A psychological conundrum

Now, for my "intellectual" look on what's has happened in my recent blog regarding my questions where many refused to even answer. Instead, some chose the conspiracy theory route that I'm somehow out to "destroy" or "hurt" the Deaf community which is nothing but a surreal assumption. Laughable. Yeah, I am a one man-wrecking army set out to see the collapse of the Deaf community. So, what were the main crux of my questions that gotten some of them up in arms so quickly?

All in all, when combined with these past events did they help tarnish the image of the Deaf community in various ways and perception? What are the lasting effects?

These may be uncomfortable questions to some people but they shouldn't be. These are honest and hard questions. A way to elevate the community's thinking and discussion. If you don't have an answer then say it rather than have these knee jerk responses peppered with conspiracy theory thoughts. Even Tayler Mayer and Errigo understand me in their signed video responses to O'Lois on what I do with my blogging and it has nothing to do with underming the Deaf community. No armchair psychology analysis from them. And there is no need to be defensive here, either. Just answer the questions as honestly as you can. That's all.

Now, don't force me to use my "look" with my glasses the next time.

I'm warning ya! It's deadly......

ADDENDUM: From Dianrez this morning:

Tsk, McConnell. With your record of repeatedly going on attack against Deaf people and their efforts to raise consciousness about issues such as AB2702 or Deafhood or infant ASL, it's no wonder your spotlighting Deaf criminals in your blog would provoke controversy. There are readers, like me, who feel you get your kicks stirring the pot and poking around repeatedly to try to get the answer you want. If a different blogger raised this topic, it would certainly not engender the response you have.

Repeatedly attack Deaf people? That's a pretty wild claim there. Is this an example of a conspiracy thinking going into overdrive? I made my disagreements and agreements known in my blogs about the whole AB2072 controversy but rarely do I ever "attack" Deaf people in my blogs. I am usually critical just like Dianrez is doing this to me. Should I call her recent blog as attacking me? No. Rather it's just a critical opinion piece about me just as I have been critical, for example, of Tim Riker's attempt to criticize an oral deaf person for using his voice when he used his. Be careful of that word, "attack," Dianrez. That stuff usually falls into the realm of conspiracy thinking attitudes. There are indeed times when people do viciously attack but being critical of something takes on a different approach. But you are free to express your opinion. Some people are merely more sensitive when their own sensibilities get offended than others. Others recognize my work in what I do in order to raise questions and consciousnesses of the collective deaf and hh communities that might otherwise be "uncomfortable" to some. And sometimes I'm the only one who would even dare try and challenge people's thinking or comments in my blog (e.g. Tim Riker criticizing an oral deaf man for using his voice) when no one else would do so.

Of course, anything that's controversial will get people to ask questions that will surely and undoubtedly be seen as stirring the pot. Minestrone soup anyone? Maybe Dianrez is suggesting that it's better not to ask some of these questions and stick our heads in the sand? Until we ask questions we won't know. There are people who are curious of the answers, like me. But one thing for sure, it'd be best to remove those insipid thoughts on any lingering conspiracy thinking before making assumptions about my postings.

Dianrez, thanks for the advice but I'll blog my way, and you blog your way. I don't go around telling people how to blog do I? But you have no problem doing that to other people do you? *looks over my glasses at you*

ADDENDUM II: A refresher and some helpful advice on what I blogged three years ago called, "When Sensibilities and Senses are Challenged." Enjoy.

Image of the Deaf community - tainted?

Boy, a lot has happened over the last several months beginning late last year. I can think of four major controversies or events that have happened. The arrest of 26 people in the latest VRS scam with notable Deaf names like John Yeh (owner and CEO of Viable), Joseph Yeh, Anthony Mowl, and Donald Tropp; the arrest, jailing and sentencing of Micah Brown who was at one time an adjunct professor of Gallaudet University and at one time a well known Deaf Democrat blogger who is now a registered sex offender; the AB2072 bill brouhaha in California that were rife with conspiracy theories about "evil" audiologists and California Legislature members; and the arrest of he-who-shall-not-be-named for charges that remain unclear at this point who is also probably the best known Deaf blogger and vlogger around whose trademark is to trash Deaf, deaf and hard of hearing people and call them names. Everyone of them, high profiled events with well known names associated with them. All within a span of 11 months.

So, which ones are the more damaging to the image of the Deaf community? That depends on who you ask. But the damage has already been done. And one of the effects of getting arrested is if you have a blog or vlog and it is not set on moderation people will take advantage of that like in the recent he-who-shall-not-be-named YouTube site. The latest news of his arrest will continue to reverberate in the Deaf community for some time, especially it being the growing number one controversy discussion in YouTube by various vloggers.

All in all, when combined with these past events did they help tarnish the image of the Deaf community in various ways and perception? What are the lasting effects? No one knows for sure. Paper bag anyone?

Karma's a bitch?

The news about a recent jailing of he-shall-not-be-named is starting to spread since it was announced yesterday on YouTube. And that reminded me of a cartoon I did a few months back about Karma, the dog. Now, when you're in jail it doesn't mean you're guilty. In a court of law you are innocent until proven guilty. Although his mugshot doesn't inspire much confidence in that theory while he's held in custody for reasons that are unclear at this moment. I am basically indifferent and in short don't much care for all this which is why I am writing this blog today. For years I had hoped he would change his behavior instead of "machine gunning" people down at Deaf, deaf, and hard of hearing people he doesn't like hoping to get a response from them. And many do respond angrily to his delight. That was his trademark, and a bad one at that. And because of that he was then persona non grata in my vlogs and blogs for the past few years now. He just wasn't worth it. I even approached him in person 4 years ago and told him that his blog has so much potential if only he knock off the continual attacking and disparaging remarks.

Prior to my initiated handshake with ***** I told him that his blog has lots of potential but if he keeps it up by disparaging other people including their families, somebody else will go after him.

And now, suddenly, he's in the glaring spotlight in such a surreal way. And I'm sure many are jumping with glee and joy that he finally got what coming to him, the guy that everybody loves to hate. Yet I don't take joy in all that just as well when Micah Brown was arrested earlier this year and found guilty for his crime. It just makes me shake my head in all this. Until more information on exactly why he's in jail I will have to wait and see. Just hope he will come out for the better, unharmed and humbled by all this experience. I'm writing this if people are wondering about what I think about all this and I'm setting the record straight here. That's all I have to say for now.

ADDENDUM: He came out of jail. Something to do with an error on mandatory court appearance and miscommunication. Yet, he hasn't been humbled by all this.

As a deaf/hh person, where were you when 9/11 happened?

Where were you when 9/11 happened? I remember exactly where I was that day when I received the news that one of the towers collapsed did I realize the enormity of this tragic event unfolding. About two hours earlier as I drove my way to a fishery dam that I was supervising which was going to be breached and deconstructed in order to restore channel flow, in my vehicle I briefly heard on my radio that a plane flew into one of the New York city's building. I immediately had the impression that it was a small commuter airplane that erroneously and tragically flew into a building just like the one time in 1945 a plane flew into the Empire State Building. Two hours later while I was supervising the deconstruction a fellow worker came down and told me the bad news. After that I dreaded going home and see it all on television after I listened to the radio during my two hour drive back home listening to the heart-breaking story.

Most Americans problably remember exactly where they were when the first heard or saw the tragic event. As a deaf or hard of hearing person, tell us where you were on that tragic day exactly 9 years ago on 9/11. Do you remember it vividly?

Kathy Buckley - a deaf comedianne.

Here's Kathy Buckley, a well known deaf comedianne in a signing video at the world premiere opening of SEE WHAT I'M SAYING at the Egyptian Theater in Hollywood.




