Carl, it is not up to you to decide

Barry describes himself in video he did in 2009 as "deafless" person which means he sees himself as a human being first, and not about his hearing loss, his deafness or whether he's hard of hearing, deaf or Deaf.  In the video below he asks a deeper question.

Does the term 'deaf' own us or control us? In some instances I've seen how the term 'deaf' control us to a certain degree where we are seen as slaves to the word. Have we forgotten the fact that we are human beings first before we are anything else? Think about it.

 

Carl Schroeder attempted to define a term for Barry is which is a no-no. The only person who is allowed to label or define him/herself as is the person him/herself. And not from other people. If Barry wants to call himself as a Deaf person, then so be it. Or if he wants to call himself as a deaf person, so be it. Or hard of hearing, so be it. Or hearing impaired, so be it. Or a deafless person, then so be it. It's important to see a person as a human being first with all other extraneous details as second. Once you get into the practice of that then it wouldn't matter if a person has a condition. It wouldn't matter if a person is deaf. It wouldn't matter if a person is blind. It wouldn't matter because the person is a human being first and foremost.

Granted that Barry went to Idaho School for the Deaf and graduated there but so what? Granted that he grew up in an nth generation household of deaf families and signing. So what? Lately the labeling of the term "Deaf" has increasingly become perverted away from the original definition to mean people who are culturally deaf. Now the label "Deaf" has become so muddled in its definition to mean anybody with a hearing loss. And how certain culturally deaf factions have attempted to hijack the term "Deaf" for their own selfish agenda as I have carefully outlined in a previous blog on that very subject. And why it is destined to fail in the attempt to mean an all-inclusive term.

It won't................work.

Carl, learn to respect those who prefer to define or label themselves as. Carl is attempting to control Barry. A typical M.O. of Carl's. It is not up to Carl to decide for Barry what label he should carry. That's Barry's decision. And his alone.

Is "Deafhood" a new tool for oppression to those who disagree?

When new labels are introduced such as "audism," "Deafhood," "deficit thinker," "Deaf," "colonialism" and so on they are oftentimes used as a tool to oppress or even discriminate others who do not share their exact ideals or thinkings. This blog is a response to another round of "Deafhood" being discussed in the deaf/hh blogosphere. In my mind the word "Deafhood" pertains to a mostly, if not exclusively, Deaf culture ideal involving ASL rather than about the various deaf/hh experiences and preferred mode of communication. For one, there has been a mixed use of the word "deafhood" and "Deafhood" to define and even discriminate. Others try and downplay the use of the "D" and say instead "deafhood" while others insist it be called "Deafhood" as it relates entirely about their Deaf culture.

Jamie Burke in About.com Deafness used the lower case 'd' in "deafhood" rather than "Deafhood" to define her various experience as a person with hearing loss.

But the word "Deafhood" used by the likes of Paddy Ladd and others who insure that any experiences are about striving toward a Deaf culture mentality than not. Suddenly it has become NOT about the various life experiences and perspectives among the 33 million people who deal with their hearing loss in the United States, where most have gotten along quite well without the need for ASL, but about the presevation of Deaf culture. It's kind of like "It's my way or the highway" kind of thinking when it's about "Deafhood" rather than "deafhood" based on total acceptance and understanding. "Deafhood" has become, as it would seem, a required path to this other-worldly state of nirvana through self-submission. It has become the new found feel-good religion for Deaf people or deaf/hh people who want to seek that path for whatever reasons. Though the irony of this is that it's being used as a political tool instead.

The attempt at activism using the Alinsky's model on radicalism to push "Deafhood" simply leaves a bad taste in a lot of mouths among the many Deaf, deaf, and hard of hearing people alike. Granted, we all have various experiences growing up with hearing loss or by those who acquired deafness later in life that shapes us. Some good, some bad ones. There are people and businesses who do discriminate against those with hearing loss and the need for communication access. It's a fact of life but that doesn't mean we should ignore those problems. but address them. We all should strive for choices and accessibility whether it's better Closed Captioning, introduce the concept of signing to parents of deaf/hh babies, oral/aural methods, cued speech, SEE, the introduction of cochlear implant, advances in hearing aid technology, advances in communication technology, advances in the biotechnology such as stem cells and gene therapy and so on. There is no one shoe size fits all.

Each of us function accordingly with our preferred mode of communication and who we prefer to associate with. Most function just fine and are quiet happy without ever knowing sign language or even Deaf culture. Others are happy that ASL is their primary mode of communication and thrive in a Deaf culture atmosphere. Some fall between the two and that's fine. However, with new labels introduced over time we have seen an increasing use of those new words to discriminate against those who follow a different path or ideal. With "Deafhood" being squandered shamelessly we see less room in the boat for others to get in. Why would anybody jump onto a boat that is on the brink of capsizing? It's time to get rid of that S.S. Deafhood boat and the person in it. I'm content for who I am and not about what I am. No need to assign labels here. I just so happens to be a person with a hearing loss who enjoys life in a variety of ways.