Grayson Clamp, who was born with Charge Syndrome, recently became the first child to receive an auditory brain stem implant as part of a Food and Drug Administration trial.
Go here to the original site to see it in CC.
Before you track this parent down, which I suggest you do not, just so you can give him unsolicited advices or worse berate him. Here's a reminder why you should not.
Wednesday, June 05, 2013
Sunday, June 02, 2013
Is Daniel Winship's art seen as "bullying"?
This what Tara Congdon wrote in her blog piece about Daniel Winship's own drawing depicting a deaf boy's head getting his cochlear implant drilled to his head:
The owner of thedeafcommunity.org has every right to label certain art as the "bullying" kind if the person feels it has that kind of feel to it. Not quite the same thing but I think I understand the reason behind it when people think it's a form of "bullying" such as the claimed example seen in the "Bully File."
Maybe some people feel that some art or drawing exhibit a form of "bullying" because of the pushiness it exhibits constantly at certain people or organization through examples of hyperboles and total exaggeration. Or that it mocks, demean, or ridicule certain people. And so on. After all, art is all about interpretation and people interpret art differently. Seeing it as a form of "bullying" is one of them.
"Precisely because of all the reactions posted on the image and its iterations across the Internet, Winship’s art must NOT be censored, as some demanded, or even labeled as bullying, as the operators of thedeafcommunity.org have done."Art is fine. It's a form of expression based on many things. Some people don't even consider certain art as being art but a heap of mess instead. I understand that, too. Censoring art isn't a great idea, either (of course, perhaps with extreme prejudice that could depend on some things). Having said that, people do have a right to feel or think that certain art is seen as a form of "bullying." Seeing how it is provocative through the art's view own hyperbolic expression helping spread the myth continue to grow and misinform.
The owner of thedeafcommunity.org has every right to label certain art as the "bullying" kind if the person feels it has that kind of feel to it. Not quite the same thing but I think I understand the reason behind it when people think it's a form of "bullying" such as the claimed example seen in the "Bully File."
De'VIA (Deconstructing the Forced Assimilation of Deaf People) resistent art used as tactis to scare, bully and silence anyone who is pro-options for deaf children. De'VIA art is exhibited in places such as Gallaudet University. For the an example of one such work, click on one of these links:But are those art examples truly a form of bullying? Perhaps not. Perhaps not in the bully context as we know it but I believe I understand where this person is coming from. I cannot say that this person's viewpoint or perspective is entirely wrong saying it's a form of bullying. That kind of context need to be explored further.
This example was shared among numerous sites on the internet in May 2013. Do note, "The Deaf Militants Battle with the Hydra Monster" poster is available for sale but without the permission of the person(s) represented on the image.
Maybe some people feel that some art or drawing exhibit a form of "bullying" because of the pushiness it exhibits constantly at certain people or organization through examples of hyperboles and total exaggeration. Or that it mocks, demean, or ridicule certain people. And so on. After all, art is all about interpretation and people interpret art differently. Seeing it as a form of "bullying" is one of them.
"F*ck you, Deaf community!": Part II
Sometimes people who think they are doing the right thing actually end up hurting their cause and image when it comes to certain deafness related issues and concerns. I blogged this before a few years back and I think this warrant another blog piece in light of Daniel Winship's Facebook piece that generated lots of negative and positive reactions as a reminder that spewing hate and vindictiveness could simply backfire where targeted parents wrongly accused get the full wrath of the Deaf community's ire. Sometimes quite skewed in their outlook while other times sobering. The thread I'm about to link provide an insight look into the views and perspectives of mostly hearing people on the discussion of cochlear implant. It's a sobering read and seeing how many of them experienced the wrath from certain inner circles of the culturally deaf community their ire and hate. The author of the thread, Fuck you, Deaf "Community" , is a hearing parent who exemplifies the very example of how the venting of the culturally deaf community can backfire in getting the very parents their support on the cochlear implant issue.
