Why did I blog about Kappa Gamma?

Why did I blog about Kappa Gamma?

For one, it's the despicable hazing and intimidation they have committed in the past and continued even after getting caught a few times for hazing. Did any of them learn anything at all after all those years even after getting caught repeatedly for hazing and getting repeat suspension? Sometimes I doubt that after seeing the number of hazing victims and the number of people that were intimidated in their wake. Although I'm naturally an optimistic person I leave you that with an open mind.

Secondly, the fraternity paddle represents the power to exert physical, mental and emotional abuse on their intended victims. To me, the paddle symbol does not represent brotherly love or respect for their fellow human beings but power. The power to exert control over their "lowly subjects" through physical and mental punishments during initiation rites. The kind of rites that have left lasting scars on many pledges whether they made it through the initiation or not.   Seeing a paddle is really a reminder on who the real bullies are. Why continue hanging proudly the fraternity paddles on the walls? Is that what bullies do when they put their trophies of past victims on their walls?

Thirdly, despite the organization cleaning up their act and publicly supporting a vigorous anti-hazing policy the problem is the number of hazing victims they have left in their wake spanning decades. Kappa Gamma or any of their brothers have refused to publicly apologize for causing physical, mental and emotional pain on their subjects seeing them as less than human beings.

Kappa Sigma is the one fraternity at Gallaudet University that best exemplify the philosophy of brotherly respect and seeing their pledges as true human beings and as equals and not some "lowly scum" subjects who deserve to be hazed and intimidated. That is an example that all fraternities and sororities should strive for without the need to have any kind of hazing, no matter how subtle.

Of course, in any fraternity organization you have your few bad apples who insist on using their influence and power to intimidate and bully other people long after they have graduated and made a name for themselves in the working world. If they think they are safe in their place of power from their own past misdeeds, then they better think twice about that. History has a way of catching up. Yet, they continue to be the bullies they are and set bad examples and name for their own fraternity long after the fraternity has cleaned up its act of no more hazing and acts of intimidation.  It is the fraternity's responsibility to confront their brotherly bullies to clean up their act and stop targeting their victims and other people through intimidation and fear.

You see? This is what hazing creates. For some victims it can create lasting emotional and psychological pain long after the initiation was completed. It is really a fraternity's own fault for creating that kind of an atmosphere that is still being felt today by some of their victims. Even though many fraternities have cleaned up their act and instituted a strong anti-hazing policy stance the problem is the many victims they left in their wake because of their own stupidity and ego.

It's time that brothers and the KG fraternity do a public apology for their intimidation and hazing practices over the years. It is the only way that will help with the healing process between them and their victims whether they are already brothers or former pledges who didn't make it. This would be a true act of unity in action rather than continue with a divisive attitude and acts of intimidation.  In fact, some fraternity brothers have done exactly that by apologizing for their past misdeed and naïve behaviors like this one fraternity brother who wrote an apology letter to all the victims that he helped create simply because he was young and naive:

Yet, if I truly want to be a Revolutionary Man, I have to be ruthlessly honest with myself. I have to own up to mistakes I’ve made, people I’ve pissed off, and most importantly people I either took advantage of or caused unnecessary harm to. Above all, I have to be honest about where I stepped out of my own integrity. This process requires that I leave no stone unturned.

The purpose of this post is to publicly apologize and to own up to three key mistakes I made while I was an undergraduate:

1. I watched and did nothing as others were hazed, knowing inside that it was wrong. 

2. In turn, I betrayed my own integrity and hazed others. I manipulated, misled, shamed, and verbally and emotionally hurt other men.  

3. When I changed my tune and realized hazing was wrong, I “came out” against hazing in a very unskillful fashion.

In college I took part in hazing other men with the aim of unifying each pledge class and “making” pledges active members of my fraternity. A guy had to “earn” his way in, and dammit, I was going to make it hard for him. After all, I reasoned, I went through it, now he has to go through it too. I think the members achieved the desired outcome of unifying the pledge class, but the means with which we did it were plain wrong.

I had many justifications for my behavior. “It’s not really real.” “I didn’t mean the things I said to him.” “It was just a joke, all BS, just for fun.” “If this guy didn’t go through hell week, he’d still be an arrogant asshole. I put him in his place.” “It made him a man” and many, many other such rationalizations.

Not until I became President of the fraternity did I begin to fear the repercussions of my actions. My good friends called me “God squad” to imply that I was abusing my power as I tried to balance old traditions with my new responsibilities. I began to slowly speak out against hazing some, but pretty weakly and was too scared to really stand up.

When I began to work for my fraternity headquarters as a leadership consultant after college, I really changed my tune. There, I heard a man speak by the name of Dave Westol who spoke of the atrocities of hazing. I got it at that speech. This is when I began to piss a lot of folks off: “Who’s the hypocrite telling us what to do?”

Now, years later and with a master’s degree in psychology under my belt, and having studied trauma extensively, I understand the price tag of hazing on the human psyche.

When faced with a threatening situation, we humans respond in one of four ways: Fight, flight, freeze or submit. In college, I witnessed men go through all of these. Men cried, men fought back, men left the fraternity forever, men “took it,” and men just simply shut down—they would get silent for hours, days, and weeks.

I traumatized other men, period. Yes, I was young and naïve, but that is no excuse for immature, hurtful behavior. I was a boy initiating other boys.

Grow a conscious. Grow some gonads. Be revolutionary and apologize to your victims. Show yourselves to be real men by exemplifying what fraternity brothers are really like and that is to show true respect for their fellow human beings whether they are brothers or not. Move away from a boy-like mentality and finally become men with pride and respect.

I support the victims. They have no voice because they were effectively silenced through acts of intimidation by instilling fear in them for even daring to speak up about past transgressions against them.

I am challenging you, Kappa Gamma, to finally do the right thing.

President Hurwitz (a Kappa Gamma brother of the 83rd Congregation who is now the university president of Gallaudet University - he is listed on the KG website as being in the 83rd Congregation and called a brother and never attended Gally as a student but is an honorary brother), do you support the victims or the few wayward brothers who continue to intimidate people into silence? Do you understand the price tag of hazing spanning decades on the human psyche and what it does to the victim's moral and self esteem?  Did you also watched and did nothing? Do you not feel remorse or concerns?  Do you wish to finally unify all of your brothers and past pledges and other past victims of hazing? Do the right thing, president Hurwitz and set an example.

