Americans burnt the Beatles music in the bible belt, because John Lennon claimed they were more popular than Jesus. I would like to offer a symbolic challenge to those at deaf.read (Pros and Cons),of deaf hood to vote for the burning of 'Understanding Deafhood' by Paddy Ladd, primarily on the grounds it will ease the huge divisions in the community its publication has created.. To this end I will put up a vote and leave it there a while say 1 month ? and if the decision is to get rid of this book, I will burn a copy and put the act on video.
Why stop there ? I will symbolically destroy audism and D/d annoyances and all that goes with that too !
40 comments:
I voted no because I believe it's always good to learn about "controversial" topics... because in time, they will no longer be in "controversial topics" category. Deafhood divides? Well, as long as people BELIEVES in the word "division", yes, it's dividing for some of them. It all depends on perspective.
Many people tried burning many books (Mark Twain's Huckleberry Finn, Bibles, etc.) and they still exist today, teaching us history. So I don't believe in burning, even though I may not always agree with some ideas.
Um, I think you're all wet. It wasn't the Deafhood book that caused the huge divisions in the d/Deaf communities; it was oralism.
Oralism and the attitudes surrounding it that hearing is the end goal, speaking is the marker of success and sign language the sign of dependency. Oralism.
The xenophobia surrounding anything except spoken English and the eugenic thinking that deaf people must be eliminated or at least controlled is what divided the HOH from the d/Deaf, the deaf from the Deaf, and encouraged a paternalistic attitude of hearing people toward the deaf.
Keep the book. In its imperfect presentation is the idea that it is okay to be Deaf. How revolutionary.
Dianrez is correct. All the divisions in the Deaf community happened LONG before the word Deafhood even was a glimmer in Paddy's imagination. The divisions in the Deaf community came from Hearing people and their audist attitudes. Perhaps you should be proposing that we burn Hearing people, hmmm?
Why not keep the factual (Historical content), and dispose of the concept ? Deafhood remains now a focus for justified division as before division was just semantics, now Deafhood promotes heirachies by background and lifestyle because the db loss debate was lost
Deaf schools no longer provide the focus of the deaf either... Anti-oralism also promotes that, since it over-focuses on 'hearing domination'. People being what they are, just then takes the bit they feel justifies the ends... and anti-oralists becomes anti-hearing becomes anti anyone who disagrees the Mr Ladd's deaf utopia and 'journey'...
Given 'Understanding deafhood' is still beyond most deaf peope's understanding because the format is not accessible, just breeds mass assumptions. It is then just the more 'able' deaf leading the rest, and understanding, what all that entails...
*rolling eyes*
Ahh... blaming game. Or shall I say, paranoia game? It's a natural response to anything that one feels his/her privelege is taken from him/her. *shrug*
Everyone has an instinct need to be better than everyone else. Survival of the fittest game. It reminds me of the classic nonfiction book I have read while I was at college, studying anthropology, Richard Dawkins' "The Selfish Gene". I recommend the book to anyone who want to understand sociobiology better. That's why I don't take deafhood, audism, etc seriously, because EVERYONE... including Dianrez, DonG, MM, Obama, etc... AND me too... are subject to the need to feel we are above the petty stuff.
I'd like to add one more thing. In 1970's, my father told me that he noticed the deaf population exhibited a certain degree of paranoia that is not normally shown in the hearing population. He's correct, even today.
I am thinking at how people who happen to be born with what genes give them. It's the society that defines what's normal and what's different. So people who are treated differently (like "lesser sex", "colored", "disabled", etc.)feel it more acutely and react more strongly which other people would sense as paranoia or jealousy...whatever.
And then we'd see the attempts to "normalizing" the "differences" that genes or accidents happen to make us, into "God-given, natural birthrights, etc.", making us feel normal or even, superior than normal. It has NOTHING to do with AGBell or oralism. It has been in existance since from the beginning of humankind.
It's called the survival of fittest... the need to be better... etc. We see that in other animals (longer fangs, brighter colors, etc.)
