Oh, I covered this before but it was done in a video format about how so many people, especially some deaf people, doubted Sarah Churman's ability to hear and even speak so well even after getting her implantable Envoy hearing device. What surprised me out of all of the videos I produced this one video I did has netted me with over 8,500 hits since last year in October 2011.Must've been a flurry of video searches going on when Sarah Churman's video went viral.
Neat.
The other video I did in July of 2009 that turned out well netted me over 5,400 hits. A video I produced called, "A positive ASL video of a 1 year old baby." And the next video I produced back in July 2011 was a video for hearing people only called, "When deaf/hh people speak, the hypocrisy from the deaf culture." A video where I discussed the hypocrisy I saw from a certain select group of deaf people in the deaf community when I pointed out to Jeff who did the very same thing producing a video for hearing people only. Just as well I also pointed out Tim Riker who did the very same thing by talking at the AB2072 Senate Health Hearing on June 23, 2010 instead of signing. And when I pointed that out in my blog about the hypocrisy they certainly circled the wagon around Tim Riker in the effort to "protect" him for speaking when they have furiously for years tried to prop up the positive message of ASL. And in the end, that group had to fall back speaking to a group of hearing people at the Senate Health Hearing despite having an ASL interpreters readily available. And this was a deaf guy, fluent in ASl, who was the the chapter president of the California Association of the Deaf (Sacramento chapter). A chapter that represents culturally deaf people who chose to speak over signing.
Now, as I think about it, my "for hearing people only" video for some reason has gotten more attention than Jeff's video even though we both produced a video for hearing people only. Why is that? Interesting.
Oh, and don't forget. Sarah Churman's new book is almost out. Don't forget to buy a copy.
Tuesday, October 30, 2012
A milestone report....
It was only a couple weeks ago when I reached my 2000th blog and I nearly forgot that milestone. Although I've had a few blogs before I began my Kokonut Pundit blogsite about a year before I finally settled on Kokonut Pundit which has become my number one main blogsite to blog on.
Again, thanks to my loyal readers and fans for stopping by. Come back in a few weeks for another milestone and guess what that might be.
Stay safe for those on the eastern states!
Having "perfect speech"....
What still boggles my mind today is to see some deaf people who are still hinging on the idea that speech theraphy is all about attaining "perfect speech."
No.
There is no such thing. It's laughable to even think that.
If you don't believe me then you certainly have not heard a hearing native southerner or hearing native northerner speak.
This is all about attaining intelligible speech and not about "perfect speech." It's important that people need to understand this. This is about attaining good diction habits. Good enuciation of words to be spoken well. It is about obtaining an oral skill that will last a lifetime.
There are many benefits in having intelligible speech whether it's done as a one way conversation or to have a dialogue with people around you.
To say that speech theraphy is about trying to get deaf or hard of hearing people to get their speech as "close to hearing people's speech" is nothing more but a play on emotion rather than about facts.
Speech sessions have its benefits for deaf and hh kids. I should know because I was one of them and the beneficiary of having taken those sessions.
Thursday, October 25, 2012
Editorial questions keeping Gallaudet University Open
More troubles at Gallaudet? Interesting article.
Sometimes people with an outside view can only see so much the value of keeping an institution open thinking it's a waste of tax-payers' money seeing "little in return" while others, primarily those "on the inside," see Gallaudet University as a great institution rich with history and culture, and have spawned world class graduates in more ways than one although it does have its own shortcomings.
This is the danger that Gallaudet University faces everyday when dealing with people who can only see so much in the value of maintaining Gallaudet University. It's simply not a university for college students but an institution that provides elementary and secondary education to deaf and hard of hearing kids on the campus of Gallaudet University. So, it's not just the 1575 college students attending but the other 280 kids for a total of about 1850 students who go to Gallaudet University and get their specialized attention and education through sign language.
Please, bare with me and keep your temper at bay, and maybe hold your jaw while you're at it. Read on.
At what cost is it worth keeping Gallaudet University going with a campus population of mostly deaf and hard of hearing students numbering about 1850 students in total? Has the university become unwieldy for its size while the cost born mostly borne by the federal government? Perhaps the appropriated amount given to Gallaudet each year by Congress to the tune of about $123 million dollars a year (2009 - 2012) would be seen as too much? Or too little? An appropriated amount which covers only 70% of Gallaudet's operating budget, a percentage amount that's been fairly consistent over the few decades. $123 million dollars each year not may not sound much but it does add up over the course of 11 years and you get a total of almost $1.2 billion (not million but billion) dollars (see page 7)! Already, a billion dollars spent in 10 years time. And in ten years time we've witness the murders, saw the marginalization of other communication preferences, the 2006 protest and now the McCaskill/Gallaudet snafu that continues to build that threaten to capture the nation's attention.
Or has the university become the epitome of excellence seeing a return investment in students who have become successful alumni who come back and donated money or give back to the university? Like to the tune of about $3 million dollars each year or about 1.8% of the annual budget (see page 10). Or is it the avant guard communication access whether you're fluent in sign language or not? Or the raising of the bar on educational standards and expectations from students? Or an example of an institution that brings deaf and hard of hearing students from around the world?
Now, like I said before, this whole McCaskill/Gallaudet snafu is becoming a public relation nightmare threatens to swallow Gallaudet University and raises the specter of more people asking on the "outside" why has Congress spent over $1billion dollars over the last 10 years for this institution? Yet students would appear, to those on the "outside" looking in, to be a bunch of ungrateful whelps who think they are owed something who sometimes put their ideology over education.
As you can see, you have the danger of how certain image is being projected about Gallaudet University to those who are watching the whole thing on the "outside" and those who don't or wouldn't know any better. Or maybe they do know better and see for what it is? But warning is in the writing and people are beginning to ask. There may come a time when the question gets asked on whether Gallaudet University worth keeping the gates open. Only time will tell.
Sometimes people with an outside view can only see so much the value of keeping an institution open thinking it's a waste of tax-payers' money seeing "little in return" while others, primarily those "on the inside," see Gallaudet University as a great institution rich with history and culture, and have spawned world class graduates in more ways than one although it does have its own shortcomings.
This is the danger that Gallaudet University faces everyday when dealing with people who can only see so much in the value of maintaining Gallaudet University. It's simply not a university for college students but an institution that provides elementary and secondary education to deaf and hard of hearing kids on the campus of Gallaudet University. So, it's not just the 1575 college students attending but the other 280 kids for a total of about 1850 students who go to Gallaudet University and get their specialized attention and education through sign language.
Please, bare with me and keep your temper at bay, and maybe hold your jaw while you're at it. Read on.
At what cost is it worth keeping Gallaudet University going with a campus population of mostly deaf and hard of hearing students numbering about 1850 students in total? Has the university become unwieldy for its size while the cost born mostly borne by the federal government? Perhaps the appropriated amount given to Gallaudet each year by Congress to the tune of about $123 million dollars a year (2009 - 2012) would be seen as too much? Or too little? An appropriated amount which covers only 70% of Gallaudet's operating budget, a percentage amount that's been fairly consistent over the few decades. $123 million dollars each year not may not sound much but it does add up over the course of 11 years and you get a total of almost $1.2 billion (not million but billion) dollars (see page 7)! Already, a billion dollars spent in 10 years time. And in ten years time we've witness the murders, saw the marginalization of other communication preferences, the 2006 protest and now the McCaskill/Gallaudet snafu that continues to build that threaten to capture the nation's attention.
Or has the university become the epitome of excellence seeing a return investment in students who have become successful alumni who come back and donated money or give back to the university? Like to the tune of about $3 million dollars each year or about 1.8% of the annual budget (see page 10). Or is it the avant guard communication access whether you're fluent in sign language or not? Or the raising of the bar on educational standards and expectations from students? Or an example of an institution that brings deaf and hard of hearing students from around the world?
Now, like I said before, this whole McCaskill/Gallaudet snafu is becoming a public relation nightmare threatens to swallow Gallaudet University and raises the specter of more people asking on the "outside" why has Congress spent over $1billion dollars over the last 10 years for this institution? Yet students would appear, to those on the "outside" looking in, to be a bunch of ungrateful whelps who think they are owed something who sometimes put their ideology over education.
As you can see, you have the danger of how certain image is being projected about Gallaudet University to those who are watching the whole thing on the "outside" and those who don't or wouldn't know any better. Or maybe they do know better and see for what it is? But warning is in the writing and people are beginning to ask. There may come a time when the question gets asked on whether Gallaudet University worth keeping the gates open. Only time will tell.
Josh Swiller on the McCaskill/Gallaudet Snafu
Josh Swiller wrote a good piece in the Huffington Post about the McCaskill/Gallaudet snafu. Not that I would necessarily agree on everything he wrote there are some points I do not quite agree on. If you don't know who Josh Swiller, he wrote a book called "The Unheard: A Memoir of Deafness and Africa." The guy who like many others before him who attended Gallaudet University while as a student faced discrimination by his own class peers just because he could speak.
In the Huffington Post piece he wrote:
That was Gallaudet's mistake.
In the Huffington Post piece he wrote:
President Hurwitz and the university administration should be commended for respecting their students' feelings and processes. Keep in mind as well that at no point has Gallaudet said it did not want Dr. McCaskill back; it just wants to respect the community's process.By making a very public announcement to the community and essentially to the nation about putting Dr. McCaskill on paid leave was tantamount to firing her. Though she wasn't fired and still on paid leave yet this is the essential equivalent of putting a scarlet letter on her forehead branded as a person who could no longer be trusted. This was a process that immediately destroyed her character and reputation in a negative way for signing a ballot initiative petition (referendum). She made no anti-gay remarks whatsoever. Signing the referendum is not the equivalent that she's "anti-gay" but rather she supports the right of people to vote on a ballot rather than leave it to a handful of people in the legislature. Yet people continue to look the other way. Her name dredged up and sought for a public flogging if she didn't comply by issuing an apology for participating in a democracy. Diversity isn't about meeting and attaining some ideological purity test. And that is exactly what Gallaudet is trying to do. Diversity is also about including support for those with minority, religious, or political sentiments. There is no wanting her back. How would they want her back? Her reputation, relationship, and character already distinctly tarnished or irreparably ruined. Gallaudet's action does not indicate that they want her back but would only do so if it turns out to be a cost effective exercise because it's cheaper to compensate her financially and allow her to keep her position and title than to go through an expensive, public relation nightmare lawsuit.
That was Gallaudet's mistake.