These victims will not be silenced!

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:

"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:

http://www.zazzle.com/the_deaf_militants_battle_with_the_hydra_monster_poster-228388261844109024

 

http://pinterest.com/silentmobster42/deaf-militants-battle-with-hydra-monster/

 

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=349626648493186&id=325226907599827

 

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.
 

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.

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.

Deaf staff bullying others at ASDB?

Where is this "I am - Fiver!" when you need her or him around (see near bottom of page)?

If this bullying actually happened then this would be the first known example of Deaf teachers or staff bullying others in the effort to get him or her in trouble by making up nonsense stuff. The practice of instilling fear into those who have alternative opinions or beliefs when it comes to deaf education, mode of communication and language development. Here's one hard of hearing staff or teacher at the Arizona School for the Deaf and Blind, who may have worked there at one time, recalled his time the going ons while working at ASDB as seen in the comment section of the Arizona Daily Star reporting on the  explosive ASDB story.

Working at ASDB not being in the in crowd, everyone watches you and reports silly crap to your supervisor. I know I was good at my job, but I allowed myself to be pushed out because going to work in a hostile work environment everyday is not healthy. Being watched and being called into your supervisors office everyday for petty stuff becomes old and tiring. I look back now and wish I would have went and talked to Robert Hill, but Nancy A. would have probably told the deaf community and I would have hell to pay.  

Bullying some of the teachers and/or staff as well as bullying hard of hearing students at ASDB? Have these incidents actually taken place at that school? If so, then it's a disturbing revelation.

Do you recall one anonymous commenter from two years ago under the pseudonym "I am Fiver!" who proclaimed to be "the most dangerous threat to their (Deafhood) plans" and discussed the idea of this so-called "assimilation" plan?

Shel has been the most vociferous with her attempts to rationalize these methods that are oppressive to those children with residual hearing and speech that can be developed. The “bi-bi” approach, or rather “movement” is operating under the guise of “teaching language and culture.” This implies that ASL and Deaf culture are only incidental to the teaching, when in fact, those concepts are the main goal. Auditory methods and speech articulation are suppressed under the rationale that it is necessary in order for these children to “assimilate” ASL to proficiency. There are many fallacies regarding this assumption. But just bear in mind that these people are profoundly affecting the lives of these children by altering the primary language to ASL and by exposure to a culture that has not been defined.

There is no theory or empirical evidence that ASL is a “bridge” to English language learning, even though this very premise has been claimed by many renowned (unnamed) educators of the deaf. In the past these advocates for “bi-bi,” ASL, etc. have alluded to, or insinuated that such a thing exists. But when pressed, they admit that there is no evidence. This has not stopped them, however. They are fervently working to manufacture “studies” and seeking out established language experts to validate their methods, by claiming parallels about how hearing persons learn foreign language. It is not the same! Learners of a second language have already acquired their primary language!

The goal of our schools, whether they are public schools for the hearing or public (state schools) for the deaf, the majority of states require that English must be taught as L1 (English=First Language). This is not happening in deaf schools where ASL is being taught as L1 (ASL=First Language). In such cases, this is clear violation of state law. Children must be taught English in order to function and be economically viable in the world, once they leave the school. I suppose, I do not know, but suppose, that they will rationalize their actions by saying that deaf require a visual language in order to communicate. All that they are doing is engraining these children into a language that is little known or used outside of deaf circles.

The minds of young children are “in the process” of being wired in early childhood. Although much of this “wiring” occurs in the first 2-3 years, it continues for many years after this “ideal window” for language development. Once a child is “wired” for a language of a certain type, that mode becomes life-long and unlikely to change. Proponents of the “bi-bi” movement know this, and are pressing forward with this misguided approach that will create a whole new generation of deaf individuals bereft of English language skills, recognizable speech, and enculturation into an extremely small minority “society” that has historically, and likely to remain a social and economic under-class in perpetuity.

Sounds like this "Fiver" person is somebody from the inside of ASDB or was on the inside or at another deaf school. At least the person appears to know a lot more details than he or she would care to share. Is this really about regaining a sure toehold on the whole indoctrination process the reason behind the constant bullying, if true, and the taping of a hard of a hearing student's mouth for talking in class, if true? Then perhaps once the investigation into these allegations on both sides at ASDB gets done it might shed some light on the veil of secrecy among the staff and the going on. Then again we might not get to the bottom of this. But one thing for sure, it won't be pretty once the investigation is over. 

Don Grushkin's Piece on Dylan Quick : Self-Flagelation Begins

The news hit with blaring headlines after headlines on the tragedy of 14 students who got stabbed at the Lone Star Community College by a crazed student. I dreaded reading such depressing news but read I did.  Then I saw the words, "deaf," and then "wears a cochlear implant" but nothing on whether Dylan Quick knew sign language or whether he was another culturally deaf person who went on a killing spree or rampage.  A rampage that would make the cut for the Texas Chain Saw Massacre movie like this culturally deaf woman did by using a chain saw on her dead lover after murdering her. I knew it would be a matter of time until somebody from the culturally deaf community would take advantage of the news as a clarion call against cochlear implants, AGBell, auditory-oral schools, cyber/bullying and Auditory Verbal Therapy for deaf and hard of hearing kids all on the premise of Dylan Quick's supposedly intolerable upbringing as a deaf kid. Some actually made the claim that this stabbing spree was a manifestation as a result of the "oral-only philosophy" impact which "destroys deaf children."

Whatever.

But lo and behold it wasn't long until a deaf person named Donald Grushkin, a PhD holder (more of him in YouTube) in the field of deaf studies wrote a piece called "I was Dylan Quick" empathizing with Dylan Quick's own deafness issues as if Donald Grushkin knew what Quick's own psychological or social issues were in the first place.

