Civil Rights History in Both Political Parties

A Civil Rights claim:

Civil Rights laws to help blacks have all happened because of Democratic push.

That's factually false. Historically and legislatively false regarding Civil Rights laws. 

Here's a little history lesson for people who do not know. Republicans have championed Civil Rights and supported freedom and liberties for minorities for over a 140 years while Democrats did this for over 50 years.

First, it was the Republicans who brought forth a series of Civil Rights Acts to the forefront beginning in 1866. And then you have the 1870, 1871, 1875, 1957, 1960 and 1964 Civil Rights Acts. A century worth of repression by Democrats who pretty much didn't want to do anything with black people and sought ways to lessen any liberties given to blacks by Republicans in Congress during the late 19th century and early part of the 20th century. This is true during a period of time when you had Democrat controlled Congress in much of the 20th century who sought ways to strike down or restrict previous Civil Rights Acts by passing laws and such that restricted the freedom and liberties of black Americans by reversing what Republicans in Congress have tried to do right beginning in 1866. It was only during the 1960s that Democrats began to progressively do the right thing and to uphold civil rights for minorities.

It was the Republicans in Congress and even Republican presidents who have done the right thing in the 19th and 20th century but only to see Democrats reverse their efforts in order to limit any freedom given to blacks and minorities.

Party In Power - Congress and Presidency - A Visual Guide To The Balance of Power In Congress, 1945-2008

File:Control of the U.S. Senate.PNG - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And then you then have more Democrats joining with Republicans who helped contribute to the 1964 and 1968 Civil Rights Acts. Before any of this was possible Congress had to abolish slavery first by passing the 13th Amendment on April 8, 1865. 100% of the Republicans in Congress voted for the Amendment while 63% of the Democrats were against it in the Senate vote. This Amendment set the stage for future Civil Rights Acts and other Amendments.
13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: Primary Documents of American History (Virtual Programs & Services, Library of Congress)

1866 - the first Civil Rights Act passed by most Republicans (67%) while most of the Democrats (90%) voted against Senate bill #61.
TO PASS S. 61. -- GovTrack.us
Slavery and the Making of America . The Slave Experience: Legal Rights; Gov't | PBS

The Senate passed the 14th Amendment on June 8, 1866, by a vote of 33 to 11 (33 Republicans voted yes, while 3 Republicans and 8 Democrats voted no).
14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: Primary Documents of American History (Virtual Programs & Services, Library of Congress)

TO PASS H. J. RES. 127. (P. 3042-2) -- GovTrack.us

Then in 1869 in a Republican-controlled 40th Congress voted for the 15th Amendment giving blacks the right to vote. Nearly all Republicans in Congress voted in favor, though a few abstained, saying it did not go far enough. Nearly all Democrats in Congress voted against the 15th Amendment.

The House of Representatives passed the 15th Amendment on February 25, 1869, by a vote of 144 to 44, and the Senate passed the 15th Amendment on February 26, 1869, by a vote of 39 to 13. On March 30, 1870, Secretary of State Hamilton Fish issued a proclamation certifying the ratification of the 15th Amendment by the states.

15th Amendment to the Constitution: Primary Documents of American History (Virtual Programs & Services, Library of Congress)

1870, 1871, and 1875 Civil Rights Act - All passed mostly by Republicans in Congress. Special note on the 1871 Civil Rights Act:

Quote:

1871- Republicans Outlawed the Ku Klux Klan. In 1871, the Republican-controlled 42nd Congress passed a Civil Rights Act aimed at the Ku Klux Klan. Guilty of murdering hundreds of African-Americans, this terrorist organization had also eradicated the Republican Party throughout most of the South. The law empowered the Republican administration of Ulysses Grant to protect the civil rights of the former slaves in federal court, bypassing the Democrat-controlled state courts. The 1871 Civil Rights Act, along with the GOP’s 1870 Civil Rights Act, effectively banned the Klan and enabled Republican officials to arrest hundreds of Klansmen. Though the U.S. Supreme Court would eventually strike down most of the 1871 Civil Rights Act, the Ku Klux Klan was crushed. The KKK did not rise again until the Democratic administration of President Woodrow Wilson.

Black History « It is time to wake up America !

In 1957 Democrats decided to join in on the push with Republicans to help enact a new 1957 Civil Right Acts.  It wasn't until 1991 when the Democrat party took the lead on the percentage number of votes over the Republican party when they voted for the 1991 Civil Rights Act.

1957 Civil Rights Act - passed with 93% of the Republican votes and 59% of the Democrats votes in the Senate.  Republican President Dwight Eisenhower sign the first Civil Rights Act in 82 years. 
HR. 6127. CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1957. PASSED. -- GovTrack.us

1960 Civil Rights Act - 83% of the Republicans in the Senate voted for it while 64% of the Democrats voted for the HR #8601 bill. And this was a Democratically controlled Congress (65 Democrats vs 35 Republicans).
HR. 8601. PASSAGE OF AMENDED BILL. -- GovTrack.us

1964 Civil Rights Act - 81% of the Senate Republicans voted for the bill while 64% of the Democrats voted for the bill. This was during a Democratically controlled Congress with 64 Democrats vs 32 at the time of the vote (4 Senate seats were vacant).
HR. 7152. CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964. MANSFIELD MOTION THAT THE SENATE TAKE UP THE BILL. -- GovTrack.us

Civil Rights Act of 1968 - 68% of Democrats voted for the H.R. 2516 bill while 91% of Republicans voted for the same bill in the Senate with Democrats in control the seats.
Y=71 N=20 TO PASS H.R. 2516, A BILL TO PROHIBIT DISCRIMINATION IN SALE OR RENTAL OF HOUSING, AND TO PROHIBIT RACIALLY MOTIVATED INTERFERENCE WITH A PERSON EXERCISING HIS CIVIL RIGHTS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. -- GovTrack.us

House of Representatives with 86% of the votes being Republicans and 71% of the votes being Democrats.
TO PASS H.R. 2516, A BILL TO ESTABLISH PENALTIES FOR INTERFERENCE WITH CIVIL RIGHTS. INTERFERENCE WITH A PERSON ENGAGED IN ONE OF THE 8 ACTIVITIES PROTECTED UNDER THIS BILL MUST BE RACIALLY MOTIVATED TO INCUR THE BILL'S PENALTIES. -- GovTrack.us

Civil Rights Act of 1991 - 96% of Democrats voted for the S 1745 bill while 88% of the Republicans voted for the same bill in the Senate.
S. 1745 (102nd): Civil Rights Act of ... (On Passage of the Bill) -- GovTrack.us

95% of Democrats in the Senate voted for the bill while 77% of Republicans voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1991 bill.
S. 1745 (102nd): Civil Rights Act of ... (On Passage of the Bill) -- GovTrack.us


So, now you know the legislative history on Civil Rights where one or both parties sought ways to help blacks and minorities attain their freedom and Civil Rights as would be granted for any human beings.

Tale of a hypocrisy and Marlee Matlin

News is still reverberating about the latest development on the treatment for hearing loss when gerbils in a laboratory were deliberately made deaf had their hearing loss reversed using human embryonic stem cells.

