Why did CAD chapter president use his voice at AB2072 hearing?

I've waited to see if anybody had actually objected to Tim Riker, the chapter president of the California Association of the Deaf (Sacramento chapter), who used his voice at the AB2072 Senate Health Hearing on June 23, 2010 instead of signing in ASL as seen in the Calchannel.com (June 23) along with a partial transcript below on what he said which starts at 31 minutes and 40 seconds into the video:

Tim: Good afternoon, my name is Tim Arthur (actually, it's Tim Riker), I’m the president of the California Association of the Deaf, Sacramento chapter. I graduated from Georgetown University, and this fall, because of all this, I’m looking forward to starting my masters’ in public policy. We are opposed to the bill as it is currently written, but we’d like to see an amendment that would work for the best interest of deaf children and the parents. First of all, I wanted to thank you for the positive changes to the current mark up language of the bill, and it means progress, but the language of the bill still needs a little bit more work to make it so that we can really put the focus on the deaf children and getting the parents access to the information that they need. I wanted to point to a 2003 state senate resolution number 20, it formally apologized for the outrageous attempt to *socially engineer people out of *existence. The regional version of Mendoza’s AB 2072 bill leads us towards a slippery slope of *eugenics. So the proposed amendment is a very good step in the right direction. It is fair, if we have a few changes to the amendment. The proposed amendment by the health committee, it still threatens the fundamental values of a deaf education and language development, by giving audiologists the power to discriminate information for which they are not trained or licensed. The audiologists’ training gives them the buyer that’s inherently unacceptable, if the audiologist ought to have a role, it must only be to identify that child is deaf, as soon as possible, and then refer the parent to an appropriate professional or entity with a focus on the educational aspect of raising a deaf child. That needs to be determined by the panel of people who are, represented by people involved with the...

How come no outrage from people in the Deaf community for Time to use his voice when the issue was about getting ASL into the spotlight? With Tim Rikier's refusal to sign and use of his voice, was it to try and appear more "intelligent" and more "educated" hoping that linguicism would prevail on the part of the committee looking favorably at Tim's pleas and be impressed with him?

A) When a Deaf person is able to speak English with his voice, or write excellent English, he gets lauded as intelligent and well educated. This person is considered successful in life.

B) When a Deaf uses ASL (no matter how fluently), but writes mediocre English, and cannot speak English, he is considered intellectually inferior, ill-educated, and guaranteed to fail in life.

On linguicism:

SCENARIOS:

Two persons are talking. During the course of this conversation, one of the persons is assessing the other’s wealth, quality of education, status in society based on the other person’s use/choice of language or dialect.

A) If the other person shows an excellent command of English, the assessor assumes he is quite well-educated, possibly from a wealthy family, which then indicates an elevated status in society.
B) If that other person shows poor command of the English language, or uses another language, the assessor assumes that he’s ill-educated, poor, possibly from a ghetto and therefore from the lower classes in society.

What I don't understand is that since Tim Riker is deep within the world of Deaf culture and community as chapter president of CAD he uses his voice.... instead of signing using his proud and preferred language, American Sign Language. I kind of wondered what exactly was Tim's strategy in doing that. What was his goal to use his voice that day as chapter president of CAD? There were voice interpreters there that day and would have interpretted his signing yet he choose to use his voice that day, on live tv, in front of thousands of Deaf people tuning into the AB2072 soap opera. Not one single outcry from a Deaf person, community or group objecting or asking why he used his voice instead. Not one (as far as I can tell so far).

Why the silence? Is this another example of hypocrisy at work?

Now, I'm in favor of a person in choosing how one prefer to communicate. I won't discriminate anybody for doing that. It's really none of my business. There were ASL interpreters available for both voice and ASL translation at the meeting it wouldn't matter to me. I am not opposed to Tim or anybody else who choose to use his/her voice or sign. I'm just noticing the obvious disconnect between what Deaf people say about using voice over ASL when it comes to choice. And it's usually a negative one.

