Deafhood: A Process of Self-Repression
Colorado Springs – A friend emailed me last week with another blog, this time from Mike McConnell’s article, “The Secret Order of Deaf Militants.” Naturally, I was asked what I thought of deafhood and McConnell’s article itself.
McConnell’s blog touches the issue of deafhood and draws the reader into wondering if deafhood is more a concept of Deaf militancy (or extremism) than anything else. If the concept of deafhood were to be universally accepted based on Paddy Ladd‘s original definition, then we should all subscribe to the belief that we must force a person to accept that they are Deaf. Or about to be Deaf. Or in the process of becoming Deaf. Or being Deaf.
Deafhood, Ladd suggests, is a process and much like a 12-step program in which the first step must be acceptance. Acceptance of a problem, or a condition or a weakness. One cannot be Deaf without accepting that they are Deaf as it would defy the process of being Deaf in the first place.
Naturally, many of you will be wondering about celebrating the fact a person is Deaf. That is called pride, and there is lots of evidence that Deaf pride exists in many deaf communities across the country. Even Paddy Ladd himself is rather proud of his achievements as a Deaf man. Still, Deaf pride is not necessarily Ladd’s definition of deafhood, either. Ladd coined the term and definition of deafhood as:
… it represents a process – the struggle by each Deaf child, Deaf family and Deaf adult …
So, it’s a process that nearly every supporter of the concept of deafhood advocates. The process of what? Watching closed-captioned movies on television? Is waking up to vibrating pillows deafhood? Graduating from a Deaf residential school illiterate is part of the process of being Deaf? When a Deaf man has sex with a Deaf prostitute, I have no doubt that the actual process would be called deafhood by supporters.
If there’s a common theme with today’s Deaf culture and deafhood supporters, it’s the prevalence of claims of oppression against Deaf people by the hearing world in general; even Ladd himself subscribes to these claims of oppression. What exactly is oppression, then?
Oppression, the negative outcome experienced by people targeted by the cruel exercise of power in a society or social group
If a hearing dentist fails to provide a Deaf person with an interpreter, then is that oppression? If a Deaf man stands silently in the back of a group of hearing people and nobody talks to him, then is that oppression? If a movie theater doesn’t have open-captioned movies during the daytime but does at night, then is a Deaf person who has to work during the evening oppressed? Of course not. In each instance, a plethora of alternatives and options exist for Deaf people, and if they fail to utilize the opportunities available to them, then that is not oppression but missed opportunities.
In generic terms, too many Deaf people have tried to identify their culture in relation to other, historically oppressed cultures, namely ethnic groups in the United States. Unfortunately, many seem to feel that the slightest inconvenience tossed their way is a sure sign of either audism or oppression in practice. Of course, there is no such thing as oppression of the Deaf by the hearing world.
To put things into a different perspective, let me paint you a different picture of what oppression really is:
For the Kurdish people, outrageous acts of oppression in Turkey, Iraq, Iran, Armenia, and Syria have included mass murder, suppression of language rights, exploitation of Kurdish resources with nothing but poverty given in return, deprivations of national citizenships, and the brutal suppression of political representation.
American Deaf take for granted the access and opportunities they have in this country. Most other developed countries around the world have few resources and even smaller Deaf communities, let alone civil rights that are enjoyed by Deaf Americans. A quick travel to Mexico reveals the fact that the national disability program there makes Goodwill seem like Harvard. And to say nothing of the cultural stigma that many Arab countries, such as Turkey for example, still maintain with regard to children born with disabilities, including hearing loss.
In order for oppression to exist, there would have to be an inability by Deaf people to overcome any perceived barriers to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness caused by the hearing world, regardless of intent or purpose. Deaf people would have to be caged like animals and unable to move freely anywhere at anytime.
But Deaf people in the United States (unlike the Kurds) are able to freely make their own choices. They are free to select the language they use; they are free to watch television or read books; they are free to find others like themselves and marry; they are free to decide where they live; they are free to attend any educational facility or institution in this country; they are free to vote; they are free to attend professional baseball games; and they are free to even break the laws of this country. Deaf people are not oppressed.
If there’s a pathology that afflicts many in the Deaf community, it is self-repression. In New Mexico, the state legislature recently passed a Memorial because Deaf people there are supposedly incapable of utilizing email, Deaf political groups, television, the Internet, newspapers or any other forms of communication to make intelligent political decisions. In short, they are self-repressed because they are too stupid, too dumb and too illiterate to form a coherent political decision without an interpreter or closed captioning provided.
And, to illustrate this point further with regard to self-repression, let’s take a quick sidestep and consider the impact that interpreters have on the Deaf community. Ladd himself complains about the interpreting community:
For one thing, interpreters should not have that power over sign communities …
Again, referring back to the NM Senate memorial, the interpreters there are blamed for the inability of Deaf people to participate in democratic processes, such as voting, for example. As Ladd’s comment demonstrates, the interpreter community plays a powerful role in the Deaf community and whether anyone likes it or not, where the interpreter community goes, so goes the Deaf community.
Interpreter issues have long been one of the mainstays for claims of oppression made by Deaf people, especially when interpreters were not provided. And another great white elephant of the Deaf community becomes apparent: Deaf people need interpreters about as much as a crack addict needs an 8-ball.
According to Ladd’s definition of deafhood, a person who subscribes to deafhood must also accept the fact that they are forever in the process of being dependent (addicted) to interpreters for basic communicational needs outside their own prison walls of Deafdom. The issue of the interpreters is one rarely discussed and so obvious that many Deaf people fail to account for the fact that interpreters play a large role in Deaf culture, and by extension, one’s purported deafhood.
If Deaf people were truly oppressed, then they would not have access to interpreters at all. The RID would not exist; the NAD would not be the entity that it is today; and Gallaudet would be a pipe dream wisped away in the imagination of young, Deaf idealists. Relay services for the Deaf would be deemed too expensive and an unfair tax upon the hearing world. VRS funding provided by the federal government would be considered pork and wasteful governmental spending; and well .. you get the idea.
