DEAFHOODism

Click me and check inside for free!


Deafhoodism - a Deaf status quo regarding Deafhood; a system of Deaf beliefs accepted as authoritative where acceptance and, sometimes, blameless actions toward other deaf and hard of hearing individuals outside of Deaf culture would be required. It is also a self-discovery oriented process involving sustained meaningful interaction with and commitment to, Deaf social, cultural and/or political life where a deaf or hard of hearing person would become a Deaf person someday.


When I first heard about this new “Deafhood” concept it came about early into the Gallaudet University protest over the selection of Dr. Jane K. Fernandes as the 9th president. It appeared approximately at the same time with their new "Gallaudet for Unity" rallying cry. All I could do was groan over the prospect of seeing a whole new politically correct terminology invented by a Deaf person, Dr. Paddy Ladd. Somehow I couldn't shake this notion of mine that all of this "unity" and "Deafhood" cries during the Gallaudet protest were borned out of a bit of a guilt complex of theirs when they have discriminated against deaf and hard of hearing people in the past.

Dunno.

Now, lately there seems to be a mad dash to get this “Deafhood” word out and encourage people to buy, buy, buy, buy this 500+ page book. While some are hoping to set up these bible-like study groups to learn more about "Deafhood" and its concept. Or so it seems. Although none seem to be commenting about it on the Amazon website.

The "Deafhood" book is as cumbersome and as welcomed as any technical manual for any readers. That's according to some who have actually read the whole thing and have stated it as being a pretty "dry" read. If you like dry, then this is your book. So, nothing short of a Cliff Notes or Dummies book will help understand the premise of the "Deafhood" message. Maybe that should be enough of a clue about simplifying this book the next time? Else it'd become a doorstop instead.

The simple message the book puts out, according to those familiar with it, is that "Deafhood" is about inclusivity and it has nothing to do with race, degree of hearing loss, Deaf generational families or sign communication preferences. That's fine. I've no problem with that. Genie Gertz explains:

“This is not about labeling one another, not about whether you are a big "D" or a small "d". This is about all of us being deaf with full support of everyone's journey to reach Deafhood. That is to unite us all, not to divide us.”

But Genie Gertz warns in her video about the complexity of “Deafhood” and that we are all on the path to a Deaf discovery. Are we really? The definition of "Deafhood" according to her is a very complex one. It requires self-analyzing, exploring, and understanding what Deaf means to us all. Nevermind that it took the Deaf community over 30 years to get the definition of what “D”eaf means down pat but right now with this "Deafhood" thing we seem to be witnessing another attempt on changing the very definition of what "D"eaf stands for once again.

Moving the goal post?

And never mind the fact that there are deaf and hard of hearing people who do not give a fig about Deaf culture, let alone even bother with the big "D" to describe their standing as a person with a hearing loss. But since Paddy says that "Deafhood" is a process about self-identity and a person's own deafness but then he also believes that "Deafhood" is threatened by mainstreaming and by new invasive medical techniques. How can that be? "Deafhood" is supposed to be about a self-discovery process, and among other things. Perhaps getting a C.I. ought to be a part of that discovery process, too?

Now, I am not making fun about the idea of self-acceptance, self-discovery, acceptance of others, etc. as discussed in "Deafhood. " But what I am weary about is seeing another concocted terminology. Of those that I have corresponded with over the last several weeks who were RIT, Gally, CSUN students or just plain deaf/hh folks where they too are tired hearing another politically correct terminology. Many are tired seeing another new word that may ultimately prove more divisionary than helpful since Paddy Ladd keeps addressing everything "D"eaf and blaming oralism in his writings. However, the concept itself, for the most part, is fine, I guess. Basically it boils down to common sense knowing that we all go through, including hearing people, our own self-awareness discovery process as part of our journey. Self-discovery about one's own deafness or hearing loss doesn't mean the person will be led into a Deaf culture life, even with Deaf people's full suport.

Ever since I stepped foot on the campus of Gallaudet in January 1988, a few months before Deaf President Now, as a hard of hearing person I saw a completely different world versus what Deaf people saw. I’ve always accepted deaf and hard of hearing people for who they are and not worry about their background, signing abilities, the ability to speak or hear, or what have you. It didn’t matter to me. But to others, in many instances, did matter alot. Does that mean they would accept the 500+ page on "Deafhood" just to understand the concept?

In one forum I presented why this new PC word "Deafhood" would generate lots of resistence (and confusion). So, I presents a hypothetical scenario.

Let's suppose we have a deaf person who was born with a hearing loss and he wrote a similar 500+ page book called "Personhood." The deaf author has a PhD. He understands the Deaf community and its distinct culture but the author does not sign at all since he grew up orally using the visual Cued Speech method. In his book he also presents a concept for deaf and hard of hearing people to learn about acceptance of self and others, their discovery paths regarding their hearing loss, and so forth to help bring about more deaf and hard of hearing people together for a greater understanding.

Now, suppose we have these "Personhood" workshops at Gallaudet University or even at the NAD convention, would Deaf people go his workshops to learn more about this "Personhood" and buy his 500+ page book even though knowing the author of the book is a devout orally-raised deaf person? Would you go to this guys workshop? Would you be leery to go dispite the fact that the author is nowhere near Deaf? But does it matter if you are Deaf when you are also deaf? Would you go? Be honest with that question. It reveals your true attitude towards other non-Deaf people.

It's all a perception issue. I frankly, I don't care for the word "Deafhood." I just simply accept people for who they are since we're all basically in the same boat when it comes to equal access issues, legal rights and the narrowing of our communication gaps with hearing people and vice versa.