Now, when I choose to use my voice at Gallaudet University's first ever blog/vlog conference where it had ASL and voice interpreters, and real time captioners available for the live internet audience, I had gotten a few grumbling complaints and objections from some Deaf people saying what I did was rude and so on. And of all places on the sacred grounds of Gallaudet University did I dare use my voice in front of Deaf people. Oh well.

What I'm presenting here or trying to say is not about the complaints per se although I am wondering about that too but it's the irony in seeing a chapter president of CAD who is Deaf use his voice in front of thousands on live streaming tv (which is now recorded for history) in order to elevate the status and use of ASL. Did he unwittingly lowered the status of ASL as not important and choose to use his voice instead? Did he unwittingly elevated the use of voice over ASL that day? Those are the interesting questions I have here.

ADDENDUM: If you have no objection (I don't) to Tim Riker's using his voice then you should have no objections to Brenda Brueggemann, who is deaf and knows ASL, using her voice at Gallaudet University's 2006 graduation commencement speech?

ADDENDUM #2: In a blog called Random Thoughts and Musings by Moi blogger discussed the Breuggemann's use of her voice and agrees strongly that she shouldn't have used her voice and that it was plainly wrong. Oh really?

People in our community are free to choose what language they want to use in various situations - I absolutely agree with that. Dr. Brueggemann's choice, however, went far beyond the bounds of diversity and was, in my view, a grave offense. I took great affront at her choice that day...

Too bad this blogger doesn't know the true reason why Brueggemann decided to use her voice in an email exchange that Brueggemann and I had at the time. I wonder how this blogger feels about Tim Riker's use of his voice being that he's a chapter president of CAD? In both situations both had ASL interpreters at the time with the exception of Gallaudet University that had both an ASL interpreter and real time captioner for the large video screen at the graduation ceremony.

Related blog - Voice is way, way better than ASL!

Why the word "a*dism" ought to be banned

The word "a*dist" or "a*dism" is without controversy just as the word "racist" or "racism" is without controversy. This is especially true when used as a weapon of choice by purposely abusing it to suit an agenda. Words tossed around for a variety of reasons but usually done as part of an automatic and defensive response when arguments cannot prevail adequately.

I am known as a deaf/hh blogger and vlogger (limited tho in speaking roles only, and with captions) that is without controversy just as I am known as a contributing and valuable member in deaf/hh discussion forums. I am without controversy if anybody has ever followed my blogs or postings over the years but to have a controversal blog piece or a post/thread isn't equivocal as being an "a*dist." Nor can one extract and assume exactly what the attitudes might be and surmise them to be as "a*dists", either. Even if a comment or thread of a post that might deemed be "offensive" or "controversal" it'd be wise to keep in check than to throw the "a*dism" word around.

The title of my blog "Why the word 'a*dism' ought to be banned" was to drive a point and get your attention since it should be titled "Should the word 'a*dism' be banned?" If you know me you'd understand why I did this.

Three years ago I did what was probably considered to be the most controversial action I've done within a Deaf community (though I don't think playing the piano on stage at Gallaudet University for an audience isn't the same thing) and that was to use my voice in a speech at Gallaudet University back in 2007. I spoke at the first ever vlog/blog convention at Gallaudet University with a conviction believing that technology will continue to increase communication access between deaf/hh and hearing people. And it will. You can see a video of my speech in Gallaudet University's video catalog (or click here to watch the video in external mode that comes with a time stamp which I recommend doing so). My speech comes with an ASL interpreter. I am introduced at the 1 minute 54 second time mark along with other bloggers. My speech begins at the 29 minute and 14 seconds time mark and ends at the 45 minute and 35 seconds mark). I was the only deaf/hh person to have spoken using my voice and I explained my reason for doing so in my 2007 blog piece. Prior to my speech I verbally apologized to the audience (interesting that the interpreter never signed this "apology" part to the Deaf audience if you watched the video) at the very beginning for using my voice knowing that what I was about to do for those who know me as a deaf/hh person who know sign language would find it questionable, even insulting.