So the Deaf community isn’t oppressed and Ladd’s definition of deafhood smacks of self-victimization in the name of spiritual celebration of being Deaf. If Black people, Ladd surmises, celebrate their struggles and language borne from centuries of slavery and oppression of every conceivable kind, then Deaf people are of the same genre, worthy of the same class of oppressed victims.
For Deaf people to lay claim that they are oppressed is sadly minimizing the true victims of oppression in the modern world, such as the Kurds. Painting self-victimization with the brush of a fancy word such as “deafhood” only adds to the self-repeated cycle of self-repression that too many in the Deaf community practice. A Deaf man who takes pride in being Deaf and calls anyone who disagrees with him a “hearie” is a man hell-bent on maintaining the cycle of self-repression – he is his own worst victimizer.
In turn, some Deaf people believe deafhood is akin to a gay man unwilling to disclose the fact that he is gay, and that deafhood means forcing a Deaf person to eventually realize and accept that they are indeed, Deaf. Again, alcoholics routinely attend classes designed to teach people the process of being an alcoholic, and the first step is acceptance of a problem or a condition or a weakness that has not been previously admitted or addressed.
Finally, the concept of “deafhood” is sad testimony to the affairs of the Deaf community and its obsession with self-victimization and self-repression. Ladd’s attempt at his 15-minutes of fame probably earned him a few pretty British pounds and American dollars, but his own self-defeating logic demonstrates what the concept of deafhood really is: the process of self-repression.
Paotie
Sphere: Related Content
Self crab theory.
Hmmm. You’re equating Deafness and gayness with alcoholism?
I think you’re mistaken there.
Alcoholism is a problem to be fixed. People who drink too much are generally unhappy and the drinking is a reflection of deeper problems. Fixing the alcoholism usually means finding and fixing the underlying problems.
An alcoholic is not a minority–they are someone who needs help.
Someone who’s Deaf or gay or left-handed or atheist or Kurdish is a minority. A minority is just your average person who has one or more attributes that makes then stand out from the “average” person. (Of course no single person is truly average, so an “average” person is a myth or statistic, not a real person.) These attributes that they have are not problems to be solved, but rather just a part of who they are.
My understanding of Deafhood is simply that it’s a process of accepting that you’re different. That’s all.
Deaf people are different, because they are a minority. So what? That doesn’t make them inferior, it just makes them different.
Deafhood–like a gay man coming out, or an insecure left handed person–is the process of accepting who you are and that you are different in some respects, and it’s OK to be different.
It is *nothing* like alcoholism.
Wow! I completely disagree with you.
Deafhood is not militancy. it is about speaking out for basic human rights and dignity of Deaf people.
Deafhood is nothing like alcoholics anonymous. We are not admitting we have a problem, a weakness or condition. That would be a medical view and the more accurate term for that might be “deafness,” not Deafhood.
Yes, Deafhood is a “process” and a journey to become whole, accepting, proud, and the best Deaf person one can be. You didn’t complete Ladd’s point. You left it hanging and then made some assumptions.
I wasn’t born Deaf. Nor did I attend a Deaf residential school. I became Deaf at age 17. But I completely understand the concept of Deafhood as a journey of self-appreciation and understanding. Of asserting my basic rights to equality, access and dignity.
I’m grateful for opportunities given to Deaf people in this day and age, but they are still not equal opportunities. I am not failing to miss opportunities. I am asking for equal access. For example, the church in my area might provide an interpreter on every 3rd Sunday. The church 50 miles away might get that same interpreter every 1st Sunday. Suppose I wanted to attend church every Sunday, but my church only offers me one opportunity a month to attend where I can access the information with an interpreter. Not fair. Not equal. Some people would call that oppression. While the quality of life has improved for Deaf people, we are still not always given fair treatment or equal access. This is what we stand up for and speak out about. It sounds like you’re saying we should shut up and be thankful for what we have. We are thankful because the efforts of those before us are beginning to pay off. People who have fought to gain equality and dignity of Deaf people have made a difference. But we will not be quiet. We still have a long way to go for equality.
By the way, the name is Paddy Ladd, not Paddy Lane. You wrote Lane several times throughout your post.
~ LaRonda
If Ladd’s approach is to be called a negative, self-repression mindset, then it stands to reason that there is a counterpart positive, self-affirming mindset. What would this look like? Is it entirely sunshine and roses?
The fact remains is that we are the product of our experiences. If we have experienced good teachers, great literature, social success and acceptance, then the fact of being Deaf is a positive thing. On the other hand, when we have experienced suppression, discrimination, exclusion and insensitivity, we become tougher and better able to handle adversity.
It is a balance of the positive and negative, like everyone else in life experiences.
Dianrez ..
The balance of life in both positive and negatives is called “life” or “experiences”, not deafhood. Hispanics do not summarize their positives and negative experiences as “Hispanichood.” Blacks do not summarize their experiences with “Blackhood.”
The opposite of deafhood would be Deaf-esteem, which quite a few lack these days. A lack of self-esteem is one reason why many Deaf people end up self-repressing themselves because they are either clueless or refuse to accommodate the larger world since they are Deaf.
Why stop with deafhood or Deaf-esteem? Why not continue finding more adjectives to describe the process of being Deaf? Shall we call Deaf teenagers Deafagers? Shall we call those Deaf elderly people, “Deaferiatics?”
Absurd. Deafhood is a joke and a pathetic attempt by too many to label their own self-repression somebody else’s problem, when in fact, it is their own problem.
Paotie
LaRonda ..
You said: Yes, Deafhood is a “process” and a journey to become whole, accepting, proud, and the best Deaf person one can be.
