Purposeful Summaries- gabythefujoshi

“Is PTSD Contagious?”

It seems counterintuitive that someone who has not experienced any traumatic experience suffers through PTSD as much or more than someone who has. Caleb Vines was sent to Iraq twice, came back with PTSD and traumatic brain damage. Surprisingly tho, his wife, Brannon Vines suffers the same symptoms as he does where she is sound sensitive and gets distressed as if she were in a life threatening situation. Someone who has not dealt with something traumatic yet goes through the same symptoms contradicts the definition of what PTSD is. It’s possible though, and Brannon Vines is living prove of it.

Brannon Vines is not the only spouse of a war veteran to suffer through this strange phenomenon. There have been studies made that confirm that spouses of Israeli and Dutch veterans suffer through secondary traumatic stress, other studies confirming percentages close to forty percent. While it isn’t classified as PTSD, the same symptoms still apply and sometimes are worse by comparison, causing some to even commit suicide. It can be argued that it’s worse than PTSD, given that the person suffers through stress and abnormalities that are out of their control. As clinical psychologist, Robert Motta mentioned, trauma isn’t just caused by one’s internal conflicts, external forces contribute as well. Those who have suffered through trauma can also affect those around them.

While it doesn’t seem logical to say that those who haven’t gone through the devastations of war, professionals have concluded that it’s verifiable. The symptoms are there, and it’s something that affects these people’s daily lives. Mental illnesses and the classifications of them are to some degree still a gray area, there is still so much that is not known. It can be said though that one does not need to go through traumatic experiences to suffer through PTSD.

“Men Defining Rape: A History”

It seems counterintuitive that it is taught how immoral rape is yet for centuries, laws have been made that are in favor to rapists. It’s been established in society that rape is a serious and still ongoing issue yet news outlets don’t mention it as often and it seems to be more sensationalized in movies/tv-shows. Also, it’s important to note the amount of times the technicality of rape has been skewed throughout history, most of which, were men coincidentally.

The main issue with men being the ones to decide what is considered rape or not is that there is lack of tact for women who are the most common victims of rape. As early as 1780 BC, women were considered property and if a married woman was raped, she was considered an adulteress. Understandably this was in the era BC; however, less than a century ago, in the nineteen nineties, there were still laws claiming statutory rape wasn’t rape if the woman was “impure.” There were still debates on whether it’s rape if the woman conceived or not. According to English physician, Samuel Farr, a woman must feel pleasure or have an orgasm in order to conceive. This claim diminishes rape victims that have conceived, having to be under the suspicion of law officials who are supposed to help them.

If there was a genuine desire to decrease the amount of rape crimes, then why do law officials such as judges and state legislators make it difficult to speak out. They suspect any woman’s report of rape, questioning their state of consciousness and their history of sexual intercourse. For a delicate and serious matter, one would think they would be more supportive to these victims. Instead, they are helpless to a society that deems them to be deceitful.

“Ranking Cute Animals: A Stock Market Experiment”

It seems counterintuitive that people express an opinion they believe others will approve while contradicting their’ own is actually beneficial to them. If one is asked what they thought a certain group of people believed in, they would not go with what their own beliefs. Why don’t they go with their natural instinct? The stock market says to go against your natural instinct.

A study was conducted where about twelve thousand people were asked who they thought was the cutest animal and then who they thought others would think was the cutest. These people were split in two groups where they both answered one of the questions. Seventy-five percent guessed right but the other twenty-five percent picked different animals. The premise of the study was to emphasis an economic theory of Keynes: the stock market is like a beauty contest, you don’t say who you think is prettiest, you say who everyone else thinks is prettiest.

This ideology makes sense when it comes to wanting a new business to be successful. The whole premise of starting your own business was that you would be your own boss, make your own rules and provide any service you wish. In reality, one cannot be their own boss, they must look at the demand of that certain service. If there is no demand, then the service won’t sell. You still have to play into the rules of the market.

It’s been taught that one should be in control of their decisions and they should decide what is best without caring about others opinions. In the world of business, others opinions are vital to the success of a business. If you don’t give the people what they want, then you are merely left with natural instinct and no profit.

This entry was posted in gabythefujoshi, Purposeful Summaries. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Purposeful Summaries- gabythefujoshi

  1. gabythefujoshi18 says:

    Feedback please, I would like to know if I am writing and expressing my thoughts correctly. I want to be sure I know how to properly write a purposeful summary for my research paper and the White Paper

  2. davidbdale says:

    Gaby, you clearly understand the material you’re describing, and a careful and generous reader will be able to follow your argument, but your phrasing is not always clear, which creates potentially confusing ambiguity. When the stakes are low, so is the danger. But when you have 3000 words to convince an audience that you command the answers, ambiguity is your worst enemy.

    Let me show you some examples.

    Someone who has not dealt with something traumatic yet goes through the same symptoms contradicts the definition of what PTSD is. It’s possible though, and Brannon Vines is living prove of it.

    This is confusing in a couple of ways.
    “living proof of IT” does not have a clear antecedent. Is Brannon Vines living proof of PTSD? Or of the definition of PTSD? Or of a contradiction in the definition? A generous reader will work out what you mean, but we can’t count on generosity.

    Brannon Vines is living proof that “Someone who has not dealt with trauma but who suffers the same symptoms (AS SOMEONE WHO HAS!) defies the definition of PTSD.”

    As clinical psychologist, Robert Motta mentioned, trauma isn’t just caused by one’s internal conflicts, external forces contribute as well.

    This claim gets the emphasis backwards, I think, gabythefujoshi. Soldiers returning from combat are understood to have suffered trauma caused by EXTERNAL FORCES beyond their control. It seems your argument about secondary PTSD is meant to emphasize the possibility that internal forces CAN ALSO create symptoms. That claim would be supported by a quote that flips the emphasis.

    In other words, if Robert Motta had said “Trauma isn’t just caused by EXTERNAL FORCES; internal conflicts contribute as well,” his statement would support your argument.

    While it doesn’t seem logical to say that those who haven’t gone through the devastations of war, professionals have concluded that it’s verifiable.

    Here you’ve left out some crucial language needed to make your sentence complete. One solution that seems consistent with your intentions would be:

    While it doesn’t seem logical to say that those who haven’t gone through the devastations of war COULD POSSIBLY SUFFER FROM PTSD, professionals have concluded that THE DIAGNOSIS IS verifiable.

    These problems are high-level errors, gaby, the sort made by good writers who handle big topics and big ideas with relative ease. They’re also correctable at the proofreading stage because they can be caught by a good reader, either the author or another.

    See if you can find and fix similar errors in your second and third summaries. If you want further feedback, I’ll be delighted to help, but I’d like you to proof your own work first.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s