Yet my speech was only "controversial" to perhaps a small number of Deaf people who felt that I "insulted" Deaf people by not signing since some of them knew already that I do know ASL and by using my voice I was looked upon as an "a*dist." Nothing could be further from the truth. And frankly, it was rather amusing to hear such an accusation. Understandable, sure, in some ways but nonetheless amusing.

Firstly, I apologized in the beginning of my speech to the audience before me explaining that I do better speaking since my train of thought flows much better, I have done public speaking many times, it is natural for me to speak as I have done so throughout my life, there are interpreters available and that there is a real time captioner to capture my speech. All this was done to drive my most basic point and that technology will be key in helping expand and level the communication playing field between Deaf, deaf, hard of hearing, and hearing people. I still believe to this day that technology will be key in helping bridge that communication gap we all face today. It's just a matter of time.

Jill Bradbury, an assistant professor of Gallaudet University, was the original author of this blog/vlog conference idea where she hosted this first ever blog/vlog conference or Coalition for Critical Inquiry at Gallaudet University. Jill Bradbury posted a positive comment in my blog about my speech.

I thought it took a lot of confidence to stand up and speak during your panel. By doing so, you helped the conference make a strong statement about embracing diversity in the deaf community. Waving hands! At dinner someone said to me that you are supporting the deaf community in a really valuable way through your interest in technology. Thanks for keeping us informed! Jill.Bradbury 02.04.07 - 1:28 pm

Not only was I recognized and applauded for my so-called "controversial" speech from her but from other Deaf people who I've met afterwards and those who commented in my blog were equally praise worthy.

From "A Deaf Pundit" who is a well known Deaf blogger and vlogger had this to say about my use of my voice as seen in my blog comment box:

I was also pleasantly surprised to see that despite the diverse panelists, except for some fine details, all were in general agreement on what needs to be done to improve Gallaudet and the deaf community.

Chris Heuer, an assistant professor who is Deaf at Gallaudet University said this in my blog:

I was inspired by the conference and am DEFINITELY going to a much bigger web-geek than I already am!

Kristi Merriweather, a high school teacher for the deaf in Atlanta, Georgia had this to say:

I enjoyed the webcast, Mike and like many, you were not what I expected!

I mean, for sure I thought you'd bring that "sucky" piano! :-D

I really enjoyed watching the debate in MY language - you have no idea how good that made all of us feel!

Dianrez, a well known Deaf blogger who had this to say:

While I don't mind deaf people who prefer to speak than to sign (I have enjoyed talking to Robert Weitbrecht and others like him), using an interpreter puts an inadvertent wall between like people and this really should be avoided even at the expense of comfort. Still, we need people with your expertise. Wishing you all the best and enjoying your blogs very much! DPG Dianrez Homepage 02.04.07 - 2:49 pm #

Neil McDevitt, a known Deaf blogger and fire fighter who had this to say ,

Sorry we didn't get a chance to chat yesterday. I can certainly empathize with the decision to speak. I think you and I come from similar backgrounds and for the longest time, I would prefer to speak in front public audiences because it just felt more comfortable in terms of managing my train of thought.

That said, given that you were speaking at Gallaudet, it took brass cojones, my friend.

Stay low.
NeilMcD Homepage 02.04.07 - 5:42 pm #

"Curious Eyes" or Patty Albee (see page 6) who is a school psychologist at California School for the Deaf Fremont and was one of the panelists at the blog/vlog conference who had this to say:

McConnell, I thought I'd have issues with you speaking on the panel too, when you first told me you were going to do it. I asked the same question ToddE did -- what about the audience? But I changed my mind after meeting you, and seeing how you sign fluently and are easy to talk to. Some deaf people can both sign and talk fluently. If that person chooses to talk instead of sign to an audience of deaf people, that does not mean the person disrespects ASL and deaf people. It isn't "a*dism" either. It's simply a communication choice. That's ALL. The interpreter did a great job of interpreting for you and I didn't feel I was missing a thing. Curious Eyes 02.04.07 - 7:52 pm #

Wildstarryeyes or Katie Roberts (see page 6) who was also one of the panelists at the blog/vlog conference who had this to say

Yes, speaking, that was fine. I thought that took guts, too. I had no problem with it personally. It was nice meeting you, and I'm glad we could keep our little turf wars online and not carry it over in meatspace.