Monday, October 22, 2012
I. King Jordan and Jane K. Fernandes at UNC
If you live in or near Asheville, NC you may want the opportunity to visit University of NC Asheville and watch I. King Jordan speak during Disability Awareness Week at the university where Jane K. Fernandes is the Provost & Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs.
“But from its beginning in 1864 until 1988 — 124 years — every president of the institution was a hearing man — that changed when Dr. I. King Jordan became Gallaudet’s first deaf president,” she said.
In his 19 years at the helm of the university, Jordan witnessed and was part of many changes affecting the deaf community — cultural, technological, medical, political and demographic, Fernandes said.
“Among his many accomplishments was championing the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act, a law that has improved accessibility for many U.S. citizens, including those without disabilities,” she said.
“Today, Dr. Jordan sees the deaf community at a crossroads, and the decisions the community makes in response to a convergence of social forces will determine its future and perhaps even its survival,” Fernandes said.
The struggles of the deaf community today are reflected in similar struggles occurring in the wider hearing world, she said, “thus all people can learn and benefit from attending his talk.”
Jordan said he plans to speak about his strong feelings that deafness — and disability — is “one kind of diversity that should be included when we talk about how important diversity is in our society.
“We too often focus only on ethnic and gender issues, and I want to remind people that disability and deafness is just one aspect of the normal human condition,” Jordan said. “And I will talk about diversity within the deaf community — there are many ways to be deaf, and people outside deafness don’t realize how diverse our community is.”Indeed. Deafness goes far beyond that just people who are culturally deaf. It's much more than diverse than that. By the way, if you're curious as to where Jane K. Fernandes went after the 2006 DPN2 protest go here and read the University of NC Asheville magazine who introduced Jane to the university.
Push for Deaf-centric Values Hurting Diversity?
What Dr. Angela McCaskill said to the press last week on Tuesday about the 2006 protest was an eye opener. What she said made me remember what Bridgetta Bourne-Firl (one of the four leaders in DPN1 protest in 1988) said back in 2006 about the DPN2 (Deaf President Now 2) protest. The 2006 protest began on May 1, 2006 the day when Celia May Baldwin, the chairperson of Board of Trustees,
announced the 9th president of Gallaudet University to be Dr. Jane
Fernandes. One day earlier Alison Aubrecht and Julie Bourne wrote an article piece posted on April 30, 2006 in the Chronicles of Deaf Higher Education: Search for the Next Gallaudet President on "Deaf-centric" values and what Bridgetta Bourne-Firl said about having a "Deaf-centric president" at Gallaudet University, a departure from having a deaf president:
Other excuses was that the Board of Trustees did a "rush job" for "hurrying" to select JKF as president when in fact there was never a "rush job" to begin with. Or because of the fact that JKF has a hearing husband as a disqualifying reason to not pick her as president of Gallaudet University.
The difference between the two protests in 1988 and 2006 is really quite simple.
The first one was all about getting any deaf president into Gallaudet University as in (d)eaf President Now (dPN1) versus 2006 which was all about getting a Deaf-centric president into Gallaudet University as in (D)eaf President Now (DPN2). Not to mention that 2006 protest with the amount of bullying and threats were quite apparent. Even so far for a deaf/hh person to phone in to the DPS at Gallaudet University a bomb threat. None of these events, even the assaulting of Dr. I. King Jordan with fluids and a plastic bottle that struck him in the head, were ever spoken up by any the 2006 protest leaders among the faculty members condemning those kinds of actions. Being silent about all this spoke volumes.
I. King Jordan became the first deaf president in 1988 after a successful push to replace Zinser who was voted by a mostly hearing Board of Trustees to become the first hearing woman president at Gallaudet University. However, it was better than nothing since I.King Jordan was never born deaf. Never grew up in a deaf family. He lost his hearing in a motorcycle accident at age 21. A late deafened person who learned sign language as an adult and was forced into the world of silence. While as president of Gallaudet University (and even before then while as part of the Gallaudet University community) his method of communication was strongly oral along with signing or SimCom. Although he's been president for 19 years he announced his resignation which surprised and sadden many people. But it also woke up the monster inside of Gallaudet University as an opportunity to finally get a "Deaf-centric" president for the first time in Gallaudet University's history.
In 2006 the selection for president of Gallaudet University were down to three finalists of the presidential search process. Dr. Weiner, Ron Stearn and Dr. J.K. Fernandes. Both Dr. Weiner and Ron Stern grew up in a Deaf-centric family. Both of their parents were Deaf parents. Both knew ASL from the beginning of their life.
This 2006 protest has never really been about "diversity" but about ensuring "Deaf-centrism" be the ideological goal surpassing all other concerns one at a time. J.K. Fernandes saw what Gallaudet University is supposed to be, a campus that show true diversity which is opposite of what the goal of "Deaf-centricism" is about.
Before I go further the definition of "deaf centricism" is certainly different from "deaf centric" from two different "ASL experts" who are culturally deaf.
Deaf centricism is defined as "feeling proud as a deaf individual and become a capable citizen in a hearing society" according to Sandra Ammons, a noted ASL and Deaf Studies scholar. Versus the definition of "Deaf centric" by Ella Mae Lentz founder of Deafhood Foundation which is to mean anything from a pro-Deaf/ASL view:
There is also another term that's the same and that is "Deaf center."
Bridgetta Bourne-Firl advocated for a "Deaf centric" president in 2006. Clearly a show for others to realize that Jane K. Fernandes was never considered as a person who is "Deaf centric" is double-speak for "not culturally deaf enough." Fernandes was born deaf to parents with a deaf mother and hearing father. Didn't learn sign language until the age of 23. Has a hearing husband. A very "oral person" when it comes to speaking much the same way I.King Jordan communicates signing and speaking at the same time. He was born hearing but lost it after a motorcycle accident at the age of 21.
President Hurwitz of Gallaudet University is considered a "Deaf-centric" person since he was born profoundly deaf and was born to deaf parents. He described himself in his Candidacy Presentation letter to Gallaudet University emphasizing profoundly deaf where both of his parents were deaf.
Jane K. Fernandes, Judy Berglund, MJ Bienvenu, Jeffrey Hardison, Frances E. Kendall, Carolyn McCaskill, Jane Norman, and Leslie Page.
The link to the paper is located under a subfile called "faux-inclusion" on a website called Gally Protest.org. I suppose Gally Protest.org thinks the paper is no good which is funny since it advocates diversity and inclusiveness with better educational outcomes while still recognizing ASL and English. What are the odds that people will actually say that the paper is "flawed" or "no good"?
The three McCaskill sisters at Gallaudet University in high positions who are well respected in the Gallaudet community. And it's no wonder that president Hurwitz has backpedaled from the possibility of firing Dr. Angela McCaskill in the latest sinkhole phenomenon that threaten to swallow Gallaudet University. He'd be dealing with three McCaskills and not just one. Along with a very public and national backlash. Bad mojo.
It's interesting how these people with very similar backgrounds were targeted by supposedly the "true Deaf-centric" people for a variety of reasons. All of these actions appear to be more likely targeted, perhaps subconsciously or consciously because for not being "Deaf-centric" enough. One has to wonder why some faculty members in very high positions took the time and effort to find Angela McCaskill's name in a petition she signed. There's an agenda afoot and it's not quite abundantly clear but we can probably take a wild stab at it. Perhaps will know with better details in the future exactly the kind of relationships among these faculty members.
But, is this what you called "Shared Governance" at Gallaudet University? Punish them first and ask questions later? Whatever it is, it's a big mess in what seems to be a slog of an effect to push "Deaf-centric" values to the forefront at the expense of minimizing true diversity and potentially hurting Gallaudent University's own survival. The culturally deaf community is certainly at a cross road. What will people think, dear and hearing?
Addendum:
This is what Jane K. Fernandes said in 2008 in the UNC Asheville magazine who interviewed her after she became Provost and Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs.
Sufficiently Deaf-Centric?
Discussions broke out in the hallways of the university, on the community forums, and through e-mail distribution lists about how and whether a person with varying level of deaf-centric views should immediately translate into the "qualified person" to lead Gallaudet University. Some blog comments conveyed the belief that the person with cochlear implants and the ability to speak would do a better job of lobbying at Capitol Hill. Others disagreed, stating that a culturally Deaf person would be the only possible qualified leader of the Deaf Nation worldwide.There's more to it than meets the eye. People may not realize about why DPN2 really took place. Even to this day I still believe that to a large degree the Deaf President Now Protest 2 which began on May 1, 2006 for the ouster of Jane K. Fernandes was all about her not being that "culturally deaf enough" or not "Deaf-centric" enough. Bridgetta Bourne-Firl made that clear in 2006 before the protest began. Protesters and leaders on the push to get Jane K. Fernandes out from becoming the first deaf woman president of Gallaudet University claimed that the protest was really all about JKF's bad administrative records as Provost of Gallaudet University. Other excuses to not have her because she wasn't "social enough" with students and staff which is saying she's not "Deaf-centric" enough because sociability among culturally deaf students is considered a cultural norm and an expectation.
Bridgetta Bourne-Firl, one of four Deaf President Now student leaders and the outreach director at California School of the Deaf at Fremont, eloquently signed in Joey Baer's ASL blog her account of a valuable lesson that she learned from one black university's president about how a gradual transition must occur in order to gain widespread acceptance.
Bourne-Firl explained, "the university president was very dark skinned and very proud of his role in the society as a Black man. This president said that at first, these universities would only hire the light-skinned presidents, because the general white population was able to somewhat identify with the new presidents. These light-skinned presidents basically paved the road for presidents that are more closely aligned with their student bodies, and that man was a result of that process."
Bourne-Firl described how when she presented at different locations, many people asked her why the selection of a late-deafened deaf adult was made instead of a culturally deaf person, and she used this story as an analogy. She concluded,
"Now is the time for Gallaudet to select someone with a strong deaf center."
"She does not have a relationship with the (Gallaudet) community in general. She keeps herself hidden." - Ryan Commerson (Video Time stamp @1:09..with a delayed caption)Other unpopular "incidents" like J.K. Fernandes punishment of students who tore down a football goal post or the pulling of alarms in celebration in a hotel at Gallaudet University were the "reason" to not like J.K Fernandes.
SHAPIRO: I think that's right. Some of it, by the way, goes back to Gallaudet's winning football season this year. Gallaudet's played football since 1883. Some historians of football give them credit for developing the football huddle. That was a way to prevent people from stealing their signs. And they've had a lousy football team, I should say, for a long time, but they got a new football coach this year and they went nine and oh. And they celebrated after the last game they tore down the goal post.
