LOcuTUS Two

Spinning off of the LOcuTUS One blog piece I did recently while today I'll discuss perceived rejection from a community and identity of self.

In one Star Trek:TNG show the Borg collective was able to successfully assimilate Captain Picard into their collective by capturing him and forcing him to become a part of the hive as one mind. He lost all sense of personality and identity where as on the Enterprise ship his identity was with his crew, his life experiences and personality that made all the difference.  A ship filled with diversity of  people like Geordi La Forge who is blind but wears a special visor that helps him see better - a technology of the time that allowed him to see more things than the natural eye ever could. Or Counselor Troi who have telepathic abilities. Or Worf's ability as a fearless warrior? A ship where respect for their fellow crew and passengers is seen regardless of race, experience, upbringings, ethnic and cultural differences, and special abilities or even those lacking normal eyesight when it doesn't matter because technology helped overcome blindness.  But the height of irony came when Captain Picard and crew did the unthinkable by welcoming a Borg ("you will be assimilated") named Hugh to come and stay on the Enterprise ship should he decide to do so. Even at the risk of losing the Enterprise when the Borg ship comes looking for Hugh. There were no rejection of Hugh near the end of that episode because the crew on the Enterprise ship finally understood Hugh by getting to know him better once he was disconnected from the Borg hive. He was able to regain some sense of his own humanity, personality and awareness of self to know better about the human race. But in the end Hugh made the decision to return back to the Borg collective for reason not what you might think.

All that reminded me a blog piece I did called "The Solution" about Amy and her experience at rejection and how many people associate with Amy her attempt to communicate in a social setting with a group of signing deaf and hearing people.

I am "Amy," as are about two million other severely hearing impaired walking around… And the abuse we are subject to by the ASL Deafies was so elegantly acted out by none other than an ASL Deafie himself.

But what is interesting is to compare some of the thoughts between an oral and hard of hearing person versus a culturally deaf person regarding the Amy video seen in my "The Solution" blog piece when it came to communicating with other deaf people. Even though Amy made the effort to pick up a few new signs and made an attempt to finger spell her name and picked up a few more signs but was ultimately rejected.

This woman who grew up oral and HOH and appears to have been raised in a non-signing environment responded in the original YouTube video source in the comment section about Amy said this:

I grew up oral and HOH and currently learning ASL. Had this HOH girl a sincere interest in making Deaf ASL friends, she could have at the very least, learned a few signs and bring pen and paper to communicate with both the hearing and the ASL Deaf. This video reinforced what I already knew, being stuck between 2 worlds sucks! I'm rather puzzled this HOH girl still didn't learn to bring pen and paper. Does she want to deliberately make communication harder than it has to be?

Versus Candy who is culturally deaf with culturally deaf parents chimed in another blog about the same video. Candy has a different approach and positive outlook said this:

I happen to know all kinds of deaf/hh folks and when one of them approach me not knowing signs, I do make an effort to involve them, even though they do not know signs. It's rude to be ignoring them and having the mindset that it's too bad they don't know signs. The attitude of those signing deaf folks who treat oral deaf is what hurts the deaf world. I was taught to treat everyone the same and I do. My deaf cultured parents taught me that and they practice the same too.

Typically those that do not want to learn signs would not have made an effort to approach signing deaf people.

Manners is what is lacking among many.

Two different approaches on how to deal with a deaf/hh newcomer to a signing community. Which ones do you think would have had a bigger impact? Candy made a great point seen in the underline bold about those who would approach a group of signing deaf people. Amy would not have made an effort to approach signing deaf people if she didn't want to learn new signs.

And then you have Lotus who is oral and hard of hearing had this to say about the video and more in a discussion forum that took place recently:

Lotus: So, what did you guys think of this video? Personally, I think it makes a compelling argument as to why a hard of hearing person should learn ASL if she wants to integrate into the Deaf community and have the common sense to bring pen and paper if she is struggling to understand what the hearing people are saying. Having grown up oral and HOH, I finally learned that one does not HAVE to remain stuck in between two worlds, that one CAN do something about this and be pro-active about it. They are not doomed to a fate that cannot be changed.