Aidan Mack, another well known Deaf blogger (and vlogger) who had this to say:

Firstly, I was impressed with you as a panelist. I agreed with you that Gallaudet University needed to create something that would make the world drawn to Gallaudet and embrace it so much.

Secondly, at first I always felt that you disliked ASL and Deaf people with big D until I saw you on a Live Web. It really changed how I looked at you and realized that you do support ASL and Deaf people with big D.

Thirdly, I really do wish that you did sign because it was your sign (word). With interpreter, I felt it was not your word. I felt something's missing. But again, it is your choice to speak and I have nothing against it. But what you sent your message to audience was great.

Thank you for participating Deaf community, working with us and to raise the bar. Good Job.

Everyone as panelists and Jill did an excellent job. I really enjoyed it so much.

Aidan
Aidan Mack Homepage 02.05.07 - 4:03 am #

And then there is Amy Efron Cohen, a very well known and respected Deaf blogger and vlogger who had this to say about my speech and voice at the conference:

Mike,
I wanted to say that the content of information you have presented was excellent! You made several great points and it shows that you really care about the community and wanted the best for the community. You presented yourself well with explaining why you used your voice. I have no problem with that, except being impressed how smooth you are with your presentation!

I am so glad that I am able to catch up with you and your signing skills had improved significantly since the day I met you for the first time at Gallaudet. You had no signing skills, but now you communicate effectively and effortlessly with ASL!

As for your *profile* which I instantly recognized you... well... I must admit that your profile is very, very distinct and unforgettable... *WINK*

Hope to bump into you again sometime soon and I'm glad we are in this together to make the community better for the future!
Amy Cohen Efron 02.05.07 - 6:26 pm #

The real damage to the Deaf community is for a person to go out of his or her way and accuse deaf or hard of hearing people of being "a*dists" whether directly, indirectly or by insinuation and call their opinions or actions as a "hate crime" are not only irresponsible but damaging. If a person wants to discuss the realities of "a*dism" then that's fine but to go ahead and imply or infer by insinuation about other deaf and hard of hearing people for his/her comments and opinions in a deaf/Deaf discussion forum calling them "a*dists" or charging them of a "hate crime" is not only dishonest but verges on the edge of extremism. It does nothing for the Deaf community in its relationship to the rest of the deaf and hard of hearing community (even hearing community of those with deaf/hh children) just to raise false accusations in order to satisfy an agenda.

This is the danger of using the word "a*dism" or "a*dist" as a weapon of choice. It does not solve anything in using it in such a manner . I recognize that inequalities and discrimination exist among people with various disabilities or conditions with those who are seemingly "normal." Or in this example between deaf/hh and hearing people.

Educating the public along with the help of the constantly improving communication technology to bridge that communication gap between deaf and hearing people are probably the best way to combat these inequalities that many of us deaf and hard of hearing people face everyday. It is certainly better than to lob reckless "a*dism" accusations at people by labeling them.

C2I Conference - why did I use my voice?

Well. The first Vlog/Blogger Conference at Gallaudet University has come and gone. It was a refreshing sight to see serious and thoughtful discussions, and the exchanges of ideas rather than a debate for a change. I'm sure if you watched the whole live webcast you'd have seen me speak vocally rather than sign. Let me take another opportunity here to explain as I tried to do so that at the beginning of my presentation at Gallaudet. And then I'll toss in some of my notes and further thoughts on this whole C2I conference.

First off. Congrats to Jill Bradbury for pulling this off. This was no small feat and she had to overcome many obstacles to get this one done. Can't wait til next year (?) to see another C2I conference. Will it be an annual thing? Time will tell. Many thanks to interpreters and captioners and everybody else involved in this historic event. It'll be recorded prominently in Annals of Gallaudet University.