Some students also were celebrating at a hotel nearby, and they set off fire alarms. Jane Fernandes was the provost of the school. She had been provost for six years. She disciplined those students, and a lot of students felt she was acting like she thought she was their mother. It was her job as provost to discipline them. But some people felt that she'd been too strict.Frankly, anybody pulling fire alarms for fun deserve to be punished. There's an inherent safety concern there. You simply do not pull fire alarms unless there is a true emergency to do so.
Other excuses was that the Board of Trustees did a "rush job" for "hurrying" to select JKF as president when in fact there was never a "rush job" to begin with. Or because of the fact that JKF has a hearing husband as a disqualifying reason to not pick her as president of Gallaudet University.
The difference between the two protests in 1988 and 2006 is really quite simple.
The first one was all about getting any deaf president into Gallaudet University as in (d)eaf President Now (dPN1) versus 2006 which was all about getting a Deaf-centric president into Gallaudet University as in (D)eaf President Now (DPN2). Not to mention that 2006 protest with the amount of bullying and threats were quite apparent. Even so far for a deaf/hh person to phone in to the DPS at Gallaudet University a bomb threat. None of these events, even the assaulting of Dr. I. King Jordan with fluids and a plastic bottle that struck him in the head, were ever spoken up by any the 2006 protest leaders among the faculty members condemning those kinds of actions. Being silent about all this spoke volumes.
I. King Jordan became the first deaf president in 1988 after a successful push to replace Zinser who was voted by a mostly hearing Board of Trustees to become the first hearing woman president at Gallaudet University. However, it was better than nothing since I.King Jordan was never born deaf. Never grew up in a deaf family. He lost his hearing in a motorcycle accident at age 21. A late deafened person who learned sign language as an adult and was forced into the world of silence. While as president of Gallaudet University (and even before then while as part of the Gallaudet University community) his method of communication was strongly oral along with signing or SimCom. Although he's been president for 19 years he announced his resignation which surprised and sadden many people. But it also woke up the monster inside of Gallaudet University as an opportunity to finally get a "Deaf-centric" president for the first time in Gallaudet University's history.
In 2006 the selection for president of Gallaudet University were down to three finalists of the presidential search process. Dr. Weiner, Ron Stearn and Dr. J.K. Fernandes. Both Dr. Weiner and Ron Stern grew up in a Deaf-centric family. Both of their parents were Deaf parents. Both knew ASL from the beginning of their life.
This 2006 protest has never really been about "diversity" but about ensuring "Deaf-centrism" be the ideological goal surpassing all other concerns one at a time. J.K. Fernandes saw what Gallaudet University is supposed to be, a campus that show true diversity which is opposite of what the goal of "Deaf-centricism" is about.
One person from Dana Point, California had this to say in a live chat with Dr. Jane K Fernandes with the Washington Post hosting it:
Dana Point, Calif.: Is it your intention to make Gallaudet University accessible to all modes of education for the deaf (i.e., ASL, SEE, Cued, Oralism, Rochester, Pidgin, etc.)? Lately, it has become ASL-only and I fear this may turn off some prospective students as CSUN and RIT have reported increased enrollment as a result.
Jane K. Fernandes: At Gallaudet, we plan to welcome all kinds of deaf students to campus. We will continue to uphold our bilingual ASL-English philosophy. In the future, as there will be many ways to be deaf, we will strengthen programs designed to teach Sign Language to deaf or hard of hearing students who don't know it and increase the level of support we provide to them.
Before I go further the definition of "deaf centricism" is certainly different from "deaf centric" from two different "ASL experts" who are culturally deaf.
Deaf centricism is defined as "feeling proud as a deaf individual and become a capable citizen in a hearing society" according to Sandra Ammons, a noted ASL and Deaf Studies scholar. Versus the definition of "Deaf centric" by Ella Mae Lentz founder of Deafhood Foundation which is to mean anything from a pro-Deaf/ASL view:
There is also another term that's the same and that is "Deaf center."
Bridgetta Bourne-Firl advocated for a "Deaf centric" president in 2006. Clearly a show for others to realize that Jane K. Fernandes was never considered as a person who is "Deaf centric" is double-speak for "not culturally deaf enough." Fernandes was born deaf to parents with a deaf mother and hearing father. Didn't learn sign language until the age of 23. Has a hearing husband. A very "oral person" when it comes to speaking much the same way I.King Jordan communicates signing and speaking at the same time. He was born hearing but lost it after a motorcycle accident at the age of 21.
President Hurwitz of Gallaudet University is considered a "Deaf-centric" person since he was born profoundly deaf and was born to deaf parents. He described himself in his Candidacy Presentation letter to Gallaudet University emphasizing profoundly deaf where both of his parents were deaf.
WHO AM I?Yes. You know what that means. That means he's "Deaf-centric." He made clear that he socialized mostly with his deaf parents and their deaf friends while growing up at his home in Sioux City. There was a Deaf club that Hurwitz and everyone attended together nearly every week. A stark difference from I.K. Jordan and J.K. Fernandes' own upbringing not born to deaf parents or used ASL to communicate while growing up. Clearly there was a preference in the beginning that took shape on May 1, 2006 at the start of the DPN2 protest. Even during the very early stage of the protest Joey Baer even mocked at IKJ's SimCom signing in his own video that was quickly taken off of the internet which gave me a huge insight in the beginning on what this whole DPN2 protest was really about. Even Elisa Aubrecht made a comment about recognizing ASL and not SimCom.
I was born profoundly deaf. Both of my parents were deaf. That’s who I am. You all know what that means.
ElisaWrites
POV: Entrenched with the protesters in their "tent-city" at the school's front gate, '06 grad Elisa Abuchuchan blogs about events as they happen. She says, "I personally support the protest but I try to present more factual information rather than my opinions."
FYI: Abuchuchan, a '06 graduate, has been blogging since the protests began on May 1. On some days, she posts 10 updates or more.
Sample post: "David Simmons and Christine Roschaert [on a hunger strike] talked to the crowd. They explained that they were starving for real, quality education. They are starving for linguistic equality, the university needs to recognize ASL as an official language, not sim-com. English classes and foreign language classes are required, but no ASL classes are required. They are starving for social justice. They are starving for a real president. Jordan and Fernandes’s goal is to divide and conquer, twisting things to the media. They are starving for the presidential search process to be reopened. They want a transparent process that includes the faculty, the staff, students, and alumni."Now, what's interesting is that we have Dr. Angela McCaskill who signs in a fashion just like SimCom. Just as well, Dr. Angela McCaskill's own upbringing was also not of born to a culturally deaf family despite her two other sisters who are deaf as well along with two hearing brothers. Her signing clearly shows that much like I.K. Jordan and J.K. Fernandes when they all learned sign language as an adult.
One of her sister had a working relationship with J.K. Fernandes. On January 20, 2006 a memo written to I.King Jordan about a plan "Towards an Inclusive Deaf University: Achieving Equitable Educational Outcomes for All Students" where Gallaudet’s future would rests on its ability to build an inclusive deaf university. Those who helped write the plan are:I grew up in Mobile, Alabama. My parents were Willie McPherson (deceased) and Janie McCaskill, currently living in Mobile—both hearing. They never married; basically, I grew up in a single-parent household. I have three sisters and one brother. The first three are deaf and the last two are hearing. My oldest sister, Carolyn, is deaf and was the first Black Deaf Miss Gallaudet in 1976. She is a professor in the Department of ASL & Deaf Studies at Gallaudet and resides in Largo, Maryland. Jacqueline, who is also deaf, graduated from Gallaudet in 1978 and currently lives in Mobile. I am the third sibling and I am hard-of-hearing. My youngest sister, Sharrell, is hearing and currently works as the Equal Employment Opportunities (EEO) Officer at Gallaudet. My brother is the last sibling, also hearing, and currently resides in Mobile.I initially attended segregated public schools in Mobile during the 1960s and ’70s. My first experience with integration occurred in middle school where I attended Azalea Middle School and W.P. Davidson High School, both predominately white schools. I was very active and ran track. Even though I have always had a passion for cheerleading, I was not allowed to try out for the cheerleading team due to household chores after school (cleaning, cooking, babysitting, etc.)I graduated from Davidson High in May 1976 and immediately enrolled at Alabama State University during the summer. In May 1980, I received my Bachelor of Science Degree [in Social Work]. I was very active at ASU. I ran track, played on the softball team, and was a cheerleader. My experience at ASU was the best days of my life. I moved to Washington, D.C. in 1980, immediately after graduating from ASU, and moved in with Carolyn. This was the beginning of a new era for me. I grew as a person when I became immersed in Deaf culture and the Deaf world. It has been my life since. I love it! Even though I have two Deaf sisters, I didn’t know American Sign Language growing up. I was fluent with the manual alphabet. I begin to learn ASL and made many new deaf friends. Ruth Reed and Pamela Baldwin were the two deaf friends that I met upon arrival in Washington. They took me under their wings and taught me ASL. I am forever grateful for their friendship and support, and we remain friends to this day, 31 years later!
Jane K. Fernandes, Judy Berglund, MJ Bienvenu, Jeffrey Hardison, Frances E. Kendall, Carolyn McCaskill, Jane Norman, and Leslie Page.
The link to the paper is located under a subfile called "faux-inclusion" on a website called Gally Protest.org. I suppose Gally Protest.org thinks the paper is no good which is funny since it advocates diversity and inclusiveness with better educational outcomes while still recognizing ASL and English. What are the odds that people will actually say that the paper is "flawed" or "no good"?
The three McCaskill sisters at Gallaudet University in high positions who are well respected in the Gallaudet community. And it's no wonder that president Hurwitz has backpedaled from the possibility of firing Dr. Angela McCaskill in the latest sinkhole phenomenon that threaten to swallow Gallaudet University. He'd be dealing with three McCaskills and not just one. Along with a very public and national backlash. Bad mojo.
It's interesting how these people with very similar backgrounds were targeted by supposedly the "true Deaf-centric" people for a variety of reasons. All of these actions appear to be more likely targeted, perhaps subconsciously or consciously because for not being "Deaf-centric" enough. One has to wonder why some faculty members in very high positions took the time and effort to find Angela McCaskill's name in a petition she signed. There's an agenda afoot and it's not quite abundantly clear but we can probably take a wild stab at it. Perhaps will know with better details in the future exactly the kind of relationships among these faculty members.