It's rare to come across deaf comedians/comediannes nowadays but surely and slowly we are seeing more of them hitting the comedy circuits whether as a novice or an old pro. Although I did a bit of comedy skits myself in the past. How about my recent video parody of a Pepsi commercial "Uncle Bob's House"?



Heh.

The role of audiologists

From American Speech-Language-Hearing Association they produced a 2007 position paper called "Principles and Guidelines for Early Hearing Detection and Intervention Programs" that was adopted by a joint committee on infant hearing. Below is the position statement:

The Joint Committee on Infant Hearing (JCIH) endorses early detection of and intervention for infants with hearing loss. The goal of early hearing detection and intervention (EHDI) is to maximize linguistic competence and literacy development for children who are deaf or hard of hearing. Without appropriate opportunities to earn language, these children will fall behind their hearing peers in communication, cognition, reading, and social-emotional development. Such delays may result in lower educational and employment levels in adulthood (Holden & Diaz, 1998). To maximize the outcome for infants who are deaf or hard of hearing, the hearing of all infants should be screened no later than 1 month of age. Those not passing screening should have a comprehensive audiologic evaluation no later than 3 months of age. Infants with confirmed hearing loss should receive appropriate intervention no later than 6 months of age from health care and education professionals with expertise in hearing loss and deafness in infants and young children. Regardless of previous hearing-screening outcomes, all infants with or without risk factors should receive ongoing surveillance of communicative development beginning at 2 months of age during well-child visits in the medical home (American Academy of Pediatrics [AAP] Medical Home Initiatives, 2002). EHDI systems should guarantee seamless transitions for infants and their families through this process.

This was a 2007 position paper where a number of revisions were made to improve it from the 2000 position paper. One thing that was updated can be seen on page 2 in the Early Invention section:

• Early intervention services for infants with confirmed hearing loss should be provided by professionals with expertise in hearing loss, including educators of the deaf, speech-language pathologists, and audiologists.
• In response to a previous emphasis on “natural environments,” the committee recommends that both home-based and center-based intervention options should be offered.

And on page 3 on Communication that was updated for 2007:

• Families should be made aware of all communication options and available hearing technologies (presented in an unbiased manner). Informed family choice and desired outcome guide the decision-making process.

Throughout the position paper it brings up sign language several times such as this one on page 23.

Early intervention professionals should follow family-centered principles to assist in developing communicative competence of infants and toddlers who are deaf or hard of hearing (Baker-Hawkins & Easterbooks, 1994; Bamford, 1998; Fischer, 1994). Families should be provided with information specific to language development and access to peer and language models as well as family-involved activities that facilitate language development of children with normal hearing and children who are hard of hearing or deaf (Marschark, 1997; Thompson, 1994). Depending on family choices, families should be offered access to children and adults with hearing loss who are appropriate and competent language models. Information on spoken language and signed language, such as American Sign Language (Pollack, Goldberg, & Caleffe-Schenck, 1997) and cued speech, should be provided.

And then we get to what the role is for audiologists from the National Joint Committee on Infant Hearing 2007 Position paper on EDHI programs. The National Joint Committee is a multidisciplinary committee.

An audiologist is a person who, by virtue of academic degree, clinical training, and license to practice, is qualified to provide services related to the prevention of hearing loss and the audiological diagnosis, identification, assessment, and nonmedical and nonsurgical treatment of persons with impairment of auditory and vestibular function, and to the prevention of impairments associated with them. Audiologists serve in a number of roles. They provide newborn hearing-screening program development, management, quality assessment, service coordination and referral for audiological diagnosis, and audiological treatment and management. For the follow-up component, audiologists provide comprehensive audiological diagnostic assessment to confirm the existence of the hearing loss, ensure that parents understand the significance of the hearing loss, evaluate the infant for candidacy for amplification and other sensory devices and assistive technology, and ensure prompt referral to early intervention programs. For the treatment and management component, audiologists provide timely fitting and monitoring of amplification devices. Other audiologists may provide diagnostic and auditory treatment and management services in the educational setting and provide a bridge between the child/family and the audiologist in the clinic setting as well as other service providers. Audiologists also provide services as teachers, consultants, researchers, and administrators.

The position paper also states at the end in the document (page 32) on who adopted the position statement by naming joint committee members (and please note the bolded words).

Joint committee member organizations that adopt this statement include (in alphabetical order): the Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, the American Academy of Audiology, the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, the Council on Education of the Deaf (see individual organizations listed above), and the Directors of Speech and Hearing Programs in State Health and Welfare Agencies.

What's interesting is to see that members of this joint committee include the Council on Education of the Deaf, and Alexander Graham Bell Association of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing
with names like:

Beth S. Benedict, PhD
Galluadet University
Washington, DC

Bobbie Scoggins, EdD
Sioux Falls, SD

Judy Harrison, MA (AG Bell Staff)
Washington DC

Recognize Bobbie Scoggins? She is the president of NAD. And you have a representive of Gallaudet University that adopted the position paper as well along with a representative from AG Bell on the role of audiologists.

I think the audiologists' role seem to be well defined here as seen in the position paper along with some broad defining roles added to it. I think the CAA has a legitimate concern over the revised August 20th AB2072 bill from that of the August 17th bill which they accepted seeing how their role as audiologists was compromised in this most recent AB2072 bill revision. There should be some flexibility to what an audiologist can do along what it cannot do rather than assuring that they be completely constrained.

Now, I've read Marla's Musings seeing how she seemed have twisted some words regarding CAA, the Mendoza letter and the audiologist's role. Some responses had no real bearing on the role of audiologists since for infant hearing screening they help ensure early intervention through referrals to early intervention specialists, including access to ASL. Regardless, I think this will get addressed soon enough.

Questioning DBC's hit counter... an illusion?

My thoughts about my recent blog on fake award badges (of which Fookem & Bug finally removed their questionable "Top Blog" award badge) turned me to thinking about the Deaf Bilingual Coalition's website. I couldn't help but noticed DBC's visitor hit counter prominently shown near the top of their website. The number I saw just a few minutes ago had a hit count of 2,495,575 hits. That got me thinking. That number literally does not add up since I know that DBC website first went up in late spring or summer of 2008 using the Archive.org site to ascertain the initial date of that website going public. And with my curiousity piqued I did a little investigation.

I used Google's search engine to use its cache feature to see what was the visitor count according to Google's last "snapshot" of that website. The Google cache captured the DBC website on August 31, 2010 showed a hit counter at 2,489,421. That's 6 days apart from Google cache record to today's count with a difference of 6,154 hits. Assuming this counter is true in over 6 days worth that's about 1,000 hits a day. Even this number might be questionable as well when compared to my website where I normally get anywhere from 400 to 800 hits a day.

Using the Alexa traffic rank website my website has a traffic rank of 3,894,629 (as of September 2010) while the DBC website has a traffic rank of 14,204,188. My blogsite is almost 7 years old with over 800,000 hits. But DBC is about 2 years old with supposedly 2,495,575 hits yet it ranks much lower than mine? With 2,495,575 hits in 2 years that's the equivalent of 104,000 hits a month yet in six days it racked up about 6,000 hits (assuming this is even true) which would leave about 30,000 hits in a month. Supposing the "2,495,575 hits" is true then certainly Alexa's website would've easily shown that.

This analysis of mine has nothing to do with who has the bigger number of hits. That's besides point here. It's about the obvious discrepancies I am seeing with DBC's own visitor counter number. And frankly, my conclusion is that whoever put that counter up with the high hits isn't being honest.

The hating of Russell Errigo....

Interesting comments seen below under Russell Errigo's YouTube "AB2072 - You Don't Own Deaf Babies!" which were pretty much an attempt to take pot shots at Russell. This got me thinking of why some of these people do these "loathings" in the first place. First, let's look at the word "self-loathing" which means to "self-hate." In Russell's case Annonymousasl claimed that Russell "self-hate" his own identity. Yeah, don't laugh folks. Keep your giggles to a minimum.

