Saturday, 20 March 2021

D/d and now G/g?


When is all this stuff going to stop? The daft messages are going out everywhere.   Culture and sign being a money-spinner and 'Job for the Boys' and more for their very obvious reliance on help to do it.  It's a self-perpetuating reliance on being a charity case, except they suggest it is 'empowerment' instead, but the image is not what others see and their emancipation not what they are demanding.  Rank and file deaf know street reality.

D/d/G/g (!) all designed to maximise deaf isolation and create have, and have not's by decibel, by social exclusion, and by language format, what we fought against for 50 years, now they make it a virtue.  If bilingualism was an essential part of it, it would be valid, but it isn't.

Sign language is the divisor, not the empowerment, these deaf maintain their own lines and barriers, politicians enable them.  The nation's host language pitted against a minority one, with only one result, the minority remains isolated. Mainstream patronising them by its acceptance but doing own thing anyway.  They want an 'interpreter'? OK give them one, but we aren't going to change, they aren't.

Of course they 'prefer' their own, what choice do they have?  No good has come to deaf people prioritising themselves as 'different' or worse, 'diverse',  nobody buys it.  We can all see their relentless campaigns for help, access and support, but it is far lesser than their desire to be included.  They are in their position because they are unable to adapt or refusing to.  

Instead of support for empowering deaf with better or more options, they demand their own exclusion by 'choice' and 'right', challenge the host country language and grammar, then demand everyone adapts to them.  It could only happen in a democracy, under siege by minority cause celebs.

One issue is defining who is deaf and who isn't, the capital D has removed actual hearing loss as the main criterion.  There is scant proof deaf ARE profound deaf as defined in a clinical sense, and by default, these areas defy clinical definition as if deafness or hearing loss was some right, and the reason they are isolated by it is down to everyone else discriminating against them by not signing as well.  

It isn't cultural-based either except for a minuscule few (5%).  Hereditary deafness is the true 'definition' of culture.   95% adopt it every generation themselves because nothing changes and the state design to do something about it isn't happening.  Deafness is now about how YOU see your hearing loss, but many with useful hearing will also insist they are deaf and indeed profoundly so, because the cultural 'bandwagon' means by self-declaration you can be 'Deaf' too and its easier to seek help with that.

The UK's DWP who assess and provide financial support to deaf people, don't pay deaf for their own support, primarily because that help does NOT advance social inclusion.  Assessment is how hearing loss affects your ability to work in the mainstream, but they expect deaf to make adequate effort to help themselves also.  However the presence of a 3rd party is hard to get around. A lack of signed access is not an essential part of that assessment because not all deaf use sign language and culture has little part in a work or disability assessment.

Wider inclusion is a political issue and decision.  Unfortunately, rather than use state support being used as an impetus to enable the deaf to adopt alternatives, that is discrimination too, so there is no end or point to a  lot of it.  They could e.g. make welfare support reliant on deaf taking up further education courses, or learning how to make more use of the skills to communicate they have, to make employment and inclusion more viable, instead of buying the cultural gig.  Many areas have a culture they manage to include themselves, migrants do all the time.  They come here, learn our language become bilingual.

Deaf signers always raise one reason why they cannot or won't do the same, even when able.  However some welfare payments e.g. the Access To Work one is not working as it was designed to, the areas are just demanding signed support to work in solitary sign areas like the deaf Arts etc.  Only the HoH are really using that welfare payment to obtain work in the actual mainstream.  The enablement payments are the highest in the UK via the deaf and no visible 'sign' it is working as it was meant to.  Employers can't or won't foot that bill when there are 100s of hearing who could do the same job with less aggravation.

It's not viable employers pay full-time wages for someone to sit alongside a deaf person in any job, or the welfare state to foot that bill.   It is a liability they don't want. As we know, it all starts and pretty much ends in school, unless we tackle the inevitable result of sign dependence and reliance, with nothing else being utilised, nothing is going to change.  They become cultural 'fodder' by default.  Another generation convinced hearing are against them.