But, is this what you called "Shared Governance" at Gallaudet University? Punish them first and ask questions later? Whatever it is, it's a big mess in what seems to be a slog of an effect to push "Deaf-centric" values to the forefront at the expense of minimizing true diversity and potentially hurting Gallaudent University's own survival. The culturally deaf community is certainly at a cross road. What will people think, dear and hearing?
Addendum:
This is what Jane K. Fernandes said in 2008 in the UNC Asheville magazine who interviewed her after she became Provost and Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs.
“Protesters wanted to see a president with different characteristics than I had. Basically, I was not ‘deaf enough’ because I am able to move pretty easily between the deaf and hearing world. I speak English. I sign ASL. They really wanted someone who was more totally a member of deaf culture to represent them,”Indeed. Some people would agree.
Friday, October 19, 2012
Threat to close down Gallaudet University over McCaskill/Gally mess?
Well, that didn't take long. Now there are calls on contacting Congressional members to begin a serious investigation into this mess.
Hurwitz released his own statement acknowledging an apparent continued confusion about why someone in McCaskill’s position would sign a petition to put something up for voter consideration. He also doubled down on his “prudent” decision to suspend McCaskill.Remember what I said just recently yesterday regarding financial concerns over this mess of a sinkhole looking to get bigger? And this could turn out to be bigger than DPN1 and DPN2 if things do not get a hold of quickly. Gallaudet University has now the national spotlight. What moves will be made now?
Hurwitz even said he thought the crisis would help the Gallaudet community “emerge stronger because of this situation.” Stronger, as in making political intolerance an unmistakable and unshakable value on the campus?
In 2011, Gallaudet University received the overwhelming bulk of its revenue — over $124 million, or almost 75 percent — from government grants. The President of the United States signs the diplomas of its graduates — a very unique perk compared to peer schools. But officials also must report annually to the Secretary of Education.
If Angela McCaskill is not reinstated, there are at least two branches of the federal government that need to begin some serious investigations into this threat to democracy. The school’s existence is reliant on the money that comes from American taxpayers, and the spigot ought to be shut off until it can be confirmed that the school is no longer openly hostile to the democratic process in favor of extremist demands about diversity.
Is Wikipedia accurate about Gallaudet 2006 protest?
I went to a Wikipedia page that covered the 2006 Gallaudet University protest and was curious whether the historical depictions were accurate? Of course, as people would already know Wikipedia is a source to be wary with since it it editable by anyone who have access to it. Whatever leaning a person has and whatever bias he or she may hold it'll get reflected in the writeup. So, perception of history can easily be changed with a few words or omissions of certain facts. But is it accurate? What is missing?
Questions abound such as who really started the push for "Unity for Gallaudet" protest which is an altogether an oxymoron combining "protest" with that of demand for "unity." Reason I'm bringing this up is because of the recent revelation brought up by Dr. Angela McCaskill in a Tuesday press conference where she stated that:
Yet the irony in all this bullying was discovered when I found out that President Hurwitz requested that Gallaudet University establish an anti-bullying policy for faculty, staff, and students back in 2011 stating (see page 2):
Looks like it got a whole lot worse straight up at the faculty level and from a person who high on the authority list as one of the faculty Senate member of Gallaudet University. More on that later below.
Who knew that their very own Dr. Angela McCaskill, Chief Diversity Officer, would become a bullying victim from faculty members who squarely have set agenda against her from the beginning which brings me to Celia May Baldwin who was a victim of bullying during the 2006 protest. I saved Baldwin's 2006 memo outlining her reason why she resigned from the Board of Trustees stating that she received threats during the 2006 protest.
Question for ya'll.
Where were the faculty members who were in support of the 2006 "unity" protest when these threats occurred? Who stood up and said that issuing such threats to members of the BoTs and said that it "ain't cool." Who publicly voiced that they do not condone such actions against BoT members?
Where was M.J. Bienvenu when that happened?
Did she not care about threats made to certain members of the BoTs?
Where were the 145 full-time regular faculty in 2006 who were in attendance for the no-confidence vote, out of a possible 220 but made the vote count appear bigger when it wasn't since 145 faculty members in total for the special meeting were in attendance. A total of 140 voted on the "no confidence" vote where there was a 93 to 47 vote where of "No confidence" in Fernandes with a difference of 46 votes. 140 out 220 voted attended the "no confidence" vote which means only 63% of the faculty voted on the subject which leaves 80 faculty members who refused to attend the special meeting or could not attend the special meeting. It wasn't a faculty Senate vote but a non-binding vote in a special meeting during the height of the "Unity for Gallaudet" protest. And this calls into question the validity of the whole vote when you have barely 60% of the faculty members attending for a special vote by which they admitted it was not a faculty Senate vote.
Jumping back to Celia May Brown.
Did faculty members who were in support of the 2006 protest ignored threats that were made to Celia May Baldwin? Was this a classic sign of allowing bullying to happen by keeping quiet about it? How come the 21-member faculty Senate never voted on the "No confidence" vote? Wouldn't that yield a more powerful, official vote and voice against J.K. Fernandes? How many of those 21 members of the faculty Senate actually participated in the non-binding vote in a special meeting that day? Who were those 21 members of the faculty Senate back in 2006?
Me wonder.
And now, today, we have faculty members who used Angela McCaskill's petition signature as a blunt weapon to bully against her by essentially forcing president Hurwitz into a corner to try and get her fired. Some faculty members who may have been key in helping start the 2006 protest may have been the ones who pushed students out in front and center to get them to protest in their favor. Who, as far as we're concerned, never condoned the threats that were made against Celia May Brown back in 2006.
Now here is what gets interesting.
Kendra Smith and M.J. Bienvenu are members of the 22-member faculty Senate for the 2010 - 2013 term. Those two are involved in the whole McCaskill/Gallaudet University mess as charged by Dr. Angela McCaskill. Kendra Smith represents Graduate Studies group while M.J. Bienvenu represents University Faculty Officers and as University Faculty Vice Chair. A powerful position with a lot of pull.
The roles, responsibilities and authority given to these members are described in the faculty Senate page:
Charge
The principal decision-making body of the faculty:
1.Review and advise the administration on the relative merits of creating new administrative structures, revising existing structures, and re-defining the purposes and functions of existing programs.
2.Make recommendations to the administration regarding the academic calendar.
3.Establishes courses of study, requirements for admission or transfer, and requirements for graduation for degrees; determines academic discipline.
4.Reviews faculty grievances and makes recommendations to the President.
5.Verifies faculty eligibility for promotion and tenure.
6.Recommends to the president and Board of Trustees candidates for degrees; and regulates faculty status and conduct.
This Committee has the following authority:
•Principal decision-making body of the University Faculty. Oversees quality of academic programs. Recommends candidates for degrees.
•Advises Provost, President, and BOT
Powerful responsibilities and the delegation of authority to those Senate members. This has an air of conflict of interest at work in the effort to oust McCaskill. Also, does this reek of "deafhoodism" all over again but in an all different format at the political level with a twist that it's become a good ole-girls network (14 out 22 are women in the faculty Senate) with Bienvenu near the top of the authority delegated to her?
Also, is Bienvenu a tenured professor?
And so all in all we can only surmise what has been going on now since 2006 with McCaskill bringing it up. Perhaps this goes back much earlier than 2006. And exactly what kind of a professional relationship there was between McCaskill and Bienvenu all those years they've known each other?
It's obvious that Bienvenu has an axe to grind toward McCaskill for some reason or another that she was willing to push such an agenda in a very public way. Perhaps time will tell eventually this sordid tale yet to be told. The 2006 chapter thought closed is now open again. What really went on and why?
Maybe it's time to add and revise some of the Wikipedia entry on "Unity for Gallaudet" protest?
Questions abound such as who really started the push for "Unity for Gallaudet" protest which is an altogether an oxymoron combining "protest" with that of demand for "unity." Reason I'm bringing this up is because of the recent revelation brought up by Dr. Angela McCaskill in a Tuesday press conference where she stated that:
"I quickly looked back to the protest of 2006 (see video on Unity for Gallaudet with MJ Bienvenu in it). Several radical people pushed the students to the front to debate student's agenda. It was not the student's agenda. It was not student's agenda back then and it is not student's agenda now."There must be more to this charge. What does McCaskill know that we don't know since she had access to faculty members in 2006 and saw what went on on the inside. I think she saw enough of what went on that simply disgusted her. Enough so to make such a charge in a live news conference.
Yet the irony in all this bullying was discovered when I found out that President Hurwitz requested that Gallaudet University establish an anti-bullying policy for faculty, staff, and students back in 2011 stating (see page 2):
We are currently developing an anti-bullying policy for faculty, staff, and students. A brief video, “It Gets Better,” was made by Gallaudet students and is available at http://youtu.be/WoaYsF_OzXU."It gets better?
Looks like it got a whole lot worse straight up at the faculty level and from a person who high on the authority list as one of the faculty Senate member of Gallaudet University. More on that later below.
Who knew that their very own Dr. Angela McCaskill, Chief Diversity Officer, would become a bullying victim from faculty members who squarely have set agenda against her from the beginning which brings me to Celia May Baldwin who was a victim of bullying during the 2006 protest. I saved Baldwin's 2006 memo outlining her reason why she resigned from the Board of Trustees stating that she received threats during the 2006 protest.
May 9, 2006
MEMORANDUM
TO: Bill Graham, Board Secretary
FROM: Celia May Baldwin
SUBJECT: Tenure on the Board of Trustees
After many sleepless nights and much reflection these past several days, I regret to tell you that on Sunday night I came to the decision to resign from the Gallaudet Board of Trustees. The presidential search and the controversy that has ensued have put enormous strain and stress on me. I simply could not ignore the numerous aggressive threats I have received over the past weeks.
I cannot express how disappointed I am that it has to come to this point. However, I trust that you will give me your full support and understanding in my decision.
It is my sincerest hope that you feel I have served Gallaudet University to the fullest in the years that I have been on the Board. I admire and respect each of my colleagues on the Board and am glad that I had the opportunity of working closely with several of them in the recent months as the Interim Chair. I also appreciate all the assistance I received from the President's Office. I am truly saddened by recent events.
I am confident that we all share the same goal of working towards the best possible future for Gallaudet University. Thank you for allowing me to serve this fine institution.
Question for ya'll.
Where were the faculty members who were in support of the 2006 "unity" protest when these threats occurred? Who stood up and said that issuing such threats to members of the BoTs and said that it "ain't cool." Who publicly voiced that they do not condone such actions against BoT members?
