Tuesday, 2 May 2017

ATR: encourages deaf apartheid ?

Image result for cultural apartheid with the deaf ?
One has to feel at times, it is only in the UK where cultural directions and aspirations are being questioned for validity.


Online questions are still being asked.  Is culture a positive or negative issue to pursue in support terms? and is 'collateral damage' perfectly acceptable as a result?  Read on, the D/d thing let us get rid of it ? or redefine it as d/Discrimination instead?

"I don't support the need for a capitalisation of a term that renders deafness and hearing loss ambiguous as an issue, the majority aren't getting support and it is minority 'rule'.   If I print 'discrimination' instead of 'Discrimination' does it mean there isn't any ? or that using a  capital D makes it somehow 'worse' ?   It is what it is.  The unhealthy obsession with labels is entirely negative and NOT an identifier since it gets applied in a blanket form and cannot define even with social/cultural overtones, or sign, who is deaf and who isn't..  I thought deaf people of all ilks despised labels? Not it seems if it can promote your bias.

We all want our hearing loss accepted for what it is, and a basic unilateral and inclusive support system approach adopted, but this has been destroyed by cultural aspiration and rights abuses, and HoH apathy, which has created a hierarchy of those with hearing loss, and indeed a determined attempt to redefine what our issues are, by people who do not have these same issues.. A few oddballs and zealots of the cultural minority are determining the entire course of all hearing loss support, and we need to address that.

I'm saddened some feel ATR  supports any form of apartheid We already identified the D/d thing as actively doing that.  As anyone and their cat knows, ALL charitable UK support areas are already polarised. We all want our hearing loss accepted for what it is and a basic/inclusive support system approach adopted, but this aspiration has been destroyed by cultural demand and rights abuses by a few who don't really care what their actions can mean to others because their head is still stuck up their arse..

It created a hierarchy of those with hearing loss, and indeed an attempt to redefine what their issues are, by people who do not have these same experiences or issue.  A few oddballs of the cultural minority are determining the entire course of all hearing loss support, and we need to address, and now counter the disinformation.


Image result for terminological warfare
After fighting for years to prevent support being applied by decibel and by background we are back to square 1..  The background is now all it is, or, the background adjusts to fit the view! There is a basic support need and this should come first.  I don't need a lecture on Milan to assist the fact I cannot hear.  Or to have a deaf school background first to determine if I am really deaf. I have a medcial certificate and proof.  I don't want any more 'isms' thanks, I am up to here and over my head with them. 

A form of terminological warfare is being waged by people who don't even acknowledge the grammatical form it is in but show advanced determination to re-write it.  It is clear the systems of support UK people with loss have is completely brainwashed already.  The cultural worm is reeling all the fish in. 

I don't need to prevent others with hearing loss knowing how I feel, by restricting their access to what I say.  In my day this was exclusion or discrimination, not a right.  Any 'apartheid' is automatically created by the use of the D/d thing.  Apart from anything else, it defies grammar rules too.   The latter abuses and undermines basic search and research options, and confuses statistics too, on which all support is based.

We all know the abuses of the D extend to every facet of support and every access and inclusion issue we have to address, we end up fighting on multiple fronts with people who are deaf too all because they insist on the D/d thing. The fact there are different areas of hearing loss and deafness, and similar communication approaches, actually negate the use for a divider.  

You cannot define people with these labels, and the D adherents are the prime campaigners insisting they hate labels, and disabled terms when applied to them etc..   MORE silly d difference.  The issue is inconsistency in approach via zealots who distort the support message operating from a position of isolation which feed their own paranoia..Once we remove sectarianism and isolation from deaf people they will understand the message of what inclusion really means.  At least we can hope it will, or equality is pointless.


No comments:

Post a Comment