However, an even more important issue soon arose: it was revealed that Dylan Quick is a Deaf (capitalized to indicate ethnicity, regardless of cultural affiliation) person who was orally-raised and uses a cochlear implant. My thoughts just as rapidly turned from gun control to the issue of mental health, especially where Deaf and hard of hearing people are concerned, and moreover, I quickly envisioned the media reports characterizing Dylan Quick as an “isolated loner” without mentioning he is Deaf, or focusing on causes and issues related to his rampage which have nothing to do with his being Deaf, insinuating that this is an isolated incident. Yet, finding out that Dylan Quick is Deaf himself, I immediately empathized with him in his expression of what must be intolerable rage and frustration, for I, at one point in my life, could have done almost exactly what he did. 

If I may say so while I'm at it the capitalized "D" in "Deaf" as explained by Donald Grushkin was used to indicate "ethnicity" presents numerous problems.  Aside from that in Donald's piece he seems to be assuming a lot of things on what Dylan's personal and social life growing up as a deaf person might have been like and whether his life was a "tolerable" one or not. Rather than wait and see exactly what the media may report on what Dylan Quick's own life was like growing up as a deaf person, Donald Grushkin took the empathy route and attempted to project his own life experiences growing up as a deaf person with that of Dylan Quick's even though we know nothing about Quick's own social and life background while growing up as a deaf kid.  Although there are a few tidbits of information gleaned so far on Dylan's supposedly eccentric behaviors we can only assume so much (but shouldn't anyway) at this point.

"He was an eccentric kid, so a lot of people thought he was weird," Chalflan explained, adding that students sometimes would make fun of the suspect behind his back. "He was always in his own little world but was super friendly."

The suspect, who was rumored to be hard of hearing, was known for his odd clothes and the pair of work-out gloves he'd always wear, according to Chalfan. He was often seen carrying a stuffed monkey toy.

Perhaps we will know more in the coming days what Dylan's personal and social life was like, and what his preferred mode of communication? Eccentricity or weirdness does not equate with tendency towards extreme violence.  Even if a deaf person who made a zombie clip mocking another deaf person would not necessarily mean anything other than a person was simply venting or having a bit of fun when all else fails and having a PhD just won't do.

Donald proceeded in his article piece describing his experiences while growing up as a deaf person:

I was born Deaf.  Upon finding I was Deaf, my parents decided to do exactly as Dylan’s parents did: raise him as an “oral” person, meaning we were taught to speak through auditory pathways and to use whatever hearing capacities we had to the best of our abilities.  Unlike Dylan, I was (in my view, fortunately)born too soon to receive a cochlear implant; this technology did not become commonplace until around the 1980s. Through the use of lipreading, hearing aids, intensive and ongoing speech therapy, I learned to speak; my speech is nearly indistinguishable from that of a Hearing person’s.

His speech is nearly indistinguishable from that of a hearing person's? Must've been really hell during all those speech therapy sessions but I'll bite.

But what about the hypocrisy some "Deaf" people have against deaf or hard of hearing people who prefer to speak and listen, even if they know sign language?  As long as speech is intelligible then everything is fine. Speech intelligibility is the important key here rather than how well a deaf person's own voice ranks with that of hearing people. Why even bother? Ever hear a native southerner speak with a deep, southern drawl while chewing on wad of tobacco?

The term "born Deaf" with the capitalized "D" has its own problems, too. As for Donald Grushkin's own hearing loss situation we don't know when Donald was fitted with a hearing aid as a toddler or a young child at age 3, 4 or 5 years old.  Studies have shown that early exposure to auditory input can make a huge, huge difference along with parental involvement.  We don't know exactly how much his hearing loss is or the type of hearing loss he has. Or what his word discrimination is like. Or the whether he derived any real benefits from using his hearing aid that gave him his speech ability that is "nearly indistinguishable from that of a Hearing person’s."

He further described how his life was peppered with bullying experiences and how it was "hell":

Prior to the sixth grade, my family moved to another state, where I entered Middle School. As almost everyone knows, these “tween” years are quite often stressful for many students, especially those who stand out as “different” –intellectually, physically, or socially. Being Deaf, I naturally stood out among all these other Hearing students, and as a result, I experienced extreme ostracism and what today would be termed “bullying” wherein certain students would deliberately use my abilities to lipread and inability to hear against me, in order to elicit reactions they thought were funny.  It is fortunate that my parents are not gun owners, for I can all too easily envision myself at that time taking a gun or two to school and shooting my tormentors.  All too likely, some innocent students would have become “collateral damage” during my expression of rage, if I had done this, and I am thankful today that this never took place.  After two years of this personal Hell, I convinced my parents to allow me to attend a school for the Deaf, where I knew that my being Deaf would NOT be a cause for such bullying.  I cannot begin to express my gratitude for my education within the Deaf world, for without it, I know I would not today be where I am – a successful, happy, married with children Deaf man with a doctorate who teaches at a major state university.

Luckily parents are not gun owners? I'll bite, again, but the most startling revelation was Donald Grushkin's own statement that he could've been the "Dylan Quick" of his day 30 years ago while as a young adult had his parents owned guns at home.

Scary.

He  acknowledged his own past repressed rage because his life was deemed "impossible" to live in a "hearing world" or so it seems.

Of course, not all deaf or hard of hearing people are the "Dylan Quick" kind. In fact, Richie's, who grew up as a deaf person since birth with profound hearing loss. He is a big gun advocate. His own life turned out pretty darned well. He wrote his own rebuttal article piece, "Not all Deaf People are Dylan Quick," against Donald Grushkin's empathy piece.

Some deaf people empathize with the crazed guy who stabbed 14 people in Texas, pointing out the frustration in gaining acceptance with the mainstream given the deafness. I don't buy it.

According to the news, Dylan Quick received his cochlear implant at the age of seven and had fantasies of stabbing people at the age of eight. Is there a correlation? Or was it sheer coincidence? You decide. I was offered the opportunity to hear at the age of six but declined. I was very content and saw no reason to change anything. Thirty-five years later, I have no regrets whatsoever. Furthermore, the technology was crude back then and was in desperate need of being perfected. Now that the technology is much closer to perfection, I will still decline for I am now an old dog who cannot be taught new tricks. However, I have no qualms with younger deaf children being given the opportunity to hear. The younger, the better. Although, I'm more of a stem cell guy.