Of course, to become “whole,” one must be lacking something to begin with. If you were already “whole”, then why the need to make yourself “whole” again? Your logic defeats your premise.
And accepting of what or whom is needed? Again, this implies that a lack of acceptance has been offered by Deaf people, and perhaps this is one reason why they need to be made “whole” again, according to your comment. But the problem of acceptance is one of the reasons why the Deaf community continues to self-repress itself because it fails to accept the reality of the world we live in today in 2007.
And finally, are so many Deaf people “bad” people that they need a concept to raise their standards of expectations towards? Ladd, and you as well, seem to suggest that Deaf people already are bad people, incapable of amounting to any good or positives, perhaps since they are not yet made “whole” and need to be “fixed” to be made “whole” once again.
The absurdity of the logic behind deafhood and Deaf culture’s rejection of needing to be “fixed” or “cured” is obvious – probably so obvious that too many people miss it.
Thanks for demonstrating the validity of my article.
By the way, thank you for pointing out my Freudian slip between Ladd and Harlane Lane. It happens.
Paotie
Learning Deaf Ways ..
Your name suits you well.
Your comment: Deafhood–like a gay man coming out, or an insecure left handed person–is the process of accepting who you are and that you are different in some respects, and it’s OK to be different.
—
In essence, you are describing the very problem with Deaf culture: the lack of self-esteem. Insecure Deaf people are those who are ignorant, clueless or incapable of making positive decisions that facilitate their pursuit of happiness. Hell, ANY insecure person – deaf or not – will probably not feel comfortable in their own skin, anyway.
Obviously, the first step in deafhood is to accept who are you as a Deaf person. If you can’t accept the fact you are a Deaf person and are not secure about yourself, it will show in the decisions you make (or don’t). You are self-repressing yourself if you are not accepting of yourself (and others) and insecure about yourself.
This is called “low-self esteem.”
Not deafhood.
One last thing: see my comment to LaRonda about being made “whole” again. Alcoholics need to be made “whole” again. So do Deaf people, apparently.
Paotie
Like it is for every one else on the planet, LIFE is a CHOICE process. We can either be rich or make excuses for not being rich, but we can’t do both. We can either be empowered or make excuses for not being empowered, but we can’t do both. Paotie makes it clear we can either be free or make excuses for being oppressed, but we can’t do both.
Paotie, I can confirm that there is someone who already cracked the logic behind Deafhood as soon as it came out and proved Deafhood to be fundamentally inconsistent and erratic in his research. His paper stands currently unpublished and he is known by name, “A.J.”, I think.
It seems that there are a very very select few, most if not all of them academic intellectuals, who have already moved past Deafhood.
-Eyefang
It always frustrates me, and even angers me sometimes, when I see ignorant comments like these. There are so many things wrong with your entry, I don’t know where to begin, Paotie.
1. Students that attend Deaf schools (institutes, as you called them) often have better academic, social, and athletic skills than their counterparts in oral schools, mainstreamed programs, and self-contained classrooms. To lump them in a group of illiterates is insulting, in the least.
2. Every person has to come to terms with who she or he is. Even white people. Everyone must accept who they are, and embrace who they are, before they can truly be happy and succeed. Deafhood is no different. In America, even, Deaf people are often told or led to believe that they are not as intelligent, capable, or “pure” as white hearing folks. If we want to truly succeed and prove them wrong, we must first accept and embrace the fact that we are Deaf and embrace the fact that being Deaf has nothing to do with one’s abilities, intelligence, or capability.
3. Deaf people in America do have it better than Deaf people in many other countries, but we are STILL not treated equally. There are STILL doctors, lawyers, courts, hospitals, cops, businesses, and so forth, that refuse to provide the accomodation that we are legally entitled to. These same people would not dare refuse to build a ramp for someone in a wheelchair, but they will refuse to get an interpreter. This is one small example, but it’s prevalent enough to demonstrate my point.
I could say much more, but I think I’ve said enough….for now.
The process –or the journey — of Deafhood varies widely from individual to individual. The process (or journey) would be
either positive or negative. Pure and simple.
Jean -
The process of being HUMAN varies widely from individual to individual, regardless of the name you call it. Ladd’s definition includes oppression, which is a fallacy unto itself.
Deafhood is a marketing gimmick that preaches self-repression above all else.
Paotie
I have said that I agree with you, and again, I stand beside you. Well presented, well written.
Alan -
If illiterate Deaf children from Deaf schools did not exist, then you could refute my article. Sadly, it has been well-documented that illiterate Deaf children graduate from Deaf residential schools. Even Gallaudet has faced probation after illiterate graduate students were allowed to teach courses there. Illiteracy is a problem in the Deaf community.
Why are you in the business of telling Deaf people what they must or must not do? Why is it a requirement that Deaf people have to accept the fact they are Deaf? If a Deaf person rejects his definition of being Deaf based on Deaf culture, will you reject his choice in favor of advocating that he is still in the process of being entered into deafhood? You would be disrespecting people’s choices in life as to how they desire to see themselves.
As for your ramp analogy – it fails miserably. Ramps are a 1-time fixed cost (all things being equal), while interpreters are a variable cost that sometimes escalates in times of severe interpreter shortages, such as the one in New Mexico. That may be more of a reason why businesses (besides the fact many can’t afford expensive interpreters) fail to provide accommodations than your view that Deaf people are treated “unequally.”
If my article contained so many ignorant points, prove it.
Paotie
Hmmm… interesting post. I am reading (SLOWLY) Paddy’s book now. Mostly about history.