Met a few familiar faces. Amy Cohen saw me and looked directly at me and she still didn't recognized me! She said she had to look at my side profile of my face to recognize me. Har har Amy.

Met Jamie Burke. Finally! Hello to her and continued luck with the blogging. Also, Kristi Merriweather was there and met and had a good time and opportunity to chat more with her in person for a change. Chris Huer was there and we got off to a good start on getting to know each other. Take heart, Chris. You did good no matter what people will say. Met my old chemistry teacher, Prof. Michael Moore. He still remembers me and some nice chats throughout the day. I also had a nice chat with Jane Norman who got a kick out of watching me play the piano. Heh heh.... Lots of positive reviews by people who saw me play the piano. For those who voted "No" on whether I should put my video up of me playing the piano on my blog, do you really think that your votes of "no" would've stop me? ;-) Glad to see that everybody had a good time. Meeting up with old friends and makiing new ones.

For those in Deafreedom land, "Wiggums" was there. Nice surprise! He used had a stopover flight in D.C. for several hours before the next flight out to Europe! For those who didn't come to the C2I conference when "Wiggums" was there is now officially on Wiggums' "bad list".

Now, on to my explanation for the speaking part.

I speak all the time. This is what I do at work. My train of thought is better when I speak. I speak at a similar capacity at work in front of groups of people that I deal with the public on environmental issues and water since I do work for the Federal government responsible for 1.1 million acres of government lands. I prepare presentations all the time. I deal with the concerned public on environmental issues either individually or in large groups, which, of course, at times I'm considered to be the target.

:-)

Now, I spoke also only because the C2I conference had voice and ASL interpreters, and a real time captioner available for the audience sitting in the seats before me and for the people out on the internet. Had it not any of the interpreters I would have signed. But in this case my preference has always been to talk and listen because i do well with it. And just as well an opportunity to showcase my point about choice and communication access. Not that I'm trying oppress anybody because of what I just did which would be ludicrous. That was an example of diversity where I am at one end of the spectrum as a deaf person who is hard of hearing. This is my identity. It always has been. And I'm still in the same boat with you and anybody else among the 30 million people with hearing loss in the United States. We all share very similar communication issues and concerns.

Now, this conference consisted mostly of three separate and consistent theme. And those are technology, communication, and education. My notes below consisted mostly about technology and how technology is the key when it comes to interaction and communication. I believe it's important to toss in my notes here because I believe Gallaudet is at a critical juncture in its survival right now. In other words, Gallaudet University must somehow re-invent itself, for the lack of a better word.

Note, some of my notes may be redundant. As always, there are lots of ideas out there that people may have on what to do about Gallaudet's future. In my honest and professional opinion is that technology is the key here for Gallaudet to survive and compete with the outside world. We MUST develop the technology on campus because we know what we want.

My conference notes for my presentation:

1. Technology - take advantage of this!

2. Communication - be involved!

3. Education - spread out knowledge, info, and raise that bar!

Ok. Here are my notes along with some modifications that I tried to convey last night but didn't have time. I will now clarify here on my blog.


"The Futuristic Classroom". What does it mean?

• Is it about the ability to interact?

• Is it about communication needs and preferences?

• Is it about accessibility when it comes to the free flow of information whether coming from a computer or human being?

• Is a “futuristic classroom” on campus only?

• How about off campus?

• Is it always about classrooms? What about outside of classrooms? Can learning take place outside of the classrooms?


What should we expect in a “Futuristic Classroom”?


• Technology seen in classrooms ought to reflect equally well the technology we would see on campus when it comes to communication and interaction.

• It ought to be seamless.

• Intuitive. Of common sense. Completely accessible and very transparent.

• A "no-brainer" (pardon the pun) campus the moment you step in at the front gate.

• The campus should be intuitively clear that Gallaudet is a university accessible to everyone at any time.