Where was M.J. Bienvenu when that happened?
Did she not care about threats made to certain members of the BoTs?
Where were the 145 full-time regular faculty in 2006 who were in attendance for the no-confidence vote, out of a possible 220 but made the vote count appear bigger when it wasn't since 145 faculty members in total for the special meeting were in attendance. A total of 140 voted on the "no confidence" vote where there was a 93 to 47 vote where of "No confidence" in Fernandes with a difference of 46 votes. 140 out 220 voted attended the "no confidence" vote which means only 63% of the faculty voted on the subject which leaves 80 faculty members who refused to attend the special meeting or could not attend the special meeting. It wasn't a faculty Senate vote but a non-binding vote in a special meeting during the height of the "Unity for Gallaudet" protest. And this calls into question the validity of the whole vote when you have barely 60% of the faculty members attending for a special vote by which they admitted it was not a faculty Senate vote.
Jumping back to Celia May Brown.
Did faculty members who were in support of the 2006 protest ignored threats that were made to Celia May Baldwin? Was this a classic sign of allowing bullying to happen by keeping quiet about it? How come the 21-member faculty Senate never voted on the "No confidence" vote? Wouldn't that yield a more powerful, official vote and voice against J.K. Fernandes? How many of those 21 members of the faculty Senate actually participated in the non-binding vote in a special meeting that day? Who were those 21 members of the faculty Senate back in 2006?
Me wonder.
And now, today, we have faculty members who used Angela McCaskill's petition signature as a blunt weapon to bully against her by essentially forcing president Hurwitz into a corner to try and get her fired. Some faculty members who may have been key in helping start the 2006 protest may have been the ones who pushed students out in front and center to get them to protest in their favor. Who, as far as we're concerned, never condoned the threats that were made against Celia May Brown back in 2006.
Now here is what gets interesting.
Kendra Smith and M.J. Bienvenu are members of the 22-member faculty Senate for the 2010 - 2013 term. Those two are involved in the whole McCaskill/Gallaudet University mess as charged by Dr. Angela McCaskill. Kendra Smith represents Graduate Studies group while M.J. Bienvenu represents University Faculty Officers and as University Faculty Vice Chair. A powerful position with a lot of pull.
The roles, responsibilities and authority given to these members are described in the faculty Senate page:
Charge
The principal decision-making body of the faculty:
1.Review and advise the administration on the relative merits of creating new administrative structures, revising existing structures, and re-defining the purposes and functions of existing programs.
2.Make recommendations to the administration regarding the academic calendar.
3.Establishes courses of study, requirements for admission or transfer, and requirements for graduation for degrees; determines academic discipline.
4.Reviews faculty grievances and makes recommendations to the President.
5.Verifies faculty eligibility for promotion and tenure.
6.Recommends to the president and Board of Trustees candidates for degrees; and regulates faculty status and conduct.
This Committee has the following authority:
•Principal decision-making body of the University Faculty. Oversees quality of academic programs. Recommends candidates for degrees.
•Advises Provost, President, and BOT
Powerful responsibilities and the delegation of authority to those Senate members. This has an air of conflict of interest at work in the effort to oust McCaskill. Also, does this reek of "deafhoodism" all over again but in an all different format at the political level with a twist that it's become a good ole-girls network (14 out 22 are women in the faculty Senate) with Bienvenu near the top of the authority delegated to her?
Also, is Bienvenu a tenured professor?
And so all in all we can only surmise what has been going on now since 2006 with McCaskill bringing it up. Perhaps this goes back much earlier than 2006. And exactly what kind of a professional relationship there was between McCaskill and Bienvenu all those years they've known each other?
It's obvious that Bienvenu has an axe to grind toward McCaskill for some reason or another that she was willing to push such an agenda in a very public way. Perhaps time will tell eventually this sordid tale yet to be told. The 2006 chapter thought closed is now open again. What really went on and why?
Maybe it's time to add and revise some of the Wikipedia entry on "Unity for Gallaudet" protest?
Thursday, October 18, 2012
Candy on the McCaskill/Gally Mess
I'm putting down in here what Candy commented recently in one of my blog post a few days ago about the whole McCaskill and Gally fiasco that's quickly becoming a sinkhole. I put her comment in here since hers was a long one. Her comment came in three installments which deserves a better coverage in the main part of my blog. Though she's not ready to blog but this one here is close enough right now and when (and if) she does blog again the audience out there will still be waiting for her.
FYI, the links below are my own and not Candy's as a matter of clarification. Apologies for the insertion and links. I hope she doesn't mind.
===========================
By Candy.
I applaud anyone who writes about what really happen, they are the ones that do not sugarcoat what really happened. Just because the article does not shine a nice light on the individual who works at Gallaudet, or any of Mike's old article on Gallaudet, does not mean Mike is a "Gallaudet hater." The article does not reflect Gallaudet as a whole, however it does reflect the problems that beset Gallaudet. Rapes on campus is a major concern, yet, deaf people who think that by shhh-ing the real problem will make it go away. Not true at all. Deaf people who think that just because someone talks about what is bad about Gallaudet means the person hates Gallaudet. Not true at all. When we bring real problems out front, it enables us to see what we can do to resolve it. I see Mike's negative report on certain aspects of real life happenings on Gallaudet to reflect his concern for his alma mater. If you don't see it that way, tough poop. At least you should be honest and tell yourself that it is a problem. To NOT talk about it is a reflection of your DENIAL. Plain and simple. Dr. Angela McCaskill is not going to withhold information so that the ongoing problems continue. It takes COURAGE for someone to come out and tell the truth. If you love something or someone, tell the truth, no matter how bad it is.
Now..let's focus on what Angela said. She said,
When one holds a position of a diversity officer or any position that is equivalent to EEO and diversity, let me tell you that no one is immune from any bias. Her position has no bearing. If Angela has had past actions that reflected her personal views affecting her job, then it would have been very telling. Many people hold positions covering certain area that conflicts with their personal beliefs, yet many are able to keep the two separate. Some were not able to and thus were not fit for certain jobs. Angela has never stated what her views are on Marriage Equality and she will never tell us and she has a right to keep that information private. I signed a petition once on an issue which I disagred with, but I wanted voters to decide. Does it mean that I supported that issue? No.
Let's suppose (what if) CDO position is up for grabs. Several prospect applicants applied for it. Interview is conducted. I can tell you that the law DOES NOT ALLOW questions that asks about a person's personal beliefs. Which means it would be against the law to ask a person if he/she supports Marriage Equality. Ergo, you all will NEVER know what the new CDO's position on ME will be unless he/she decides to divulge that information. IT IS AGAINST the law to ASK such questions. Don't believe me? Look it up yourself. I used to be an EEO Counselor and received training. We were required to keep our personal beliefs out of our job. If we couldn't or if evidence showed we did not, we would have lost our job. If we were to sign a petition out of our work place and hours, we would not have been punished. These are facts regardless of your personal view on whether or not a CDO can sign such petition or not.
Let's move on to a much more revealing information that Dr. Angela McCaskill shared. She said,
Who are the people that pushed the students to the front during the 2006 protest - the Unity For Gallaudet protest? It's easy to see who she is referring to. She is referring to faculty members. Several faculty members = who? If we remember which faculty was very involved, we would remember that it was MJB. I personally was told MJB was the one who spearheaded the protest by an individual who worked on campus and by another individual who had contact with faculties and staffs on campus. I did not have rock hard solid evidence, but hearsay, back then..that is, until Dr. Angela McCaskill revealed that information during the press conference.
MJB and other radical and/or extremist faculty members are the ones that are very into deafhood and, they are the ones that took advantage of the students by pushing them out front to make it look like it was the students agenda to protest during 2006.
It would be suffice to say that MJB and her fellow faculty members whom are radical/extremist were the ones that put Gallaudet at risk and Gallaudet was at risk of losing their accreditation after the protest in 2006.
They could very well be the ones that were causing a lot of chaos on campus, pushing students to bully and harass those who use their voices on campus, and so on.
It would make sense that these radical professionals were against someone who wanted to embrace all deaf people and supported changes that is inevitable, such as the rise of cochlear implants and allowing war vets to be part of Gallaudet. It now makes more sense why they were against JKF.
What is interesting is that MJB and her partner immediately wrote a letter to Dr. Hurwitz and demanded that Dr. McCaskill be fired. Dr. McCaskill proposed (she was thinking of Gallaudet and the students) to offer a campus wide dialogue on that situation instead. But, Dr. Hurwitz was pressured by MJB and her partner. One can only surmise what the pressure was, considering that MJB played a big role during the protest of 2006.
Several employees of Gallaudet have confirmed that MJB did not like Dr. McCaskill and was jealous of her. These same employees say that there is more to the story and that McCaskill was being bullied by certain faculty members.
Reading the comments at Rate My Professor, at least four comments over there is revealing and backs up with what I have said.
If MJB really cared for Gallaudet, she would have worked with Dr. Hurwitz and Dr. McCaskill and participated in a campus-wide dialogue to resolve this situation. Instead, a deaf-gay publication broke the news. You want to guess who tipped that media off?
We knew that deafhood ideology and deafhood radicals were behind the protest of 2006. Now we have stronger evidence of such.
============================
This is Kokonut Pundit responding here. I am now scratching my head with this old-new info.
FYI, the links below are my own and not Candy's as a matter of clarification. Apologies for the insertion and links. I hope she doesn't mind.
===========================
By Candy.
I applaud anyone who writes about what really happen, they are the ones that do not sugarcoat what really happened. Just because the article does not shine a nice light on the individual who works at Gallaudet, or any of Mike's old article on Gallaudet, does not mean Mike is a "Gallaudet hater." The article does not reflect Gallaudet as a whole, however it does reflect the problems that beset Gallaudet. Rapes on campus is a major concern, yet, deaf people who think that by shhh-ing the real problem will make it go away. Not true at all. Deaf people who think that just because someone talks about what is bad about Gallaudet means the person hates Gallaudet. Not true at all. When we bring real problems out front, it enables us to see what we can do to resolve it. I see Mike's negative report on certain aspects of real life happenings on Gallaudet to reflect his concern for his alma mater. If you don't see it that way, tough poop. At least you should be honest and tell yourself that it is a problem. To NOT talk about it is a reflection of your DENIAL. Plain and simple. Dr. Angela McCaskill is not going to withhold information so that the ongoing problems continue. It takes COURAGE for someone to come out and tell the truth. If you love something or someone, tell the truth, no matter how bad it is.