The stem cells were used to make immature nerve cells. Those were then transplanted into the deaf ears of 18 gerbils.  

Ten weeks later, the rodents' hearing ability had improved by an average of 46 percent, with recovery ranging from modest to almost complete, the researchers reported.

Not totally a cure yet but certainly in that direction that hearing loss or nerve deafness can certainly be reversed.  A key conceptual working model demonstrated here using the medical knowledge and technique that can readily be applied on humans, and that adult stem cells would be used as well.

With that news Marlee Matlin was asked about the medical break through with stem cells.

“Think about this. What if someone told you that you could’ve been made different than the content person you are with genetics. Would you? Now think how millions of deaf people who lead productive lives, would feel when told that babies born deaf can be ‘cured’.”  

Matlin also told followers, “Be proud of who you are, regardless of what people think is a “handicap” or “normal.” Normal is what you want to be. Don’t let anyone tell you who or what you should be.”

The problem here in reference to the yellow highlighted part above is that parents of deaf or hard of hearing babies have the parental and legal right to make an informed decision regarding the use of stem cells to reverse their baby's hearing loss once that procedure becomes safely available. They can either go forward with the treatment or reject it. And odds are quite high that most parents will prefer to opt for the stem cells treatment than to forego it. This would be absolutely true when we have someday stem cells that can reverse blindness or low vision condition would parents opt for that treatment for their blind or low vision babies. Chances are high that culturally deaf parents of a deaf/blind baby would stop at nothing to see that their baby get the stem cells treatment for blindness but not deafness when they value more on vision than hearing. Just as any parents would see any other medical condition would they like to see reversed for their babies. A hypocrisy in action folks. In fact, there wouldn't be any outcry from the culturally deaf community if there was a stem cells treatment that could reverse vision loss in babies, children, teens and adults.

But here's another "hypocrisy" about Marlee Matlin's. She champions for the donation of free hearing aids to deaf and hard of children around the world with the Starkey Hearing Foundation. I think this is great! In fact she regularly attends this annual gala event called, "So the world may hear." This year's gala 2012 event raised a record $7.6 million dollars and had many notable celebrities like:

President Bill Clinton, Maria Bello, Robin Williams, Marlee Matlin, Billy Crystal, Forest Whitaker and Sammy Sosa attended this year's Awards Gala, which raised a record $7.6M. But the biggest star was the power of hearing.

And yet she warns us about stem cells treatment for hearing loss? What's her stance on stem cells treatment for curing blindness or low vision in babies?

The power of hearing. Yes, that's a strong draw and reason for people to support on finding ways to alleviate hearing loss. Even Lou Ferrigno (who received his Esteem Envoy implantable hearing aid) and Gary Busey (Marlee Matlin confronted Busey his hearing loss that he needs to get a hearing aid seen in the Celebrity Apprentice show by which $1 million dollar was raised for Starkey Hearing Foundation) who were at the gala event as well. It won't be long until celebrities support for the cure for hearing loss through stem cells treatment.

Now, here's the irony.

Marlee Matlin is perhaps unwittingly helping people understand and value the power of hearing for several years by attending the "So the World May Hear" gala annual event that began in 1984 and supports the distribution of free hearing aids to children around the world. Deaf and hard of hearing children around the world with their free hearing aids are getting a taste of that power of hearing and experience the joy of being able to hear sound.  And with that taste in mind already experienced they certainly would want to opt for stem cells treatment to reverse their own hearing loss if they had that choice and the means to do so.

Now, I'm sure some in the culturally deaf community would express their shock and outrage over this but let me remind some of the culturally deaf people that the bulk of their community do wear hearing aids and cochlear implants. Look around whenever you are with a group of deaf and hard of hearing friends. How many of them are wearing hearing aids and cochlear implants? Why are they wearing hearing aids? Why cochlear implants? What makes you think they would not want to opt for stem cells treatment to reverse or simply improve their own hearing?  What makes you think they would not support parental rights to make an informed decision to provide stem cells treatment to reverse hearing loss for their deaf/hh babies?

So, who is really showing the hypocrisy here?

Is the death of culturally deaf community that far behind? Or is it just plain paranoia? 

Oral only are now officially Deaf by Humphries and Padden

The "Redeafined" blog is one of the few blogs and people out there using the capitalized "D" in "Deaf" to not mean as an inclusive group for all deaf and hard of hearing people - an attempt at a new ideology, or in this case moving the goal post, on what "Deaf" today supposed to mean in place of deaf and hard of hearing. I explained earlier in my recent blog on how that example of using "Deaf" is set to fail because of the confusing message and meaning behind it will simply be lost with the rest of the population of people with hearing loss.

Simply put, it won't work.

JPR said it well in one of my blog about this very same subject:

I shake my head at the ideology that Dr. Donald Grushkin exhibits. It is his business to think whatever he wants (the First Amendment is intact, last time I checked) but the ideology will not be helpful at all. It fails to recognize the pluralism and the huge diversity in the deaf population as you described. It is offensive to many deaf people who do not identify themselves as members of the Deaf culture when the proponents of the ideology insist that they must be Deaf. Have the proponents learned anything from the history? The U.S. attempted to impose the idea of Melting Pot on the immigrants but it did not succeed. Instead, the immigrants still retained their identities that they acquired from their native countries or cultures. Saying that all deaf people are Deaf is like trying to impose Melting Pot on them. It is not going to work, as you said.

Indeed. it won't work because people have their own identities and how they are comfortable with it. You cannot force an ideology on other deaf and hard of hearing people's own identities in the name of collectivism and unity.

JPR continues:

I have to wonder why some people are promoting the ideology of applying the cultural identity of Deaf to all deaf people in spite of the reality. Is it because they want to build the Deaf Ethnos? Is it because they fear that the technology of cochlear implant and medical technologies are changing the landscape of the Deaf culture? Is it because they want to build Deaf Utopia where unity and single identity (read: collectivism) are required? I will wait and see what true colors they are showing over the time.

I explained in response to JPR's comment that a "Deaf utopia" doesn't exist in the sense of "deaf and hard of hearing utopia" when taken on with the new meaning and definition of "Deaf."

Is Gallaudet University is an utopian example? In what way? Socially? Technologically? hierarchically? It may be an ideal place to go for a variety of reasons but the problem is you have deaf and hh people at Gallaudet University that make up 95 to 97% of the campus population. That kind of tight social fitting cannot be done at that level once you leave the gates of Gallaudet University. You become 0.2% (0.002) of the total population in the United States. The only way to achieve something close to that of Gallaudet University if you live in large enough cities (e.g. Rochester, NY; and perhaps in some surrounding communities of Washington D.C., etc) that have large clusters of culturally deaf people in their area. That's not utopia, neither is Gallaudet University's example. Rather it's an example of isolationism by mixing with your own kind and very little to do with hearing people.

All black universities are not examples of an utopian campus. Ideal perhaps but not utopian because they've become isolated with their "own kinds." An utopian society would be more liken where members are able interact with each other across culturally and linguistically. For that to happen technology will be key in helping bridge that communication gap where it becomes 2nd nature to communicate with anyone regardless of mode of communication or language used.  (In reality) we'll be more likely to segregrate ourselves withn our "own kinds" than to mix and interact with those not of "our kinds." Just our basic human nature that we do this. Nothing utopian about it no matter how much fantasy you can throw it to other people.
 

