Deafread is an aggregator site and not explicitly for "entertainment purposes" as people should already know. The owners developed DeafRead as a way to allow everyone a voice, including mine, for those who sign up.
One central reason for developing DeafRead is that Jared and I wanted to empower the deaf community; we wanted to allow everyone a voice, a place where people could speak out.I am one of those voices. They make a key point in Deafread about the purpose of its aggregator, note the bold.
An aggregator simply gathers posts; it does not mean we support or reject the content within each post. We don't censor blogs based on the bloggers' opinions. We publish everything as long as it is deaf-related and satisfies the guidelines.So, this "Deaf Anthology" blog appears to satisfy Deafread's guidelines. And that's fine. At least have the cojones to admit that what was written was essentially personal in nature instead of hiding behind a disclaimer that blogs written were simply fictional in nature or for "entertainment venue". Deaf Anthology, if you have an actual, real, bonafide complaint, then take it up with Deafread.
UPDATE: Again, if you have a real, bonafide complaint, take it up with Deafread instead of relying on fictional blogs. Secondly, understand that Deafread never made any promise of taking anyone to some "promise land" but rather an aggregator site to give voice to all sides. Plus, they even put up a disclaimer.
"DeafRead does not endorse any of the blogs by the mere act of publishing."Learn to agree to disagree.
2 comments:
Man, he's in total denial. If it's fictional then he has no voice because they're only fictional stories. Just for "entertainment" only and no real complaints. His words. Might as well go with that.
Anony, correct. And very astute observation, too. For example, his disclaimer says: "The Deaf Anthology blogs are fictional, read at your own risk!" and in one of his blog he wrote on Oct 8, 2011:
"Deaf Anthology # 1011: "God & Deafhood"
Why are all these people criticizing the concept of "Deafhood" on the Internet, one may point out that the term, along with "*udism," isn't in the dictionary, hell, even the words, "rapture" nor "trinity" ain't in the Bible itself. We Deafies are wasting our time debating "Deafhood" as those Creationist over "evolution." Paddy and Darwin are alike, introducing their theories that changes our way of thinking. Deafhood is a philosophy just as Evolution. Both Paddy and Darwin came to that conclusion, based on their observations. We always disagreed with anything that we don't understand, rather than accept its reality, so therefore your arguments are irrelevant. Deaf asceticism in our culture, not!"
Since the above is a fiction per Gary's disclaimer and warning, the complaint and his comment are not real. Everything is made up and has no voice. I agree, anony, exactly that. No voice because it's all fictional and therefore no statement can be made and to be taken seriously because they're fictional!
Gotta love the irony.
Post a Comment