(by Annonymousasl) - It is amazing how much self-loathing you have for your identity. I finding it IRONIC that you are using the same communication method you tend to bash to get your point across. This last vlog of yours really shows the real you, not by what you say, but by that disillusioned face you show through your entire vlog. You may SIGN whatever you want, but that face reveals your true feelings.

Go ahead, respond with one of those defensive answers of yours. May you be happy with who you truly are.

And Russell responded

Obviously, you have some difficulty accepting that options are here to stay. Options shall be respected regardless how you feel about it. When you say something like this in a negative matter, you're putting the hearing parents in a position for not wanting to be part of deaf community. You're setting yourself as an example.

My video has shown a positive reenforcement for everybody. And, your comments have proven a narrow one sided viewpoint.

One more thing...we knew it's going to be like this when we made a decision to implant our son.We knew people like you will loathe us. We knew people with their viewpoint like yours will always be an issue.

Bottom line...it's our decision.

dominicerrigo 2 days ago

So, what is exactly Russell Errigo's identity? No one knows exactly for sure except Russell himself and really it's none of our business because it's a personal thing. Our own identity is defined by many things in our own life and not wholly about our hearing loss. The only person who is having issues about some one else's "identity" is Anonymousasl who is obviously a very insecure person. Instead of applauding diversity or supporting informed parental choices for their deaf/hh children, Anonymousasl goes on an anonymous cowardly rant about how Russell "self-loathe" himself about his own identity. What utter nonsense.

I'd say that for some Deaf people who loathe other Deaf, deaf or hard of hearing people's decisions on their communication methods, their support of parents for making informed choices regarding their deaf/hh children, or the choice on cochlear implant might want to do some serious introspecting of themselves about their hate. This is all about informed choices. As for Russell's videos they are certainly better than a bunch of ranting videos whining about other Deaf, deaf or hard of hearing people and in the process encouraging more vitriol and hate. Such a bore. Although the number one whining video in my view has to do with monopoly money. Can't beat that one.

Did Fookem & Bug get punk'd?

Maybe "punk'd" is the wrong word but I have a few questions about the "award"badge seen on the Fookem & Bug website that they pasted on seen on the right side of their main page near the top (see screen capture of Fookem & Bug with the badge award picture). The blog award badge says "TOP HEARING IMPAIRED BLOG 2010. AWARD WINNER" and clicking on that badge links you to the Medical Assistant Schools "top hearing impaired" web page that lists "hearing impaired"....uh... "blog winners" including some of the well known and recognized blogs like Candy, E?What?Huh?, Jared Evans Global Microbrand, An American Mom in Tuscany, and Dorkette:Exposed.

Eh?What?Huh?
http://www.ehwhathuh.com/

Found in Blank
http://www.foundinblank.com/

The Frost Village Blog
http://frostvillage.com/blog/

Adreanaline
http://www.adreanaline.com/blog/

Grumpy Old Deafies
http://www.grumpyoldeafies.com/

Deaf Special Needs
http://www.deafspecialneeds.com/

Show of Hands
http://aslperformingarts.blogspot.com/

Diversity In Deafhood
http://deafprogressivism.blogspot.com/

Ben Fletcher
http://benfletcher.wordpress.com/

Big Ben Factor
http://bigbenfactor.wordpress.com/

Sharlyn Ayotte's Blog
http://billyclarkstudios51.blogspot.com/

Candy
http://candysweetblog.wordpress.com/

Deaf Chef At Large
http://www.deafchefatlarge.com/

Tactile The World
http://tactiletheworld.wordpress.com/

Just Singin' & Singin' in the Sun
http://danielgreene.com/

Hearing Mojo
http://hearingmojo.com/

Deaf Chipmunk
http://deafchipmunk.com/

Deaf Civil Rights Movement
http://deafcivilrightsmovement.wordpress.com/

Deaf411 Online v\Blog
http://deaf411online.com/blog/

Deafinitely Girly
http://www.deafinitelygirly.com/

Going Deaf
http://denareiter.blogspot.com/

Donald's Deaf\hard Of Hearing Technology Blog
http://prosumertech.blogspot.com/

Liz's Deaf Blog
http://l1zblog.wordpress.com/

My Opinion Here
http://geminisigner.blogspot.com/

Fookem And Bug
http://fookembug.wordpress.com/

Campaining For Deaf Children
http://iannoon.wordpress.com/

J. Parrish Lewis
http://jparrishlewis.com/

Through a Deaf Lens
http://www.thedeaflens.com/

Jared Evans Global Microbrand
http://www.jaredlog.com/

The Deaf Edge
http://deafpundit.wordpress.com/

Deaf Politics Blog
http://blog.deafpolitics.org/

An American Mom In Tuscany
http://rallycapsdotnet.blogspot.com/

Crazy Deaf Joe Blog
http://www.crazydeafjoe.net/

Curse Of Silence
http://ilsordo.blogspot.com/

ABC
http://johnlestina.blogspot.com/index.html

Deaf Women In Film
http://dwif.blogspot.com/

Love Daddy
http://www.lovedaddy.org/

A Deaf Mom
http://deafmomworld.com/

The Dream You Are living Is Your Creation
http://jimikiwi.blogspot.com/

Dorkette:Exposed
http://gnarlydorkette.blogspot.com/

Besides Fookem & Bug that got punk'd there are a few others that also displayed the badge award on their website such as an ASL website called Show of Hands where you can see the award badge seen at the bottom of their webpage, and Deaf Women in Film has that badge award, too. Out of a list of 40 blog "winners" three blogsites actually displayed this bogus award badge that links to a spam/bogus website.

I might understand how others may have put that blog award badge on their blog/website but Fookem & Bug? I'd at least expect these Deaf guys to question such an award badge, especially when it when it comes to controversial words that may offend the sensibilities of some Deaf people like "hearing impaired." And that it came from a website designed to point people as "one-stop" shop on getting your online degree in medical assistance. If you didn't know it you can tell it's a spam website if you spotted the statement on their award page where it says:

These blogs will cover topics ranging from prevention tips to treatment.

That was a red flag right there. Now, tell me. What are the odds that these blogsites will cover medical topics on hearing loss on prevention tips and medical treatments?

Right. It's a spam website.

Also, notice the link address that lists the "Top 40 Hearing Impaired Blogs" and look at the bolded part I outlined:

http://www.medicalassistantschools.org/top_hearing_impaired

From that URL layout and recognizing it as a spam website I did a quick Google search and sure enough there are several other disabilities sites that the Medical Assistant Schools website list as part of their fake "Top Blog Award" campaign effort.

Here's the screen capture of my Google search result.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Fookem & Bug, and others, you've been PUNK'D!

And who would've thought this could ever happen?

Oral Deaf Man Criticicizes Other Oral Deaf Man for Using His Voice

It was pretty incredible, bold, and foolish at the same time for Tim Riker (chapter president (Sacramento) of California of the Deaf) to criticize and demean a deaf man, John Fortius/Fortias, as seen in his response to my blog yesterday for using his voice in show of his support of the AB2072 bill on June 23, 2010 at the California Senate Health Hearing.

(Tim Riker) - I was a little disappointed with one of the supporters of AB 2072 who testified because his voice was unintelligible. If he had known ASL and used an interpreter, perhaps the audience would have understood everything he said and Senator Alquist wouldn't have interrupted him several times. Maybe his parents were misinformed or information about ASL was withheld by the audiologists, physicians, and his private oral school. I can see why they would withhold or distort this information; it would negatively impact their cash flow. We can't turn back time to correct this egregious mistake, but it's not too late to learn ASL and there are many in the Deaf community who will welcome and support him.

