Reading on social media today concerns that disability and deaf rights campaigns are being constantly defeated by state arms and undermined, but as ATR knows they are defeated not by state arms but their own disunified approaches.
There is too much self-interest I'm afraid, and this prevents a united view going forward. In the hearing loss areas, there are FOUR distinct areas that lobby, none of them cut across the other and there is no unified message either. 'Cest la Vie' becomes 'my way or the highway..'
Currently only loudest voice is heard and the rest get ignored. Divide and rule can only succeed if you allow them to divide you. There is too an emerging 'elite' of disabled lobbyists, so either you are in with them or they don't support or recognise your needs.
BBC online is host to many of them who do not really have direct links to campaigns any more and into self-promotions, blogs, and in social media where a type of sectarianist approach is adopted and you only may contribute 'if the view fits'. Disability/Deaf arts is another elitist area where, unless you sign it makes no difference if you are deaf or not, access isn't for you. They justify this non-access by occasionally throwing in captions as a sop, but the content will have zilch in common with your lifestyles and image, so it simply is there to deter complaint.
ATR believes social media has been a huge disappointment to most of us. E.G. 'Closed sites' I am really not a great fan of, and reluctant to join some of them because it suggests they only want certain people contributing, but use the excuse they are deterring disharmony and dissent or bullying. In essence they just enjoy talking to themselves. I had stopped bothering for 6 years. They were designed originally that way to be safe havens, but then were used for less than equal access approaches, and a sort of respectable form of bullying.
One site still had me banned after 6 years, I noticed recently, I can only thank them most profusely, but urge them to seek counseling before (Or it may be already, ) too late.. as their membership is only 6 people after all the time down from 2,000, they wondered why...
There are numerous ways you can keep order on a site without vetting or even editing, people's posts and membership applications first, and/or banning people left right and centre... It's a form of 'control' being used, where the clique unites to isolate you, an issue very damaging to vulnerable people who, deserving leeway and patience, to raise points, just get slapped down instead and banned. We would call it discrimination, even organised bullying in itself.
I hate it. My only rule is personal abuse or, abuse of others on my blog, I don't stand for it, such people can resubmit a view without the bile, if they won't they are out. You can offer alternative views to oralism and Deaf culture if you want, or even challenge the validity of sign applications and hearing aid use, there are no sacred cows here.
Far better to use proper organised sites with trained moderation, and avoid sites run as 'one man/women/one sector, single issue bands'. Sites designed only for a single purpose in our multi-purpose environment, it usually means a licence to exist in own bubble and to be extreme.