It's all in genes.
Genetics describing behavior seems not to apply to higher forms of life.
To use animal terms: birds peck to death any one of their flock that is different: such as albinos. Rats eat their own if born or become weak or ill or injured. Stronger lions kill cubs of mates they take from another pride in order to sire their own strong cubs.
On the other hand, elephants and monkeys nurture each others' babies and even compete to share in their care.
Can you see how far the monkeys and elephants have evolved and how much further humans have? A measure of advanced civilization is how well we take care of our less favored and make their lives equal to everyone else.
Now, Deafhood as proposed in the book and as adapted by the California group might not sit well with some people.
Some want normalization or restoration to a generally accepted standard.
Others want acceptance as equals with or without the requirement to normalize. But it definitely is a step forward in civilization. There will be more.
I'd have to disagree here. I am seeing it in higher forms of life... such as hierarchy of people in different countries (caste system in India, for an example), human beings do practice infanticide, etc. It depends on the environment, part of adaption. We are blessed with "benevolence" from people which unfairly or fairly have helped the deaf community for centuries.
A new link that a friend sent to me... check out: http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/rnl-bio-rescues-a-college-student-from-autoimmune-hearing-loss,1027683.shtml. And there's a youtube video about it, but it's not captioned : http://www.youtube.com/user/rnlbio#p...-A7LaM]YouTube
So, what's next? The parents will go for stem cell treatment over CI surgeries and/or hearing aids. Remember the majority of deaf children come from hearing families.
That's why we have "mask of benevolence" and why hearing parents want the best for their deaf children... that they want them to hear. It's about providing the opportunties to deaf babies/children.
I have to decline on the book burning. I don't believe in censorship of any kind. I prefer the concept of publishing a rebuttal. I have never read Paddy Ladd's book.
Fahrenheit 451 is one of my favorite novels, BTW. :-)
Karen-- interesting what your father said about 'paranoia' I think it happens to the late-deafened as well. When you can't hear what others are saying, I believe your own voice may begin to make up with you **think** they are saying, and that can become your truth if you don't bother to clarify.
I have felt both the positives and negative aspects of 'benevolence' even as a late-deafened person, and I have to say I can understand how that could cripple a Deaf person over a lifetime. When you are late-deafened you normally have a sense of an independent self before you become deaf. I think hearing parents of Deaf children may see a need to protect their "disabled" child too much. Teachers may expect far less than they would from a hearing child, and I think sometimes a Deaf child may come to rely on Deafness as an excuse to fail, unless parents and teachers demand more. It is the same with many minority populations.
I saw the article about the college student who was cured with stem cell intervention. Amazing and exciting stuff! :-)
We need to face facts here, I think the poster was talking about divisions among the deaf people. Has nothing to do with hearing people. You, Don G., Dianerez and others, need to step outside of the deaf box and see the light.
Don't burn the book. It is a book to let people think. It has gone as far as a group abusing the book and treating like the Bible. It is actually sad. Save your energy cuz you can burn as many of the book as you can, but it will never go away. The same as the division, sadly to say. As long as one group will never open their minds, there will be cults.
BTW, F451 is one of my favorite books by one of my favorite authors, Ray Bradbary! The man is just simply awesome.
MM,
I do not think that "Understanding Deafhood" by Paddy Ladd caused the division. I think the people that developed DH workshops used materials written by Genie Gertz "Open Your Eyes" one of the materials among other materials, as a platform to teach deaf-hood in their classes and workshops. Definitely the whole concept of DH and what they are pushing for created this great divide. I am all for burning this concept, its idea - if you will, so that it only becomes a historical reference in deaf history. Read Paddy's book and read Genie Gertz theory within "open your eyes" and you will find that many of the argumentative points that caused the divide came from Genie's materials, not Paddy's book.
And, in order to "burn the concept" one does not have to burn the actual book. We can burn it figuratively.