Since Tim Riker didn't say exactly who but there is only one man who used his voice and supported the AB2027 bill in the video recording of the meeting and that was John Fortius, a volunteer deputy district attorney in Stanislaus County. Tim Riker can only be talking about John Fortius. There can be no other person he could be talking about except John Fortius.

What is galling and irresponsible for Tim Riker is to criticize without any merit saying that John Fortius' (profoundly deaf since birth) speech was "unintelligble." Tim Riker's comment was done in poor taste. It was rather unprofessional for Tim Riker to use his position as chapter president of CAD to go after another deaf man for using his voice when in fact he also used his voice on that same day as well. It is rather an unsavory move for him to use his position to try and convince many others of that false claim in order to push his ASL agenda and lob a few conspiracy bombs about audiologists while he's at it.

Tim, I can tell you for a fact that John Fortius' speech was indeed intelligible and was understood for perhaps 98% to 99% of his speech. Mind the fact that were two unofficial transcripts (see below) that recorded all of his speech that day. Also, one ASL interperter was able to interpret what he said as seen in the video starting at 20:48. I was able to understand most of his speech just by listening to the recorded video. And he spoke fine to me. There is no need to get into details on how his voice sounded like which is, of course, not like what a hearing person's speech would sound like. His speech was "unintelligble" only to Tim Riker who is deaf and uses a hearing aid. Perhaps he should consider the fact about his own hearing loss and the limitation of how he can discriminate another person's speech? Perhaps he could not understand John Fortius' speech because he has a deep voice? Tim Riker needs to understand that some deaf/hh people are able to hear better when people's voices are in the higher frequency range than lower ones like men's voices. Or vice versa. Or that some deaf/hh people can hear very well in both the higher and lower frequency range of a person's voice. In this case, it was only Tim Riker who could not understand him while everybody else could to one degree or another.

Secondly, Senator Alquist did not interrupt John Fortius "several times" as Tim Riker tried to put it. In fact, she only interrupted him once to ask him to speak from his heart and not look at his notes. That can be seen in the video. You can also see that in the transcript, too. How disengenuous of Tim Riker to say those things in order to push his ASL agenda while as chapter president of CAD, no less. He even contributed to a heavily biased "eugenics" article called California Eugenics-Style Bill Creates Uproar Among the Deaf Community. Anything to do to push an agenda, eh? Kick another deaf man down for using his voice and then try and prop him up saying that the Deaf community would welcome him?

Nice move.

Here's the unofficial transcript below and in the video John Fortius begins to talk at 20:48:

JOHN FORTIUS: Good afternoon, my name is John Fortius, I am 32 years old, and I have been profoundly deaf since birth. I’m here today in support of this bill. At a young age, when my Mom found out that I had lost my hearing, she decided that she was going to do the oral-auditory approach, and this in part because she had prior training to my birth, she had a speech pathologist. As a result of her guidance and some education through oral-auditory school, I was mainstreamed in preschool and on. Some of my [accomplishments] since then, is I was an honor roll throughout high school, I was a sport athlete and captain, graduated with honors from Williamette University in Salem, Oregon. Was a college football player, and just a year ago, I recently graduated from law school. And continuously, from the time that I graduated from college, I’ve been continuously employed when not in school. Just most recently I have been working as a deputy district attorney in Stanislaus County as a volunteer. Currently–

SEN. ALQUIST: And why are you supportive of the bill?

FORTIUS: Why am I supportive of the bill?

SEN. ALQUIST: Yes, that’s why you’re speaking now.

FORTIUS: It gives people an opportunity–a chance to [pause] have, potentially, a more, what I believe would be a more [unintelligible] life. It would allow them to be just like anyone else. I’m the first to admit, I am not–I’m going off my speech–I’m the first to admit that I am not part of the Deaf Community. I have–I don’t associate with it, but I am an advocate of you know, just the best thing–the best course of action, whatever that might be–for disabled people. And so that is a big part of why I’m here today. And–

SEN. ALQUIST: Just speak to me.

FORTIUS: What’s that?

SEN. ALQUIST: I like what you’re saying. Don’t look at your notes. Just–why are you supportive of the bill?

FORTIUS: OK, basically, what I’m getting from, is when we’re faced with such an important decision in our lives, when is not being fully informed the best solution? And it’s logical, it’s common sense, and I believe seriously that being fully informed in any big decision in your life is very important, and so that is a big reason of why I’m here today in support of this bill.

SEN. ALQUIST: Thank you very much.

FORTIUS: Thank you.

This transcript follows almost exactly in another unofficial transcript as well which goes to show that John Fortius' speech was indeed quite intelligible that day.

My advice to you Tim Riker? Leave out your business of criticizing other deaf or hard of hearing people's speech and their choices to use them or not. Not doing so will make you look bad as chapter president of CAD.

And lastly, Tim Riker complained that I used his name without permission of which I find humorous.

Next, this blog is offensive to Deaf people and my name was used without my permission.

No permission is required or needed in this case. Tim Riker gave his name and spoke at the June 23, 2010 AB2072 Senate Health hearing which was captured and recorded on video for the public made possible by California taxpayers. This means that the mentioning of his name in that video and what he said are now a matter of public record and for public consumption. What I did was copy the verbatim part of Tim Riker's comment in one of the transcripts. It's all part of the public record, Tim. No permission is required.

I support both John Fortius and Tim Riker's use of their voices regardless of the situation when there are interpreters available. I'm not in the position to criticize other deaf/hh people choice's to use their voice or sign using ASL or SEE (or whatever). The important point here is that deaf/hh people have the right to decide which methods to use to communicate. For Tim Riker to criticize another deaf man's use of his voice is a serious step back on CAD's own credibility as an organization. This time, I and many others doubt Tim Riker's sincerity after he criticized and demeaned John Fortius by saying this:

...there are many in the Deaf community who will welcome and support him

Really, Tim? After what you have done so far? Unity for whom now?

*shakes head*

Tim Riker, chapter president of CAD, respond to Kokonut Pundit

In my blog, "Use of voice is way, way better than ASL! ", Tim Riker, chapter president (Sacramento) of CAD, responded in my blog comment section on why he choose to use his voice at the AB2072 California Senate Health Hearing. I am putting his combined responses here for ease of reading for my readers and a forum for him and others to respond and discuss here. Although for now I am assuming this is him responding unless otherwise notified.

Tim Riker - I had discussed with the people involved with the CDNIAS coalition regarding whether I should speak or sign during the hearing. I had their support to speak. Both ASL and spoken English were at my disposal because of my bilingual education while growing up. The general rule is to first consider the main audience when selecting which language to use. Then if you are able to use that language directly and fluently then use it. If not, then use an interpreter. This applies to any situation and any language. When someone who is fluent in Spanish decides to speak English to a predominantly Spanish speaking audience, then of course that would be considered very offensive. My audience was predominantly English speaking and my choice was appropriate for that situation. Tim Riker.

And another response in the same blog comment section.