Was it the deafness that prompted the stabbing or was it the fact he was a loner? Not all loners are deaf nor are all deaf people loners. Some deaf people get along with those who are not deaf while some don't. It could be due to impropriety as deaf people have the tendency to lack familiarity with social norms particularly with humor or sarcasm. Or it could be that people don't have the patience to scribble on a piece of paper to communicate with the deaf person. There are other factors as well. Less than 1 out of 1,000 people can claim fluency with sign language so it is a very rare language. I can assure you the repeated claims of American Sign Language (ASL) being the third (or fourth) most widely used language is a myth. If there was any truth to this, I would encounter a lot more signers in shopping malls or in public settings.

Despite my profound deafness, I have friends who are not deaf, some from high school, some from my childhood neighborhood, and some co-workers. In fact, my oldest friends are not deaf and I see them regularly. They do not know sign language but they are used to me as well as me to them. I also see my former co-workers whenever I'm in the area of my former job. We're close although they don't sign.

My friends who are not deaf won't scribble on a piece of paper nor have they expressed interest in meeting other deaf people. They like me for who I am. Perhaps it's my sense of humor. Also, they don't see themselves as "hearing." Here's a perfectly logical explanation behind this:

Blind people call us "seeing," assuming we are not also blind. The word "seeing" is foreign to us since we don't encounter blind people very often. Since we're deaf, we regularly use the word "hearing," but most hearing people have yet to encounter a deaf person so they are not accustomed to that particular word.

I was born without hearing. I was classified as profoundly deaf since birth. Hearing aids were moot and I stopped wearing them at the age of seven very much to the chagrin of my teachers who insisted I keep them on to maintain my speech. They were sorely mistaken, hearing aids never worked on me but I retained my ability to speak. I do not claim to be educated since I dropped out of high school at the young age of sixteen. I went to college for only one year and realized it wasn't my cup of tea seeing how it would have no effect on my future or my success.

I started using sign language at the age of six and still sign. I sign fluently and easily pass for a native ASL signer. I have deaf friends too but I am also very fortunate to still speak. The thorny issue is that had I been unable to speak, I would not have been able to work in a company. Sure, I could find work in the VRS industry, the government, or at a school for the deaf. Instead, I chose to work as a marketing manager responsible for graphics, writing proposals, ensuring production milestones are met, and making sure our marketing materials are up to date. There are times I wish there were more deaf people working in non-governmental jobs. The level of discrimination is at unbearably unacceptable levels but we also need to look at it from their perspective. Would you hire a Navajo speaker to do the job? Exactly.

Frankly, it is a difficult dilemma. An interpreter just won't cut it, hence my sheer frustration. I usually spell frequently, thus risking misunderstandings when I say something such as, "The animation sequence is messing up the shadow effect." A simple sentence that took me 20 seconds to describe to the interpreter so she could relay it to the person on the other side of the line. Saying it would take only three seconds. Mind you, that was an experienced interpreter. Sometimes it'd take me three seconds to sign something and the interpreter would take 30 seconds to explain it. ASL is funny sometimes.

Anyways, not all deaf person are Dylan Quick so hearing people mustn't fear us.

This is insofar about a deaf or hard of hearing college student who had this lurid and unhealthy obsession to stab people since he was in elementary school. He finally acted out his fantasy to stab people at random. He fulfilled his own wish to hurt or attempted to murder them during the stabbing spree which appears to have been done at random. Quick was mentally unstable. Off his rockers. Nuts. Just like how a culturally deaf man murdered two culturally deaf people with a 20-gauge shotgun. He was mentally unstable. Or the Joseph Mesa case, a Gallaudet University student who murdered another deaf student on campus. Or a culturally deaf woman who murdered her own culturally deaf lover and then cut her up into pieces with a chain saw. No doubt mentally unstable. It's no surprise that deaf people do go out and kill/murder other people whether they're deaf or hearing. They're just a bunch of mentally unstable people who don't know any better. I have no sympathy for them at all. I side with the true victims of the crime. I don't make excuses for them.

Each of us as a deaf or hard of hearing person we deal with adversity in our own ways. Some see themselves as perennial victims, complaining and bitching every step of the way and rail against the "hearing system." Others do not see themselves as victims but see the very people who attacked or looked down on them as simply a bunch of misinformed, uninformed, and uneducated lot. But thank God for my hearing aid, my mother and for her to not put me into a "Deaf school" because I did very well in regular schools, made friends and competed in sports winning national championships otherwise I would not be who I am today. 

Let the self-flagellation begin by some in the deaf community in the effort to assuage their own internal guilt complex.




Hat tip for the help with thanks to Richie B.

When gays support McCaskill

Here's a guy who is gay makes a point about the importance of not stifling a healthy debate and makes a note about the whole marriage thing by referring to the McCaskill/Gallaudet snafu.

As actively engaged citizens, we are supposed to be involved in healthy, productive debates about this topic from one end of the Free State to the other in advance of casting our ballots. But for some reason, decent folks with legitimate viewpoints frequently choose to remain silent. Why? 

We've seen pundits like the Washington Post's Richard Cohen saying, "The opponents [of same sex marriage] have no case other than ignorance and misconception and prejudice," (June 28, 2011). Is a statement like this intended to invite robust debate, or shut it down?

Who can forget the mayors of Boston, Chicago and San Francisco last summer, vowing to exile beyond their city limits any person or business (i.e., Chick-Fil-A) questioning the notion of same-sex marriage? Seems more like tyranny than collegial dialogue.

When the Washington Blade published the names and addresses of everyone who signed the same-sex marriage petition which led to Question 6's inclusion on the Maryland ballot, this incited multiple instances of personal harassment. It led to people being confronted by strangers in their driveways. It went so far as to jeopardize the employment of Gallaudet University's Chief Diversity Officer, Angela McCaskill. These types of incidents are meant to intimidate those who hold a differing view from expressing their views. Yet these folks had only signed a petition, not a letter of condemnation.