So, the "reDeafination" use of "Deaf" will not confuse the message, the meaning and definition as established by Humphries and Padden back in 1988.  We have deaf and hard of hearing communities, not a Deaf community because a Deaf community means a culturally deaf community and not of those who are hard of hearing who are fine with speaking and listening, oral users, S.E.E. users, CUED speech users, deaf AGBell members, and anybody with a hearing loss who isn't a culturally deaf person. I can imagine the utter ridiculousness in trying to convince a person who has a high frequency hearing loss but has mild hearing loss ("late deafened") that he is a Deaf person.

No. It won't work. Still kind of incredible that people are willing to shove some three decades of the definition brought forth by Humphries and Padden in 1988 (as seen proudly in NAD's explaination) down the drain. If they weren't dead already they'd be rolling in their graves.

Why "Deaf" (big D) for all with hearing loss won't work

I want to add more on what I wrote earlier in my blog about what Don Grushkin said previously about changing the definition of the word "Deaf" with a capitalized letter 'd' to be reserved for all people with hearing loss, deaf and hard of hearing. I want to explain to the readers (and to Don Grushkin and everybody in his Deafhood Foundation circle) why this new definition of his will not work.

First off the definition of "Deaf" with the capitalized 'd' was made popular with the help of Padden and Humphries. The newly defined word has already entered into the collective conscious minds of people for almost three decades. They ran with it without even looking back. The d/D hole has already been dug and will continue grow and be divisive.

Who to blame? Well, we all know who.

Secondly, in the Google search you have nearly 15,000 searches that cover the meaning and definition of "D"eaf or "big D." You have About.com explaining the big 'D' and small 'd' in d/Deaf. You have Wikipedia doing the same thing. You have medical journals that discuss culturally deaf people and using the "big D" to explain the meaning of "Deaf."  In an ASL lesson website it explains the big 'D' and little 'd' in d/Deaf.  In other countries they recognize the big 'D' in Deaf on what it supposed to mean. It has entered in the glossary of disability groups or organizations.  Captioning services explain to people on the meaning of "D"eaf.  That definition is ensconced in the Federal government such as NIH.  And the examples go on and on.

The hole continues to go deeper and bigger.

The divisiveness will continue.

That strategy is no good to try and move the goal post in the hope it'll help the Deafhood Foundation or for any "Deafhood" followers with a capital "D" (as opposed to "deafhood") to try and get the new "Deaf" word out as to mean all inclusive for anybody with a hearing loss. That effort was tried once before in CAD who got caught with their pants down for violating the 501(c)(3) laws in their secretive attempt to change their own bylaws that went unnoticed for almost 6 years on inserting the word "D"eafhood.

The old CAD Bylaws in July 2005 was peppered with terms like "Deafhood" in place of "deaf" and "hard of hearing" and had a language written in such a way that supported profiling such as in Section 25.3 mentioning "Deafhood" as a requirement for running for office in the CAD organization.

Section 25.3 Nominations for office shall be those who are part of the Deafhood, a California resident and be active Association member for at least two years.

It wasn't an alternative or an option on the Deafhood requirement part because the word "shall" is a legally binding word and must be followed. No room there.

Back in October 2009, Barry Sewell produced a captioned video expressing concerns regarding what it appears to be profiling and discriminatory practices favoring "Deafhood" proponents or adherents.

Comparing the old from the new by-laws, one can see how much of the language and terms used were redacted. This change could be credited to Mr. Sewell for sending a letter to the California Department of Justice expressing concerns that the 2005 CAD bylaws are discriminatory that practices profiling. It took CAD 2 years to correct the language used in their by-laws noting the fact it had that discriminatory language in place for over 6 years.

But still left behind the "big D" Deaf in their bylaws language. Barry Sewell in his captioned video asked why it was left in without any definition or explanation for the "big D" Deaf.

Don't forget that important bit of history of subterfuge.

Bottom line, the "big D" and "little d" are already well ensconced into the collective minds of culturally deaf people.   They already developed manual signs to distinguish themselves from deaf people and that's simply a hole already dug, Don Grushkin.

Picture source. Left: Judy Gough; and Far Right: Ella Mae Lentz - board members of Deafhood Foundation. 

Don Grushkin on what you said about the d/D as being divisive.

I choose to capitalize "Deaf" for all Deaf (and Hard of Hearing) people, not to signify any cultural affiliation, but to emphasize the common ethnicity of Deaf people. I believe that the d/D distinction is unnecessarily divisive, cumbersome, and ultimately more trouble than it is worth, although it did serve an important purpose in its time. But using Deaf for all does not signify cultural membership, just as not all Black people are necessarily part of Black culture or all Jews are practicing religious Jews.

I agree, it's divisive. It's ego driven but the hole has already been dug and it continues to be dug. And to try and change the meaning (moving the goal post) of the word "Deaf" (big D) to the advantage of Deafhood Foundation, CAD bylaws or for Deafhood followers in the effort to try and capture a much larger deaf and hard of hearing population and appear neutral about it will not work. You have 30 years of the "big D" and "little d" definitions working against you.

Good luck on undoing all that.
 

Matt Hamill vs Vladimir Matyushenko

An update on the Matt Hamill's next UFC fight. Previously Matt Hamill was to fight Roger Hollet but Roger sustained some injuries and so a new fighter was needed to replace him.  The new fighter is now Vladimir "The Janitor" Matyushenko.  The UFC 152 fight will still happen on September 22, less than two weeks away.  Hamill and Matyushenko will be a part of the main card lineup. Incidentally so will Michael Bisping who won a very controversial fight against Matt Hamill when Bisping was in the 205lb category and decided later to compete in the 185lb weight category. Bisping is doing very well at that weight category.

AGBell members are now officially Deaf people

Recently Don Grushkin made an opinion regarding the use of the capitalized "d" for the word "deaf" to mean an all inclusive definition:

I choose to capitalize "Deaf" for all Deaf (and Hard of Hearing) people, not to signify any cultural affiliation, but to emphasize the common ethnicity of Deaf people. I believe that the d/D distinction is unnecessarily divisive, cumbersome, and ultimately more trouble than it is worth, although it did serve an important purpose in its time. But using Deaf for all does not signify cultural membership, just as not all Black people are necessarily part of Black culture or all Jews are practicing religious Jews. 

 Since I'm persona non grata over at Deaf Echo I will as usual make my responses here and write my opinions on what Don Grushkin said. I will disagree with his attempt to move the goal post on what "D"eaf is to mean nowadays.

Noticeably over the past few years a few notable people in the culturally deaf community have been attempting to change the meaning and definition of the word "Deaf" to include any and all deaf and hard of hearing people, including culturally deaf people. But the problem is that the term "Deaf" with the upper case "D" has always denoted to mean culturally deaf people and this was explained by Carol Padden and Tom Humphries, in Deaf in America: Voices from a Culture (1988) on the meaning and difference between "D"eaf and "d"eaf:

We use the lowercase deaf when referring to the audiological condition of not hearing, and the uppercase Deaf when referring to a particular group of deaf people who share a language – American Sign Language (ASL) – and a culture. The members of this group have inherited their sign language, use it as a primary means of communication among themselves, and hold a set of beliefs about themselves and their connection to the larger society.