First, I want to make it clear that every language needs to be respected, whether it's American Sign Language (ASL), English, Spanish or some other language. To deny any language the equal respect it deserves is called linguicism. Next, this blog is offensive to Deaf people and my name was used without my permission. I don't see anyone pointing out that Assembly Member Tony Mendoza or any of the other Hispanic legislators spoke English rather than Spanish in the Capitol. If someone wrote an article celebrating that a Hispanic person chose to speak English rather than Spanish in a specific situation, wouldn't that be an insult to Hispanic people who speak Spanish? I want to note that I am multilingual and select the most appropriate language for each situation. My first languages are both ASL and English and I have my family who used ASL with me and my bilingual education at Maryland School for the Deaf to thank for having multiple languages at my disposal. The fact that I spoke English during the California Senate Health Hearing was because the primary audience I was speaking to were the Senators who voted on this bill-- all of whom speak English. However, the most comfortable language for me in most situations is and will always be ASL. I was a little disappointed with one of the supporters of AB 2072 who testified because his voice was unintelligible. If he had known ASL and used an interpreter, perhaps the audience would have understood everything he said and Senator Alquist wouldn't have interrupted him several times. Maybe his parents were misinformed or information about ASL was withheld by the audiologists, physicians, and his private oral school. I can see why they would withhold or distort this information; it would negatively impact their cash flow. We can't turn back time to correct this egregious mistake, but it's not too late to learn ASL and there are many in the Deaf community who will welcome and support him. There are many with that background who have done that and they were among those who fought the hardest against AB 2072. I believe having a strong foundation and immersion in two different languages provided me the versatility I needed for various settings. However, how well I speak does not define who I am or my success. I know many very gifted, educated and successful Deaf people who use ASL to communicate and they don't hear or speak at all. I have nothing but respect for them and their contributions. Tim Riker

He also responded in my blog "Why did CAD chapter president use his voice at AB2072 hearing?"

I discussed whether I should speak English or use American Sign Language while testifying with the core committee. I had the support of the core committee. I think it's a general cultural rule if you're fluent in ASL but choose to speak English to a predominantly Deaf audience, it is offensive. In my case, even though there were many Deaf people watching, the main audience were the Senators on the Health Committee who ultimately had to vote on the bill. As a multilingual Deaf person, I spoke English with the support of other Deaf people because it was appropriate for me in that situation. By the way, please beware of Candy since I notice she will quote what other people say out of context. She did that earlier by quoting only a small part of my comment on another blog several months ago when I explained how audism and dysconscious audism in society creates a hierarchy. It's actually in every person's best interest to promote English and ASL bilingual education for every Deaf child so they can eventually choose for themselves which language they use for each situation. More importantly, when society is equally accepting of ASL, you will shatter this hierarchy which affects everyone regardless of how well they hear or speak. Tim Riker

Use of voice is way, way better than ASL!

There you go, this has taken me four years to get to this point where I can now use three different actual situations from three different people who are Deaf, deaf or hard of hearing and were either raised orally or orally-aurally (the pronunciation of words plus auditory feedback) and their choices between using ASL or voice. In each situation the venue had the proper number of ASL interpreters along with either having real time captioner available for the audience. The core understanding is that for each of them they had the right to choose between using their voice or sign in ASL to the audience. But because of their choice their reasons shouldn't matter because supposedly the enlightened Deaf crowd ought to know already that it shouldn't matter why voice was used but that they should be respected for their choice since their message was never lost that day.

The three people are:

1) Dr. Brenda Brueggemann, a deaf person who was the interim Acting Chair of the Gallaudet University Board of Trustees and chair of the ASL Department at Ohio State University chose to use her voice that day as the Commencement Speaker at the 2006 Gallaudet University graduation ceremony. But you have to read her story on why she used her voice before jumping to conclusions and make any further wrong assumptions.

2) Mike McConnell, a hard of hearing person who graduated from Gallaudet University in 1991 was one of the several panel members at Gallaudet University's first ever vlogging/blogging conference in 2007 that was televised live in front of an internet audience and the audience that were physically present. I already explained why I chose to use my voice that day.

3) Tim Riker, a Deaf person who is the chapter president of California Association of the Deaf decided to use his voice (English) at the committee meeting in the California Assembly building on June 23, 2010 in the effort to raise ASL by pleading and making a case through voice (English). Although Tim Riker has not yet offered his reason on why he chose to use his voice that day.

All of them are deaf.

In all three situations there were professional ASL interpreters available. In two situations there were real time captioners available at Gallaudet University's graduation ceremony where Dr. Brueggemann did her speech and at Gallaudet University's vlog/blog conference. In all three situations each of the person had their own personal reason for their decision to use his or her voice. It didn't matter if you think it was a "wrong" decision to do. What's important is that they had that right to choose between ASL or voice when it was made available. They all chose voice for a variety of reasons. And that should be the end of it. People should just simply respect their choices instead of going all nutso for not signing or go into some deep analysis to arrive at four different conclusions (that were never the correct ones) as to why the person did not use his or her voice is a waste of time and frankly quite inappropriate and none of their business.

So, kudos to Dr. Brueggemann and Tim Riker for paving the way when it comes to choices (I can't really kudos myself can I?) and not be afraid to use his or her voice instead of signing in ASL! And that, yes, deaf people can talk!

Dr. Brueggemann eloquently said four years ago,

"there also does need to be some flexibility and respect for all abilities and kinds of language and communication."

Amen. And that's true in this day and age. So true.

As for for my blog title, "Use of voice is way, way better than ASL." It's all about personal choices and not whether voice (English) is the better language and/or modality than ASL. It's just a preference.

Can you guys finally calm down now?

Deaf Gally Board of Trustee Used Voice at Gally Graduation Ceremony!

You remember. I'm sure you have. Or at least many of you did. It was supposedly one of the more remembered so called "scandal" at Gallaudet University in 2006. We had Dr. Brenda Brueggemann, who is deaf and was the Commencement Speaker for Gallaudet University's graduating class of 2006, use her voice instead of ASL. She was at the time the interim Acting Chair of the Gallaudet University Board of Trustees. She took Celia May Baldwin's position after she resigned because of threats against her by some nutty pro-DPN2 protesters.

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.

Celia May Baldwin was supposed to be the 2006 Commencement Speaker at the Gallaudet University graduation ceremony and she would have signed in ASL, too. Instead she resigned a few days before the graduation date. The Acting Chair position soon fell into Dr. Brueggemann's lap a few days later. Thus making her to be the 2006 Commencement Speaker.

Oh, what joy!

Below is an email response from Dr. Brueggemann. Both of us exchanged emails in my conversations with her to understand what went on with her after the DPN2 protest and why she used her voice that day. I emailed her yesterday and got her permission to print this email response explaining why she used her voice for the graduating class that day on May 12, 2006. Below is the email from Dr. Brueggemann dated November 28, 2006 (the first link below is mine in order to point out what Dr. Brueggemann was referencing to).

I'm glad you made your communication preferences very clear at the outset of the development of this event at GU on Feb. 3. (I know both who Jill Bradbury and Christian Vogler are) I have found that lately--say, the past 4 years especially--the "policing" over the use of ASL at GU has grown considerably. I think there are some good and "right" reasons for that. But meanwhile, there also does need to be some flexibility and respect for all abilities and kinds of language and communication. Amen.

Your choice to use your voice sounds much like what I would say. I make the comparison often that if I were going to Germany (which I did a few summers ago) and asked to give an academic or public lecture there I would always chose to do so in English, if I could, first and foremost because it is my "native" language and the one I feel most comfortable and expressively capable in. Now, I can carry on a halfway decent conversation in German (I used to teach it back when I was a high school teacher) and probably even muddle, painfully slowly and simply, through something like a "lecture" in German if I had to. But if I have the chance to use my native language for major events like this, that's always what I would choose.

Meanwhile, I do also completely understand the reason and "right" for using ASL more and "better" --especially at places like Gallaudet. My ASL is only about half-good right now--not even as good as my German probably. But I can have conversations. I did so all the time as Board Chair with King and other Gu administrators directly on VRS (not using interpreters). I get by. And had I had any time to actually prepare my remarks for the GU graduation last May, I probably would have signed them more or at least part of them. But I didn't have that prep time. I was dropped into the Acting Chair's position on May 10, to be exact--once CM Baldwin resigned. And I was handed the remarks she was supposed to deliver (already scripted) for graduation on May 12. In fact, they didn't even give me the script until the morning of May 12. And it still had her name at the top of it! So, using oral/spoken English, I could feel comfortable enough to develop a few of my own "touches" in the prepared script. But I sure couldn't do that trying to use ASL....

When I delivered the remarks at the naming of the Linda K. Jordan Art Gallery on Oct. 5 I actually WROTE the remarks myself (not from a prepared script someone in the GU President's office prepared for me... as they almost always did for Glenn Anderson, the former Chair) and then I also had plenty of time to practice turning them into some ASL. And I did so. Rudimentary though it was.

I always struggle to accept that some people in the community can be, well, so militant about ASL use now and actually "hold it against me." Should I really be blamed for the fact that I grew up in the 60s and 70s in very very rural remote western Kansas and my parents made choices for me that then meant I did not even really know about ASL or Gallaudet U until it was 1988, DPN was happening, and I was taking my first sign language class in the basement of a Baptist church in Louisville Kentucky (at the age of 29, as a Ph.D. student). Is that really MY fault?

Well, that's my soapbox for the day. I've written about some of these things in my published essays as well....

Good to "chat" with you.

Best, Brenda

I don't blame her. Such a short window of time to do her speech and even less time to practice her speech in ASL where she hadn't gain complete fluency yet. It's understable now why she used her voice. I already knew that for more than four years now. Yet how so wrong most of you were about her decision to user her voice. Such bad assumptions. And even worse is to attack her for using her voice. So, shame on you!

At the time in 2006 several bloggers, even some of the well known ones, excoriated her derisively, mercilessly and even cruelly for using her voice to speak at the graduation ceremony. One blog called Random Thoughts and Musings by Moi took it personally and was offended by Dr. Brueggemann's choice and that she shouldn't have used her voice and that it was plainly wrong.

People in our community are free to choose what language they want to use in various situations - I absolutely agree with that. Dr. Brueggemann's choice, however, went far beyond the bounds of diversity and was, in my view, a grave offense. I took great affront at her choice that day...

Oh really? And yet all of your conclusions never came close as to why used her voice and the reasons behind it.

Perhaps it's time that you (Random Thoughts and Musings by Moi) and many other bloggers who wrongly attacked Dr. Brueggemann in 2006 ought to make a public apology to her. An apology for your false charges, derisions, insults or make these unwarranted attacks against her just because she decided to use her voice that day. Her reasons were valid considering the constraint she was in as you can tell in her email to me back in 2006.

Again, it took a blogger like me who took the time to email (back in 2006) Dr. Brueggemann to ask her questions regarding the use of her voice instead of ASL at the Gallaudet University graduation ceremony. It may have been four years later but I think it's high time now that you, the public, the readers, some of the harrassers, the nutjobs who threatened CM Baldwin, and whoever could benefit from this would finally understand exactly why she used her voice that day.

Remember what Dr. Brueggemann said (see picture above the captions) in her Commencement Speech video starting at 45:15:

"Keep an open mind when you meet people and ideas that are new and different."

So, true. Keep an open mind. Not everybody is fluent in ASL. Not everybody who is deaf knows ASL. Many do prefer to use their voice rather than sign. And so four years later in her email to me today she has another quote and message for all of you readers.

"Hey, I like my voice!" I'm proud of it. It's unique, it's mine, I like it. I think I'll use it! - Dr. Brenda Brueggemann. Sept 1, 2010.

Yeah, me, too.

So now you know the rest of the story.

Related blog - Voice is way, way better than ASL!

Why did CAD chapter president use his voice at AB2072 hearing?

I've waited to see if anybody had actually objected to Tim Riker, the chapter president of the California Association of the Deaf (Sacramento chapter), who used his voice at the AB2072 Senate Health Hearing on June 23, 2010 instead of signing in ASL as seen in the Calchannel.com (June 23) along with a partial transcript below on what he said which starts at 31 minutes and 40 seconds into the video:

Tim: Good afternoon, my name is Tim Arthur (actually, it's Tim Riker), I’m the president of the California Association of the Deaf, Sacramento chapter. I graduated from Georgetown University, and this fall, because of all this, I’m looking forward to starting my masters’ in public policy. We are opposed to the bill as it is currently written, but we’d like to see an amendment that would work for the best interest of deaf children and the parents. First of all, I wanted to thank you for the positive changes to the current mark up language of the bill, and it means progress, but the language of the bill still needs a little bit more work to make it so that we can really put the focus on the deaf children and getting the parents access to the information that they need. I wanted to point to a 2003 state senate resolution number 20, it formally apologized for the outrageous attempt to *socially engineer people out of *existence. The regional version of Mendoza’s AB 2072 bill leads us towards a slippery slope of *eugenics. So the proposed amendment is a very good step in the right direction. It is fair, if we have a few changes to the amendment. The proposed amendment by the health committee, it still threatens the fundamental values of a deaf education and language development, by giving audiologists the power to discriminate information for which they are not trained or licensed. The audiologists’ training gives them the buyer that’s inherently unacceptable, if the audiologist ought to have a role, it must only be to identify that child is deaf, as soon as possible, and then refer the parent to an appropriate professional or entity with a focus on the educational aspect of raising a deaf child. That needs to be determined by the panel of people who are, represented by people involved with the...

How come no outrage from people in the Deaf community for Time to use his voice when the issue was about getting ASL into the spotlight? With Tim Rikier's refusal to sign and use of his voice, was it to try and appear more "intelligent" and more "educated" hoping that linguicism would prevail on the part of the committee looking favorably at Tim's pleas and be impressed with him?

A) When a Deaf person is able to speak English with his voice, or write excellent English, he gets lauded as intelligent and well educated. This person is considered successful in life.

B) When a Deaf uses ASL (no matter how fluently), but writes mediocre English, and cannot speak English, he is considered intellectually inferior, ill-educated, and guaranteed to fail in life.

On linguicism:

SCENARIOS:

Two persons are talking. During the course of this conversation, one of the persons is assessing the other’s wealth, quality of education, status in society based on the other person’s use/choice of language or dialect.

A) If the other person shows an excellent command of English, the assessor assumes he is quite well-educated, possibly from a wealthy family, which then indicates an elevated status in society.
B) If that other person shows poor command of the English language, or uses another language, the assessor assumes that he’s ill-educated, poor, possibly from a ghetto and therefore from the lower classes in society.

What I don't understand is that since Tim Riker is deep within the world of Deaf culture and community as chapter president of CAD he uses his voice.... instead of signing using his proud and preferred language, American Sign Language. I kind of wondered what exactly was Tim's strategy in doing that. What was his goal to use his voice that day as chapter president of CAD? There were voice interpreters there that day and would have interpretted his signing yet he choose to use his voice that day, on live tv, in front of thousands of Deaf people tuning into the AB2072 soap opera. Not one single outcry from a Deaf person, community or group objecting or asking why he used his voice instead. Not one (as far as I can tell so far).

Why the silence? Is this another example of hypocrisy at work?

Now, I'm in favor of a person in choosing how one prefer to communicate. I won't discriminate anybody for doing that. It's really none of my business. There were ASL interpreters available for both voice and ASL translation at the meeting it wouldn't matter to me. I am not opposed to Tim or anybody else who choose to use his/her voice or sign. I'm just noticing the obvious disconnect between what Deaf people say about using voice over ASL when it comes to choice. And it's usually a negative one.

Now, when I choose to use my voice at Gallaudet University's first ever blog/vlog conference where it had ASL and voice interpreters, and real time captioners available for the live internet audience, I had gotten a few grumbling complaints and objections from some Deaf people saying what I did was rude and so on. And of all places on the sacred grounds of Gallaudet University did I dare use my voice in front of Deaf people. Oh well.

What I'm presenting here or trying to say is not about the complaints per se although I am wondering about that too but it's the irony in seeing a chapter president of CAD who is Deaf use his voice in front of thousands on live streaming tv (which is now recorded for history) in order to elevate the status and use of ASL. Did he unwittingly lowered the status of ASL as not important and choose to use his voice instead? Did he unwittingly elevated the use of voice over ASL that day? Those are the interesting questions I have here.

ADDENDUM: If you have no objection (I don't) to Tim Riker's using his voice then you should have no objections to Brenda Brueggemann, who is deaf and knows ASL, using her voice at Gallaudet University's 2006 graduation commencement speech?

ADDENDUM #2: In a blog called Random Thoughts and Musings by Moi blogger discussed the Breuggemann's use of her voice and agrees strongly that she shouldn't have used her voice and that it was plainly wrong. Oh really?

People in our community are free to choose what language they want to use in various situations - I absolutely agree with that. Dr. Brueggemann's choice, however, went far beyond the bounds of diversity and was, in my view, a grave offense. I took great affront at her choice that day...

Too bad this blogger doesn't know the true reason why Brueggemann decided to use her voice in an email exchange that Brueggemann and I had at the time. I wonder how this blogger feels about Tim Riker's use of his voice being that he's a chapter president of CAD? In both situations both had ASL interpreters at the time with the exception of Gallaudet University that had both an ASL interpreter and real time captioner for the large video screen at the graduation ceremony.

Related blog - Voice is way, way better than ASL!

Kokonut Pundit - the longest continuously running deaf/hh blog around?

My Kokonut Pundit blog will be approaching its 7th year this October when I began blogging in 2004. With over 1,558 blog posts (not counting this one) I believe I am probably the most prolific deaf/hh blogger around if I may be so bold. With a few pauses here and there I maintained my regular blogging ever since covering interests ranging from politics, the environment, the Gallaudet University protest, deaf and hard of hearing issues, advances in technology and biotechnology, and lately the AB2072 debacle. Unless if I'm mistakened, and readers can point this out to me, are there other blogs that have been around much longer than mine and continuously blogged on a regular basis? If so then I will stand corrected. However, from what I can I tell, at least here in the United States, the Kokonut Pundit blog is the longest running and regularly maintained deaf/hh blog around. And certainly one of the more popular deaf/hh blogs around, too. Thank you, readers!

Deaf and blind hiker on Appalachian Trail

Here is something you don't see. A deaf and blind hiker on the Appalachian Trail in his attempt to hike the full length of the trail.

The 2,160-plus-mile Appalachian Trail is daunting enough for most hikers. For Roni Lepore and Roger Poulin, the trail presents extra challenges.

Lepore, who is deaf, and Poulin, who both deaf and blind in one eye and has tunnel vision in the other, talked about their special relationship with the trail when they spent several nights with Carol and Ron Baker at the Huffman House Bed and Breakfast at Creekside Farm near Newport, which is half a mile off the trail.

The hikers had accomplished more than 600 miles by the time they stayed with the Bakers, after starting their adventure in early April from Springer Mountain, Ga., on the trail that runs from Georgia to Maine.

The Bakers, who thru-hiked the AT – from end to end – in 1999 and said they found it “extremely difficult.” They noted Lepore and Poulin “hike faster than we ever could. They managed around our house and ‘talked’ to us by writing things in a notebook.

“Roni is very patient and loving and really cares that Roger makes it all the way to Katahdin, Maine. Roger is determined to hike through ‘thick or thin’! He gets banged up a lot, but trudges on! He generally comes in to the pick up site (I shuttled them) after Roni. She whoops and hollers and jumps up and down and claps for him. She is truly glad that he has made it,” said Carol Baker. “We can’t fathom how either of them is doing this!”

Lepore’s trail name is “Ram Sham” for Rambling Shamrock. The New Jersey resident holds bachelor and master’s degrees from Rochester Institute of Technology in New York in the area of Information Technology.

Maine resident Poulin’s trail name is Adventurous Cane. He was born with Usher Syndrome, the most common condition that affects both hearing and vision, which also comes with balance problems – not able to walk steady.

Read the rest here.

And here's a story about a hiker's dream to hike the 100 mile Wilderness Trail where he met a deaf hiker.

I also met a deaf hiker named Caribou and his dog, who had flipped from New Jersey and was now hiking south to there going 20 miles per day. Don’t think he’s quite on that pace though, as I just saw him at breakfast in Monson this morning a week after we met.

Deaf hikers on the Appalachian Trail? How often does that happen?

Anyway, if you live in the Northwest and like to hike then check out my next hike if you want to join and perhaps start the first get together of Deaf and HH Hikers of the Northwest.

See ya.

Northwest Deaf and HH Hikers Get Together

If you live in Washington or Oregon, like the outdoors and hiking then perhaps plan for this upcoming short short hike and come along with other deaf and hard of hearing hikers of the Northwest. If you're interested in seeing my earlier hike to Gotchen Creek on Mt. Adams go here and see my pictures.

This High Rock Lookout hike will be the first tentative plan for hikers to get together and hike up to Lookout High Rock near Randle, Washington, located on the Gifford Pinchot National Forest in Washington.

This trail takes hikers up to High Rock Lookout, one of three fire lookouts remaining on the Gifford Pinchot NF. The trail begins on Road 8440 and climbs steeply through increasingly sparse conifers to High Rock Lookout. High Rock is a prominent 5,685 feet high peak on Sawtooth Ridge with a sheer 600 foot drop on its north face.

Please use caution when exploring this area. Stay behind the cables. The fire lookout was built in 1929. The lookout offers incredible views of the Sawtooth Ridge, Mt. Rainier and much of the surrounding landscape.

Trailhead: High Rock - Trailhead is at the intersection of FR 8440 and the southern end of High Rock Trial No. 266.

From the scale of easy to moderate to ardous this is a moderate hike. One way it is 1.5 mile starting at 4320 and climbs to 5685 feet above sea level at the lookout fire watchtower, a gain of 1365 feet. Here's an entry by someone who hiked a few weeks earlier.

I was in Packwood to meet up with Ralph and hike up Old Snowy on Saturday so we made a quick decision on Friday afternoon to go up to the lookout and highest point (5685')in the Sawtooth Range. The trail #266 sign says 1.5 miles but it seems more like 2 because it climbs quickly. We got to the top in about an hour and were rewarded with spectacular views, especially of Rainier to the north. The trail looks well traveled and there are some wildflowers in bloom but it is mostly shaded through forest. This was a very hot day and the bugs were out in force.

Pictures of High Rock lookout tower. Or you can look at other previous entries and pictures from other hikers that went to High Rock.

The date of the hike? The weekend of September 11th or 12th. Not too late into the summer season so as to take advantage of the still warm weather and less chance of rain with the hope of lots of sunny weather opportunities and a shot to see up close the famous Mt. Rainier.

The meeting place will be in Randle, Washington on road 12. Exact location will be dependent on who is coming. Once everybody arrives then I will lead the way driving to the Lookout Rock.

From Seattle to Randle the drive is 108 miles.
From Olympia to Randle the is is 86 miles.
From Tacoma to Randle the drive is 76 miles.
From Vancouver to Randle the drive is 115 miles.
From Portland, Oregon to Randle the is 124 miles.

If necessary the initial meeting place may take place at Tacoma before resuming the drive to Randle. This is to insure that everybody is there before resuming the drive to Randle, Washington so as to save everybody some time (and even frustration).