This paranoia is very true. It is the assumption that someone is always oppressing the deaf. Whereas the truth is nothing but deep paranoia. Deaf-hood is creating that even much more deeper among the deaf. Deaf-hood presenters have repeatedly fed into the minds of deaf people that we are where we are because of the hearing people. They speaks of colonialism, and how English is destructive to the deaf community. They encouraged the deaf to eye the hearing people with deep distrust, thus creating more paranoia. Not good. Burn that concept, yes.
Reading the various takes in this blog, I felt as if "the blame game" is where we went off track.
It isn't hearing society, or oral people, or anyone per se that is personally to blame, but mistaken interpretations of concepts by persons in power.
I have felt equal to hearing people once I reached maturity and was making my own decisions early. Sometimes I had to fight the interpretations, but people generally meant well or at least didn't stand in my way.
So, telling us to "think outside the deaf box" is inappropriate in this group of people.
There are a few people who need to be shaken out of this box, though, and I can understand where the Gertz, et. al. interpretation could help them realize that limitations can be artificially imposed by unthinking people and to understand how to challenge them. In that way it is useful.
So pigeonholing and talking about "deaf boxes" and "anti-oralists" and "blame games" are not useful; examining ideas to see how they might be useful or interesting is worthy of discussion.
Deafhood is not my specific philosophy, though. That's still being formulated. DH is simply an open topic for me among others.
I have to agree with GAMAS. It is the concept that need to be burned. They are the same kind of concepts bad leaders use to ensue fear into people. There is a long history about it and it is just being repeated in different forms.
Dianerez, you will have to forgive me. When I see the word "deafhood", I automatically think of it as the deafhood people, you know the likes of DBC, AFA and such. That word has been twisted in so many ways that I don't have any concept of the word and it has left a bad taste in my mouth. I have been trying to find other words to make the deaf experience more positive and it is hard. So, please do forgive me.
Dianerez, this concept of "The xenophobia surrounding anything except spoken English and the eugenic thinking that deaf people must be eliminated or at least controlled is what divided the HOH from the d/Deaf, the deaf from the Deaf, and encouraged a paternalistic attitude of hearing people toward the deaf." is just plain wrong for most people. There is not a lot of people in this position to exercise this. Sure, there is the Chinese gov't do this and all and you will have to notice that it some not the deaf people, but the hearing people that had a beef with this. I have met exactly one person that had this attitude, but it was not preached to me, but to my mother. And I never heard of the concept until getting into deafread and seeing all these extremist declaring the concept.
I'm all for discussion and all, but where can we start? Right now, this so-called "deaf community is not a community I want to be part of. People so easily associate specific rules or judgments or expectations to people who are part of this community and I have zero desire to be part of it. Sad to say, but these few people have destroyed my ability to be a part of it for the simple fear of being shot down or brushed aside because I don't agree with the concept.
"It is the assumption that someone is always oppressing the deaf. Whereas the truth is nothing but deep paranoia."
I don't agree with this statement. I've seen some Deaf people truly oppressed by the hearing people for a variety of reasons: the inability to assert oneself, weak English skills, lack of education, hearing people's low expectations, among other factors. Not to acknowledge that some Deaf people do struggle with oppression from some hearing people is to invalidate their experiences, even though we may not have the same experiences. Incidentally, this isn't confined to Deaf people. Some disabled people reported being oppressed by the abled people, i.e. the term disablism.
By the way, I don't advocate burning any book. Regardless whether we agree with the contents of the book or not, we leave the readers their right to read certain books if they desire :)
MishkaZena --
What do you mean "hearing people's low expectations?"
I think your'e referring to:
(1) If hearing people never met a deaf person before, they would not be the ignorant.
(2) If this "kind of" behavior purposely towards a deaf person, it might be the ignorant.
(3) Our job is to give people who never met a/some deaf person/people before, some education about the deafness' needs. It will be repeat and repeat for the "rest of our life." We have to live with this repeat and repeat.
Please clarify this, MishkaZena.