1. My 4-year-old daughter is deaf. She is not "Deaf" with a
capitol D. She simply has no hair cells in her cochlea, she has no
functioning inner ear. Even though she is deaf, she is not
automatically part of your little world of shame and exclusion, and her
native language is not ASL. It is not child abuse if we decide
to raise her in a household that speaks English. So: fuck you for
claiming her as your own, without a second thought to the wishes of her
parents.
2. We gave our daughter cochlear implants when she was an infant. We made this long and difficult decision based on the research that was available to us, based on the educational resources available in our area, based on the nature of her deafness, and, yes, based on our own biases and desires. She had her surgeries before she was old enough to make the choice for herself, because to wait so long means to give her hearing long after her developing brain can make the best use of it. It is a well-known and long-researched phenomenon that pre-lingual implantation leads to vastly improved speech and hearing skills. But you call it child abuse. You call it cosmetic surgery on an infant, and more than once you called me a monster for it. It is not child abuse, to make complicated decisions about your kids without their input - it's called parenting. Nor is it cosmetic to give my kid a developmental boost. So: fuck you for heaping accusations of pre-lingual cosmetic surgery child abuse on me.
3. Our family is learning ASL, and have been since we learned our daughter was profoundly deaf. We will use sign as a second language, indefinitely. My wife is in school to become an interpreter. Nor do we believe in a purely oralist tradition; we acknowledge the importance of communication between deaf people without assistance. We get it, ok? We're committed. But because we gave our daughter cochlear implants, you automatically believe that we're out to destroy ASL, to destroy Deaf culture. You never listen to our reasoning, because what do we know? We're motivated by a desire to mingle in both worlds, and yet we're constantly scoffed at by the Deafies on principle. So: fuck you for your pernicious false dichotomies.
4. Speaking of false dichotomies: what the hell do you mean by the "Hearing Community"? You mean the 99% of the world...with functional ears? They form a single community separate from your own? Because obviously it's the Deaf Community vs. the world. Yeah, fuck you and your false dichotomies, again.
5. It's funny how your handicap isn't a handicap. You aren't missing a major sensory organ, it's simply that you have chosen a primary language which is signed rather than spoken. You embrace and welcome the nature of your language and your community, and you are, you say, just as capable as any hearing person. I get it - it's not a handicap. It's not a disability. You feel that there's nothing wrong with your bodies. You aren't broken machines in need of repair. You're not incomplete people deserving of pity. You're a close-knit community because, I gather, there's a conspiracy of doctors and audiologists and educators and academics and hearing-aid industry types, who are, to a person, out to suck your wallets dry then utterly crush and humiliate you, simply because...they hate your lifestyle choice. But you look past all that. You're complete and beautiful human beings and you're happy with the way God created you. There's nothing wrong with being deaf. Deafness is beautiful! So fuck you for demanding - and happily accepting - constant special accommodation for your alleged non-handicap. (And fuck you for demanding respect and understanding from my family, without giving us any in return.)
6. Your precious ASL doesn't have a sweet simplicity; it's just as capricious and arbitrary and fucked-up as any other language. I mean, come on! In our current class, we're learning three - THREE - different signs for the word "car". Which you don't apparently use interchangeably. What the hell? It kind of messes up your principle of "conceptual accuracy". Especially considering that there are many signs for most common words. A lot of the difference is regional, but a lot is just "we do it this way, they do it that way". ASL is, simply, fragmented. English, at least, has standardized on "wh" question words: "who", "why", etc. But English, even in signed form, is "too ugly" for you. Fuck you and your "beautiful language" high horse.
7. ASL purists, who want to distance ASL from English as much as possible, who advocate removing as much fingerspelling from the language as possible, who want to remove as many initial letters ("T" for toilet, "B" for box, etc.) as possible... yeah, I see you fingerspelling common words, I see you happily using intial letters. Fuck you for...well, for being uppity elitists. Go drive a Hummer while you're at it.