People who don't have a prejudiced, homophobic bone in their bodies are afraid to make known the fact that they're not prepared to jump on board with same-sex marriage. The too-clever proponents of the new law have conflated the issue of ending prejudice against gays with the notion of same-sex marriage. They are unrelated.

Doug Mainwaring is right. Dr. Angela McCaskill only signed a petition, not a letter of condemnation. Equally true is that the stifling of true dialogue through fear and intimidation will not go anywhere. The very act of turning this into a personal agenda for the ulterior purpose to make sure McCaskill gets fired is nothing more than a personal harassment case. In short, the hallmark of a bully. Yet the irony plays itself out here when president Hurwitz requested that Gallaudet University establish an anti-bullying policy for faculty, staff, and students back in 2011 stating (see page 2):

We are currently developing an anti-bullying policy for faculty, staff, and students. A brief video, “It Gets Better,” was made by Gallaudet students and is available at http://youtu.be/WoaYsF_OzXU."

It gets better? I beg to differ. Who would've thunk that a faculty member would actually try and bully another faculty member into submission in the hope of getting that member fired? 

Bullying

Fortunately I have not been a victim of bullying since I don't see myself as a victim in the first place. Rather I see the perpetrator as someone who wants attention in the effort to raise his or her self-esteem by targeting certain people with their rants and hate. For years as a blogger I've been a target of bullying-tactics by a few deaf people who have graced my blogsite of time's past. The same people who have attacked those commenting in my blog comment box and used profane language against them. Ultimately I was forced to ban them from my blogsite after warning them to cease against attacking people who leave comments in my blog. Even that didn't always work because they usually find a way to continue with the attacking and bullying. But in my own wisdom I've learned to ignore those people who insist on finding ways to target me.

What prompted me to blog about this was because of an article I read on the psychology of bullying asking an interesting question, "Bullies Have Low Self-Esteem Or High Self-Esteem?"

But current research shows that most bullies actually have high self-esteem. Bullies usually have a sense of entitlement and a feeling of superiority over others, and lack compassion, impulse control and social skills. They enjoy being cruel to others and sometimes use bullying as an anger management tool, the way a normally angry person would punch a pillow. Research does support the fact that bullies have low empathy and don’t know how it feels to be in someone else’s shoes.

I never realize that a person who bully sometimes uses it as an anger management tool. That one surprised me but I certainly understand that such attitudes and actions give them the feeling of superiority over others and enjoy being cruel to them in a variety of ways over the internet.  Such cruelties include name calling, put downs, smearing, lying or going after their families or spouses by targeting them in order to get to his/her main target.

More on bullying....

As long as bullies are able to manipulate another person or a situation, their self-esteem goes up. Once bullies lose control of their victim, or realize that they can’t manipulate situations to their liking, their self-esteem goes down. This causes them to look for new victims to manipulate and control so that their self-esteem can go up again. The bullying in itself almost becomes an emotional fix that bullies need in order to feel good about themselves.

Which is why it's important to ignore certain bullies for their bullying tactics because by doing so you are not giving them any opportunity for control or the opportunity to try and manipulate you.  If you can do this  try and block the person from your blog, YouTube, Facebook or anywhere else. The bullies I've come across in the past I see them almost as the equivalent of a druggie who seeks emotional fixes in order to get that same "high." It's almost a description of  stalker looking for his/her next fix.

If you come across a bully, do not try and engage with a bully. Best weapon is to put that online bully on ignore. Or, if you can, try and ban that person. That's what I did and I was able to take that control away from the few bullies who knew no better. It takes confidence to wrest control away from an online bully by the mere simple act of ignoring the bully in the first place. You have that power.

Just the facts, Ma'am.

I'm not sure what the deal is here with DP on going after me, Candy and Ann_C other than it's nothing more than another witch hunt over a difference of opinions under the guise of "facts" and which people have more "credibility" (note the underline bold throughout): 

On one hand, we have Amy Cohen Efron, a deaf ASL user who has a Master’s degree and works solely in the Deaf Community. We have MishkaZena, a formerly oral deaf person who now uses ASL fluently. She holds two Master’s degrees and has worked extensively in the Deaf Community. And you have me – a native ASL deaf user, who has a bachelor of science degree and has worked/volunteered extensively in the Deaf Community. All of us three have done some form of scholarly research on the Deaf Community. We’ve read books, professional journal articles, attended classes and professional workshops focusing on various issues in the Deaf Community. We participate and subscribe to an email list serv for deaf academics. And it is very easy to find out MishkaZena and my real names – our real identities are not a secret.

On the other hand, we have Mike M, Ann_C and Candy. Nearly nothing is known about Ann_C. We do not know her real name, nor whether if she holds a college degree. The only thing we know is that she is an oral deaf/severely hard of hearing person who, by her own admission, infrequently uses American Sign Language. She has not mentioned working or volunteering within the Deaf Community, or even having friends who use ASL. I have not seen her discuss reading scholarly books, journal articles or the like, about the Deaf Community. From what I’ve gathered so far from her, the only information Ann_C gets about the Deaf Community, is from the v/blogs.

Mike M is hard of hearing and holds a baccalaureate degree. To my knowledge, he does not work or volunteer in the Deaf Community and primarily uses his voice to communicate. McConnell even wrote once on his blog, which post has apparently been deleted or buried under the reams and reams of posts, that he thought there was something such as too much education. As far as I’ve seen, he has not discussed whether after graduating from Gallaudet, if he has read any scholarly books, journals or the like on the Deaf Community.

And we have Candy. Very little is known about this woman. She appears to be a hard of hearing woman who claims to sign. She has not mentioned whether she works or volunteers in the Deaf Community. Word has it that Candy only has a high school diploma, since she is a college dropout, but we don’t know that for sure, since she has refused to disclose her credentials or her real name. Candy has mentioned that she refuses to read Harlan Lane’s Mask of Benevolence, because she heard it was too biased. Aside from the proclamation of refusal, Candy has not discussed reading any scholarly books, journal articles or the like, on the Deaf Community. And lastly, her claim to expertise regarding the Deaf Community, is supposedly due to her being from a Deaf family and her sister being a high school teacher.