Now..let's focus on what Angela said. She said,
"She (MJB) assumed my signature meant that I was anti-gay. No one has a right to decide what my signature petition means. Only I can do that."
When one holds a position of a diversity officer or any position that is equivalent to EEO and diversity, let me tell you that no one is immune from any bias. Her position has no bearing. If Angela has had past actions that reflected her personal views affecting her job, then it would have been very telling. Many people hold positions covering certain area that conflicts with their personal beliefs, yet many are able to keep the two separate. Some were not able to and thus were not fit for certain jobs. Angela has never stated what her views are on Marriage Equality and she will never tell us and she has a right to keep that information private. I signed a petition once on an issue which I disagred with, but I wanted voters to decide. Does it mean that I supported that issue? No.
Let's suppose (what if) CDO position is up for grabs. Several prospect applicants applied for it. Interview is conducted. I can tell you that the law DOES NOT ALLOW questions that asks about a person's personal beliefs. Which means it would be against the law to ask a person if he/she supports Marriage Equality. Ergo, you all will NEVER know what the new CDO's position on ME will be unless he/she decides to divulge that information. IT IS AGAINST the law to ASK such questions. Don't believe me? Look it up yourself. I used to be an EEO Counselor and received training. We were required to keep our personal beliefs out of our job. If we couldn't or if evidence showed we did not, we would have lost our job. If we were to sign a petition out of our work place and hours, we would not have been punished. These are facts regardless of your personal view on whether or not a CDO can sign such petition or not.
Let's move on to a much more revealing information that Dr. Angela McCaskill shared. She said,
"I quickly looked back to the protest of 2006 (see video on Unity for Gallaudet with MJ Bienvenu in it). Several radical people pushed the students to the front to debate student's agenda. It was not the student's agenda. It was not student's agenda back then and it is not student's agenda now."(see video of that remark starting at the 4:39 time stamp).
Who are the people that pushed the students to the front during the 2006 protest - the Unity For Gallaudet protest? It's easy to see who she is referring to. She is referring to faculty members. Several faculty members = who? If we remember which faculty was very involved, we would remember that it was MJB. I personally was told MJB was the one who spearheaded the protest by an individual who worked on campus and by another individual who had contact with faculties and staffs on campus. I did not have rock hard solid evidence, but hearsay, back then..that is, until Dr. Angela McCaskill revealed that information during the press conference.
MJB and other radical and/or extremist faculty members are the ones that are very into deafhood and, they are the ones that took advantage of the students by pushing them out front to make it look like it was the students agenda to protest during 2006.
It would be suffice to say that MJB and her fellow faculty members whom are radical/extremist were the ones that put Gallaudet at risk and Gallaudet was at risk of losing their accreditation after the protest in 2006.
They could very well be the ones that were causing a lot of chaos on campus, pushing students to bully and harass those who use their voices on campus, and so on.
It would make sense that these radical professionals were against someone who wanted to embrace all deaf people and supported changes that is inevitable, such as the rise of cochlear implants and allowing war vets to be part of Gallaudet. It now makes more sense why they were against JKF.
What is interesting is that MJB and her partner immediately wrote a letter to Dr. Hurwitz and demanded that Dr. McCaskill be fired. Dr. McCaskill proposed (she was thinking of Gallaudet and the students) to offer a campus wide dialogue on that situation instead. But, Dr. Hurwitz was pressured by MJB and her partner. One can only surmise what the pressure was, considering that MJB played a big role during the protest of 2006.
Several employees of Gallaudet have confirmed that MJB did not like Dr. McCaskill and was jealous of her. These same employees say that there is more to the story and that McCaskill was being bullied by certain faculty members.
Reading the comments at Rate My Professor, at least four comments over there is revealing and backs up with what I have said.
If MJB really cared for Gallaudet, she would have worked with Dr. Hurwitz and Dr. McCaskill and participated in a campus-wide dialogue to resolve this situation. Instead, a deaf-gay publication broke the news. You want to guess who tipped that media off?
We knew that deafhood ideology and deafhood radicals were behind the protest of 2006. Now we have stronger evidence of such.
============================
This is Kokonut Pundit responding here. I am now scratching my head with this old-new info.
Pres. Hurwitz backpedals furiously....
I think this is somewhat to be expected. President Hurwitz of Gallaudet University is now backpedaling about the whole Angela McCaskill dust up when he put her on administrative leave raising eyebrows and getting national attention because of it.
From what it's worth based on President Hurwitz's words, "indicate forcefully," this is looking more likely by the minute that Gallaudet University will end up working with McCaskill and see that she returns after her administrative leave to continue as chief diversity officer. This won't happen unless McCaskill is compensated well for damages to her reputation and character before she thinks about returning to Gallaudet University as CDO. The favor is obviously in McCaskill's court. President Hurwitz knows this. So does Gallaudet University. But I think the damage is too far gone to continue on campus and she may end up suing or that Gallaudet University agrees behind closed doors on offering her a hefty compensation package instead.
Earlier Tuesday, Gallaudet University President Alan Hurwitz sent a message to the campus community, to "indicate forcefully" that the school would like to work with McCaskill to enable her to return from administrative leave and continue as chief diversity officer.
He wrote, "While I expect that a resolution of this matter can be reached... this will require that she and the university community work together to respond to the concerns that have been raised."
During a press conference Tuesday, McCaskill described the university as one of intolerance that manages by intimidation and bullying among faculty staff and students. She asked to be reinstated.
At her afternoon press conference, McCaskill said the anonymous faculty members who reported her petition signature to President Hurwitz were M.J. Bienvenu and Kendra Smith.
In response, the two faculty members said in a statement, “At this time, we would prefer this matter be a discussion between the University and Dr. Angela McCaskill.”
Gordon says Hurwitz’s statement today is a 180 degree turn from last week.
“We certainly want to give him a chance and explore his sincerity in the statement that he made to the public. But at the same time we are cautious about his intentions because he had a chance to do this some time ago,” Gordon said.M.J. Bienvenu and Kendra Smith try hard to stay out of this mess. Sorry, but they are part of the whole problem here that caused the escalation and created the growing sinkhole that threatens to engulf Gallaudet University. It's totally disingenuous to say that the discussion ought to be be held between McCaskill and the University. Well, that "University" also includes the faculty members who were the ones who precipitated the whole thing and caused this whole affair to denigrate into a national attention.
From what it's worth based on President Hurwitz's words, "indicate forcefully," this is looking more likely by the minute that Gallaudet University will end up working with McCaskill and see that she returns after her administrative leave to continue as chief diversity officer. This won't happen unless McCaskill is compensated well for damages to her reputation and character before she thinks about returning to Gallaudet University as CDO. The favor is obviously in McCaskill's court. President Hurwitz knows this. So does Gallaudet University. But I think the damage is too far gone to continue on campus and she may end up suing or that Gallaudet University agrees behind closed doors on offering her a hefty compensation package instead.
Agree with us.....or else mentality.
Such an atmosphere seems to pervade at Gallaudet University and elsewhere amongst some bloggers and vloggers. Case in point, a "Deafhood? No Thanks" Facebook group which is open to the public was formed on May 18, 2010. It's a safe-haven for those who favor open society approaches such as equality for all deaf people
regardless of their backgrounds, communication methods and technology
options. All without the need to adhere to any singular mindset thinking the solution is a one-size fits all. That Facebook group is an exercise on the free expression rather than to adhere to a political correctness mindset that pervades in certain groups in the culturally deaf community. And because many of us favor the approach on allowing the free exchange of important information and ideas regarding communication choices, educational choices, technological choices and parental rights for them to make informed decisions we have learned that it's better than forcing parents with limited choices. A limited choice foisted upon people with an an attitude of, for example, "your-children-belong-to-us-and-not-to-you-so-you-better-do-as-we-say." That has the "agree with us or else" mentality mindset. And if you don't agree then the name callings come raining down. Something that the public will continue to witness time and time again. Something that Dr. Ron Stearn has warned about on focusing too much on being a closed group. Diversity is key. Respect is key.
The AB2072 issue is a good example of the "agree with us or else" mentality whenever bloggers presented their own alternative opinions about the subject not popular to some people. Those who vehemently disagreed would actually contact a blogger's employer or make the threat of contacting their employers which is very much in line with the "agree with us or else" approach mentality. Candy, a well known culturally deaf blogger, experienced exactly that first hand for simply disagreeing or for having alternative opinions not popular with certain factions in the culturally deaf community. And because of that known culturally deaf people contacted her employer hoping to get her into trouble and perhaps fired.
Another notable culturally deaf blogger (name withheld) experienced first hand the bullying approach "agree with us or else" mentality with threats to contact the blogger's employer to make known the blogger's online activities. That was enough to make a trip to the emergency room for a mental breakdown.
The "agree with us or else" mentality is sometimes manifested in various ways like wishing the death of a toddler baby boy just because they do not like the boy's deaf father or use some other fantasy excuse as justification for making those wishes. Or you have bloggers who blog in such a way to encourage readers to do their dirty work, whether intentionally or not, to out people who blog anonymously by encouraging them to dig for more information. Why?
Despite that you can have anonymous commenters or bloggers who can still make great and credible arguments without the need to go to the extreme for those who disagree. Who says anonymous people have to identify themselves whenever they make cogent arguments? It's just simply better to agree to disagree rather than to make online threats veiled or otherwise to out people and such.
All this brings me to this new drama unfolding and how it's becoming a McCaskill vs Gallaudet University vs Bienvenu vs McCaskill. A sinkhole that guarantees to get bigger if things do not resolve quickly. All it took was one selfish act in the effort to publicly "expose" McCaskill which quickly escalated into its own growing sinkhole at this moment. It would have been better to confer privately behind closed doors to understand what the issues are in a show of respect and decorum. Instead people succumbed to this "agree with us or else" mentality which was presented to president Hurwitz of Gallaudet University. He became an unwitting pawn in this whole scheme to get Dr. Angela McCaskill fired purely out of selfishness. This is the kind of sinkhole that could put Gallaudet University in danger of being swallowed financially with potentially more lawsuits from more than one person and even Congress may look into it. All this has the making of a public relation nightmare at the national level for Gallaudet University. A level that could easily clip all other dramas to date including DPN1 and DPN2 protests with the Dr. J.K. Fernandes in 2006 brouhaha should this new drama spiral out of control. This isn't about "social justice" but purely a witch hunt gone awry. This is also about "deafhoodism" exposed in its rawest form with the mentality of agree with us...or else in order to to get people to "fit in" rather than accept diversity for what it is.
But we say, no thanks. We'd rather agree to disagree.
We can do better as a community of fellows with many commonalities and shared experiences, and not about political correctness. We see people as equals whether hearing, hard of hearing, or deaf. Whether they know sign language or not. Whether they prefer to speak or not. It doesn't matter. What matters is the respect for our fellow human beings. What happened that day wasn't about respect but pure selfishness.
UPDATE: Check out the latest interview with McCaskill.
The AB2072 issue is a good example of the "agree with us or else" mentality whenever bloggers presented their own alternative opinions about the subject not popular to some people. Those who vehemently disagreed would actually contact a blogger's employer or make the threat of contacting their employers which is very much in line with the "agree with us or else" approach mentality. Candy, a well known culturally deaf blogger, experienced exactly that first hand for simply disagreeing or for having alternative opinions not popular with certain factions in the culturally deaf community. And because of that known culturally deaf people contacted her employer hoping to get her into trouble and perhaps fired.
Another notable culturally deaf blogger (name withheld) experienced first hand the bullying approach "agree with us or else" mentality with threats to contact the blogger's employer to make known the blogger's online activities. That was enough to make a trip to the emergency room for a mental breakdown.
The "agree with us or else" mentality is sometimes manifested in various ways like wishing the death of a toddler baby boy just because they do not like the boy's deaf father or use some other fantasy excuse as justification for making those wishes. Or you have bloggers who blog in such a way to encourage readers to do their dirty work, whether intentionally or not, to out people who blog anonymously by encouraging them to dig for more information. Why?
Despite that you can have anonymous commenters or bloggers who can still make great and credible arguments without the need to go to the extreme for those who disagree. Who says anonymous people have to identify themselves whenever they make cogent arguments? It's just simply better to agree to disagree rather than to make online threats veiled or otherwise to out people and such.
All this brings me to this new drama unfolding and how it's becoming a McCaskill vs Gallaudet University vs Bienvenu vs McCaskill. A sinkhole that guarantees to get bigger if things do not resolve quickly. All it took was one selfish act in the effort to publicly "expose" McCaskill which quickly escalated into its own growing sinkhole at this moment. It would have been better to confer privately behind closed doors to understand what the issues are in a show of respect and decorum. Instead people succumbed to this "agree with us or else" mentality which was presented to president Hurwitz of Gallaudet University. He became an unwitting pawn in this whole scheme to get Dr. Angela McCaskill fired purely out of selfishness. This is the kind of sinkhole that could put Gallaudet University in danger of being swallowed financially with potentially more lawsuits from more than one person and even Congress may look into it. All this has the making of a public relation nightmare at the national level for Gallaudet University. A level that could easily clip all other dramas to date including DPN1 and DPN2 protests with the Dr. J.K. Fernandes in 2006 brouhaha should this new drama spiral out of control. This isn't about "social justice" but purely a witch hunt gone awry. This is also about "deafhoodism" exposed in its rawest form with the mentality of agree with us...or else in order to to get people to "fit in" rather than accept diversity for what it is.
But we say, no thanks. We'd rather agree to disagree.
We can do better as a community of fellows with many commonalities and shared experiences, and not about political correctness. We see people as equals whether hearing, hard of hearing, or deaf. Whether they know sign language or not. Whether they prefer to speak or not. It doesn't matter. What matters is the respect for our fellow human beings. What happened that day wasn't about respect but pure selfishness.
UPDATE: Check out the latest interview with McCaskill.
Wednesday, October 17, 2012
Rate your professors at Gallaudet University
Maybe it's time to take another round of look at professors at Gallaudet University and rate them accordingly. Go here and check out the Rate My Professor for Gallaudet University. Scores range from 0 (complete failure) to 5 (top notch). Not only can you rate your professor, you can include some comments about your professor that you had while as a student at Gallaudet University. Useful tool in weeding out the undesirable ones or at least get yourself prepared to take that professor's class expecting the the worst or best of it.
Tuesday, October 16, 2012
Dr. McCaskill speaks....names her accusers.
An important lesson that it's better to resolve these things behind doors with a better understanding on what has happened rather than to make assumptions. Here is a signed video of Dr. McCaskill making her stand against witch hunts. It was Dr. McCaskill who exhibited professionalism, and not those who allowed people to make brash, wild charges in a witch hunt quest that really does not go anywhere nor does anybody any good. Three people made that mistake and it wasn't Dr. McCaskill.
And so the process begins, maybe, on getting Dr. McCaskill to be reinstated back to her CDO position but with a caveat from her attorney:
And so the process begins, maybe, on getting Dr. McCaskill to be reinstated back to her CDO position but with a caveat from her attorney:
The president of Gallaudet University said Tuesday that the chief diversity officer who was put on administrative leave after signing an anti-gay marriage petition is welcome to eventually return to her position.A bullying atmosphere at Gallaudet University using fear and intimidation with the "agree with us or else" mentality. Why would Gallaudet University want to live under that reputation when teachers have to live in fear from reprisal.? Eventually McCaskill will get re-instated but at a cost to the university that no amount that can repair her ruined reputation.
But an attorney representing Angela McCaskill said that would likely only happen if the university compensates McCaskill for the emotional distress she endured, along with the damage to her reputation. There are also calls for university trustees to examine the situation.
“I am dismayed that Gallaudet University is still a university of intolerance, a university that manages by intimidation, a university that allows bullying among faculty, staff and students,” McCaskill said at a press conference in Annapolis on Tuesday afternoon, with the assistance of an interpreter.
McCaskill's petition...what does it look like?
Here it is. Go here and see exactly what the petition looks like that Dr. Angela McCaskill signed. Reading it says that this recent bill (now law) on allowing same sex marriage (Civil Marriage Protection Act) should be voted on by the people of Maryland rather than allow the Maryland legislature to craft the bill and pass it and for the governor to sign it to make it a law. There is nothing anti-gay about it but a support to let democracy take place. It is suggesting that democracy ought to be the route to let the registered voters of Maryland to either approve or reject this (the then) proposed bill (Civil Marriage Protection Act) at the next general election. If it passes, then it goes through the proper legislative channels to be voted on, passed and eventually becomes a law. If the voters reject the bill, they have in place an alternative language to define natural marriage.
Seeing the petition in its full form makes Gallaudet University's appearance of "neutrality" even worse seeing that prejudice and acts of discrimination and bullying are more likely when they put Dr. McCaskill on administrative leave thus violating her civil rights and her first Amendment Right. Whoever began this witch hunt had nothing more than the desire to see Dr. McCaskill go. And if it came from one of the staff or professors at Gallaudet University then that person probably had issues with McCaskill herself in the beginning otherwise a witch hunt against her wouldn't have happened. Maybe it's this person who started the witch hunt ought to be fired for conduct unbecoming?
Hat tip: "Candy"
Seeing the petition in its full form makes Gallaudet University's appearance of "neutrality" even worse seeing that prejudice and acts of discrimination and bullying are more likely when they put Dr. McCaskill on administrative leave thus violating her civil rights and her first Amendment Right. Whoever began this witch hunt had nothing more than the desire to see Dr. McCaskill go. And if it came from one of the staff or professors at Gallaudet University then that person probably had issues with McCaskill herself in the beginning otherwise a witch hunt against her wouldn't have happened. Maybe it's this person who started the witch hunt ought to be fired for conduct unbecoming?
Hat tip: "Candy"
Sunday, October 14, 2012
The letter 'D 'is for Discrimination but not Diversity
The letter 'D' has been brought to you by Kokonut Pundit. Next, I'll show you how to count to 10 to help you maintain your cool. Here's an article called "The 'Diversity' Police Strike Again" which is a very good read.The money shot is on the 2nd page:
This reminds me of the very same doublespeak when it came to the new term "deafhood" which was classically displayed by the CAD organization to mean something else. They levied a requirement in their old 2005 CAD bylaw in order to join their organization if you happen to be a deaf or hard of hearing person.
But there is not a single mention of gay or lesbian issues on the university’s web page entitled, “About the Office for Diversity and Inclusion.” Instead, the Mission Statement declares, “The mission of the Office for Diversity and Inclusion at Gallaudet University is to promote an academically enriching and supportive climate that allows all the diverse members of its community to thrive and succeed. The Office for Diversity and Inclusion will achieve its mission by collaborating with units on campus to intentionally design a comprehensive, university-wide approach to diversity; facilitate equity, access, social justice and inclusion; and, empower students, faculty, and staff to build a diverse and inclusive campus community. Through the cultivation of diversity, the Office for Diversity and Inclusion will lead efforts to institutionalize diversity as a fundamental transformative force that fosters professional growth and academic excellence.”It noted that "there is not a single mention of gay or lesbian issues on the university's web page" but about promoting and ensuring that "diverse members" thrive and succeed in a rich academic environment. But the question was whether a Chief Diversity Officer can fulfill that role without believing that marriage should be radically redefined? Certainly so. Even Planet Queer noted students they interviewed on the Gallaudet University campus who thinks so.
Can someone fulfill this role without believing that marriage should be radically redefined? Is it possible for the Chief Diversity Officer “to promote an academically enriching and supportive climate that allows all the diverse members of its community to thrive and succeed” without believing that a man should be able to marry a man and a woman marry a woman?
“Dr. McCaskill is well liked by students. ‘She’s been a great ally to the LGBT community and supported many of the LGBTQA Resource Center’s programs,’ said one student, who asked to remain anonymous. ‘I’m heart broken about this.’” So, you can be a friend of the LGBT community without believing that marriage should be redefined.The term "diversity and inclusion" has always meant the welcoming of diverse viewpoints and ideologies and peoples. But Gallaudet University is at a cross road with their "Office for Diversity and Inclusion" on whether to get co-opted by the term which is doublespeak to mean the opposite of what true diversity and inclusion is to mean in the name of political incorrectness.
This reminds me of the very same doublespeak when it came to the new term "deafhood" which was classically displayed by the CAD organization to mean something else. They levied a requirement in their old 2005 CAD bylaw in order to join their organization if you happen to be a deaf or hard of hearing person.
The old CAD Bylaws (link is no good but I do have a copy if you want to look at it) 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.
