definition of biological life:
Quote:
Life, living matter and, as such, matter that shows certain attributes that include responsiveness, growth, metabolism, energy transformation, and reproduction.
Life is about more than one generation, inherently. Without a macro drive for reproduction, everything living is bound for quick extinction.
Quote:Quote:
Being tied down to a house and a work place "in the world" rather than out in the black, has it's own issues, and even non-monetary costs.
True. On the other hand, there's also much safer options for spaceships lifestyles than a fifty year old Firefly that's been taken apart and put back together half a dozen times, and there's also safer jobs than what they do. Though, I admit having fugitives aboard does limit their options a little.
I didn't say they would always have the same ship, or that the whole crew would stay on board until their dying day... It just seems like some of the characters are in the life that suits them, and I would include Zoe and Mal. It would take a lot for them to depart from that life, and I am not sure a child would be that impetus, rather than raising that child in the environment that they currently enjoy.
Quote:Quote:
I think she is more in tune with assessing danger, and knowing what is possible through dangerous situations than most.
I think she's more likely to dismiss dangerous situations as "not dangerous." It's fairly common among veterans. Imagine Simon (or Wash's) reaction to a situation versus Zoe's reaction to a situation. One of the two is more desensitized to violence and danger.
I don't think so. I think she knows exactly what danger she is capable of handling, where there might be traps, and what situations are un-tenable.
You don't survive a war by being a bad judge of strategy and tactics, or sizing up situations carelessly.
Quote:Quote:
I disagree with, and that is the pin-point of where I was wondering if you are ascribing your own thoughts as those of Zoe Washburne.
Hey. What did I say about motives? We were going to leave that behind. What I am has NOTHING TO DO with the conversation we're having.
I was just identifying the LOCATION of my previous point of contention, and identifying it as my ONLY previous point of contention. It was edification, not accusation.
You seem to be quick to take this quite personally.
Quote:Quote:
She knows the fear of death, and is in touch with mortality. She knows about circumstance, and survival. What she has gotten past, is FEAR of those things.
Um. Not Good?
Consider this for a second. She is going to be a mother. The continuing life of her child is going to be foremost on her mind.
What does "not being afraid of death" imply? Her dying? The child dying? That's really, REALLY bad.
That's why when she was having that conversation with Wash, she was not showing sound judgment or reasoning.
She gets better later, and post movie, she might be emotiNOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Life, living matter and, as such, matter that shows certain attributes that include responsiveness, growth, metabolism, energy transformation, and reproduction.
Life is about more than one generation, inherently. Without a macro drive for reproduction, everything living is bound for quick extinction.
You have to remember that our conception of life is rather anthropocentric (also individualistic). There may be organisms out there who are effectively immortal. There may be a species of automatons out there with artificial intelligence and sapience that were made by a squishy creator race. There might be colony organisms that are constantly dying off, but because their cells are always dividing, they're effectively immortal. There might be a hive mind species where the loss of an individual is no more a concern than the loss of a cell. We may someday repair the flaw in transcriptase that causes humans to age.
And lastly, on a chemical level, matter is conserved. You die, but your components are broken down and remade into something else.
So basically, scientists themselves have no idea how to define life. They argue over it quite a bit.
Opposition: I give you viruses. And from a fictional perspective, elves.
Discuss.
Quote:
It just seems like some of the characters are in the life that suits them, and I would include Zoe and Mal. It would take a lot for them to depart from that life
Like a bullet.
Sorry.
I dunno. I just think that there's a such thing as unacceptable risk. We might have fun watching things constantly get worse on a television show or in a movie, but ultimately I can't really agree their lives suit them because I really think they're going to get themselves killed at the rate they're going.
Quote:
I think she knows exactly what danger she is capable of handling, where there might be traps, and what situations are un-tenable.
You don't survive a war by being a bad judge of strategy and tactics, or sizing up situations carelessly.
You don't survive civilian life by constantly seeing it as (or making it into) a battle situation, either.
There's alternatives, really.
Quote:
Knowing death, and fearing it analogous to respecting it and actively, tactically avoid it, which she does expertly, is one thing.
But they haven't. Two of their crew have died, because they've gotten into situations that were too dangerous to expect survival.
Quote:
I think that clear-headedness in the face of danger makes her a more effective protector, not a more reckless person, nor a more panicky person.
Perhaps. But it also makes her more inclined to walk into a situation, sure she'll survive, then to avoid it entirely.