The questions now for all of you to consider are – who do you hold as being more credible on the Deaf Community issues? Whose ideas will you primarily draw from, so you can then help obtain what’s in the best interests for the Deaf Community? Which ideas will you hold as being credible?

What I see here appears to be an attempt to try and out individuals like Ann_C and others under the guise of "just the facts, ma'am" under a topic of who is "more credible." Incredible! All this reminds me like the time when Candy was exposed last year when her real name was revealed which resulted in people who didn't like her contacted her employer in the effort to try and get her into trouble because of a difference of opinions over her blogs fearing the boogeyman was out to destroy their ideology on Deaf culture. Ironically, in Candy's blog she wrote last year "A bully responds to Anti-Bullying Effort!" you can read what DP wrote in the comment section (note the bold):

People need to start filing reports with the police for harassment about these trying to get them fired for no good reason.

It’s one thing to complain about public servants behaving badly, but trying to out private citizens who blog anonymously, then trying to get them fired from their jobs, is just wrong.

Yet in DP's blog she goes after Ann_C, who is a private citizen, and attempted to identify her as much as possible and said,

Nearly nothing is known about Ann_C. We do not know her real name, nor whether if she holds a college degree. The only thing we know is that she is an oral deaf/severely hard of hearing person who, by her own admission, infrequently uses American Sign Language. She has not mentioned working or volunteering within the Deaf Community, or even having friends who use ASL. I have not seen her discuss reading scholarly books, journal articles or the like, about the Deaf Community. From what I’ve gathered so far from her, the only information Ann_C gets about the Deaf Community, is from the v/blogs.

All this has a writing of a dressing down in the effort to compartmentalize each of us into bite size pieces in the attempt to identify who we are and what we have done or not done and whether we fit into their ideological mold. Despite Ann_C's unknown status of who she is (which is not at all important nor necessary to know except by insecure people) as a blogger what DP just did reminded me of time when Ann_C and White Ghost (a frequent commenter) who were once threatened to be outed someday by a commenter in Ann_C's own blog. All this undermining efforts just because of a difference in opinions.

Last year Ann_C wrote "A Moral Compass" where she astutely observed:

V/bloggers, commenters, and readers alike all have seen this monster rear its ugly head online. And it’s an ugly head, no matter what shape it takes on: online personal attacks, cyber-harassment, hijacking of a thread, email threats, organizational bullying, online outting of a v/blogger’s real name, letters written to one’s employer, frivolous lawsuits, real-life threats/stalking, physical confrontations, ad nauseam.

Is it because of the target’s opinion/ view? No, it’s because the attacker dropped his moral compass in the angry desire to hit back at the person he disagreed with.

Pretty ironic considering what has just transpired today. And then you have DP who run by that familiar line again on Candy as someone who is "very little known."

And we have Candy. Very little is known about this woman. She appears to be a hard of hearing woman who claims to sign. She has not mentioned whether she works or volunteers in the Deaf Community. Word has it that Candy only has a high school diploma, since she is a college dropout, but we don’t know that for sure, since she has refused to disclose her credentials or her real name. Candy has mentioned that she refuses to read Harlan Lane’s Mask of Benevolence, because she heard it was too biased. Aside from the proclamation of refusal, Candy has not discussed reading any scholarly books, journal articles or the like, on the Deaf Community. And lastly, her claim to expertise regarding the Deaf Community, is supposedly due to her being from a Deaf family and her sister being a high school teacher.

Excuse me, her name was revealed last year thanks to zealous overbearing morons. But remember, it's "just the fact's, ma'am" when DP said:

All I did was to present facts here, then let the readers draw their own conclusions. If you interpret that as arrogant… well. So be it.

Facts? Or is this really an attempt to undermine and out individuals just because you disagree with their opinions like on what Ann_C opined in Amy Cohen's blog? It's one thing to disagree and state your arguments but it's entirely another thing to try and do this whole dressing down business that has an air of trying to out people of their full identities, and in a tone that would encourage other readers to try do more of the dirty work to do more of the outing business.

And then you have me that DP went after and it was a bit bizarre read, too.

Mike M. is hard of hearing and holds a baccalaureate degree. To my knowledge, he does not work or volunteer in the Deaf Community and primarily uses his voice to communicate. McConnell even wrote once on his blog, which post has apparently been deleted or buried under the reams and reams of posts, that he thought there was something such as too much education. As far as I’ve seen, he has not discussed whether after graduating from Gallaudet, if he has read any scholarly books, journals or the like on the Deaf Community.

For the record, as I have said before in my blogs, I have a B.A. degree in Math from Gallaudet University and a M.S. degree in Geology from University of Idaho. I even got accepted for a PhD study at University of Maryland, too, along with a $5000 NASA  grant with the help of Gallaudet University. Yet I chose a better route than to get a PhD and that was time to start having a career. What's really bizarre is when DP wrote about having too much education claiming I said something like that.

"......even wrote once on his blog that he thought there was something such as too much education." 

Too much education of what? What the heck is that supposed to mean?  What a bunch of rambling nonsense here that doesn't make an ounce of sense. I've always held the philosophy that in life one never stop learning.  And what does it matter on whether I've read any scholarly books or journals about the Deaf community has to do with any of this? Maybe you missed this one?

DP has an opinion about credibility. Her views are her own and not representative of every single person in the Deaf community. People do have valid opinions regarding the Deaf community and such. Heck, I am a representative Gallaudet University. I represent Gallaudet University since I graduated from Gallaudet University. Nothing can take that away from me. If I opine that's not popular or agreeable by other people then that's not really my problem. But it does become a problem when people who disagree with people they don't like and get into this outing business. It simply gets way too personal. And from the looks of things, DP decided to hit back at three people whom she disagreed with in her blog using "just the facts, ma'am" bunk defense in the attempt to out people.

Not cool.

Addendum:  For those who say she doesn't "out" people, well, I beg to differ.

Allegedly?  It's been over a year since she was outed.

Addendum II on what Ann_C said:

I would have been glad to offer my view had DP's post not gone into a witch-hunt but instead asked me directly what I meant. She did get to it finally in a comment after a barbed exchange, but by that time, she'd already written me off. *shrug*

I was expressing the opinion that the video was pandering to deaf issues, and I still stand by that. With the approaching holidays and ten ppl coming to my house, I didn't have time to write a lengthy explanation under ACE's blog.

Btw, pls do read Anony the Great's analysis of that PPT in Candy's Who Let Out the Signage Out blog. It reflected a great deal of what my response was to that PPT.

Have a good holiday.

Ann_C

Happy holidays, ya'll. Btw, PPT = powerpoint.

Addendum III: Ann_C wrote a rebuttal to DP in the comment section below where I am copying and pasting it here:

Since Deaf Pundit closed her comment section under her "A Matter of Credibility" blog and didn't publish my last three comments, I believe my unpublished comments should go on the record:

"Lol, in all the time I've been blogging/commenting online, I've never claimed to be an expert nor have I ever claimed to represent the whole deaf community.

OTOH, a person who claims to be a Deaf E-X-P-E-R-T does have the problem of credibility, because she professes to speak for all of the deaf community.

Deaf E-X-P-E-R-T-ise as "standard operating procedure"?

Ooooooh I'm SCARED-- *trembling hands in the air*
Run for them thar' hills, folks, the Deaf Inquisition is coming!!!!

*********snort*"

The asterisks ran off the first comment page without the word "snort". That's why I sent two more comments, trying to put in the word "snort", which finally showed up on the third comment, ok?

That's it.

Ann_C

And you know what DP said?

Ann_C… I read your last 3 (unpublished) comments and the only thing I have to say to you is that I truly do feel sorry for you.

That means technically Ann_C wrote only one comment while the other two were exactly the same except for the number of asterisks that were too long and she had to re-write it again. What DP said sure made it sound like Ann_C wrote three separate and different scathing comments or something like that.  *smh*

When bullies go after kids with cochlear implants

Here's a good story about a deaf boy who had to take a stand and defend himself against a bully. I'm not sure if it's because he was bullied because he wore a cochlear implant but in the end the deaf boy ultimately stood his ground.

There comes a point in all of our lives when we reach a limit and we are forced to defend ourselves. Bullies beware of a deaf child wearing a cochlear implant who will take no more shit.

I think many of us who wore hearing aids while growing up in regular or mainstreamed school were sometimes targeted because we were easily identified as a deaf/hh person. But for me growing up I never considered myself as being bullied because I always stood my ground and fought back. Only a couple instances happened in my life while as a kid I can remember clearly when I was in the 6th grade and 10th grade. I was never the one to back down if anybody ever thought I was easy picking. It helped that I had years of wrestling experience and have won tournaments. I had a great time going to regular school (4th thru 12 grade) and had a great many number of hearing friends while growing up. I played and competed in baseball, soccer, wrestling sports and school band competitions and made friends as well. I can't ever recall a bad time going to regular school starting in the 4th grade to 12th. The same goes for at a time when I went to a school with an oral program up to the 2nd grade at Birney School in Tacoma, and then entered a mainstreamed school at 3rd grade and eventually went to regular school starting in the 4th grade ever since.  I know others who have truly experienced bullying and were unable or didn't want to defend themselves had the brunt of it. But in my life, I don't dwell on constantly painting myself as a victim. In fact, I never saw myself as a victim at any stage of my life. As the old cliche goes, what doesn't kill you makes you stronger. And by that convention you can certainly come out on top. 

Deafhood? No Thanks.... revisited

People continue misunderstand about this loosely affiliated "group" on FB called "Deafhood? No Thanks" thinking it's based on the denial about ourselves regarding our hearing loss and who we are.

That's the furthest from the truth.

Rather it's our polite way of telling people that we do not subscribe to a closed society's approach using peer pressure, the incorporation of 'deaf power' movement or the flavor of it, the 'one communication option' approach, or using the movement to bully others through fear or use of oppressive tactics. Yet probably the most important of all is that we don't subscribe to playing the perennial victim card.  Subscribing to those approaches is a sure way to alienate further hearing parents of deaf/hh children, hard of hearing and deaf people, and even Deaf people. We don't subscribe to a victim mentality. We don't subscribe to the philosophy of exclusion and judgements regarding deafness.  We don't subscribe to going after parents who make alternative decisions for their deaf or hard of hearing children. We favor open society approaches such as equality for all deaf and hard of hearing people regardless of their backgrounds, communication methods and technology options. We invite anyone and make no judgements when it comes to deafness and their choices.We give them our support regardless the choices they make on deafness related issues.

We don't go around and mock other people's ability to speak calling it "yowling." We support them if they prefer to use their voice or not. Sign or not. Cued speech or not. Use of pen and paper or not.  Use SEE or not. Use ASL or not. Use CI or not. Use implantable hearing aid or not.  Prefer a hearing society over a deaf society. We don't go around wishing people harm or death because of philosophical difference or disagreement regarding deafness or their communication preferences. We don't harass people and sic the CPS on them. Or call their employers. And most important of all, we don't see ourselves as victims lamenting about the cruel fate of life, the unfairness of it all. The woe is me shtick. We don't need more labels. We don't need the stereotypes. We define it for ourselves as each of us see fit. Our journey is already deeply personal to begin with. A mere label doesn't do justice. And many of us simply do not care for it. While others may like the label and use it as they see personally fit, which is fine but I leave a caveat.

You may say it's simply a journey when it comes to "deafhood" but to go further by tacking on that label with a political ideology will only serve to alienate people further. Using the term to advance a political agenda and a springboard to attack individuals or companies while hiding behind an obvious facade.  Hypocrisy shines through when those things happen. We may be deaf or hard of hearing but we ain't blind. The concept of "deafhood" has de-evolved away from the concept of diversity and simple acceptance into the maws of power, politics and even greed. If it were about diversity and simple acceptance it would have been plainly obvious for all to see. But the mask has long since fallen off.