White Ghost
Not necessarily are these people with low expectations unfamiliar with Deaf people. Even some hearing families with Deaf relatives don't have high expectations for them. Unfortunately, in the Deaf education system, some of the hearing professionals have low expectations of the Deaf students, even though they have advanced degrees and should know better. They don't see the Deaf people equal to their hearing peers.
Of course I'm referring to some hearing people, not all. But it does happen more than many people realize, especially outside the metropolitan cities.
MZ, it's a dog eat dog world out there. I'm not saying that oppression does not happen, but I do think that this paranoia over many things could simply be people being ignorant. This is a fast paced society, people don't take the time to stop and smell roses. People don't have time for anyone but themselves. To me, that thinking is pure paranoia. That, aside from real oppression that you can easily prove in court.
I was going to ask you to give me examples, but then, I realized that the one example that you give me will be a small portion, isolated at best of what is really happening out there on a daily basis.
It's not just the deaf that faces oppression in daily lives, it's pretty much everyone that does.
A dog eat dog world.
Gamas. I didn't say deafhood caused the divisions originally, indeed, do not believe years ago these divisions were anywhere near as marked as they are now. I believe that deafhood has become a FOCUS and justification for those divisions.
The D/d thing, the wholesale abuse of the audism term, all this has been crystallized into the deafhood 'concept' which to my mind is quite often the 'blame' game. Mr Ladd blew it for me in the opening definitions of who was what, from then on it was pointless taking on anything else he wrote. You had to accept his definitions to follow the rest.
It is whether you believe too, that the 1881 thing is relevant today, I say it isn't, and it's a whole new ball game.
I don't really believe there is a concern about identities or a need to self awareness, within what is called the 'Deaf' world, (which broadly-speaking are those born deaf or in the deaf school/club set up from virtual day one).
The real ID crisis is OUTSIDE of that cultural area, these are the deaf who (Acquired/deafened/severely deaf etc), who are neither one thing nor another. So Paddy even addressed the wrong audience, then compounded it by refering historically, to an entirely different set of people.. It made no sense.
There is a need now to debunk the myths.... a devil's advocate if you like. Obviously If a vote said burn it, it would not affect those who are never going to listen anyway, the thing is symbolic only as perhaps a call for the in-fighting to stop.
MM... you are talking about the late deafened majority, which already have languages and cultures of their own, for an instance, Kim.
Yes, I believe I understand where you are coming from. Look at the demographics...
Karen/GAMAS/MM --
Yes, it's possibly "a dog eats the dog world."
The majority of the late deafened and the baby boomers of the 21st century aren't the ones that divided since Paddy Ladd launched the "Understanding the Deaf Culture: In search of Deafhood."
The majority on "both sides" in other countries have their own beliefs, cultures and languages.
I'm pretty sure the demographics will show the deterioration of the deaf population to use the deafhood book in nation-wide. I would not be surprised to see that.
White Ghost
MM --
I understand what you are trying to do, but I have to say that it would be a losing battle. Barry Sewell tried it and everyone shot him down and would not have tried to listen to what he was really saying. He is just one and there were hundred like him trying to show the other side, but nobody will/would listen to them.
So, I just say forget it. Where are the so-called "deaf leaders"? They should be here to discuss this, but of course, they won't cuz it is all "wrong". Why do you think they all left DVTV? They are all sheep following the one that ran off.