• Especially so for a Deaf person stepping onto the campus for the very first time seeing that technology along with service is leap years ahead of everybody's expectation on how a campus should function.

• The front gate is our advertisement to the world that they are invited to come in and without worry when it comes to their and, especially so, deaf people communication need where signing is the preferred mode of communication.


Is technology critical to Gallaudet University’s success?

• Yes. Extremely important.

• Why? Technology is moving faster than ever before. Technology and performance doubles every 2 years.

• Technology will play a major role in how we will interact with anyone on and off campus.

• We must plan 2 to 4 years in advance and take into consideration future technology not quite ready for the market but has been demonstrated such as the flat screen panel that’s thick as a playing card you can put up on a wall.

• We must also plan 5 to 10 years down the road on how technology can be integrated successfully all over the campus and in classrooms.


What area of technology is growing so fast?

• (describe computer chip speed and memory)
• cell phones
• internet connection
• voice recognition – it is widely being used today. Many cell phones have voice recognition features built into them. 
• ASL or sign language recognition later on down the road but potentially critical for Gallaudet survival and propagation and preservation of ASL.


What can we do?

• Gallaudet must RE-INVENT itself!
• This is critical to Gallaudet University’s success and survival.
• Technology is the key.
• Look around the conference room.
• Today’s conference is a perfect example of how technology is helping you, Gallaudet University, and future students to continue to thrive and succeed.
• Technology is key to the preservation and, even, propagation of ASL.
• ASL was never in danger in the first place!


Must have a program established on campus. One idea is to have what you called “Media Lab”. Media doesn’t necessarily mean “news” or “info” but how we use and spread information and ideas by incorporating the value of communication on all levels. An experimental campus. Must establish a core research area on Gallaudet that can become recognized as an important scientific "Think Tank" on campus. Everybody is involved. Even kids since sometime they bring up the darndest and great suggestion.

• Need to keep people who have done computer/technology work relating to communication on campus of Gallaudet. Such as Christian Vogler, who will leave Gallaudet this April, who has done his PhD work on computer ASL-recognition and facial recognition. Lots of valuable time, resources and money were put into him will be lost upon Gallaudet when he leaves. Also, same goes for other people who have done similar work. We need to bring those people on board and begin the real serious research and must have the full support of Gallaudet University.

• Must use technology on campus and develop better technology because we know what we are looking for and want.

• Why wait for technology to happen when the researchers, students and other contributors on campus can make it happen first and earlier?

• There are no engineering program at Gallaudet. Why not?
• Establish computer science and electrical engineering program on campus. Use existing consortium universities and their engineering classrooms to help fill the engineering gap at Gallaudet in the meantime.
• This may lead to the increased potential of retaining engineering students at Gallaudet. Perhaps develop masters program? Use consortium universities?
• Have students develop a need to have this "Media Lab" which may help keep students on campus and not quit early or go home.
• We must employ greater use of the consortium program.
• As a requirement, undergraduates (and perhaps graduates) need to attend at least 2 to 4 classes at one of the 13 universities in and around D.C. as part of their graduation requirement.
• Why?
• Because we will always interact with hearing and deaf.


What’s more is that We are seeing this capability today. Compared to 5 years ago, just think of the kind of technology we didn’t have. And think where we may be in 5 to 7 years from now.

Digital convergence

University of Idaho engineering outreach

Consortium universities – how many of them are wired and accessible. A “webcam” in every classrooms?
universities that are a part of the consortium program


Establish a new program that will support researchers at the graduate and staff level, as well as professors who are in the area of technology and communication accessibility.

For example, Christian Vogler who is deaf and has a PhD who worked in the area of ASL-recognition research where computers would learn to recognize ASL movements and decipher them.

Invent the technology here on campus and patent them which could be a source of revenue in the future.

A “mini-MIT” campus so to speak.

What program would be ideal to start with?

Have a program called “Media Lab”.

It does not necessarily mean “news” or “info”. It is about how information is used and propagated. It is how we interact with each other on the social level is where we get our new information.

Related blog - Voice is way, way better than ASL!