[u][i][b][quote]... would like to extend my support to any/all that may need it. Even if you do not fall into this category but have struggles with your mental health, you are not alone.[/quote][/b][/i][/u] This was literally the whole purpose of this forum, and you completely missed it and turned it political.

Nothing political about what I said. My entire purpose in responding was to emphasize that more than active, retired, and former military members and their families can have PTS and/or PTSD. Other comments emphasized that it’s been a tragic road for the medical and psychological community to get to the point they have in diagnosing and treating PTS and PTSD. If you are truly welcome to supporting all people with PTS or PTSD, as you say, then perhaps your next post title and majority of your post will reflect that. People have to get past the title to find the open invitation.

The condescending tone I read in this comment- which, by the way, is made on a post seeking to do some good, implies to me that you are incredulous over a veteran who wants to help other veterans. So he didn't include women issues in the title- so?- the point seems to me to help other vets and relate in the form of a support group. The fact that they invite all later on in the post and not in the title is irrelevant. How are the traumas of civilian woman and hardened combat veteran, who may be a man [i]or[/i] woman, related? PTS is obviously not exclusive to those who have seen combat, anyone with a basic understanding of human behavior knows that. While "women" experience PTS, the idea of a one size fits all approach when dealing with civilian women and combat veterans is preposterous. Perhaps I'm just confused- when are you starting your women's support group that invites everyone in, but doesn't really relate to the traumas of men or others? I just don't see the point of your comment at all, except in the context of "Oh but women too have traumas" well- yes they do but how many of them are keyed to the trauma of fighting in a war zone? Help me out here. What was the point of interjecting this hot-take on PTS instead of making your own post to address the issues of women?

I agree that you may be confused. Spend a few years researching the topic and you should gain clarity. You are forgiven.

Agreed, I feel like using the term “shell shock”could be a way to differentiate between the two. Edit: a lot of people taking this the wrong way. Probably best pretend I am not here.

LMAO [u]NO![/u] Tilman G; you are here, you are present, and your voice does matter. Edit: Am I crazy or does no one value or see the importance of having open and engaging conversations? It's when and only when toxicity breeds more toxicity is it no longer beneficial. Ignorance can only be changed through getting past tough conversations and understanding one another.

There is biologically and psychologically no difference between PTS or PTSD caused by “shell shock” and other forms of trauma. That is my point. PTS and PTSD are experienced by vastly different demographics of people. Individuals with vastly different forms of trauma can benefit from the same types of support, treatment, and therapy. However, when support, treatment, and therapy is focused on a particular demographic and resources are limited, others may not have the opportunity to receive what they need to heal.

Wrong- you are implying that the experiences had by veterans and civilian women with trauma are easily relatable. They are not. You can try to say the biological/physiological effect is the same but that discounts the cause being totally unrelated.

Research. You are still forgiven.

Common sense- getting shot at; living under the constant threat of attack, and being verbally/physically abused by another is not the same experience. most people are not mental health professionals and when they attempt to help others in the form of relatable support, they don't need some keyboard psychiatrist telling them they aren't doing enough. You have no point here- you're flexing some irrelevant knowledge for an unknown goal. Please stop.

Research. You are forgiven.

[quote]Individuals with vastly different forms of trauma can benefit from the same types of support, treatment, and therapy[/quote] - yes, they can. It is a shame that more programs aren't available to the general public. I am "fortunate" to have the resources available to me that I have. They did come at a price though. You are entitled to your opinion, but I respectfully disagree (@Tilman G @DRAG0NH0NEY). What you are saying is somewhat inaccurate and misappropriate in regard to the history and use of some terms. Starting with the demographic i.e. the [b]"shell shocked"[/b] combat veterans of WW1 up until the Vietnam War in which the term was actually recoined to [b]"battle fatigue"[/b]. [u] We have turned away from those terms because they are actually diminishing and dismissive to the person experiencing symptoms associated with PTS. [/u] It is now more common to reference without the negative connotation of it being a [i]disorder[/i] - [quote][b]I wear this as a badge of honor. I am very much orderly as opposed to disorderly. [/b][/quote] I do agree with maybe one part of what you said. At one point, PTS was an epidemic that was going untreated (and still is to this day) in the military. It was very ostracized and stigmatized to admit having any mental health issues during one's enlistment and even afterwards. Unfortunately, it is still seen as a "weakness", and I actually have/had fellow Marines deny that they were affected due to the negative view media and culture associate with these terms e.g. "shell shocked", "battle fatigue" and PTSD. Which unfortunately, and only naturally, conditions people to believe that PTSD is exclusive to combat veterans. So yes, there may have been a moment in time where a lot of efforts, support, treatment, and therapy was focused on a particular demographic and resources [were] limited, in which others may not have the opportunity to receive what they needed to heal. I do believe times are different now and mental health awareness is more inclusive. The only way to raise awareness is to talk about it and have these conversations. I may be a combat veteran and have some bias, but I also consider myself to be permeable to all opinions and values. [b];[/b]

I apologize I did not mean for what I said to become divisive in any way. I knew that in the first world war, “shell shock” was dismissed by others, but I had believed that we as a society had moved past that and understood that it was a genuine issue that should be properly addressed.

PTSD is a disorder and it should not have any more negative connotations than any other illness. In that we agree. The whole history of how PTS and PTSD became diagnosis is fraught with bias, ignorance, discrimination, and suffering. Thankfully much study is still underway to understand the mechanics our bodies perform to protect us from future trauma.

Please note my exact comment in regards to use of “shell shock”. I thanked him for his clarification. Nothing else should be read into that.

That was my point as well, sorry I did not explain well. I was just pondering if using that term to differentiate the origin would be useful so that more people would realize that ptsd is not exclusive to military service.