8. ASL has no written form. It must use another language - the hated and maligned English - for written communication. Therefore, it's nigh-impossible to look up a new word by its sign. Therefore, memorization plays a much larger role in ASL than in most languages. Therefore, more effort goes into learning how to sign, when other kids are learning how to read and write. Guess what kind of impact that has on illiteracy rates? And...you seem to prefer it that way? Before I met y'all I thought the illiteracy was the result of educational and developmental difficulties. But the more Deaf people I meet, the more I find that you don't much care about reading and writing proper English. ASL and TV is all you need. So...yeah. Fuck you for that, too. By the way, my deaf daughter is learning how to read, you dipshits.
9. While I'm at it, Alexander Graham Bell has been dead for 86 fucking years. When he was alive, he didn't gas any Deaf babies, he didn't sterilize anyone. If you honestly believe that he wanted to prevent deaf people from reproducing, even when his mother and wife were deaf, then I honestly believe you're pretty damn stupid. At any rate, it's a vastly different world today than it was back then. Believe you me, there are plenty of other villains to worry about today. Fuck you for not getting over A.G. Bell already.
10. Again with the calling me an audist in denial of your beautiful heritage. Which is funny, because from my perspective, you're being "deafists" in denial of your own handicaps. But you don't see me calling you out on it several times a week. Fuck you and your utter lack of tact.
But mostly, fuck you for putting a claim on my kid. I've been at this for more than four years, and you're just getting more hostile at us hearing-family-with-deaf-child-who-has-cochlear-implants. Our world, the world of the hearing, the world we're raising our girl in, the world you loathe so much -- our world is fucked up, sure, but it's roses and cotton candy and day-long free pony rides compared to yours.
2. We gave our daughter cochlear implants when she was an infant. We made this long and difficult decision based on the research that was available to us, based on the educational resources available in our area, based on the nature of her deafness, and, yes, based on our own biases and desires. She had her surgeries before she was old enough to make the choice for herself, because to wait so long means to give her hearing long after her developing brain can make the best use of it. It is a well-known and long-researched phenomenon that pre-lingual implantation leads to vastly improved speech and hearing skills. But you call it child abuse. You call it cosmetic surgery on an infant, and more than once you called me a monster for it. It is not child abuse, to make complicated decisions about your kids without their input - it's called parenting. Nor is it cosmetic to give my kid a developmental boost. So: fuck you for heaping accusations of pre-lingual cosmetic surgery child abuse on me.
3. Our family is learning ASL, and have been since we learned our daughter was profoundly deaf. We will use sign as a second language, indefinitely. My wife is in school to become an interpreter. Nor do we believe in a purely oralist tradition; we acknowledge the importance of communication between deaf people without assistance. We get it, ok? We're committed. But because we gave our daughter cochlear implants, you automatically believe that we're out to destroy ASL, to destroy Deaf culture. You never listen to our reasoning, because what do we know? We're motivated by a desire to mingle in both worlds, and yet we're constantly scoffed at by the Deafies on principle. So: fuck you for your pernicious false dichotomies.
4. Speaking of false dichotomies: what the hell do you mean by the "Hearing Community"? You mean the 99% of the world...with functional ears? They form a single community separate from your own? Because obviously it's the Deaf Community vs. the world. Yeah, fuck you and your false dichotomies, again.
5. It's funny how your handicap isn't a handicap. You aren't missing a major sensory organ, it's simply that you have chosen a primary language which is signed rather than spoken. You embrace and welcome the nature of your language and your community, and you are, you say, just as capable as any hearing person. I get it - it's not a handicap. It's not a disability. You feel that there's nothing wrong with your bodies. You aren't broken machines in need of repair. You're not incomplete people deserving of pity. You're a close-knit community because, I gather, there's a conspiracy of doctors and audiologists and educators and academics and hearing-aid industry types, who are, to a person, out to suck your wallets dry then utterly crush and humiliate you, simply because...they hate your lifestyle choice. But you look past all that. You're complete and beautiful human beings and you're happy with the way God created you. There's nothing wrong with being deaf. Deafness is beautiful! So fuck you for demanding - and happily accepting - constant special accommodation for your alleged non-handicap. (And fuck you for demanding respect and understanding from my family, without giving us any in return.)