That term was used to discriminate and profile deaf and hard of hearing people as a political correctness litmus test. This "diversity and inclusion" term is being co-opted to mean something else as well. Making stuff up as they go along in the name of political correctness rather than simply respecting people for who they are. We see people obsessing about what they are as part of their ideological litmus test that comes attached with an ideological term. If we can do away with that things would go a lot smoother around here. Otherwise this whole process is tantamount to having the thought police think you've committed some sort of crime if you don't accept the "deafhood" notion thinking you're against culturally deaf people or if you don't agree with the new doublespeak of "diversity and inclusion" mean you're against gays. Hardly. Both examples are steeped in political correctness as way to bully people into submission to think and act the same way. That's not diversity but rather discrimination by those who are against true inclusion of those who have differing opinions instead of out respect the differing opinions. That is exactly what the "Marylanders for Marriage Equality" group has done by showing respect towards Dr. Angela McCaskill stating she has the right to her own opinion regarding the referendum petition she signed and asked Gallaudet University to reinstate her position as Chief Diversity Officer. That's true inclusion and diversity right there. Gallaudet University has not shown that.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.
Saturday, October 13, 2012
McCaskill retains a lawyer
It was a matter of time until Dr. Angela McCaskill retained a lawyer in the eventuality if she does gets fired as Chief Diversity Officer at Gallaudet University for signing a petition to put a referendum on a ballot regarding same sex marriage in Maryland. Her lawyer will explore legal options to get her re-instated.
The lawyer for Angela McCaskill says she is "not anti-gay." Attorney J. Wyndal Gordon says McCaskill will speak in greater detail about her actions at a news conference Tuesday in Annapolis, Md.The key thing that's important to see is that even gay marriage supporters have criticized Gallaudet University for punishing McCaskill by placing her on administrative leave. There are actually people out there who recognize the importance of exercising one's First Amendment. And the right from fear for reprisals for exercising that First Amendment.
Gallaudet is the nation's leading university for the deaf and hard of hearing. McCaskill, who lives in Maryland, is the chief diversity officer at the school. She was placed on leave this week. Gordon says he is exploring legal options to get her reinstated.
Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley and other gay marriage supporters have criticized the move, saying McCaskill should not be punished for exercising her First Amendment rights.
Kokonut Pundit's New Milestone...and more!
Huzzah for me. Rah. Rah. Rah!
Ok. Enough of that. G'night folks.
Friday, October 12, 2012
McCaskill's Fired!
He finally did it! Fired Dr. Angela McCaskill as Chief Diversity Officer of Gallaudet University after working for 23 years at the university. And her lawyers have just informed Gallaudet University that they intend to sue the university in a civil and criminal lawsuit for voter intimidation and mental harm seeking $200 million dollars in damages, and charges of criminal violation against the president of Gallaudet University and several administrators involved in the decision to fire her by using the D.C Code of illegally interfering her right to sign a referendum. Her lawyers say "It's about principle, not about money. People should not fear retaliation at place of employment for signing a petition, a referendum, or even a recall petition. This was a witch hunt and Gallaudet University followed that path."
Of course, McCaskill hasn't been fired. Never happened. Yet. Just a scenario I painted.
Now, should that scenario happen then doing so would probably become a very expensive proposition for the university. An expensive lawsuit could hurt their bottom line, perhaps their future as a college and a very possible reality that president Hurwitz could go to jail for firing McCaskill but that's a fuzzy line to that possibility. There is a Washington D.C. law that prevents an employer from firing an employee for signing a petition, for example, that an employer doesn't like as way to bully employees into submission.
I'm sure president Hurwitz and Gallaudet University's administrators are taking their time with their lawyers if firing her would be such a smart move or not. Would it be worth it? A safe bet?
Family Research Council has already set up a petition drive to help re-instate Dr. Angela McCaskill. So far there has been 16,654 responses on joining the petition drive. Will it work?
Meh. We'll see. More drama down the road I suppose.
Of course, McCaskill hasn't been fired. Never happened. Yet. Just a scenario I painted.
Now, should that scenario happen then doing so would probably become a very expensive proposition for the university. An expensive lawsuit could hurt their bottom line, perhaps their future as a college and a very possible reality that president Hurwitz could go to jail for firing McCaskill but that's a fuzzy line to that possibility. There is a Washington D.C. law that prevents an employer from firing an employee for signing a petition, for example, that an employer doesn't like as way to bully employees into submission.
Under the D.C. Code, it is a criminal violation for “[a]ny person who … by threats or intimidation, interferes with, or attempts to interfere with, the right of any qualified registered elector to sign or not to sign any initiative, referendum, or recall petition.” The sentence for violating the provision can be up to a $10,000 fine and a year in prison.Remember, folks. McCaskill signed a petition to allow a referendum for Maryland residents an alternative option to vote against the state's Civil Marriage Protection Act . She is absolutely entitled to sign a petition for a referendum. She didn't write an op-ed piece to the editor demanding that gay couples should not be allowed to marry. She did not carry signs on street corners demanding that natural marriage ought to be the rule of law. And so on. She exercised her civil rights to sign for a referendum. But, boy, somebody sure had plenty of time on their hands and a serious axe to grind in the effort to find McCaskill's name through 110,000 other names and addresses which was probably based on a tip received and decided to go hunting.
…Because a Maryland law — and not a D.C. law — is at issue in the referendum, however, the D.C. Code’s criminal provision is not directly implicated. But, it could indirectly apply to McCaskill’s suspension through a civil lawsuit in which she seeks money or reinstatement.
I'm sure president Hurwitz and Gallaudet University's administrators are taking their time with their lawyers if firing her would be such a smart move or not. Would it be worth it? A safe bet?
Family Research Council has already set up a petition drive to help re-instate Dr. Angela McCaskill. So far there has been 16,654 responses on joining the petition drive. Will it work?
Meh. We'll see. More drama down the road I suppose.
Wednesday, October 10, 2012
Associated Press on Dr. Angela McCaskill
Here's another round of drama as reported in the Associated Press that'll soon reach a crescendo regarding the story of Dr. Angela McCaskill who is the Chief Diversity Officer at Gallaudet University. She is now in "hot water" with university officials for practicing her constitutional and civil rights on signing a referendum petition for Maryland's Civil Marriage Protection Act without fear of reprisals. Though no crime was committed and yet she was placed on administrative leave by president Hurwitz although not clear whether the leave was a paid administrative leave or not.
So far there are 7 responses in the Associated Press' comment section with one being the most vocal:
An update.
From U.S. News:
Fire an African American Gallaudet University employee for political participation at her church and exercising her freedom of expression, freedom of speech, constitutional and civil rights?
Good luck, president Hurwitz.
Update number 2.
This is simply an old fashioned witch hunt in the hope to have the person fired for expressing an alternative political opinion. This is strangely familiar since this happened to another deaf person for expressing a political opinion on a sensitive deaf-related issue did people try and get this person fired for having an opinion in her own personal blog.
"I want to inform the community that I have placed Dr. Angela McCaskill on paid administrative leave effective immediately. It recently came to my attention that Dr. McCaskill has participated in a legislative initiative that some feel is inappropriate for an individual serving as Chief Diversity Officer; however, other individuals feel differently. I will use the extended time while she is on administrative leave to determine the appropriate next steps taking into consideration the duties of this position at the university. In the meantime an interim Chief Diversity Officer will be announced in the near future."A group called "Marylanders for Marriage Equality" who is for the Maryland's Civil Marriage Protection Act had this to say about Dr. McCaskill's right to her own opinion regarding the referendum petition she signed.
Marylanders for Marriage Equality issued this statement by campaign manager Josh Levin.
"We strongly disagree with the decision to put the chief diversity officer on leave and hope she is reinstated immediately. Everyone is entitled to free speech and to their own opinion about Question 6, which is about treating everyone fairly and equally under the law."Was this an attempt to squelch Dr. Angela McCaskill's freedom of speech through intimidation exercises? Some may say yes. Others say no. An another witch hunt attempt to get another deaf employee fired for having an opinion? Was Dr. Angela McCaskill's free speech infringed upon? Marylanders for Marriage Equality thinks so.
So far there are 7 responses in the Associated Press' comment section with one being the most vocal:
Dr. Hurwitz:The next question is that if she is let go by president Hurwitz for exercising her constitutional and civil rights to vote or even sign a petition to get a referendum on the ballot so voters can have an option will she sue Gallaudet University for damages for infringing on her rights? What will president Hurwitz do next? Only time will tell.
I just read on line of your placing Dr. Angela McCaskill on administrative leave because she signed a petition to place an anti gay-marriage referendum on the ballot in Maryland. Although I live in Louisiana and have no connection with your University or anyone involved in this incident, I was so shocked to hear that such action would be taken merely for the exercise of one's civil rights that I felt compelled to contact you. Surely we have not arrived at a point where employees of universities are expected to waive their civil rights in order to be employed in any position at the University. The fact that she was a diverse city officer should have absolutely no bearing on this issue. I hope that you will use this as an opportunity to reaffirm your University's commitment to freedom of speech and freedom of conscience. The mere act of placing her on administrative leave has a chilling effect, and should be corrected quickly. Should you and the University not correct this egregious infringement on Ms. McCaskills civil rights I certainly hope that she takes appropriate legal action. Please do the right thing in this matter.
An update.
From U.S. News:
Gallaudet spokeswoman Catherine Murphy told Buzzfeed that the university did not have "a policy against political participation." When asked about the nature of the petition and if the university had any policy regarding such political participation, Murphy told NBC News in an email: “For the moment we are sticking with this (Hurwitz) statement. Please understand that in an administrative personnel matter we won't be saying anything more until we get complete clarity on what took place.”
McCaskill was the first deaf African American female to earn a Ph.D. from Gallaudet, where she has worked for 23 years in various roles, including becoming the deputy to the president and associate provost of diversity and inclusion in 2011, according to her biography on the university website. She did not respond to an email seeking comment and it was not possible to leave a phone message.
Fire an African American Gallaudet University employee for political participation at her church and exercising her freedom of expression, freedom of speech, constitutional and civil rights?
Good luck, president Hurwitz.
Update number 2.
This is simply an old fashioned witch hunt in the hope to have the person fired for expressing an alternative political opinion. This is strangely familiar since this happened to another deaf person for expressing a political opinion on a sensitive deaf-related issue did people try and get this person fired for having an opinion in her own personal blog.
Monday, October 08, 2012
Why did Matt Hamill come out of retirement?
Everything you ever wanted to know on why Matt Hamill came out of his year long retirement as a MMA fighter at the UFC can be found here. Words of encouragement can still reverberate in a person's mind from a loved one that has since long passed away. It only takes a few reminders to bring back that voice of encouragement. And it can become a powerful source of inspiration.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)