According to one blog by an HOH guy, this video is about how badly HOH people are treated by ASL Deafs even though it's very clear in the video that the Deaf woman tried hard to converse with the HOH girl. In fact, it was the Deaf woman who said hi first. This HOH girl attempts to join an ASL conversation even though she doesn't know the language. The thing is, if two people don't speak the same language, it's rather difficult to hold a conversation. Pretty evident that the HOH blogger harbors negative feelings towards the deaf community, even though he himself also has a hearing problem. I feel sorry for this hearing wanna-be blogger........ One can be deaf and happy although he doesn't seem to think it's possible and that being HOH is a better way to live, even though the video proved that being an oral HOH means being left out of both worlds and it's a miserable place to be in. Have to confess that I was stunned that this HOH blogger seems to think the solution for HOH is to use simcomm where basically you communicate with another person using what looks like a typewriter. yeah, the solution for the deaf/hoh to talk to deaf/hoh is not ASL, it's a cumbersome piece of equipment that looks like a typewriter. Personally, ASL and pen and paper is far far more convenient plus simcomm won't fit in either my back pocket or my evening purse. I'd rather write on a napkin!

Of course, Lotus is talking about me as that "HOH blogger." And she got it wrong about a technological communication solution I often speak of.  But the funny thing is that over the last 24 years I have signed in ASL/PSE and I have never felt rejected by the deaf community because I am in many ways am a part of the deaf/hh community and by convention a part of the hearing community, too. The real problem is the few culturally deaf people who have rejected or not have accepted me for a variety of reasons over something that I have no control of. They are the least of my worries. I have not rejected nor have negative feelings towards the culturally deaf community because I have always recognized their uniqueness and abilities. After all, I did go to Gallaudet University, Lotus did not.

I still interact with both deaf kids and adults and have done so since the days as a student at Gallaudet University since 1988. And it was great yesterday to be with a bunch of deaf kids and their deaf parents helping pull weeds during Earth Day weed round up and help them learn more about the environment. This is one example of many. I think Lotus' confusion and obvious bias rest on the fact that she failed to take the time to know who I am  and instead preferred to make generalized assumptions about myself, wrongly I might add, and what I supposedly believe or how I feel. Instead of assuming, why not ask, Lotus?  My world is not your world, your world is not my world, and I have my own preferences on how and who I want to interact with. I have no desire to make any presumptions about Lotus' own feelings or identity.

I have my own preferences on which culturally deaf people I'd like to be friends with or who I don't mind hanging out with, of course. The same goes with non-signing deaf, hard of hearing and hearing people on who I prefer to be with. I see myself as a hard of hearing person. I also see myself as a deaf person. I wear a hearing aid. I am fluent in sign language. I am fluent in the spoken language and speak effortlessly. I went to Gallaudet University. I like playing ragtime piano. I like listening to talk radio while I drive my truck. I've produced videos in sign language with captioning as part of my signing discussions in DVTV. I am an opinionated person. Yet, I respect other people's opinions rather use ad hominem when some people think it takes the place of an effective argument. I like talking on the phone. I like talking over the video phone. I take advantage of communication technology when I'm at work like real time captioning for video conference meetings or use transcribers at large meetings. I like to talk, listen and be a part of small group of hearing people in a conversation. The same goes for being part of a signing conversation with a group of deaf people as I have done so for more than 24 years. I am comfortable with my identity and who I am. I don't feel "stuck" between two worlds because I enjoy both. I live how I want to live my life. It does not matter if you cannot function at the same level as I can or anybody else. I am happy for who I am and not about what I am. I do not presume what's better for other people to live their lives or be critical of them on how they choose to live their life when it comes to their deafness and the people they associate with. Again, my world is not your world, and vice versa.

As for the supposed limitations there are ways on how a non-signer deaf person could interact with either the hearing or culturally deaf people whether by using pen and paper, sign language, real time captioning, talking and lip-reading, using the hearing aids, cochlear implants or Esteem Envoy implantable hearing device (which is NOT a hearing aid), or using an existing face to face technology that allow communicating in a written language in real time with hearing people. The solutions are many as I've explained many times before for years. Technology has made much of our lives easier when it comes to communication. The real attitude is how you approach a solution that fits you depending on a situation.

The point I made in my earlier blog about the Amy video was about how willing are deaf or hearing people to take the time to have a genuine face to face conversation? Or will they continue to reject others simply because they cannot hear well or do not know sign or have misplaced assumptions about them? The real limitations are those who do not have the patience or take the time to communicate with other people regardless of how it is done and the opportunity to get to know them in person. Candy's example is a powerfully positive one.

Captain Picard and Hugh lived in two different worlds at one time but eventually they had a choice on which world they would prefer to live in. Captain Picard who was once a Borg named Locutus who in the end ultimately accepted Hugh, a longtime Borg, without question and gave him the opportunity to choose which world he wanted to belong. Huge was once part of the human race as a boy was able to experience his long lost identity and human feelings separate from the hive's collective thought while on the Enterprise ship. Huge ultimately decided (as a sacrifice and to save Picard's crew and ship) to return back to the Borg ship and continue to be a Borg. A conscious choice he made. Captain Picard who was once Locutus was able to re-assert his deeply locked away human identity in order to become Picard again who quickly rejoined the human race with the help of the Enterprise crew. Picard was able to retain those feelings and understanding on what it was like to be a Borg, a revulsion and hatred he developed against the Borg collective for violating his human identity when he was forced to become a Borg. But it was that experience that caused him to finally understand Hugh when he became "human" again by asserting his independence using the personal pronoun "I."  There is no "I" for a Borg. And it was Hugh's own past experience once as a young human boy that gave him the ability to understand Picard's human race once Hugh became disconnected from the Borg collective thoughts. Two different worlds and both were able to gain valuable insight from each other only because him and his crew were able to get to know each other in person.

The message? Don't presume to think you know everything about the person until you meet him or her in person and get to know the person better.  It's better not to presume and be critical about it because chances are you'll be horribly mistaken.

UPDATE: A slight edit was done in this blog by removing a nom de plume of one person for the sake of calming people down. Secondly, a clarification. I am not making any parallels between Lotus and Locutus. If you note the spelling and capitalized letters you will see two names. Two different and separate person but the story provides an insight and a message.

UPDATE II:  Linking a person's AD account in my blog? Never did that. Never happened. All I linked was to the YouTube account's name that had the comment response in question that I copied for my blog. There was never any linking to any AD url addresses. I never mentioned anything or linked to anything about AD. There were only two sites that I did discuss and that was YouTube and ND. Instead of jumping to conclusion like always read carefully next time before claiming that I linked to AD.

Naturally so...

A certain person who used to be a moderator in one forum recently claimed that I made a slanderous remark against a new forum in a recent blog I did. A claim that is certainly unfounded. The problem is that I've always supported competition as I've said before elsewhere. If people think they can build a better mouse trap (i.e.better product, services, etc), go for it. This is exactly how it happened between Deafread and Deaf Village. Both are blog aggregator websites where Deaf Village was borne out of its own need (and frustration) on a matter of principle and ideology in 2008 to build it's own blog aggregator site instead of relying on Deafread's blog aggregator site. In fact, I was one original Deaf Village staff who helped get Deaf Village off the ground in 2008. And yet I am a blog contributor to both Deafread and Deaf Village blog aggregator sites.

The same story goes between DeafvideoTV, Deafcube and ASLrocks.net (now defunct) which are (or were as for ASLrocks) video blog aggregator websites but Deafcube (and ASLrocks) was, too, born out of its own need (and frustration) on a matter of principle and ideology recently to build it's own video blog aggregator site. So, nothing is new under the sun when Naturally Deaf came about a few weeks ago borne out of its own need (and frustration) and as a matter of principle and ideology against All Deaf to build it's own forum.

People are free to make their choices when it comes to competition over the internet and that's what makes America great. There are now more choices to chose from for deaf and hard of hearing people, late deafened, culturally deaf, cochlear implant wearers, CODA, hearing parents of deaf/hh children and people who are simply curious or interested about deafness issues. I've already told a few people about the new forum site to check it out yet the snarkiness and sniggering on congratulating me for helping generate traffic to their new forum continues as I speak which certainly tells the story. 

As I have said before to the new moderator, good luck on the new endeavor and duty as a moderator. I mean it.

Now, back to my blog.