6. Your precious ASL doesn't have a sweet simplicity; it's just as capricious and arbitrary and fucked-up as any other language. I mean, come on! In our current class, we're learning three - THREE - different signs for the word "car". Which you don't apparently use interchangeably. What the hell? It kind of messes up your principle of "conceptual accuracy". Especially considering that there are many signs for most common words. A lot of the difference is regional, but a lot is just "we do it this way, they do it that way". ASL is, simply, fragmented. English, at least, has standardized on "wh" question words: "who", "why", etc. But English, even in signed form, is "too ugly" for you. Fuck you and your "beautiful language" high horse.
7. ASL purists, who want to distance ASL from English as much as possible, who advocate removing as much fingerspelling from the language as possible, who want to remove as many initial letters ("T" for toilet, "B" for box, etc.) as possible... yeah, I see you fingerspelling common words, I see you happily using intial letters. Fuck you for...well, for being uppity elitists. Go drive a Hummer while you're at it.
8. ASL has no written form. It must use another language - the hated and maligned English - for written communication. Therefore, it's nigh-impossible to look up a new word by its sign. Therefore, memorization plays a much larger role in ASL than in most languages. Therefore, more effort goes into learning how to sign, when other kids are learning how to read and write. Guess what kind of impact that has on illiteracy rates? And...you seem to prefer it that way? Before I met y'all I thought the illiteracy was the result of educational and developmental difficulties. But the more Deaf people I meet, the more I find that you don't much care about reading and writing proper English. ASL and TV is all you need. So...yeah. Fuck you for that, too. By the way, my deaf daughter is learning how to read, you dipshits.
9. While I'm at it, Alexander Graham Bell has been dead for 86 fucking years. When he was alive, he didn't gas any Deaf babies, he didn't sterilize anyone. If you honestly believe that he wanted to prevent deaf people from reproducing, even when his mother and wife were deaf, then I honestly believe you're pretty damn stupid. At any rate, it's a vastly different world today than it was back then. Believe you me, there are plenty of other villains to worry about today. Fuck you for not getting over A.G. Bell already.
10. Again with the calling me an audist in denial of your beautiful heritage. Which is funny, because from my perspective, you're being "deafists" in denial of your own handicaps. But you don't see me calling you out on it several times a week. Fuck you and your utter lack of tact.
But mostly, fuck you for putting a claim on my kid. I've been at this for more than four years, and you're just getting more hostile at us hearing-family-with-deaf-child-who-has-cochlear-implants. Our world, the world of the hearing, the world we're raising our girl in, the world you loathe so much -- our world is fucked up, sure, but it's roses and cotton candy and day-long free pony rides compared to yours.
Cochlear Implant Surgery - "It's a Beautiful Thing"
Two extremes, one is an exaggerated drawing of a boy getting cochlear implant by Daniel Winship where people responded both positively and negatively.
Tara Congdon went on to write about her interview with Daniel Winship his drawing seen in his Facebook. The interview was an interesting read and insightful but I couldn't help noticed when Tara used one comment by posting a screen capture of an unknown commenter who described cochlear implant surgery as a "beautiful thing."
You can see the whole context in the screen capture right before the comment was made on how beautiful cochlear implant surgery is and understand the perspective of why that person said that. It is after all a whole different and positive viewpoint seeing that a cochlear implant surgery can be a beautiful thing. This unknown commenter have had her/his own cochlear implant surgery done and saw that it was a beautiful thing because she has gotten so much positive benefits out of her own first cochlear implant at age 4. and 21 years later will get a 2nd one this year. The unknown commenter was responding to Daniel Winship's exaggerated drawing in his Facebook of a cochlear implant surgery.