The term "deafhood" will never be accepted by the larger population of people with hearing loss. This is a population with some 33 million people with hearing loss ranging from mild to profound hearing loss. The majority of people are those with mild and moderate hearing loss.  A smaller percentage of that population are people with severe to profound hearing loss. Smaller still are people considered to be culturally deaf with ASL that makes up roughly about 2 percent of the total population of people with hearing loss (~600,000 or so).

It's like trying to incorporate "blindhood" and say that it's for all people with any kind of vision impairment who are undergoing their own journey, even those with easily correctable vision. But ask them if they are blind and they'll emphatically say they are not while others with more serious vision loss or impairment may say they're legally blind to those who have no vision at all are completely blind. The same with "deafhood" when it comes to people with mild or even moderate hearing loss who function fine with hearing aids (or even in some cases without hearing aids) and ask them if they are deaf and they will emphatically say they are not. Hard of hearing sure. Some hearing impairment? Sure. Have a hearing loss? Sure. But don't tell them they're deaf. That is the reality. That is how they wish to identify themselves as.  I'm not in the position to tell those people that they are wrong if they see themselves as deaf, hard of hearing, Deaf, partially deaf, partially hearing, hearing impaired or simply a person with a hearing loss. It's an individual thing.  Respect that.

Deafhood? No thanks!

Bullying and mocking only because they look different?

A recent news of a deaf boy who was bullied and mocked on a school bus only because he was different and wore hearing aids. It got so bad when kids grabbed his two expensive hearing aids and threw them out of the bus window. The deaf boy explained using his clear and articulate voice  on what happened and you can tell he was upset by it all. This reminded me of an incident when I was a sophmore in high school during lunch in the school cafeteria. One hearing guy at the cafeteria table mocked me by putting up an empty paper cup (for ketchup) on his ear as if it were a hearing aid. A fake hearing aid. I wrote that one off as purely a case of immaturity and lack of education. What he did would be construed as a sort of bullying when done in such a mocking manner.

That incident also reminded me of the coda brothers, who are hearing, when they mocked cochlear implant wearers on camera by wearing fake cochlear implants.  There was also another video example with one of the coda brothers who mocked by pretending to be an oral deaf person by making exaggerated lips and mouth movements, and talking loudly thus painting a false stereotype of deaf people who prefer to talk or can speak.  There are deaf and hard of hearing people who talk just fine (for example, see here, here, here, here, here, here, and here).  They may look different, they may speak differently, but so what? Why the need to mock and bully deaf people for who they are?

Watch the video below and turn on the CC button to get the captioning on the main YouTube page by clicking on the YouTube icon first.



Now, you wouldn't like it if hearing people go around on videos and mock deaf people by doing a bunch of fake signing, would you?

I hope that deaf boy's mother will get her money back for buying those expensive hearing aids and there'd be some justice in all this.

You don't belong here at Gallaudet University

Worst thing to say to a deaf or hard of hearing person who is thinking of going to Gallaudet University, those who are currently students, or those who have been to Gallaudet University by another deaf person who is an alumnus by saying "you don't belong here at Gallaudet University." Yes, This was actually said against Charles Wirick in a case that showed increasingly the (circumstantial) evidence was more likely over miscommunication issues than anything else along with him being a target in the effort to get him to look like a trouble maker than not. Of course, there are possibly a few more varying factors that ultimately led to suspending Wirick for one year from Gallaudet University.

Lately, Charles Wirick's videos were removed for unknown reasons over the holidays. His account was also deleted.  If you haven't seen them then you're out of luck. But here's the burning question. Was bullying involved here that ultimately cost Wirick one year of suspension from Gallaudet University? Who was doing the bullying if any? Gallaudet University administration? The students? The Buff and Blue? By fraternity and/or sorority members?  Student Conduct Board? Who pushed whom over there? And why? Those the are questions I'm trying to raise here over my last several blogs about the Charles Wirick's case. What really happened here and seems like Gallaudet University does not really care or do not wish to address the issue at all.  How ironic and interesting to see all of a sudden Gallaudet University to start with this anti-bullying campaign just recently last year in 2010. Maybe they need to look at their own administration internally a bit more deeper and see who protecting who.  I'm sure it isn't the Pawheeves doing the protecting here which has mysteriously disappeared if you click on the link. But something is certainly going on within the system that has been worked in over the years,Vishnu or not. Right, Dwight?

Anybody who is deaf or hard of hearing is certainly welcomed to attend Gallaudet University and once there, no matter the preferred mode of communication, that person belongs there just like everybody else. It's really up to the person to decide for personal reasons on not wanting to go to Gallaudet University. And once that person graduates, he or she represents Gallaudet University. Just like me. I certainly belong but that's another story.  And I'll be sure to remind people that Gallaudet University must adhere to Section 504 ruling established by Congress.

Poll: Was Charles Wirick bullied and targeted unfairly?

Earlier I did a 3 part series about the Charles Wirick's case where rampant rumors and perhaps questionable actions by others resulted in the suspension of Charles Wirick. Read the three part series (Part 1, Part II - Rumors, and Part III - Ganged Up?) to understand what went on. There's a real possibility that Charles Wirick was a victim of on campus bullying of sorts.

The bullying of a deaf kid

I take special umbrage against bullying, even cyberbullying, when aimed at kids. Read Karen's blog "Bullying Experience from Parent's Point of View" about her deaf son who was bullied at a Deaf school. The irony here is that you'd expect some acceptance and support at a Deaf school but instead the young man gets bullied. And this is without another irony, too, if you include the fact that he wasn't bullied while in a mainstreamed school when he begged to be put back into mainstreamed school fulltime the second time around.

Karen's son wrote down words or acts that were said or done while he was bullied at a Deaf school. If you read the PDF letter "Bully" he wrote you can see the exact same cyberbullying and threats experienced by deaf/hh adults in today's blog/vlog world. It's the same words and actions used today against adults.  It's not just one time, as the Karen's son said, but the numerous times the bullying takes place over a space of days, weeks, months, or even years. Some are able to handle it. Some cannot and must resort to other self-preservation actions. Some are able to deal with it straight on by confronting it, especially if it's a serious one where restraining orders or arrest warrants are justified.

Thank you Karen for bringing that one up. Whether it's bullying or cyberbullying, it's simply not acceptable.