Of course, everyone is bound to have his/her own definition of what deafhood really means. As for me, it is more of “self-help/self-enpowerment”, but then I am more of a cynic, seeing the extremists who strike me as trying to control the middle ground. I know there is hearing world (after all, we live in the hearing world… that is fact, we all cannot argue with it. If one tries to argue with it, then he/she is a fool.) My deaf son is mainstreamed and is doing VERY well, functioning above his grade level. My daughter who is a student at ISD, I am keeping an eye on her to make sure that her academic needs are appropriately met. However, my daughter told me that deaf children think that hearing people hate them and I say it is not true, but I wonder if it is the reflection of their parents which leave lasting impression (felt as oppression on children who would then grow up with the imagination of how oppression should feel like…)
Food for thought. Yup, real world functions on visual means… racism, disability, sexes, etc.
*Shrugging* we all have to learn to live in the harsh world, learn to roll with the punches that life throws at us, etc.
Paotie ~
?
Hello?
Do you really think I buy your so called theory? We have oppression in every level that needs to be changed! We experience the oppression, regardless. Us having luxury? No, cuz hearies have luxury, and we are picking up their leftovers. Oppression is alive and around here. I do not agree with you!
you there? Perhaps in other world?
deafk
Wow. That’s all I gotta say….
I’d have to agree with your argument there: Why is it that we have Deafhood and no other minority have some sort of “hood” in association with their respective groups (blackhood, gayhood) is a very good question.
To compare Deafhood with Alcoholism wouldn’t be unjust come to think of it: medically alcoholism is a disease that needs to be fixed and medically, deafness is a disability that needs to be fixed. Point taken. However with that argument i’d like to shift away from medical definitions and go closer to linguistic minority. Alcoholism is self-imposed disease (Yes i know many people would disagree). One makes the decision to drink: hence, the reason why I call it “self-imposed.” Deafness is not.
To compare the two would be a bit unfair. That’s all.
You’ve powerful points in your argument against Deafhood. I’d have to sit down and reread your post and let it all soak in. I will have to agree with you with some points and disagree with others.
Der Sankt
deafk ..
You are sadly the epitome of a self-repressed individual, incapable of seeing beyond his own anger and to make yourself feel better, you toss “insults” towards people as if it somehow were to elevate you to a higher status (or better argument) than mine.
You proved my article correct with your comments. Thank you!
Paotie
Readers ..
In case anyone wants a more concise explanation of the problem of “deafhood”, read Mike McConnell’s comment at another blog.
He said:
“Deafhood” is not a proper noun. A noun, yes.
Ok. Then call it “personhood” since it’s about having qualities that confer distinct individuality for that person regardless where he/she is coming from or where he/she is going. Make it neutral. Otherwise we’ll have “paralytichood,” “blindhood,” “gayhood,” “amputeehood” “deaf/blindhood,” “stutterhood,” and so on with every PC label imaginable. All those labels imply “oppression” because barriers must be overcome on a daily basis. It gets ridiculous. Even though it sounds nice it is still a PC gimmick.
—–
Paotie
deafdk…
Yes. You DO have a luxury here in the states not afforded as much anywhere else.
We have the ever expanding internet technology, text paging, internet video relay, telephone relay operators, the constant improvements on text-to-speech or speech-to-text software, TTY, Instant Messaging, e-mail, video cell phone, cell phones with text messaging capability, Sorenson Video phone, web cams, hearing aid, cochlear implant, implantable hearing aid, smaller and faster computer chips, closed captioning, open captioning in movie theaters, software programs that have the ability to “translate” one foreign language into another, and even a software that is being developed that can detect sign language motions and convert the motions into readable texts. The United States has spoiled deaf and hard of hearing people with these increasingly deaf-friendly technologies and deaf services that would put the rest of the countries to shame when it comes down to helping their own deaf and hard of hearing citizens.
I’m just about to write a blog entry in response to your entry.
I think I’ve made some valid points.
I’m more than willing to open that pandora’s box, my friend, I ain’t afraid of doing just that.
Der Sankt
[...] came across a blog presented very good arguments against the concept of Deafhood and what it stands for. In the [...]
Ben ..
Do you really want to open the Pandora’s Box that is the definition of who is or is not to be part of the “lingual minority?”
Boy, things are gonna get reeeeal interesting if you do.
Paotie
it’s done. I’d love your two cents.
Der Sankt
An enlightening article. I agree with you, and support your article.
Ok. Let’s remove ASL and replace that with Cueing. We’d now have a community of deaf Cuers who communicate with each other visually. Identities are discovered and accepted! Call it….Deafhood! A new class of cultural ownership is born! Just like manhood, womanhood and such where people share and relate with such commonalities like oppression, their struggles, and the discrimination they face everyday.
Ben ..
You are a good writer and make logical arguments and I’m happy to see that your tone is respectful, so I shall reciprocate in kind.
Your comment:
“A person can realize that he/she is deaf; however, they do not have to accept it. The deaf person could easily get hearing aids or cochlear implants and train themselves to become “hearing” in the normal sense and actually be one. This transformation in itself is a process of Deafhood because it would never be possible at all if they were hearing.”
—
A homosexual man can easily deny to himself that he is homosexual and reject the idea of homosexuality. That is sometimes called latent homosexuality and has been argued as a precursor to homophobia. Strange that a certain gay Deaf man would equate a homosexual in denial as the same as deafhood. He said it, not me.
Secondly, you fall into the same trap as Ladd and other deafhood supporters: you end up using the medical model as the basis for your definition of deafhood. A deaf person who is oral may feel he is NOT deaf because he may view himself to be hard of hearing, which as we all know carries different significance among members of the Deaf community. You’re suggesting that deaf is deaf is deaf and that he is still deaf because he is engaged in the process of being a deaf person. Again, you cited the medical model as your basis for defining deafhood, which contradicts the purported cultural model of Deaf people: they reject the medical model of deafness.
So, you seem to be suggesting that deafhood is the process of DEAFNESS, not being Deaf.
Alcoholics: they choose to drink – even if they have a genetic predisposition to alcoholism. They, like the gay man in denial, refuse to believe they have any problem or issue in their lives relating to drinking – or they cannot stop drinking because they lack the ability and self-esteem to find constructive and positive changes.