But it takes two to have a dialogue and a discussion, good or bad.
It's not surprising to see people respond negatively to this unknown person's own positive experience that cochlear implant surgery is a beautiful thing such as Dr. Don Grushkin seen in another Facebook discussion.
I'd say a lot of the vindictiveness is due to lack of understanding, miscommunication, and lack of respect instead of agreeing to disagree and that various opinions are valid in more ways than one. Sometimes the vindictiveness is at the fault in some circles of the culturally deaf community who tend to side on hyperboles and myths much like what happened in one blog I covered called, "F*ck you, Deaf community!" which serves an example of how such protestations by certain Deaf people can simply backfire instead of lending a helping and understanding hand.
What a way to lose the support of that parent.
So, yeah, people do see certain surgeries as a "beautiful thing" because to them they see is liberation, access, and freedom. And, yes, parents who do the right thing and make an informed decision still get flack from certain inner circles of the culturally deaf community who run on hyperbolic emotions.
Did Daniel Winship's drawing help or hurt the culturally deaf community?
UPDATE: Check out "F*ck you, Deaf Community!: Part II"
Don't miss it!
Commenters have used a range of words to describe the illustration, including powerful, evocative, propaganda, utter nonsense, crap, an evil depiction, sensationalistic, and patently false. Winship himself has been accused of brainwashing, labeled a sick person, and called a cunt, “closed-minded arrogant twat,” and wacko on the same level as members of the Westboro Baptist Church. Others have made assumptions, including that Winship must be an ex-implantee, that he doesn’t have children – much less any with “a birth defect” – and that his illustration reflects the opinion of the entire deaf community.It's acknowledged that people see things differently based on a variety of reasons including life experiences whether it was a positive or negative one.
Tara Congdon went on to write about her interview with Daniel Winship his drawing seen in his Facebook. The interview was an interesting read and insightful but I couldn't help noticed when Tara used one comment by posting a screen capture of an unknown commenter who described cochlear implant surgery as a "beautiful thing."
"I do not support a sick person who thinks this is what a cochlear implant surgery looks like. I'm 100% sure you have never seen the actual surgery. It's a beautiful thing!"
But it takes two to have a dialogue and a discussion, good or bad.
It's not surprising to see people respond negatively to this unknown person's own positive experience that cochlear implant surgery is a beautiful thing such as Dr. Don Grushkin seen in another Facebook discussion.
I'd say a lot of the vindictiveness is due to lack of understanding, miscommunication, and lack of respect instead of agreeing to disagree and that various opinions are valid in more ways than one. Sometimes the vindictiveness is at the fault in some circles of the culturally deaf community who tend to side on hyperboles and myths much like what happened in one blog I covered called, "F*ck you, Deaf community!" which serves an example of how such protestations by certain Deaf people can simply backfire instead of lending a helping and understanding hand.
We gave our daughter cochlear implants when she was an infant. We made this long and difficult decision based on the research that was available to us, based on the educational resources available in our area, based on the nature of her deafness, and, yes, based on our own biases and desires. She had her surgeries before she was old enough to make the choice for herself, because to wait so long means to give her hearing long after her developing brain can make the best use of it. It is a well-known and long-researched phenomenon that pre-lingual implantation leads to vastly improved speech and hearing skills. But you call it child abuse. You call it cosmetic surgery on an infant, and more than once you called me a monster for it. It is not child abuse, to make complicated decisions about your kids without their input - it's called parenting. Nor is it cosmetic to give my kid a developmental boost. So: f*ck you for heaping accusations of pre-lingual cosmetic surgery child abuse on me.
Our family is learning ASL, and have been since we learned our daughter was profoundly deaf. We will use sign as a second language, indefinitely. My wife is in school to become an interpreter. Nor do we believe in a purely oralist tradition; we acknowledge the importance of communication between deaf people without assistance. We get it, ok? We're committed. But because we gave our daughter cochlear implants, you automatically believe that we're out to destroy ASL, to destroy Deaf culture. You never listen to our reasoning, because what do we know? We're motivated by a desire to mingle in both worlds, and yet we're constantly scoffed at by the Deafies on principle. So: f*** you for your pernicious false dichotomies.
What a way to lose the support of that parent.
So, yeah, people do see certain surgeries as a "beautiful thing" because to them they see is liberation, access, and freedom. And, yes, parents who do the right thing and make an informed decision still get flack from certain inner circles of the culturally deaf community who run on hyperbolic emotions.
Did Daniel Winship's drawing help or hurt the culturally deaf community?
UPDATE: Check out "F*ck you, Deaf Community!: Part II"
Don't miss it!
Saturday, June 01, 2013
Deafread continues to improve
Elsewhere on a positive note, Deafread continues to improve in its standing. This uptick is slowly gaining grounds since 2011 after an all time low global Rank of 2,553,855 per my screen capture. Visiting the Alexa site reveals the changes. Looking at my screen capture from last year in December of 2012 showed a global Alexa Traffic Rank of 2,124,154 while ranking in Canada yielded a rank of 86,239. Today showed a global rank of 2,064,335 and a ranking of 56,297 in Canada. A definite improving trend. For what it's worth I am noticing more and more people using Deafread now and it is now becoming much more adequately diverse on the type of blogs and people that grace the aggregator site's. So much for certain Deaf factions' boycott attempt over petty reasons in their effort to control Deafread's aggregator output and to force Tayler Mayer to fall in line with their ideology and deaf politics.
Tayler refused to so do and refused their online bullying tactics.
Good. We need people like Tayler Mayer who can think independently and not become coerced by people who think bullying and slandering are the answer.
Another interesting finding is that people are actually looking up my name in Deafread as seen in the "Top Search Queries results for Deafread.com" search results near the bottom of the Alexa page. Approximately 3.51% of the traffic searches in Deafread went for looking my name up in Deafread.
Dudes. I can't be that popular!
Deafread, still surviving, still thriving since the big boycott walkout of 2009.
Tayler refused to so do and refused their online bullying tactics.
Good. We need people like Tayler Mayer who can think independently and not become coerced by people who think bullying and slandering are the answer.
Another interesting finding is that people are actually looking up my name in Deafread as seen in the "Top Search Queries results for Deafread.com" search results near the bottom of the Alexa page. Approximately 3.51% of the traffic searches in Deafread went for looking my name up in Deafread.
Dudes. I can't be that popular!
Deafread, still surviving, still thriving since the big boycott walkout of 2009.
Death of a Deaf Forum
It's dying of natural causes because naturally no one cares to visit this forum because it has become so one sided with everyone agreeing and nodding their heads together like bobbleheads.
No real diversity of thoughts allowed, practically so, without the risk of getting lambasted by zealots for having an alternative opinion or thought. Never daring to be different. The last group of lemmings was seen heading over the cliff.
Even in Facebook shows inactivity for a year with no hope for revival. Because who would want to go to a deaf-run forum with everybody agreeing on just about everything involving deaf politics and politics itself? It was a place seen as a "safe-haven" so to speak. But the forum is wretchedly and slowly dying of natural causes. What is the forum I'm speaking of? Not gonna say. Just let it be and let it die naturally. But if you do find the site via Google search you will find a warning beneath the link that says, "This site may harm your computer." Might as well be a leper colony that nobody in their right mind would want to go and visit.
Yeah, let it die. Tis only humane. No one really cares. Life moves on.
No real diversity of thoughts allowed, practically so, without the risk of getting lambasted by zealots for having an alternative opinion or thought. Never daring to be different. The last group of lemmings was seen heading over the cliff.
