Shell Shock (and the names and stigmas associated with it)
There is the misconception regarding the homecoming of veterans of various nationalities from past bloody conflicts, homecoming was not always met with a hero’s welcome or parade. The wounds that veterans carry back with them are still an issue that we struggle to aid and understand today. Depending on their nationality though, not all veterans were received the same. Unlike their US counterparts, “ostensibly, Red Army Veteran were treated as heroes, but in reality many were angry and disappointed” (Dale 115). The mental and emotional scars veterans accrued, along with any physical injuries was a heavy burden that US officials tried to lighten through the changing of medical terminology and perspectives of civilians back home. However, to do so, a change of perspective had to take place regarding psychological trauma from cowardice and shame to acceptance and inclusion.
(I Hope to be Remembered for my Atrocities)
Despite this ideal of helping all veterans those who suffered physiological wounds before 1943 “early psychiatric casualties were stigmatized – especially when labeled ‘psychoneurotic,’ a term that included associations with both the “feminine” (neurosis) and the insane (psycho)” (Jarvis 100). As a result the idea of an individual’s masculinity arose, if a male had experienced “’breaking down’ under the stress of military life or combat…the emotional side of men and challenged a warrior ideal predicated upon bravery, self-mastery, control, and courage under fire” (Jarvis 99). The accepted belief beforehand was, if soldiers suffered from non-physical injuries during were emasculated by society since they were unable to serve was a tough obstacle to overcome. In an attempt to combat this established mentality, writers tried “to destigmatize and normalize psychiatric discharges (Jarvis 103). Around 1944, “a steady stream of advice literature on veterans’ readjustments” (Jarvis 101). Some of these “prescriptions for achieving a ‘normal’ or ‘whole’ masculinity…’ included things like seeking others to speak about experiences (Jarvis 103). As a result, the terminology of mentally and emotionally wounded changed from “Sissy or Neurotic” to “Neurotic Heroes” (Jarvis 108). Although there were genuine attempts to help these soldiers and sway society’s interpretation veterans were also told “that he had ‘no reason to pity himself, or to ask for a grateful government to support him the rest of his life’” (Jarvis 110). As a result, propaganda and the Press created the veil of disillusionment and double standards that veterans injured or uninjured would gladly be accepted back home and “the ‘ultimate ought to be done for them’” (Jarvis 98).
With the idea of wounds extending beyond the realm of physical injuries and the struggles that veterans face today, I would make the argument that at the present day we have successfully identified that PTSD is a serious medical concern that has and will afflict many past, present, and future veterans will unfortunately have to combat. I would also like to say that in my opinion that veterans still face some adversity within society in regards to mental and emotion wounds they have suffered, similarly to those who preceded them. I also wonder with females in the military how is PTSD interpreted since they are feminine themselves? I would not at all attribute PTSD to any particular gender as any individual could be afflicted by it. I hope that medicine will continue to advance to help treat those men and women who selflessly serve as we can hope to do no less than to take care of veterans the help in their time of need.
PTSD has always been one of the most interesting ailments facing veterans and civilians alike. No one can predict the possible causes for it and no one knows when this disease, and I mean diseases, will strike. To me, it almost seems that, until modern times, each warrior and nation had to relearn how to deal with this condition and the only people who truly understood it was the people who also had it. This is where the stereotypical trend in movies where the young soldier comes home, has a tough time with re-adjusting and it takes someone who also served or served in a later war to show them how to get on their feet again.But sometimes it takes someone who knows the pain to heal it.
You placed great emphasis on the effect of media on veteran affairs which I feel is just as relevant today as it was in the post-war. The fact that veterans and the general public have been led to believe a narrative, a national myth, about the status of returning troops shows the power of nationalism that existed at the time. The fact that the focus of war time wounds has shifted from the purely physical to the mental has shown a drastic development in the way we perceive veterans. I also think it is interesting how different nations treated their demobilized armies based on their participation in the war. One would think that those most affected would feel the most sympathetic to their troops; however, this was not the case. But it is something to ponder.