Perfect example is the dialog between Ken50X or something (you know, the black guy from YouTube). He started off by asking for the definition of "audium" (that is still not defined right, BTW). What does Ella do? She steps in like she is the expert on the definition instead of stepping in with an open-minded discussion, but really to preach the definition! That is what burns me the most. They think they are "experts", but they are not, it takes a whole group for very diverse of people to define a definition. These people come in without facts (and Paddy Ladd's book is NOT a fact book, just a history or personal experience book) and thinking they are "experts"? They all present a concept, but NOT facts and they can't get it through there thick heads that there is a lot more to it! So, I stand by Ken50X when he screams at Ella that the so-called deafhood group's definition of "audium" is totally, absolutely WRONG! He is just saying what 100s of other have said, but is anything dialog done about it, no, a new stupid group for developed called the AFA. As far as I'm concerned Ella and their group is doing it all for money, if the concept works that brings in money, but they are not going to sit down and talk about it civilly. And you know what is worst, they are taking advantage of this deaf souls that are at their lows by teaching them abusive, angry driven words instead of saying it is ok to be deaf and live in the hearing world and to educate hearing people about it, but instead they set up church, rallies, protests and abuse the word called "deaf". Talk about oppressing others!
So, I would just forgot it and stop feeding the trolls. The more we bring it up the more it will be talked about for nothing, the longer they will stick around. So, it is better to just ignore them like the Japanese do with lettuce and let them rot away.
Karen --
Regarding the Indian caste system, apparently that in itself is a result of colonization, from the time when the Indians were conquered by the Aryans....
There is a lot of history showing how oppressed groups' patterns resulted from colonialist actions.
"In 1970's, my father told me that he noticed the deaf population exhibited a certain degree of paranoia that is not normally shown in the hearing population. He's correct, even today."
I think that your father must have read it by a hearing researcher.
In real life, born-deaf people are exactly the opposite to the late-deafened people. The latter are paranoid and feel insecure. Born-deaf people do not know the difference.
Edward Dolnick, author of "Deafness
As a Culture" (Atlantic Month [on the editorial page], Dec. 1993), says that Matthew Moore, editor of some deaf magazine, was asked if he missed music. To which Mr. Moore replied that he did not know any difference because he had never heard any musical sound. That is it.
"It's called the survival of fittest... the need to be better... etc. We see that in other animals (longer fangs, brighter colors, etc.)...It's all in genes."
Not in genes. Rather, it is from learning behaviour.
Jean,
That could be true. Many studies mix deaf and Deaf up. The late-deafened often suffer identity crisis, and insecurity in trying to navigate life being unprepared for the disabiltiy they've newly acquired. Deaf children grow up preparing, and learn a number of coping skills by adulthood. On the other hand, as I pointed out earlier, the late-deafened usually have a more solid sense of independence, if not identity-- so it's a trade-off. Normally people can't get away with patronizing us, because we've already been successful in many ways..
Jean,
I beg to differ. I know of many born deaf that tend to be distrustful and leery of the hearing population and tend to be very paranoid. They tend to assume things based on other person's body language or facial expressions and assume that they are being mocked and what not. Typical. I've seen it, so, I don't think it is more so of one group of deaf people over another that tends to be paranoid. I can recall the many times I have had to tell my friends that so and so wasn't thinking that way, they moved on to another topic and was in no way referring to them.
Jean, shows the kind of people you hang out with. You obviously have not met the people you just described. Very narrow.
I vote no on burning the book. Let people read it and decide for themselves.
And Gamas, yes. The world is a dog eat dog world. Yes, people are ignorant. Yes, everyone experiences discrimination.
But I refuse to accept the idea that just because it happens to everyone else means we have to roll over and let people abuse us.
If you want to tolerate abuse, by all means, bend over and take it... but don't expect the rest of us to do the same.
Deaf Pundit, I don't know what made you think that I would take abuses, I don't. Nowhere in my comment did I say that or does it imply that.
We are not the only ones that experiences oppression. Everyone in this world does. Everyone. Not just deaf people, nor blind, nor crippled.
We educate others or we ignore them, depending on the situation. We shouldn't let people walk over us either.
It's kind of sad to see that deaf studies arena, especially coming from Genie Gertz, is encouraging deaf people to eye the hearing with distrust. It's not gonna get them anywhere, it will only create more barriers.
What Deaf Pundit means is that we should be able to recognize oppression and respond accordingly, not develop a paranoid lifestyle.