Even in Facebook shows inactivity for a year with no hope for revival. Because who would want to go to a deaf-run forum with everybody agreeing on just about everything involving deaf politics and politics itself? It was a place seen as a "safe-haven" so to speak. But the forum is wretchedly and slowly dying of natural causes. What is the forum I'm speaking of? Not gonna say. Just let it be and let it die naturally. But if you do find the site via Google search you will find a warning beneath the link that says, "This site may harm your computer." Might as well be a leper colony that nobody in their right mind would want to go and visit.
Yeah, let it die. Tis only humane. No one really cares. Life moves on.
Remove "Deaf people can do anything except hear" phrase
The phrase "Deaf people can do anything except hear" is an oft repeated phrase used by many culturally deaf people but it's a phrase that I and millions of other people with hearing loss do not really care for.
Why?
Well, it's not entirely an accurate phrase for one thing because people with hearing loss can do anything including the ability to hear. Not everybody, mind you. Having said that it's unclear what the term "Deaf" seen in the phrase is referring to. If we're using Humphries and Padden's definition to mean culturally deaf people only, then perhaps the phrase is adequate for the most part when that phrase was invented at the time. Then again you'd have this deaf band Beethoven's Nightmare to contend with that question with their most recent YouTube video. If it's not Humphries and Padden's definition and instead to mean anyone with a hearing loss from mild to profound (all inclusive) then the phrase is sorely outdated and antiquated in the era of hearing technology. There are Deaf (new definition) people who can hear and do the jobs just like hearing people can using their ability to hear with the aid of existing hearing technology to perform the same type of jobs. This is another example of how the term "Deaf'" does not help make the case for culturally deaf people who insist on the newly defined term. And this is why.
Why?
Well, it's not entirely an accurate phrase for one thing because people with hearing loss can do anything including the ability to hear. Not everybody, mind you. Having said that it's unclear what the term "Deaf" seen in the phrase is referring to. If we're using Humphries and Padden's definition to mean culturally deaf people only, then perhaps the phrase is adequate for the most part when that phrase was invented at the time. Then again you'd have this deaf band Beethoven's Nightmare to contend with that question with their most recent YouTube video. If it's not Humphries and Padden's definition and instead to mean anyone with a hearing loss from mild to profound (all inclusive) then the phrase is sorely outdated and antiquated in the era of hearing technology. There are Deaf (new definition) people who can hear and do the jobs just like hearing people can using their ability to hear with the aid of existing hearing technology to perform the same type of jobs. This is another example of how the term "Deaf'" does not help make the case for culturally deaf people who insist on the newly defined term. And this is why.
CAD and the AB 455 California Bill
The AB 455 bill is looking more like a bill that needs to be thrown out because it lacks an official definition for the term "Deaf" seen here in the bill. Unless the bill can provide an official definition to the term "Deaf" then perhaps the bill can be saved rather than scrapped.
But there's a problem.
The confusion could be blamed on zealots who wanted to change the definition of the word "Deaf" with the capitalized "D" to mean all inclusive of those with a hearing loss from mild to profound, whether they know sign language or not. In fact, you have people like Dr. Genie Gertz, Ella Mae Lentz, and others who are in the same boat and would even agree with what Dr. Grushkin said,
California Association of the Deaf bylaws is another good example who used the term "Deaf" peppered throughout but no definition explaining the meaning "Deaf." Yet also, their bylaws make no reference to the term "hard of hearing," either. They didn't write down "Deaf and hard of hearing" in their bylaws like the AB 455 bill did but used only the "Deaf" term instead. In other words they made the term "Deaf" to mean all inclusive those with a hearing loss from mild to profound rather than to mean only for culturally deaf people.
At the very bottom of the bylaws CAD has a definition of the term "Deaf":
Over the last three decades Deaf (culturally deaf) people have made a point that they "own" the word "Deaf" and for it to mean explicitly one thing, a deaf culture group that uses ASL. They have always agreed with Padden and Humphries' definition of that term.
Well? What is it?
I'm waiting.
UPDATE: Of course, this is something that Tara Congdon failed to realize in her "investigative" reporting on CNN that the bill lacked any definition for the term "Deaf" which might become the unexpected monkey wrench. We'll wait and see, and get a more definitive report elsewhere whether the bill might present a problem or not.