Granted. The culturally deaf community was able to grant their own exclusive right to capitalize the letter 'd' in "deaf" to mean one thing and one thing only as exactly as what Carol Padden and Tom Humphries pointed out.  And become members of an exclusive heritage group or so they say. Otherwise by not accepting the very definition set forth almost 30 years ago by Padden and Humphries would mean it could no longer to specifically mean culturally deaf people. It would simply become a generic brand with no identification on culture and language (ASL) that ties itself to a specific heritage group. In fact, that very act would devalue the very word "Deaf" away from the culturally deaf community and disappears altogether with no identity at all. AGBell members who are deaf or hard of hearing who do not know a lick of sign language are now defacto Deaf people. No need to focus on ASL, deaf culture, culturally heritage and language. All that would be rather strange if not outright blasphemous to a lot of culturally deaf people and of all things coming from a guy who is helping run Deafhood Foundation.  Funny how one thinks that by saying deaf/Deaf is "divisive" yet there were ASL-only Deafhood workshops (here, too). So much for the concept of including everybody this "Deaf" idea of Don Grushkin's.

Another thing, there is no common ethnicity that ALL deaf and hard of hearing people share regarding their physical trait on hearing loss.  Ethnic means that a group of people either share a common and distinctive racial, national, religious, linguistic, or cultural heritage. Nothing about hearing loss which is a physical trait. The only commonality here we all share is hearing loss whether it is bilateral or unilateral. Whether born with it or acquired hearing loss later in life. And that communication access, as it varies from one person with a hearing loss to another, is the other commonality amongst them as well. Some struggle more than others. Some are fine with it. Some do not have the need to sign while others do require sign language to communicate.

What has been divisive is some of the nonsense deaf politics that have been going on for years rather than over two simple words, deaf and Deaf. There are two groups. The culturally deaf group and the not culturally deaf group. You have hard of hearing, deaf, and culturally deaf. And that's a fact of life.

Speed Limit

Which is faster in communicating? American Sign Language (ASL), Signing Exact English (S.E.E.) or Oral (i.e. speaking)?  Is speed really that important? Does speed indicate intelligence? Does speed indicate IQ capability? Why does it matter when it comes to the speed of communicating?  What's really important when it comes to communicating? Well, in my humble opinion it does not really matter when it comes to "communication speed. It doesn't matter which communication methods is used as long as whatever works and that the person is comfortable with it. Speed isn't a factor here but the ability to communicate effectively, comfortably and people are able to understand you. And that the communication is an intelligible one.  But I'm still quiet impressed if a person can speak at an ungodly speed breaking the world record as the fastest talker at 600+ words per minute. And I can only type 80 wpm! Holy schmoly!

Green Brownie Eaters

I've been to several online forums (both hearing and deaf/hh) going back to the 1990s and have participated in many debates, proffered my own opinions and facts on a variety of topics and issues. But over the years there were two online forums, which were incidentally deaf/hh forums, that stuck to my mind on the pervasiveness of such bullying type of attitudes that took place. Some form of bullying took place were quite direct and obvious while others tried to make it discreet but even their actions were obvious through the use of pervasive amount of emoticons, excessive use of memes, raucous put downs and insinuating remarks in the effort to bait people and just plain making fun of those who comment in online forums. Quackery ensues from supposed "experts" who are unprofessionally or emotionally too involved.  Sometimes moderators were of no real help with their heavy lead fingers on ban button by banning members 3/4 of the time they don't personally like because of ideological differences and whatnot just to protect their status quo and precious ideologies. Sometimes it's like that, other times not so.

The good, bad and ugly I suppose in the world of deaf/hh discussion forums.   

One deaf/hh forum was one of the earliest chat forums that was set up. It only took a few short years for members to realize the pervasiveness of such militant beliefs or attitudes in a variety of topics or issues but were exacerbated when owner(s) or monitor(s) who continually looked the other way when you have ongoing crude or bullying remarks time and time again against members whenever they simply disagreed.  In this forum former members discussed how bad one other forum was.

I haven't patronized DC or DN in months now, since I've learned of it's true colors. Now I'm finding more of a militant attitude among the Monitors (gasp!! Shades of Orwellian 1984!!) that seem to override any free expression under the guise of "maintaining the peace in here". Ahh, well... It was a good site while it lasted.

Indeed. That particular deaf forum lasted several years before it petered out into internet oblivion.  As you can see in the Wayback Machine based on the amount of online activity peaking out for many forums around in the mid-2000s years (see below for graphics). Favoritism reared its ugly head for far too many times and it became obvious to everyone except to the owners, monitors and few chummy friends of theirs who participated seemed to be immune from getting suspended or banned or hardly even a tongue lashing. Please, no French kissing jokes here. Instead of instituting their own rules strictly by the books, emotionally uninvolved, on handling members' posted comments it was often times found easier to look the other way and leave a bullying comment or heavy insinuations in place. Sometimes you get ethically-challenged people who have tried to post members' names and workplaces as effort in retaliation of sort. Certainly not the cat's meow. That very same thing happened to deaf bloggers as well. If those kinds of practices on looking the other way as a matter of practice then any online deaf forum's popularity would only last for so long. Destined for the internet trash bins of yesteryear. 

Below you can see screen grabs from various deaf/hh forums over the years based on the Wayback Machine's number of crawl times. Less postings means less crawling by the Wayback on updating a website.  Around 2004 - 2006 were typically the heady years as you can see. Most popular deaf/hh forums died out around 2007 - 2009.

Over time popular discussion forums will someday soon go to the wayside and slowly die out into oblivion into internet obscurity only to be revised on occasion through the Wayback Machine or Google caches. Or that former members of one discussion forum gets peeled away to make way their own discussion forum but only to see the same pattern repeated and eventually get destined for the Internet trash bins of yesteryear. It's only a matter of time, ya see. Yet, forum owners have every right to see how their own forums take place and what is allowed and not allowed. That much is clear.

So, by now you are probably asking what are the "Green Brownie Eaters" seen in the blog title above? Well, they're the ethically-challenged people who think they can get away with things hoping others will look the other way, even among those higher up in the echelon ladder, knowing the substance baked into the brownies they are eating is illegal in an otherwise innocuous looking brownie treats. And how they hope others will eat them as well by jumping the bandwagon. Meow!

Deaf man to run for city council position in Minnesota

Sonny Wasilowski. If you haven't heard of him you will now. He's a deaf family man out of Minnesota who is running for the Faribault City council position. He's a familiar name in sComm, a deaf owned business, where he was interviewed on using a real time face to face communication product back in 2007 called the UbiDuo. So strong is his faith in this communication technology that put deaf people on equal footing with hearing people he is using it to his political advantage on reaching out to hearing people as seen in his Facebook photo in his quest to win the Faribault City council seat. A sign of a strong and independently but open-minded person. He has the means and political experience to take the task at hand. If you live in Faribault, Minnesota (map), take the time to vote for Sonny Wasilowski on November 6, 2012.

His background:

Name: Sonny Wasilowski 

Age: 31 

Family: Lisa, married for nearly ten years. Jane, 16 years old host-daughter from Malaysia. RJ, four years old son. Maggie, 14 months old daughter. 

Occupation: Human Resources Assistant with the United States Department of Agriculture. 

Education: Bachelors in Business Administration at Gallaudet University, Washington, DC and Graduate Certificate in Public Management at Minnesota State University, Mankato. 

Political/community involvement: Governor Dayton appointed Board Member of Minnesota State Academies, President of Christ Through Hands Ministry, past Director of Faribault Deaf Club 

Why are you running? My family and I love Faribault. Yet, Faribault could do better. I want to do Faribault right by being fiscally smart, making the right decisions for our future and most importantly, I want to give our residents top-notch services through our park and recreation, library, public works and so on. 

What's the most important issue facing Faribault? The Council has an obligation to be fiscally smart, short and long term. I also want to be equally concerned with constituents concerns and requests along with the delivery of city services. 

The power of a positive message with no hate on sign language

Here's a video of my 1 year old precocious baby at her 1st birthday party showing the many signs with Mom, Dad, and Grandpa asking Heather how to sign a particular word. She is my oldest daughter of the three girls (all hearing) I have and she just turned 19 years old recently. In this clip she signed several different words such as baby, table, tree, more, thank you, tummy, nose, ear, "Heather" (her name sign) and so on. In this video you can see people were asking her to sign certain words verbally like "Show me 'more' " and she would sign "more." This is a simple video using positive examples the power of using sign language with none of the deaf politics and hate in the effort to push an ideology. Avoid that and you'll go farther with your simple but positive message instead of hate. My daughter today is fluent in sign language.

Noah Buchholz's Journey: Part 4 and 5 series

Lots of surprises on daring to communicate in the most effective way with hearing people. Part 4 Part 5

Sarah Churman's new book....Powered On

Remember Sarah Churman with almost 14 million hits to date on YouTube? Yeah, you remember her (and all the hate or lamentations that followed like here,  here, here, here, here, ....ad nauseum) and the Esteem Envoy implantable hearing aid that was turned on for the first time and it turned Sarah Churman into an overnight internet sensation. That sensation is still continuing almost a year later with the ongoing media coverage.  Anyways, she has a new book coming out in October. The book is called "Powered On."  The title certainly does make sense. And if you pre-order now you can save a few bucks before her book comes out officially in October. I already ordered mine! And I'll let you know when I'm done reading it. I'm sure it's much better than buying a blank book under false advertisement and pretenses (oh, I never bought it, fyi) but I still reserve that the Steve Jobs book I got would be the better one to read and enjoy. We'll see. Get yours today!

19 Perfect Moments in Subtitles History

I wouldn't call them "perfect" but here ya go. Click here and see 19 screen grabs from different TV shows with subtitles that line up absolutely perfectly.  Or so they say.

Did Facundo Element violate the 501(c)(3) exemption requirement?

Any organizations that is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization, such as Facundo Element, need to be aware of the restrictions regarding political activity if they are to be a tax-exempt organization. From the IRS page:

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity. Violating this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes.

Under Facundo Element's own YouTube channel with Alison Aubrecht speaking on behalf of the Facundo Element organization where at the end of the video a link was provided to Facundo Element's website. In the video it discussed politics publicly with obvious political bias in support of or against a political candidate. And by doing so may have violated IRS restriction (a grey area in this instance with its video presentation but it is still obvious all around where that video was going) by making public statements of position of support or against made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office. Even though at the end of the video she tells viewer to think carefully on who to vote for despite the obvious bias throughout the 7 minute long video.

For a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization it is better to protect their tax-exempt status at all cost in order to fulfill their own mission to help others in need rather than risk their tax-exempt status organization by speaking on behalf of its own organization on political campaigning in favor of or against a certain candidate. An effort to influence viewers to vote one way.  It'd be a whole different story had Alison Aubrecht voiced her political opinions or expression in her own personal YouTube channel rather than under Facundo Element's own YouTube channel.  When it comes to politics it'd be better to stay out of it and remain unbiased.

UPDATE: My video response on lie #1.

Deaf man hears music and can't stop listening to it

Here's an article of a profoundly deaf man who got a Phonak digital hearing aid which made a world of difference on its ability to give Austin Chapman a greater access to the breadth of sounds in music enabling him to hear Mozart's "Lacrimosa." It was a realization to him that using advanced state of the art hearing aid technology makes a world a difference really hearing the variety of sounds.

The 23-year-old filmmaker, whose life has largely been visual until now, still struggles to adequately explain the rush of new sounds echoing through his head. He compares them at one point to seeing a high-resolution photograph for the first time. Later, he describes the sensation as being exposed to a color you've never seen before. Finally, with a broad smile on his face he offers this analogy: "It's like the first time you kiss a girl. It's like that."

That's the difference when you can use an advanced hearing technology will the world open up like a colorful, inspiring painting suddenly in front of you.

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/2012/08/25/3779010/a-deaf-man-hears-music-and-cant.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/2012/08/25/3779010/a-deaf-man-hears-music-and-cant.html#storylink=cpy

Drama...drama...drama...

You know, looking back all those years we got to see one drama scene after another take place practically every 3 to 6 months in the deaf culture world, sometimes multiple times in a space of a few months that are manifested in the form of blogs, vlogs or some kind of petition on getting the word out. The latest drama would be this recent petition to get Dr. Karl White to resign from EHDI and leave the "culturally deaf community." This new drama earns the "Stephen Colbert's Drama Scream" animated gif for the continuing pathos evoked time and time again with the hyperbolic outrage as if everybody is on the same boat.

Not really.

It wasn't long ago, two months ago in fact, that there was a petition to get rid of a 19th century statue of two Indians fighting a mother grizzly bear (in her effort to protect her two cubs as it would appear) which was created by Douglas Tilden, a world renowned deaf sculpture, where it stands at the California School for the Deaf in Fremont, California, claiming that the statue is racist and it "represents generations of dehumanizing violence towards Native American communities."

Not at all.

Of course, it appears that the majority of those in the Deaf community do not even accept the idea to get rid of the Combat with Grizzly statue that was made by a world renowned deaf sculpture.

Oh, I mustn't forget another recent outrage a few months back about a dirty sign language book penned by a hearing author. 

And, of course, another petition to get a printing company, St. Martin's Press, to not print her book because sign language only belong to culturally deaf people and not to the world.  By the way signing your name in an online petition does not work nor is it really that effective. It is one of the laziest ways to protest. Sorry to bring that horrified fact to you.

So, what are other list of dramas that I failed to mention here?

Hypocrisy when it comes to captioning vs transcript in videos?

This has been an ongoing hypocrisy for quite awhile when it comes to signed videos that do not provide any subtitles or captions but instead provide transcripts for those who do not know sign language. For years culturally deaf people have complained loudly how videos they watched were never captioned such as TV shows and movies over cable and the internet, including YouTube videos. But that has been changing slowly (or quickly depending on your perspective) while captioning and easy to use subtitling technology catches up. But imagine instead of subtitles or captions you have a transcript for each video. Why not just provide a transcript instead?

Well, it's not quite the same thing since it provides an obvious disconnect between the viewers and those in the videos because other visual cues and emotions would be entirely lost.  So, it makes good business sense is to provide captions/subtitles along with the signing in a video. This allows non-signing viewers a certain connect with signers seen in a video. It is just not those who do not know sign language but those who may be weak in sign language and having captions helps. It also makes good common sense to include captions in videos since that will help reach a wider audience regardless of who the viewing audience is.

But the hypocrisy continues. Some bray saying that putting captions in a signing video "pollutes" it. If that is their logic for an excuse then putting captions in a speaking video also "pollutes" it. Laughable on both sides.

So, if you are running a deaf/hh business or an organization and have the means and wherewithal to include captions to your videos then please do it. If you believe in communication access and inclusion your business or organization ought to be including captions/subtitles in their videos otherwise you and your organization or business  just end up as a bunch of hypocritical people with a stupid excuse not to provide captions/subtitles but tosses out a transcript instead. If you do that, then please do not complain again about the lack of captions or subtitles in movies, TV shows, news shows, internet videos, and on YouTube.  In fact, you would have no right to complain because your organization or business refuses to provide captions/subtitles in their own videos. In fact, by refusing to do so you've become just like....them.

Milestones....

I recently looked at my site counter and saw that it is nearing the 1 millionth hit mark. It'll be a few more months until that happens. I figured that this is an opportunity to pause and reflect back on my blogging history going back 8 years beginning in October of 2004. I've become, I believe, the longest running and most posted deaf/hh blogger with probably having the most cumulative blog hits as well.

I covered many subjects on American politics, deaf politics, deafness issues, technologies, medical science, the environment, Earth science, the nonsense global-warming-as-caused-by-human-beings-which-will-cause-sea-levels-to-rise-20-feet, interviews with Matt Hamill over the years who is now making a comeback, the "deafhoodism" cultural mindset that people would swear it is a cult following, the failed walked outs against DeafTV and Deafread, and many more topics. Some blogs I wrote were funny ones like the ever so famous Monopoly money debacle to covering serious issues like the rapes at Gallaudet University which continues to get worse are enough to keep pace with my varied interests on what to blog. Enough so for readers and fans to keep coming back. I thank you for that. With 1,978 blog posts so far and another milestone coming up as reach closer to my 2000th blog post I never imagined my blog would come this far 8 years later with so many twists and turns along the way. I met a lot of haters along the way but they were by far outweighed by the many fans and readers who like to read my blogs and contribute their opinions and thoughts.

Milestones.

They can only be reached if you take your first step and keep moving forward.

Apps for your Android phone on voice recognition

Here's an app, Closed Capp, that you can download to your Android phone where you can ask a person to speak into your phone and two seconds later have their words transcribed across your phone screen. This is a great app for those who have trouble hearing or are unable to hear.  Not exactly real time captioning nor real time conversation which last only 5 to 10 seconds long for a limited conversation to be transcribed each time.  But it's the next best thing for those who would want to opt for that piece of technology with the help of Google. Voice recognition technology is getting better and better as more people use it, and Google is constantly updating the service and accuracy they offer.  To understand how it works check out the Closed Capp video demo page.

It's only a matter of time that technology will improve to a point where voice recognition technology with the aid of powerful and fast computers will see accurate transcription, in real time, of at least at the 95 percentile range that will enable real time conversation without pressing the button every 5 to 10 seconds to transcribe what was spoken.

A captioning question.....

How come at a live political rally there is a sign language interpreter next to a person giving a speech who is running for office in front of thousands of people but no real time captioning nearby?

That's something to think about.

You have about 600,000 culturally deaf people (adults) who use sign language as their main mode of communication but you also have some 38 million people with hearing loss ranging from mild to profound who do not know a lick of sign language. You have about 6 million people who have difficulty hearing in the 18 to 74 age group, a rough estimate. But if you include those over 74 years old the estimate jumps to about 10 million as a total for those 18 and older.  There are about 200 million people in the United States in the 18 to 74 year old age category, an age group of those who are most likely to attend a political rally.  So that means 1 out 33 people in a large crowd listening to what a person is saying on stage at a political rally will have difficulty hearing what's being said vs 1 out 333 people who may be culturally deaf attending the event.

For example, in a crowd of 10,000 people attending a political rally you may have 300 people in the audience who will have trouble hearing or understanding what's being said versus perhaps 30 culturally deaf people who may be in attendance. I think it is a disservice to those who attend a rally but have trouble hearing what's being said with no access to real time captioning. Some have requested CART services at rallies (see page 5) yet this should be done automatically, within reason if it's not cost prohibitive, without the need to ask just as sign language interpreters are sometimes automatically provided.

The real hidden and silent majority of those with hearing loss are not the culturally deaf people but those who don't sign and have trouble hearing while relying on their hearing aids. In time this will change for the better on providing better communication to all those who need it.

Vice president Biden mocks sign language!!

Um, no, he didn't do it to mock or make fun of sign language but did it as part of his joke about how his sign language interpreter may soon suffer from tendonitis with his excessive babbling. Even the interpreter laughed at his joke. He imitated a signing movement to go with his joke. Mocked sign language itself? Not really.
This is what Biden said:

"I have more to say, but I am saying too much already because these guys get me going... and you're gonna have trouble translating all this! The poor lady, she's gonna have tendonitis by the time she finishes this."

NAD, NAACP or any other organizations won't even bother with this one so don't expect any chastising from them towards Biden.  Some people simply need to calm down over this one. Nothing worth getting your panties in a bunch or have your blood pressure burst an vein in your forehead with more of. this faux outrage. 

ADDENDUM: One more time, folks, people need to stop with the faux outrage about Biden's signing. The sign language interpreter was obviously enjoying Biden's humor and no embarrassment at all on her part. Really, the whole thing is a non-issue except for the most limp-wristed, sensitive folks out there.

Matt Hamill comes out of retirement to fight again

Matt Hamill stated last week that he has come out of retirement after a year long break to fight in the upcoming UFC 152 fight on September 22 against Roger Hollett. The Hamill vs Hollet fight can be seen on Pay Per View TV.

Apparently Hamill's hunger to fight has not entirely disappeared after allowing his body, mind and spirit enough time to recover. The question now becomes can he make it at age 35 years old? Can he succeed in winning more UFC fights? We'll have to wait, watch and see what happens after September 22.

Welcome back, Matt!

The Hammer returns!

(Check out my past interviews with Matt Hamill here, here, here, and here).

Missing Deafread Link

Not sure what his problem is about an old Deafread's link to my old blog piece that I did 5 years ago saying the link is missing from the Deafread aggregator list on a particular page number. In this case on page 1809 as he stated in his blog piece.

Egbert is unable to find Deafread's old link to my blog piece on page 1809 in Deafread because it is now has moved to page 1816. Tomorrow or the next day it should move to page 1817 and so on. Egbert need to go back again to Deafread because the link in Deafread's aggregator list that link to my old blog piece is still there where it is currently on page 1816, not on page 1809 which was the case a few days ago.

Egbert needs to remember that every new blog link that gets added to the Deafread's aggregator current list on page 1 pushes all older archived links further back a page or two. So if you linked to an older archived link in Deafread, say, on page 1815 (http://www.deafread.com/page/1815/t/) on the aggregator list to find Hair Cell Regeneration, for example, and click on the page 1815 link again a week later you won't find it on that page since the Hair Cell Regeneration location will be found on page 1816 or 1817 or further depending on how many new blog links that got added to Deafread aggregator's current list on page 1. Deafread captured my old blog piece on July 20, 2006 and that is the date you should be looking for rather than the exact page number of the aggregator list if you happened to save the link to that particular page number. If you can't find it on that page number simply go back a page or two until you can find it.

This is all real simple stuff that really need no explanation here. Just try and keep up with the growing list of pages on the Deafread aggregator archived list. Nothing sneaky on what Deafread has been doing all these years. Pretty straight forward stuff here. Instead Egbert jumped to conclusion without checking out why a particular link wasn't on page 1809 and if had taken the time he would have found it a few pages further. The link to a particular blog you were looking for, Egbert, never disappeared from Deafread's aggregator archived list.

Historical role of a deaf Indian on the massacre at Wounded Knee

Here's an interesting but sobering history about the massacre at Wounded Knee where a deaf Indian possibly played a role in a key event that may have helped accidentally trigger a massacre resulting in the death of at least150 Indians with 50 of them wounded. Based on various accounts it appears that a lack of communication and understanding by a deaf Miniconjou Indian warrior named Black Coyote who may not have gotten the message on a deal requiring Indians to give up their arms.

The consensus among them seems to be that, whatever the catalyst, it was accidental; a gun that went off somewhere in the assembled ranks provided the spark for the subsequent mayhem. Dewy Beard describes how a deaf Indian named Black Coyote refused to give up his rifle; he was having difficulty understanding why the Miniconjous were being asked to give up their weapons in the first place. It was winter. Food was scarce. Each warrior needed a weapon to help feed his family. A few Indians close to Black Coyote agreed  that they would take it upon themselves to explain to the deaf man through sign language why the soldiers wanted his weapon. The Indians were confident that once they explained the situation, Black Coyote would hand over the rifle. But before they could try, several soldiers came up behind the deaf man and tried to wrest the gun away. There was a struggle. Black Coyote refused to yield. "Look out! Look out!" cried a soldier, who stepped back and leveled his gun. The rifle, held rigidly by Black Coyote in an upright position with the barrel pointed harmlessly in the air, accidentally discharged. A single shot splintered the gloomy air. The sound was like a clarion. The strain of the morning hours suddenly dissoled in a paroxysm of violence. Several Indians threw off their blankets and brought their weapons into play. The eruption of gunfire on both sides in some instances was simultaneous. With no audible order from their officers, soldiers of Troops K and B started blasting.

The massacre resulted in the death of "at least 150 Indian men, women and children, Spotted Elk  being among one of the killed, as well as 25 officers dead and 40 wounded." Although accounts of that event differed.

Strange bedfellows?

You have AGBell, NAD and other organizations who are part of the Hearing Alliance (DHHA) group, a Coalition of Consumer and Professional Organizations, who support the ratification of Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) which was made on July 17, 2012. Also, if you hadn't noticed when you clicked on that link it goes through the Listening and Spoken Language Knowledge Center website. That internet address will soon be AGBell's new website for the AG Bell Association. The old AGBell website address will soon redirect to the new Knowledge Center.

Anyways, AGBell explains in depth about the CRPD along with AGBell's position paper regarding the CRPD with some suggestions on changing/adding a few things to CRPD and compare that to
NAD's position paper which was updated in May of 2012.

Interesting to see the differences between the two organizations regarding their support for CRPD.

You can see the continuing CRPD changes on the amendments in the US Senate Committee on Foreign Relations webpage.

The Extinction of Keresan Pueblo Indian Sign Language among Deaf Indians?

In 2007 I first published a blog questioning whether the "forced" use of ASL and the adoption of American deaf culture had some impact on deaf Indians their use of their own native Indian Sign Language (ISL) causing ISL to fall out to disuse like the Keresan Pueblo Indian Sign Language (KPISL) and ultimately having them removed from their own Indian culture and customs once they were placed in deaf residential schools. 

Keresan Pueblo Indian Sign Language (KPISL) is a means of communication developed and used among many of the residents of this one New Mexico pueblo. It is one of many North American Indian sign languages found in the United States, and one of two in Southwestern United States that have been studied and documented—the other being Navajo (Davis & Suppala, 1995). A literature review suggests that signed languages were also used among Apaches and Hopis (West, 1960). KPISL is believed to have developed on one pueblo by family members in order to communicate with their offspring, siblings, and relatives who were deaf (Kelley, 2001). It is not at all uncommon for deaf children and their family members to invent a home-based sign system for such a purpose. However, KPISL does not fit the framework for home-based sign systems set forth by researchers such as Frishberg (1987) who states that home signs do not have a consistent meaning-symbol relationship, do not pass on from generation to generation, are not shared by one large group, and are not considered the same over a community of signers. KPISL was passed on from one family’s eldest brothers and sisters to their hearing and deaf siblings, nephews, and nieces. KPISL is also used among non-family members living on the pueblo. It has been found to function in two significant ways: (a) as an alternative to spoken language for hearing tribal members and (b) as a primary or first language for deaf tribal members.

For the KPISL it was considered a first language for deaf Pueblo tribal members. But the sad irony as I have pointed out several times in my blogs concerning the topic of ISL is that the adoptive use of ASL and the adoption of an American deaf culture helped cause the disuse of the KPISL among deaf Indians. Not necessarily the primary cause but certainly bears some culpability. This is especially true with English and its American customs and culture helping along the demise of KPISL/ISL.  However, deaf schools of the past and recent past never made any attempt to help accommodate or preserve KPISL or ISL among deaf Indians attending deaf schools. Instead they were inducted and indoctrinated into the "Deaf World" and its American deaf customs using ASL. In the end after graduation they were forced to choose between ISL or ASL.

Both KPISL and PISL have become endangered languages. KPISL is not much used among the pueblo’s younger generation owing to their learning school English, ASL, or signs that follow the spoken English word order. Before the 1990s, American Indian Deaf/Hard-of-Hearing tribal members usually left home to attend a residential school for the deaf located far away (Baker, 1997; Lane, Hoffmeister, & Bahan, 1996). At the school, there was usually no formal instruction of American Indian or American Indian culture and signs; only Deaf culture and ASL were taught, leading many American Indian students to join the “Deaf World.” After graduation, the students had to make difficult decisions about where and how to establish themselves: on the pueblos with hearing families and friends, in urban areas with other Deaf/Hard-of-Hearing people, or in border towns with limited access to both groups.

The extinction of a language happens when they fall out of disuse because of a dominant language and culture:

If a language (spoken or otherwise) is not utilized or passed down from one generation to the next, then the devastating result would be language extinction. Accompanying the loss of a native language is the loss of the traditions, culture, and perhaps even a loss of life. Language extinction, also referred to as total language death, is defined as occurring, “when there are no speakers of a given language idiom remaining in a population where the idiom was previously used (i.e. when all native speakers die). Language death may affect any language idiom, including (so-called) dialects and languages.” 

The death(?) of KPISL and its culture is an example of how a language failed due to the lack of it being maintained and passed on down to the next generation of KPISL users.  Deaf Indians using KPISL went to deaf schools who were forced to adopt ASL and its American deaf culture which led to the lack of maintenance of their own ISL and culture that spanned generations in their own tribe.

During a study conducted in the Spring 2000 by the University of Texas at Austin, a previously undiscovered form of sign language was uncovered. Walter Kelley and Tony McGregor, two doctoral candidates from the University write, “The signs, Keresan Pueblo Indian Sign Language (KPISL), are used by some of the pueblo’s Deaf/Hard-of-Hearing individuals. This newly discovered language, an idiosyncratic home sign language, was developed perhaps by family members in order to communicate with their offspring, siblings and relatives who have a hearing loss. The signs appear to have evolved in the same way as spoken language, progressing gradually from the representational to the symbolic, from the picture to the symbol, but still remaining primarily representational or ideographic (Frishberg, 1987). Today, many individuals in the pueblo use it while communicating with others inside the small village” (Kelley,1998). However, the potential for collision with ASL lies in the fact that without regular usage or due to the integration of American ASL in schools, KPISL is now becoming a dying language. Kelley and McGregor go on to reveal, “Unfortunately, the signs are not used among the younger Pueblo Indian generation due to their learning in school American Sign Language (ASL) used by American Deaf individuals or Seeing Exact English 2 (SEE 2), a methodology of using signs following the spoken English word order. In addition, KPISL was used at a nearby pueblo but it is no longer seen” (Kelley, 1998).

So, in retrospect some of those deaf schools that use ASL were responsible in more ways than one for the inevitable language death of deaf Indians' ISL, in this case KPISL.

The purpose and use of KPISL were different than that of the PISL.

KPISL didn’t originate for the same purposes as the well known Plains Indian Sign Language (PISL), which was primarily developed to facilitate intertribal communication between the American Indian tribes that spoke different languages in the Plains region of the present United States and Canada—a region extending from what is now the state of Texas northward to Canada and, at its widest point, stretching from Arizona through Oklahoma (Taylor, 1978). Signs were used during hunting and trading among the different tribes and were also used for storytelling and a variety of ceremonies. Plains tribes known to use signed language included the Cheyenne, Comanche, Kiowa, and Sioux. Signed languages were also used as a means of communication by the Iroquois in the state of New York, the Cherokee in the Southeastern United States, the Eskimos in Alaska, and the Mayan in Mexico (Johnson, 1994; Scott, 1931; West, 1960).

The question now lies on how many deaf Indians with their own ISL who were indoctrinated into deaf schools forced to learn another language (ASL) and American deaf customs, culture and language (English) and forgo or diminish their own Indian Sign Language, custom and culture? Much the same way when thousands of hearing Lakota Indian children who were forced into American schools at boarding houses to learn and adopt American customs, language and culture.

They were not tall, muscular braves, armed with bows and tomahawks that emerged from this train. Instead, what greeted the crowd were frightened children wrapped in blankets. They were tired, cold, and frightened by the crowd of strange white people that stared at them. There were eighty two boys and girls that arrived at Carlisle that night.


These were the first of many Indian students that would learn how to be “civilized” at the Carlisle Indian Industrial School. What these students didn’t know was that they were about to have a burden placed upon them. Aside from trying to learn a new language and culture, they would be tasked with bringing everything they learned back to their reservations and teaching their people the White Man's ways. In order to do this, the instructors at Carlisle used gender, in particular the females, to "civilize" the Indians. 

NAD (National Association of the Deaf) was established in 1880 in support of using ASL and had a huge role and influence to help incorporate ASL in deaf schools since its inception.  The irony is that during those years when deaf schools incorporated ASL, deaf Indians were indoctrinated into their deaf culture, ASL and American way of life (English language, customs and culture) at deaf residential schools at the expense of their own native sign language, customs and culture. Just like the deaf Keresan Pueblo Indians. This is the equivalent of hearing Indian children of the past being sent to American boarding schools to learn another language (English), American customs and culture at the expense of losing their own native language, customs and culture. But the scale and impact of this among deaf Indians going to deaf residential schools are unknown. Certainly not at the scale and breadth like the Carlisle Indian Industrial School for hearing Indian children who were forcibly placed into. And that it was the English language and western (American) culture that ultimately put their own native Indian language and culture at risk.

Many deaf Indian children were sent to deaf residential schools just as many hearing Indian children were sent to Indian residential schools.

Since the late 1800s, social, cultural and historical factors have caused the number of native users of traditional American Indian sign language to dramatically decrease along with the decline of native languages and cultures, came the loss of signed language that was once a widely used alternate to spoken language, and a traditional way of storytelling.  The role of a signed lingua franca has been replaced by English, which means that fewer hearing Indians are learning the traditional ways of signing. The decline of sign language among native groups also contributes to the marginalization and isolation of tribal members who are Deaf (see Goff-Paris & Wood 2002 and Miller 2004 to read more about the experiences of Native American Indians who are Deaf) (page 51).

.
.

 By the turn of the 20th century, however, a dramatic decline in sign language use among native groups was evident, largely due to its replacement by English as a lingua franca. The documentary evidence suggests that the use of a signed lingua franca continued well into the early 20th century. However, during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries in the United States and Canada (mainly in Northwestern and Southwestern regions) residential Indian schools were established by state, provincial, and federal governments; and by religious organizations in some cases. It become common practice for Indian children and adolescents to be systematically removed from their families and placed in these residential educational institutions. The official educational policy during this period was "cultural and linguistic assimilation." This translated into loss of many native ways, including the loss of native language and culture for many Indian children. Indian children were taught English only and in most cases were forbidden to follow or practice their cultural traditions (page 60).

Similarities do exist between many deaf Indian children who had their culture and their own language (e.g KPISL/ISL) who were sent off to deaf residential schools to learn a new language (ASL and English) and culture (American culture) to that of hearing Indian children who already had their own culture and own Indian language who were forcibly sent off to Indian schools to learn another language (English) and adopt American culture and customs. Just like the before and after picture seen above of a hearing Indian boy.

All this brings me to a recent blog I did on why NAD and other deaf schools have not apologized for helping with some of the eradication of deaf Indians' own ISL when deaf Indian children were forced to choose their language and culture and with no effort to help them preserve and maintain their own ISL identity and culture. And most importantly I also already asked whether an apology is really necessary despite the fact that we will never know the full impact on the placement of deaf Indian children in deaf residential schools that use ASL have had on their ISL and culture. We may never know on how many similar tribes like the Keresan Pueblo who had their deaf Indians lose their native sign language and part of their culture to ASL and American culture and customs at deaf residential schools of time's past. For all intent and purposes the KPISL could be technically extinct at this time until further research can ascertain that KPISL is still alive and that deaf KP Indians are still using it. 

Accountability goes both ways, folks.