Too many of us have been raised to passively accept the status quo or an imposed dependency from way back--e.g. "this is a hearing world and you must accept it" when we were beefing about the lack of accessibility.
Had we followed that advice, we would not have TTYs, captions, interpreters, induction loops, etc.
Gamas,
I said that because you have repeatedly said everyone goes through this.
And I'm like, no $h*t?
The repetition of your comment that everyone experiences a similar thing is a strong implication that you feel that what happens to us is *not* important, and we need to put up and shut up.
By no means do I support fear and hate-mongering against the hearing, like GG and some others do, but to run around saying "Everyone experiences this! Calm down!" is an insult to every single deaf person who has encountered discrimination.
DP, first off....
Karen said:
"In 1970's, my father told me that he noticed the deaf population exhibited a certain degree of paranoia that is not normally shown in the hearing population."
Which I totally agree.
Here we have deaf people who tend to misunderstand the body languages and facial expression of the hearing people.
And then Jean says she disagrees and thinks that the late deafened are the worst paranoid group of people which of course I disagree with.
You are going off tangent on this with me.
And as someone who's family is culturally deaf, I do not think I am insulting deaf people.
I'm all for stopping discrimination, but that is not what I was talking about either. And, we can't always accuse everyone of oppression because of some body language or facial expression and assume shit. That's paranoia.
Done here.
Funny this topic veered off from burning books one disagrees with into imagined paranoia. Okay.
Dr. Allen Sussman, a professor of counseling during graduate school, discussed this. He said that while deaf people are thought to be prone to paranoia, it actually is a protective adaptation to a difficult situation.
Hearing people can be thoughtless, rude, even hurtful whatever the reason for their behavior. In many cases, protective paranoia has saved many a Deaf person from being further inconvenienced or put into actual danger.
A recent airplane trip illustrates this. One example: baggage clerks searching my bag suddenly burst into loud laughter and pushing one another. My effects were spread across the counter and I became concerned that a)some items might fall behind the counter and not be noticed, b) medicines might be flagged for further investigation or otherwise lost, and c) they were laughing because they had discovered my new alarm clock and accidentally turned it on. When I asked what the problem was, they waved me off and continued to laugh as people behind me watched.
I finally got my bag back and had to make a hurried stop at a restroom to insure that nothing important was missing and that the clock was turned off, not left on "alarm" (or it could buzz off during flight.) Paranoia? You bet. But protected from worse problems later on.
That wasn't the only example. More examples occurred with agents directing me to the wrong connecting flight, leaving me stranded as they went to the wrong bus stop, and so on.
You might say, those are commonplace and everybody experiences them. Tsk. tsk. When one is deaf and others don't think, one has to be extra protective especially in the absence of access to information or telephones.
Calling it paranoia when one reacts to thoughtlessness, insensitivity, rudeness or outright stupid behavior? Have a heart.
Dianrez,you said, "Too many of us have been raised to passively accept the status quo or an imposed dependency from way back--e.g. "this is a hearing world and you must accept it" when we were beefing about the lack of accessibility.
Had we followed that advice, we would not have TTYs, captions, interpreters, induction loops, etc."
That's exactly true. It's best to channel energy towards access issues than to spend much time blaming others for oppression or discrimination-- which we all know exists.
Oh dear... I wish I did not bring up what my dad said... which was YEARS ago. Things were different back then. Please don't take what my dad said out of context...
Paranoia happens to worst and best of us, especially when we don't know what's going on and then we'd think worst.
I see it more now that we have audism and deafhood which send mixed messages to us, making us more suspicious of hearing people. But it's sad to see it exist among "Deaf" leaders who believe that eugenics is still practiced... I believe it is due to ignorance. Once we understand, paranoia goes away. Once we realize that we are stared at because they are genuinely curious in positive way about us, then we won't have to deal with paranoia. Etc.
When I referred to the oppression of the Deaf people, I wasn't talking about facial expression and body language, not at all. That's best defined as
'misunderstanding', not oppression.
And all hail to those that know the difference...
Post a Comment