But there's a problem.
The confusion could be blamed on zealots who wanted to change the definition of the word "Deaf" with the capitalized "D" to mean all inclusive of those with a hearing loss from mild to profound, whether they know sign language or not. In fact, you have people like Dr. Genie Gertz, Ella Mae Lentz, and others who are in the same boat and would even agree with what Dr. Grushkin said,
I choose to capitalize "Deaf" for all Deaf (and Hard of Hearing) people, not to signify any cultural affiliation, but to emphasize the common ethnicity of Deaf people. I believe that the d/D distinction is unnecessarily divisive, cumbersome, and ultimately more trouble than it is worth, although it did serve an important purpose in its time. But using Deaf for all does not signify cultural membership, just as not all Black people are necessarily part of Black culture or all Jews are practicing religious Jews.And compare that to the official definition of "Deaf" according to Carol Padden and Tom Humphries, in Deaf in America: Voices from a Culture (1988) who invented the capitalized, big D, word explains the meaning and difference between "D"eaf and "d"eaf:
We use the lowercase deaf when referring to the audiological condition of not hearing, and the uppercase Deaf when referring to a particular group of deaf people who share a language – American Sign Language (ASL) – and a culture. The members of this group have inherited their sign language, use it as a primary means of communication among themselves, and hold a set of beliefs about themselves and their connection to the larger society. We distinguish them from, for example, those who find themselves losing their hearing because of illness, trauma or age; although these people share the condition of not hearing, they do not have access to the knowledge, beliefs, and practices that make up the culture of Deaf people.In short, the term "Deaf" has always been defined as people who are culturally deaf and signs in ASL. That already defined word has already entered into the collective conscious minds of people for almost three decades. But people have a nasty habitat on putting the term "Deaf" into a bill or a bylaw without providing an official definition as a clarification.
California Association of the Deaf bylaws is another good example who used the term "Deaf" peppered throughout but no definition explaining the meaning "Deaf." Yet also, their bylaws make no reference to the term "hard of hearing," either. They didn't write down "Deaf and hard of hearing" in their bylaws like the AB 455 bill did but used only the "Deaf" term instead. In other words they made the term "Deaf" to mean all inclusive those with a hearing loss from mild to profound rather than to mean only for culturally deaf people.
At the very bottom of the bylaws CAD has a definition of the term "Deaf":
"Deaf is a term that includes all the individuals: born deaf, deafened in early, sometimes late childhood, for whom American Sign Language and Deaf community/culture collectively represent their primary experience and existence regardless of hearing disability they have.”Was that an official definition of "Deaf" from CAD? Curiously so in their most recently updated bylaws as of August of 2011 they presented no definition for the term "Deaf" in various forms such as "Deaf community," "Deaf individuals," and the single term "Deaf."
Over the last three decades Deaf (culturally deaf) people have made a point that they "own" the word "Deaf" and for it to mean explicitly one thing, a deaf culture group that uses ASL. They have always agreed with Padden and Humphries' definition of that term.
Deaf with a capital D is a cultural term, rather than an audiological one. As defined by Carol Padden and Tom Humphries in Deaf in America: Voices from a Culture (1988), Deaf refers ‘to a particular group of deaf people who share a language—American Sign Language (ASL)—and a culture.”Hence, it's understandable seeing the confusion of the bill's language writing in "Deaf and hard of hearing" into the bill when earlier it was written as "deaf and hard of hearing." Exactly what is the official definition of the term "Deaf" seen in the AB 455 bill?
Well? What is it?
I'm waiting.
UPDATE: Of course, this is something that Tara Congdon failed to realize in her "investigative" reporting on CNN that the bill lacked any definition for the term "Deaf" which might become the unexpected monkey wrench. We'll wait and see, and get a more definitive report elsewhere whether the bill might present a problem or not.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)