From Randle to the High Rock trailhead will take about 45 minutes or so of driving. And the hike to High Rock watchtower will take anywhere from 1 to 1.5 hours depending on the pace of the hike. Be sure to bring a sturdy hiking shoes. Comfortable clothes. Lots of water or fluids. Food. Snack. Binocular. Your camera and other smaller items you may want to bring yourself. And lastly be sure to bring your sense of adventure and humor which is required.

Plan on anywhere from 2 to 3 hours driving one way (depending on where you live) and about 4 hours that will cover the time to hike, eat, take pictures, talk, and so on. and then the drive back home which is another 2 to 3 hours. This will be a whole day adventure lasting 10 to12 hours.

Directions:

From Tacoma, drive State Highway 7 east to Elbe and continue on Highway 706 to Ashford. Continue east and turn right onto Kernahan Road. At about 1.5 miles, turn right onto Forest Road 85. Proceed 5.8 miles to FR 8440. Turn right and continue 4.5 miles to the trailhead on the left.

An alternative route to get the family sedan to the trailhead. Take Hwy. 7 east from Tacoma to Elbe, then turn east on to Hwy. 706 toward Ashford. Make a right turn on Kernahan Rd., then turn left onto FR 52 at 1.5 miles, and continue 3.3 miles to FR 8440, turn right and go about 9.5 miles on FR 8440 to Towhead Gap and the trailhead. Make sure you stay on FR 8440; there are a lot of forks along the way.

Map of High Rock location. If the map below doesn't show you need to "ZOOM OUT" until you see the map.


View Larger Map

High Rock was one of the many hikes I did when I was a kid with my family growing up in the Northwest. I still remember the spectacular view of Mt. Ranier on a sunny and warm day. Trust me, at 5685 ft the view is stunning on a sunny day.

This hiking get together is still up in the air and can change such as a different hiking location where the trail is closer or easier. Or this High Rock scheduled trail hike can change because of weather conditions, meaning it has to have a forecast of rain or heavy clouds (i.e. lightning danger). If you're interested in going let me know. This High Rock hike is still up in the air and can change to a different if not easier hike.

Boot up!

Incredible Hulk Character equals Oppression to Deaf?

Now, I gotta laugh at this one. In DonG's blog he lamented over whether Lou Ferrigno's acting as the Incredible Hulk character who had no speaking role and did the whole "Aaarrgghh!" thing instead somehow constituted as "avdism" (purposely misspelled) just because the actor happens to be deaf? Oh, please.

So, I wonder why in the comic book, the Hulk can talk, but in the TV series, the Hulk never talks, except to say GRRRRRAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHH! I’m thinking it is either:

The writers found the Hulk would be played by Lou Ferrigno, and assumed that he can’t talk, even though Lou was raised orally and can talk.
OR

The writers wanted to emphasize the Hulk’s lack of intelligence, so they wrote it so the Hulk can’t or doesn’t talk in order to emphasize his stupidity. That is, muteness is equated with stupidity.
Either way, that’s a*dism, right?

No, it's not. They cast him because of his size and build. He was a well known bodybuilder and was consider large for his size at the time at 6'5" and 275lbs. In fact he was one of the tallest professional bodybuilders at that time next to Arnold Schwarzenegger. I don't think it was that important to have a Hulk tv character to do these simple angry one liners when an occassional "Aaaarrrgghh!" would suffice. And it did. It was all about visual effects. Not about voice.

There were five TV seasons, several TV movies and the first Incredible Hulk movie feature where the Hulk character never talked even though in comic books had him saying simple words like "Hulk smash! or "Hulk no like puny humans!" But that soon changed in the last Hulk movie a few years back by using Lou Ferrigno's voice to do the "Hulk smash!" voice over.

Hulk's verbal skills and intelligence have varied in the comics, but he's never been as mute as the TV version. So it's a little ironic that TV Hulk Lou Ferrigno will give voice to the Hulk in this film. Producer Gale Ann Hurd says Ferrigno was a last-minute addition to a panel on the movie at New York's Comic-Con. Director Leterrier invited him to "audition" onstage. "Lou did this amazing, 'Hulk smash!' " says Hurd. "And (director Louis Leterrier) said, 'Come in, we'll record you next week.' Everybody thought it was either a staged event or we wouldn't really do it. But the next week Lou came in in L.A. and his voice is the voice of the Hulk."

Satisfied?

So, let's knock off this nonsense in the attempt to find anything to do with "avdism" or the use of the a-wordism and attach that to this Hulk thing. I'm sure Lou Ferrigno would have laughed at the whole silly notion. What's next? Preferring to talk instead of ASL would be labeled as avdist for a deaf person, too? Oh, please! Such moronic thinking.

White deaf man calls black person an "Uncle Tom"

Pretty shocking to see this happen in this day and age. Go here for more details and where it took place. People need to understand and realize the need for greater tolerance and how it is important that it's about a person's character and not about skin color. Yesterday was Martin Luther King's 47th anniversary of his "I have a dream," speech that was delivered on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial. This "Uncle Tom" (see definition) name calling is getting old and need to stop already.

California Academy of Audiology responds to blog readers' comments on AB2072 bill controversy

An email was sent to me today from the CAA in regards to my yesterday's blog in the effort to answer many of the readers' responses. They asked me to do this and so I am putting this email response in my blog. No names will be divulged here so please DO NOT ask me for them! The CAA's responses are below and answers some of the responses/questions seen yesterday in my blog comment box.

Hi Mike,

I and my board read your blog and the comments to yesterday’s post. We would like the opportunity to respond. Please let your readers know it comes from the CAA board of directors and legislative committee..do not use my email as it is from work…

1. Anonymous asked about the decibel level of the second screening….This pamphlet is to be given out at the diagnosis of hearing loss, not the outpatient screening. Some babies who fail the outpatient screening just have fluid in their ears etc. and just need time or medical treatment to resolve. We are being asked to hand this out to ALL children who have permanent hearing loss, of any kind and any degree…so yes even parents whose child has a mild loss or unilateral loss will be required to get this pamphlet and have ALL of the options for communication reviewed with the family.

2. Linda should know that we actually did not amend the language form the 17th…We actually endorsed that language and asked the author to go back to it. We did not take it as a gag order as to discuss all forms of communication options IS in our scope of practice…we objected to the August 20th amendments that was given to the author from legislators and the opposition, NOT CAA.

3. This is not about screenings..Please read the bill..it is about children diagnosed with hearing loss, any kind, any degree.

4. We are not even going to address the cochlear implant concerns as that is NOT a communication option…it is a device that is surgically implanted and is not part of this bill and will/should not be a part of the pamphlet…

It saddens us that the DHH community has such misinformation about our profession and our training. One of the biggest problems we feel the bill does not address is our families who use total communication as their option..they were not even included in the negotiations or the panel..We believe the panel and the costs incurred but the State is not necessary as there are pamphlets out there that are non biased and include all options, including ASL and SEE sign. We also believe at this point the bill is so far from its original intent that we cannot support, nor do we think given the polarizing options on the panel that the process will be arduous.
As audiologists we are trained in spoken speech and language development as well as different sign languages, including ASL. Some audiologists’ practices are not diagnostic but actually are educational and or rehabilitative only, and work with families in the development of spoken and visual language. It is referred to as aural rehabilitation, or in the case of a child, habilitation.

Because we too felt this bill was getting into a political battle rather than about communication and educational choices we asked to be removed as the primary pamphlet distributors and asked that the educators hand out the pamphlet but we would be happy to answer questions regarding anything in the pamphlet or direct the parent to the appropriate agency or reference material. This was rejected by the author…….Hope this clears up some of the misconceptions….

Thanks for your efforts and your fair representation of the facts……We hope this answers at least some of your readers questions…Thanks for asking!

If you have questions or comments and would like to direct them at CAA use their contact page to submit your questions or comments.

Thank you!