It's understandable that some people would miss my warning that I'd play the devil's advocate (I made it abundantly clear in the beginning) in one of my recent blog.  Long story short, I explained that some people might think of the phrase "naturally deaf" as applied to people would find it odd. Much the same questioning could be said for "naturally blind" and so on. But if people actually think I did make a slanderous statement against the new forum in my recent blog then show exactly where I made that slander. Otherwise it'd be smart to retract that accusation when it was never true in the first place which, ironically so, is the very definition of a slander. Go figure. Yet, I have my own opinions and beliefs regarding forums, blog and vlog aggregator sites. I have the right to express them as I see fit. Even when I believe some favoritism and bias have played a role on influencing moderators. There is no such thing as a bias-free moderator, naturally so. And in retrospect, I'd be wary of joining a deaf discussion forum with that kind of rampant bias and favoritism.

Naturally Deaf?

Recently a phrase "naturally deaf" was brought up where it raised all kinds of questions concerning the expression behind it for deaf people who may use it as sign for "Deaf pride." I get it so don't get me wrong. It's about "acceptance" of oneself, acknowledgement of their deafness, yada yada yada.

Got it.

Yet, the culturally deaf crowd represents barely 2% of the 36 million people with hearing loss in the United States. It's all about personal choice to describe oneself.

But allow me to play the devil's advocate for a moment.

This phrase would make as much sense as saying "naturally blind" or "naturally mute," or, to play the outside of the rules of today's politically correct games, even "naturally mentally retarded" to many people. Their line of thinking would be to ask what's natural about it for those who cannot walk and must use wheelchairs, for example? Exactly what's "naturally" about it some might ask?

In the United States about 2 - 3 infants out of every 1,000 live births will have some degree of hearing loss at birth according to NIH.   About 50% of the babies born are due to genetic factors where some 400 different genes are the root causes of deafness through a variety of genetic mutation. About 15% of those babies born have other conditions that accompanies their deafness or syndromatic (i.e. "multiple disabilities" such as deafness and cerebral palsy) while 25% of them are born only with a hearing loss as a result of a genetic change (non-syndromatic). 

About 25% of cases of deafness are caused by non-genetic factors such as premature birth and illnesses while pregnant like Rubella (German measles), Cytomegalovirus infections, Toxoplasmosis, Herpes infection, and Syphilis. 

And then you have non-genetic causes of deafness after birth such as head injuries, childhood infections (such as meningitis, measles or chickenpox), certain medications (such as the antibiotic streptomycin and related drugs), and even ear infections (otitis media) in rare cases causing permanent hearing loss. 

And the rest of the remaining 25% of the cases of deafness in infants and children are unknown causes.

I might be belaboring this but I see using the phrase "naturally deaf" as an attempt to define oneself in a feel good way sort of thing. And that's fine. Others may choose a different way to express oneself. Not everybody see hearing loss in the same way as the next person. Of course, you don't hardly hear people with a blindness or a vision condition say "naturally blind" and have a forum with that name, too. I'd be just as wary joining a deaf forum under a similar moniker.

Naturally.

UPDATE: In an OCDAC blog I noticed with bemusement of how a few people got it wrong about this blog piece. This piece is about the phrase "naturally deaf" which, to me, appears to be much out of sync aligning with the same idea of people born with mental retardation to be called as "naturally mentally retarded." It just doesn't make sense. I do not need to refer to a website about that phrase and why should I? So, instead these people go about the conspiracy talk.

Lotus got it wrong, eh Weyn?

So did Jill, a serial online bully done via snarkyism and derision at a known deaf-run discussion forum who finally got the perma ban. A hearing woman who was the most addicted forum member who paraded as the savior for deaf people everywhere took the time to go online nearly on a daily basis for hours and went after other forum members who do not agree with her or have opinions she doesn't like. Instead of putting a member on ignore she chose to harass certain members. A woman who, ironically and hypocritically, has a M.Ed in Counseling and a BS in psychology. A woman who was the most addicted member to a particular online discussion forum who posted relentlessly, yet consider the degrees under her belt, her addiction and bullying attitude. It's somebody you don't want to get professional advice from her.  And because of her constant online bullying, I had no choice but to put her on ignore. She continued to berate, "snarkyed," and derided me where others responded to her comments hoping that I would get see her comments. Even those people were eventually put on ignore after I recognized their tactics in getting me to try and respond to "Jill." Her constant bullying soon earned her a permaban after she and others have tried to get me permanently banned for years. I never received a permaban over there or anywhere else. In fact, that one forum was the only forum I constantly attended for several years.

Lastly, there were only two comments I didn't approve. That was because they broke the posting rules. It was not even "numerous comments" that I didn't approve but two. A former moderator and a different person.