And your comment regarding the “native” language of television being in English as opposed to in ASL is interesting. The simple answer to your comment is this: we live in a democracy and when people want to make changes, they can unite collectively to make a change. This is called the democratic process. It is not democratic to require a majority population of a country to provide separate but equal television programming in both English and ASL.
If you and other Deaf people are really interested in making positive political changes for the Deaf community as I do, then you might want to start learning about political consumerism. If there is a great enough demand for a service, for example, then the facilitating of the service becomes reality much sooner and with better quality, especially the longer the demand is sustained.
Suppose movie theaters were suddenly deluged with emails, calls and letters from all types of people with hearing loss, urging theaters to provide open-captioning or rear-window captioning in movie theaters. Chances are, the theaters will realize the market potential of providing such captioning services because EVERYONE will benefit.
But as it stands today, 15 people will email a local movie theater and ask for captioning, or at least more showings of captioned movies. Maybe the theater owner will be generous and offer an additional movie captioned, even if he risks losing money because less than 5 people show up for each captioned movie shown. Or maybe the owner will flat out refuse to provide additional showings with captioning because he can’t afford it (let’s not get into pettifoggeries about tax credits and breaks, and the common view that theaters all are rich, fat, greedy barons with nothing to lose and millions to burn like gas in a propane BBQ grill on on 4th of July weekend).
Making a law requiring the theater to provide captioning has been, for the most part, an abysmal failure. When governmental intervention takes place, the record is long and notorious for showing that the government ends up making things WORSE. Note the ADA needs serious overhauling. Note the backlash against No Child Left Behind Act.
The reality of the matter is that Padd’s and your definition of deafhood states that deafness and being Deaf are NOT mutually exclusive and this defies the rejection of the medical model of deafness found supposedly only in Deaf culture.
So, if you believe in deafhood, then by it’s own definition, you cannot possibly be Deaf because it rejects Deaf culture’s definition of who a Deaf person is (or isn’t.)
Really, if you think about it, if you embrace deafhood, then you must accept AGBell Foundation supporters. After all, a deaf person who is oral is still in the process of deafhood, like you.
Paotie
I wonder what Paddy would say about this, as well as Ella, GG, and DE…
But you made a point, especially in the last comment about the deaf oral person being in the process of deafhood, like other deaf people (ASL, SEE, etc…) and having to embrace AGBell Foundation supporters. True.
Also that people who are actively professing to be in the Deafhood CANNOT be rigid about who fits the picture of a Deaf person and who cannot be accepted into the deaf community.
Karen
Karen, what’s more. They state that ASL is a big part of Deafhood even though they say that Deafhood is about accepting everybody and anybody with a hearing loss. That’s great. If that’s the case, then ASL shouldn’t be the ONLY mode of communication as the end result of every deaf/hh person on their journey of self discovery and identity. It could be Cued speech. Or just plain oral/aural. After all, technology keeps changing the picture. It is conceivable that in 20 years will have a bunch of people with auditory neural implants that are totally implanted and self-sufficient (use body heat as a source of energy for example) and has the equivalent hearing reception and discrimination as that of a hearing person. We already have that implant that nearly mimics that right now. I see it as no different when blind people get their implants to help restore vision equally to that of seeing people. Or are they on the path to blindhood instead?
I challenged DE and everybody else last year in my blog that they take that Deafhood discussion to people with mild to moderate hearing loss and convince them that they are on a path of self discovery which will someday lead them to become that Deaf person, and will use ASL. Two different crowds here. You may convince for the most part the crowd with the most hearing loss than a crowd of people with much better hearing who function quite well with their hearing aids or even cochlear implants (even future implants or hearing aids with even better results).
It’s a political correctness gone amok. It’s more of a feel good application that surmises the end results where you become that brand new Deaf person! An easy 12 step program to total enlightenment.
Hey. I accept anybody with a hearing loss no matter how big or small. I am not about to tell them that they’re on their path to a Deafhood journey just to follow today’s status quo.
Yeah, I noticed that ASL has lately been manipulated to meet the expectations of deaf people deeply involved in the deaf community/culture. Even Rohem notices this, as a few people, like you and Paotie, notice it and try to show it to the deaf world, that ASL does not have to be the only way to enter the deaf culture.
Either be accepted and feel part of it or be rejected and be alone… we don’t like rejections, so we strive to be part of something… human nature.
Also, one of the biggest problem is their use of the big “D” in “Deafhood” when they say it doesn’t matter if a person is deaf or Deaf when it comes to Deafhood. You don’t see people say Motherhood with a capital “M.” “Brotherhood” with a “B” or “Fatherhood” with an “F.” Capital “D” in “Deaf” has always meant culturally deaf, which means it’s about ASL only. In my perspective and view, you can’t eat your cake and have it too if people try and use Deafhood with a capital “D” and then say it’s not about the little “d” or big “D”. And guess who invented the big “D” in “Deaf” in the first place? And now, they want to change it again?
Call it “deafhood” and perhaps people will be a bit more accepting of that concept.
I would accept the definition of deafhood if it included DEAFNESS as part of the process of deafhood. Maybe something like this to get the ball rolling:
–
deafhood – the unique experiences and processes of those with DEAFNESS experience as human beings.
–
Of course, the definition of culturally Deaf people remains to be reconciled with the above definition, since they reject the medical model of DEAFNESS.
Perhaps it’s time for the Deaf to recognize and appreciate the fact they are people with DEAFNESS, even if they choose a different form of communication. Additionally, the number of people who are learning ASL is not restricted only to Deaf babies in Deaf residential schools: increasingly, late-deafened and HOH people are learning ASL as a supplementary tool for communication. It is conceivable to argue that these people both accept ASL and may even be fluent in ASL, and reject the medical model of deafness on par with the culturally Deaf.
Are they now to be identified as culturally Deaf? In writing, it sounds reasonable, but reality dictates otherwise: as McConnell notes, the selectivity of who is or isn’t “culturally Deaf” implies class elitism. And by extension, class elitism begats what? Oppression AND self-repression.
Paotie
Witness this blog that states quite plainly:
We do need interpreters …
—
And, the blog discusses blatant disrespect and arrogance by interpreters exhibited against Deaf consumers and the corresponding requirement that interpreters “need” to respect Deaf/deaf people.
Who is the master?
Who is the servant?
Paotie
*rocks back and forth on his feet and whistles innocently*
Boy, it’s cold up here today! Snowed in the mountains, too!
How’s the weather out there in America?
*smiles sweetly*
Paotie
Indian summer here in Indiana… leaves finally starting to show colors.
)
Sounds beautiful. Soon, we’ll take a quick drive to see the last of the Aspens’ leaves turn from gold to red. Beautiful.
Mostly, I’m excited that it’s snowing in the mountains here in Colorado. Ski season already started.
I am just chomping at the bit to get snowboarding.
Paotie
Im posting this abbreviated article from my blogsite “Ella’s Flashlight” in hopes it helps clarify how Paddy Ladd’s Deafhood can be interpreted. Nancy Carroll and I wrote this interpretation early 2006. I believe once people read and study the book and this article carefully, we can finally move beyond arguing against the word “Deafhood” and create a vision that is healthy, pro-Deaf, pro-SignLanguage, anti-audism, anti-deafness….come join and work towards that vision!
——-
“Why another word for Deaf people? What’s wrong with the terms such as “deafness” , or “deaf and hard of hearing”? Deafhood is a term created by Dr. Paddy Ladd, a Deaf scholar in the Deaf Studies Department at the University of Bristol in England. Deafhood is found in Ladd’s book “Understanding Deaf Culture: In Search of Deafhood” (2003).
Deafhood is described as a journey that each Deaf person undertakes to discover their true identity and purpose here on the Earth as a Deaf person among other people. This journey is for anybody who is what George Veditz calls “first and foremost, people of the eye”. These people are visually oriented in dealing with the environment. They feel most at ease using a signed language rather than a spoken language. If you fit that description, you have begun the search for Deafhood. The degree of your hearing or speaking ability does not matter. Each person’s search for Deafhood occurs on all levels: physical, linguistic, mental and spiritual. And through that, it links each person to the amazing collective experience called the Deaf community and culture.
However, the search is not without obstacles. Those obstacles are Oralism and Audism that peaked in the early 1900’s with eugenicists such as Alexander Graham Bell, and weakened when Sign Language made a comeback in the 1960’s, 1970’s and 1980’s. Eugenics is the science of controlling the population by deleting certain characteristics that are considered negative through selective breeding, sterilization, and at its worse, genocide. Oralism and Audism have come back more ferocious and dangerous in the 2000’s with rampant mainstreaming, cochlear implants, and genetic engineering. Boudreault (2005 CAD Conference) categorizes those as “neo-eugenics” because when it comes to Deaf people, their ultimate goal is to eradicate the “deficit”, that “horrible isolating disability,” through technology and education. Oralism is the educational philosophy and practice that focuses on developing speech (and listening) skills and looks down on and accuses Sign Language of interfering with Deaf people’s focus on that training. Audism, a word that was first published in 1975 by Dr. Tom Humphries (a Deaf scholar currently working at University of California in San Diego), describes the behavior and/or attitude of an individual, professional, or institution that believes that being Hearing is superior to being Deaf.
….that term [“deaf and hard of hearing”] seems to split the Deaf community as we try to label us one way or other. It has fostered unhealthy competition based on the differences. A result has been that we accuse one other of rejecting the other. This was the true success of Oralism that Deaf people are divided from other Deaf people as they are “brainwashed” in believing one with better hearing or speech is superior. This caused resentments to arise. The true success of Deafhood is when Deaf people feel “at home” with being Deaf and finds a commonality with other Deaf people in their use of Sign Language and their visual orientation. When we are secure with our own natural language and community, we can be healthier, more creative and more embracing of the diversity surrounding us.
…. we desire to unify those of us who seek our Deafhood …. to fight neo-eugenics, the oppression of oralism and the arrogance of audism. We begin by celebrating the many gifts springing out of our community, history and language. We vow not to fight against other Deaf people, but to support each other in our journeys towards Deafhood, and to challenge the influences of Oralism and Audism in our lives. We will fight against the systemic audism prevalent among our schools, jobs, and families. We will also fight against financial interests and remove the masks of benevolence of the Hearing companies or professionals that “think they know all about … the Deaf, but know nothing about their thoughts and souls, their feelings, desires, and needs.”
We acknowledge there are people who do not see the need to search for their Deafhood. Some of those people are ones who discovered they are Deaf in their later years, and feel they have no use for Sign Language or a Deaf identity. We understand that their primary language is spoken and their culture is Hearing and naturally they may desire to restore their old identity and abilities. We know there are other organizations catering to those people and we do wish them the most happiness possible. However, we declare that those people are welcome to initiate their journeys into Deafhood. To begin the journey, we encourage those people learn and use our vibrant and exciting Sign Language, and open themselves up to the challenges and possible new joys and friends among other Deaf people. We will challenge and encourage them, but we will never manipulate nor control their bodies, their minds, their souls as the Audists and Oralists have done to Deaf people for years.”
Ella Mae ..
Long posting.
Ummm .. still, there are 2 basic flaws with your post.
First, as a Deaf person, you reject the medical model of deafness. Even your own rejection of oralism is based on the medical model as well. In short, you contradict the definition of deafhood by excluding others, namely those who are orally deaf.
Secondly, you are now telling people HOW to interpret Ladd’s definition. This is another rampant problem in Deaf culture: too many so-called experts are in the business of telling people HOW to think critically (i.e. interpret) regarding Ladd’s definition.
Sorry, you defy your own logic.
Additionally, you are now engaged in class elitism by rejecting oralism. So what if you think it’s an evil? Not every parent of a deaf child agrees with you, so why would you shame or condemn them? We live in America – people have the right to make their choices FREELY and without coercion. Your statement on HOW to interpret Ladd’s definition smacks of oppression.
You are validating my article! YAY!
*smiles innocently and flicks a piece of lint off his shoulder*
Paotie
Paoti
Coexistence with Open Minds as We Learn and Grow Together To Higher Consciousness of Our New-Found Existential Stances -
Your topic on Deafhood: Process or Self-Regression was something I am compelled to respond.
I read your responses as well as your comments in your blog about deafhood with great interests. What you just discussed is exactly what deafhood is all about. Maybe the appropriate title for your blog would be “Deafhood: Misunderstanding and Pains.”
Basically, deafhood is simply a beginning of our healthy and positive dialogue to explore further and learn together where no one has not gone before. It is a very exciting process and at the same time, it can be scary.
In the nutshell of deafhood as I understand (like I said, we are in the learning curve), a person with hearing loss recognizes that he or she is NOT a hearing person, and feel POSITIVE about themselves. It focuses on your existential stances, which are based on normality, collectivism, and recognition of the share belief and values. Again, this is about all of us being deaf with full support of everyone’s journey, besides the point on whether you are a big “D” or a small “d” to reach deafhood with intention to unite us all, not to divide us.
Please be mindful that deafhood is infancy stage where we have had and will continue to have more opportunities to discuss and learn more about our existential stances. Therefore, there will be many misunderstanding and pains to figure out what deafhood is. Unfortunately, due to the nature of our society, we tend to be in a big hurry and we are typically in assumption modes too often. We need to step back from time to time, evaluate and learn as we go and grow.
Your blog reminds me of an article by Thomas “Buzz” Thomas in the USA Today newspaper last Monday, discussing about whether or not the Constitution establishes America as a “Christian” nation. What I found Thomas’ article very intriguing, which is similar to your blog that is based on assumptions. I am equally guilty when I am clueless about Constitution and the intention behind it. I read over 60 comments in responding to Thomas’s article with great interests. Many comments included facts, great anecdotal, references and the historical information to responding to Thomas’s article. And yet, while many Americans felt strongly that America is a Christian country, it would require us to take a long hard winding journey via cycles in order to process of becoming the best American human being one can become. By doing so, we must continue to keep healthy dialogue open positively to understand each other on what America is all about.
It is also true when it applies critical thinking to raise our consciousness. Including myself, we need to keep our minds open and become “well-cultivated” critical thinking, not just critical thinking per se. It is so easy for us to read a book or two and make comments without really engaging meaningful conversation with people in person, discussing about deafhood. After all, non-verbal communications is always far superior to verbal communications when it comes to understand the “intention” of what person attempts to communicate with us, especially deafhood. In short, when we are in an environment where we engage into a social event, we learn a lot more about their “intention” by simply observing and interacting nonverbal communications.
In closing, I could not help but notice that you do not reveal your real name and your personal background. Is there significant reason why you are not doing this? Maybe this is why you have been responding to deafhood so strongly where we could learn more about who you really are and your intention to be part of the process of becoming the best deaf/hh human being you can become? Just a thought.
Be Well
Jack ..
I do not feel the need to offer personal information about me on the Internet for your review to validate whether or not you think I am worthy of discussing my perspectives. The only thing you need to know about me is that I am deaf. Enough said.
Figured someone would eventually describe the comments section as deafhood sooner or later. It just had to happen.
So, assuming we buy your argument regarding deafhood, then this means AGBell supporters must also be considered as part of deafhood. Shall we agree or disagree?
Your statement:
“After all, non-verbal communications is always far superior to verbal communications when it comes to understand the “intention” of what person attempts to communicate with us, especially deafhood.”
–
Ok, so where does that leave an oral deaf person? You are suggesting once again class elitism by claiming superiority of one language over another. You are actually proving my article correct.
If one were inclined, one would remind you that scholarly research indicates that SPOKEN and written language facilitates a greater and better ability for people to think critically and intelligently. So, you know, if you want to stake a claim that one language is superior over another, go for it, but it’s counterproductive as I hope you can see.
Clearly, you are advocating for deafhood to be aligned ONLY for those who sign because anything else other than ASL (or sign language), for example, is inferior.
My description of my life as a deaf person is simply that: my life as a deaf person. I also am of Hispanic heritage, but we do not succumb to labeling our experiences in class elitism by proclaiming that only certain Hispanics can celebrate our heritage or process of being Hispanic, which you are advocating for deafhood. There are millions of Hispanics who celebrate their heritage or process of being Hispanic and don’t even know 10 words in Spanish. Trust me on this – I’ve lived in the Southwest all my life.
Try this analogy: you are saying that it is acceptable for a black man to tell another black man that he is not “black enough” to be involved with “blackhood” because he doesn’t know enough ebonics. Boy, that’s called an “Uncle Tom” insult if I ever saw one.
Deafhood may be in it’s infancy, but it sure looks like it’s one hell of a deformed fetus kept alive by machines.
Try again.
Paotie
Paotie,
I’ve never been a fan of the deafhood movement. It struck me as unnecessary and superfluous. But it seems to have faded away- you don’t even see many blogs rambling about it anymore.
Regardless, do you think you could’ve impugned the concept of deafhood without resorting to insulting and stereotyping deaf people? There are good deaf people and bad deaf people, simple as that.
Ok Mr. J. Dawson. I can see there is no point for me to continue. Wish you well.
Jack
Xor ..
Well, while you’re sitting on your perch, try to remember that not everyone was on the blogosphere the last time deafhood made a fuss. Remember that simply because you don’t see it does not mean that other people are not writing about deafhood.
I can do whatever the hell I want on my web site. Thank you!
Paotie
Jack ..
Want a cookie to go with your “discovery?”
*applauds Jack*
Paotie
Hey Paotie,
On my perch?
Cute, considering I’m the one who actually socializes with deaf people on a regular basis, as opposed to deafread-surfing.
Yes, it’s your blog. I never said otherwise.
It’s just that if you demonize deaf people, you’re no better than those you rail against- the deaf people who demonize hearing people. If you’re fine with that fact, I’m cool with it.
Xor ..
You socialize with deaf people on a regular basis!?!
Yay!
*gives you a cookie*
I haven’t demonized anyone. Pointing out the flaw of a theorized concept is hardly akin to demonizing people.
*munches on a cookie*
Paotie
[...] Deafhood: A Process of Self-Repression [...]
Paotie–
1. There have been plenty of studies out there, including one of my own, that show students that graduate from schools for the Deaf have HIGHER English literacy skills than their counterparts that were mainstreamed or taught orally.
2. Deaf people from Deaf families almost always score higher on literacy tests than their counterparts with hearing parents–why? They had FULL access to a language when they were infants–which leads to future literacy.
3. Oralism was something that was IMPOSED (FORCED) onto the Deaf community by ignorant hearing people who did not bother to find out if it would work. These ignorant hearing people deemed Deaf people inferior in spite of the facts at the time, which showed that Deaf people were doing just fine–academically, work-wise, social-wise (I’m referring to Milan). Since 1880, oralism has proved to be a dismal failure. Of course we should fight oralism and for a return to our glory days–an age where bilingualism was used and successful.
4. I have not once ever seen anywhere that being stone Deaf was a requirement for Deafhood. Hard of hearing people (using the medical term) are just as welcome to start, continue, and/or become involved in the process of discovering Deafhood. Other minorities have gone through similar things–why not the Deaf community?
5. Deafhood can be capitalized as a proper noun because it refers to a minority group. Brotherhood, fatherhood, and motherhood are not minority groups, but a sense of unity or a sense of duty. These terms cannot be compared with Deafhood.
Alan ..
So, who exactly is Deaf? All people with deafness, including HOH people? The problem you and I have seems to be simply in understanding how to define WHOM should be labeled as “Deaf” and not “deaf” or HOH.
Your #4 point was a great one, except that again, the importance of Deaf vs deaf rears its ugly head again. Do you mean to suggest that ALL people with hearing loss can enter into deafhood? If so, I’m amenable to agreeing with you.
So, let’s define who is “Deaf” and who isn’t (“deaf” and HOH).
Thank you for responding in a civil, respectful manner – I really appreciate that, even if we disagree.
Onwards ..
Paotie
Ahh, perhaps a meeting of the minds here? Say, why do we need labels anyway? As my daughter so aptly says when people are referring to others with labels, “labels are for soup cans, not people.” Well, duh!
LOL.
Got a smart kiddo, you do, doc. In all the comments and blogs I’ve read over the past week, your comment probably summarizes it all best: labels are for soup cans, not people.
Well, duh!
Excellent!
Paotie
[CommentsEditor: Please do not insert entire URL's into the name field when entering a comment.]
[...] Awareness: Refuting MMDeaf Versus Deaf Refuting Carl Awareness Versus CultureThe Deafhood ReviewDeafhood:A Process Of Self RepressionThe Secret Order of Deaf [...]
[...] Of The Deafhood – An IntroductionWhat is Deafhood?Deafhood: A Process Of Self RepressionMany [...]
[...] Of The Deafhood – The EpiphanyTales Of The Deafhood – An IntroductionWhat is Deafhood?Deafhood: A Process Of Self RepressionMany [...]
[...] LesbiansTales Of The Deafhood – The EpiphanyTales Of The Deafhood – An IntroductionWhat is Deafhood?Deafhood: A Process Of Self RepressionMany [...]
[...] LesbiansTales Of The Deafhood – The EpiphanyTales Of The Deafhood – An IntroductionWhat is Deafhood?Deafhood: A Process Of Self RepressionMany TribesMedia Watch: Hearing People Still Don’t Get It! Part Two“Stop Eugenics!” = [...]
[...] Of The Deafhood – An IntroductionMore Thoughts on the Deaf BlogosphereWhat is Deafhood?Deafhood: A Process Of Self RepressionMany TribesIn One’s Own Image: Ethics and the Reproduction of DeafnessEthnicity, Ethics, and [...]
[...] Of The Deafhood – An IntroductionMore Thoughts on the Deaf BlogosphereWhat is Deafhood?Deafhood: A Process Of Self RepressionMany TribesIn One’s Own Image: Ethics and the Reproduction of DeafnessEthnicity, Ethics, and [...]
[...] Of The Deafhood – An IntroductionMore Thoughts on the Deaf BlogosphereWhat is Deafhood?Deafhood: A Process Of Self RepressionMany TribesIn One’s Own Image: Ethics and the Reproduction of DeafnessEthnicity, Ethics, and [...]
[...] Tales Of The Deafhood – An Introduction More Thoughts on the Deaf Blogosphere What is Deafhood? Deafhood: A Process Of Self Repression Many Tribes In One’s Own Image: Ethics and the Reproduction of Deafness Ethnicity, Ethics, [...]
[...] Of The Deafhood – An IntroductionMore Thoughts on the Deaf BlogosphereWhat is Deafhood?Deafhood: A Process Of Self RepressionMany TribesIn One’s Own Image: Ethics and the Reproduction of DeafnessEthnicity, Ethics, and [...]
[...] then, there are people who buy a book, interpret the book, the author and his beard, and then declare that they are the end-all-be-all expert of Deaf Expert La-La Land. In fact, more [...]