Quote:
The shuttles were going further than Serenity
But still not really close enough to anywhere they could land or be picked up. They all knew they were probably going to die. The shuttles don't have a system to regenerate carbon dioxide back into oxygen. They have a store of oxygen on board, and fuel, but they're only short range shuttles and would run out as well. At best, if they hadn't gone back to Serenity, Mal gave them an extra day to live. And as it explicitly said in the episode, that still wasn't enough time for them to reach any kind of safety.
The other ship happening to be out there was lucky, and not something any of them expected.
Mal stayed behind for all those reasons you said, but again, that doesn't suggest it's because he'd rather go down with his ship than anything else. He simply didn't have any other options.
Quote:
she's still there. That would have been a window for her to leave.
And as I said, she was helping them fix the ship and get emotionally back on their feet. We don't know that she'll stay.
Quote:
But rest assured, Mal and Zoe are happier to keep flying than they were during the week they spent starving on the battle-field.
That's not exactly a high bar, which is kind of my point. Yeah, of course it's better than dyin
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Reavers could have hit them at almost any time, and likely done a whole lot more damage than killing Wash, if they came up unexpectedly. Zoe talked about the order in which the Reavers operate, if they're very, very lucky.
Reavers could have hit them if they lived in a settlement, like the one they were robbing at the beginning of the movie. The broad wave in the bar said that the whole settlement was wiped out, except for some people that MAL put in the vault, because he had the presence of mind to react quickly, and not freeze up.
The Operative is responsible for Book's death, and everyone at Haven, and every one of their contacts. They protected River, as they would protect any of their crew, a child of a crew-member included. They went back for Simon and River like "Big Damn Heroes", before that, too.
And Mal made it clear that the issue that was burning up River Tam's brain, and bringing an operative up against them, was worth dying for, several times, and gave them an out before they left Haven. Zoe was appalled at turning their "home" into an abomination... to make a suicide run, then. If she had a kid in tow, she very well may have stayed behind on Haven rather than making that run.
If the whole outer rim of the 'verse is rough... and there is always an Operative, or a Rance Burgess, or some other thing acting the threat, would you not prefer to stick with people who will go to the mat for you, and your child?
And she said, she isn't so afraid of those circumstances so not to have the child she wants some day.
And being on the drift with a busted ship doesn't do anybody any good for getting their share of the next job. Expenses before profits. That may seem callous to the people wanting to get paid... but a repeat of the situation from "Out of Gas" would be a bad thing... and you have to buy parts when you can, before they break. Kaylee waited on that part for months, before it broke, and put everyone's life at risk. People can get by eating a little less and conserving a little more. IF the ship breaks again, it is a much more fundamental problem.
I am not sure we're ever going to convince each other... but the discussion makes for an interesting day.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Well, some quick points. Blue Sun is in a part of the system far from the core. Reavers have only been confirmed to hit planets in the Blue Sun system and one time in the Georgia system (nearest to the Blue Sun system), around Whitefall. The other three systems so far are pretty safe, excepting the usual humanity and riff raff.
The Operative is responsible, yes, but choices they made put them on that path. Things could have easily been averted. They were actually rich not once but TWICE between the series and and the movie, well enough they could have retired and bought their own moons. In that case a busted ship doesn't really come up, but Mal decided to go for a bunch of improvements and remodeling instead, and the other time they had less of a choice but they still ended up having to lose it all. So except for Book and Inara they were all still on the ship when things went downhill, and it conceivably could have gone another way.
Though to be fair Book and Inara weren't on the ship, but dragged into it anyway by mere association. But then again, the rest of the crew might not have been IN the bar to have River see the subliminal message and reveal herself if they'd played their cards right.
It's a tragedy. And good dramatic tension. And a tragedy.
But yeah, it has been good talking. Sorry if I was a little too confrontational earlier.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Still seeing both sides of the Zoe debate, is it better to raise a child on Serenity or off it? I think that the only thing that would potentially prepel Zoe to settle on a planet is the fact that Wash died. If Wash was still alive I have no doubt that they would have stayed, at least for a while, on Serenity. But with Wash['s death Zoe may feel a sense of needing to plan a safe life for her child, safer than Serenity life. If Wash hadn't died I'd be siding completely with MidWesterner, but Wash's death would give Zoe pause to evaluate what would be safest for the child in her womb. I can see her choosing either way of life for child rearing at the point of post BDM.
Byte a chara, I don't understand why you're taking this biological drive thing so seriously, you are being very sensative about it, uncommonly sensative, especially since its a scientific concept and doesn't imply anything about you personally.
"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME