Thursday, October 18, 2007

Diverse Thoughts: Who Belongs in your Inner Circle?



Lately I've been reading a lot of interesting blogs and thinking about the terms d-deaf and D-deaf. Chris Heuer generated a great discussion when he asked if oral deaf were developing their own culture. Since I'm neither oral deaf or culturally deaf, I didn't have an opinion on this specifically, but followed the debate-- which eventually morphed into the question of who is part of Deaf culture. I should clarify--yes I'm oral-- but I didn't grow up deaf so I consider myself LATE-deafened. My "culture" is White Anglo-Saxon Protestant American. YUP. I'm a WASP.



I could never claim to be "culturally" deaf, and I'm not sure I'd want to be. Frankly, after weeks of reading all kinds of Deaf blogs and trying to understand Deaf logic I have to admit I'm still perplexed. Many Deaf bloggers are exceedingly bright, logical and articulate. It's the concept of excluding anyone who doesn't fit certain rigid qualifications of the "Deaf" deafinition that throws me. The Deaf define deafness differently than Webster’s dictionary: "Deafness: Deafness is defined by partial or complete hearing loss. Levels of hearing impairment vary from a mild but important loss of sensitivity to a total loss of hearing."



OK-- In fairness, Webster’s is an English dictionary. The validity of a separate Deaf definition could be argued. ASL IS a separate language, after all. According to Deaf culture I have deafness and I'm a part of deaf community, but I'm not Deaf, I'm only. . . deaf. What I question is the elitism expressed by some. Though, I get the feeling it's only a minority of Deaf who promote elitism. The majority seem open to including others/any deaf person fluent in ASL.


I've asked those in the minority--I’ll call them the “excluders“-- how the Deaf benefit from excluding others, and I was told by one my question offended her because I was somehow disrespecting/invalidating Deaf culture since I would never ask the same question of a Korean or French person. This is not true. I WOULD ask if we were discussing Korean or French policies of exclusion. I had prefaced my question with examples of the benefits of diversity within America. I was simply trying to understand something that didn‘t make any sense.



Historically, when a small group of people have fought for independence, rights, or whatever, most have traditionally adopted the motto, "United we stand, divided we fall." -- It's from Aesop. During the American Revolution, we were made of 13 separate colonies who fought amongst each other, then realized the only way to win our independence against the greatest power on earth would be to pull together. One reason the American Indians failed against the white man was because they could not unite, and we used this weakness against them by constantly spreading rumors to keep them suspicious of each other. The one time they did unite they were a powerful scary force. It's an old trick-- divide and conquer. Do I see through hearing eyes or American eyes?



One offended "excluder" used a whole lot of armchair psychology on me. Here’s a nice little quote (yes--I‘m being sarcastic): “I think that (your comment) stems from the feeling that Deaf culture is somehow unimportant and expendable, just as ASL is somehow not "appropriate" for deaf babies (but fine for hearing babies, for example).”



Just for the record--I believe ALL deaf babies should learn ASL. However, it isn’t for me to tell others what to do or to judge them when they don’t do what I think they should. I am late-deafened. I’m learning ASL. If I had a deaf child, which I don’t, I would want that child to learn ASL. Also, if I had a deaf child I would love him/her equally, just as I hope you all would love a hearing child. It makes me gag when I hear deaf people saying they want a deaf child. Of course I understand you want a child like yourself, but it's sort of the same thing as a hearing person saying she would be disappointed if her child were deaf-- reverse discrimination. If you don't like hearing people saying this about their deaf children, you shouldn't say this about your own hearing children. When I was pregnant all three times I only said I hoped my children were healthy and that I would love whatever God gave me. I have encouraged my hearing children to learn ASL. I do not judge others for following a different path, but please love ALL your kids for who they are.



I have mentioned that America values diversity. Admittedly we need to work on it. There are some unpopular exclusive groups. KKK for example. We've had a lot of racial incidents lately. . . On a personal level I despise all forms of exclusion. I have gay friends, Buddhist friends, black and Asian friends. I grew up saying the Pledge of Allegiance with the phrase,. . ."and liberty and justice for all" and I took it to heart. I assume American deaf children say the same Pledge. I believe America has benefited tremendously from black culture, Latino culture, Asian and Jewish cultures just to name a few, and yes, even gays and gay culture. We are, in fact, the greatest country in the world because some of the most talented people come here to live, and we welcome them with open arms. This is our American way. I give one obvious and very convincing example--Albert Einstein. I could list thousands.



Further I feel compelled to point out that some of America’s most celebrated Deaf heroes don’t fit the prototypical Deaf culture ideal because they were oral. Just to name a few--Edmund Booth, Regina Olsen Hughes, Donald L. Ballantyne, Robert Weitbrect, Erastus Smith and many, many more. Those of you who would exclude oral Deaf from your inner circle, how do you teach your children about these Deaf heroes? Are they completely ignored?



Judging from blog input lately, the entire Deaf community seemed deeply disturbed by the racial incident at MDDS this past month. The response actually surprised me--mainly because this sort of thing happens in hearing schools all the time. I believe the only reason it made the national news at all was because of the “twist” involving deaf students. It wasn’t even a particularly violent attack. The kid was drawn on for heaven‘s sake. Kids get beaten up and stabbed for being the wrong color at hearing schools all the time. If this had happened at a private hearing school? (***yaaaawwwwnnn***). Not that it should be overlooked, but things like this happen so often that unless someone nearly died, it would be overlooked.


The fact that the Deaf blogged about it for a full ten days or so opened my eyes to the true colors and feelings about the community of Deaf bloggers. They care intensely about diversity, racism and inclusion. I conclude exclusion is NOT a Deaf value held by most.



Finally, I'm taken aback by those who reject the medical model of deafness. I was surprised by the blog about cell phone etiquette during Deaf events and how many readers admitted being able to use a cell phone in noisy environments. The thing is, most late-deafened and oral deaf people I know have a lot of trouble using cell phones-- IF they use phones at all. I almost never see anyone using them at late-deafened events. Admittedly some can use cell phones in quiet places with awkward accommodations attached, NEVER in public. It's super rare. We're DEAF! Does it seem a little strange to anyone that my oral-deaf friend Kate who uses a TTY, Sidekick for texting only, and video phone for all phone communication would be labeled only hard-of-hearing since her primary mode of communication is oral? She does know ASL, but her husband and children are hearing, and she was mainstreamed as a kid. Not her fault!



I think Paotie summed it up best when he said that (rejecting the medical model of deafness) was like one black person telling another he's MORE black. But hey-- that does happen! Blacks do get down on each other for acting too white sometimes. I’ll give you one guess who’s more successful in life-- the black guy who talks in “Ebonics” or the one who uses proper English?



Personally--I see us all on a continuum with hearing people being at one end and deaf non-oral at the other. The rest of us fall in-between somewhere. We either speak or we don't depending on where we fall on the continuum and when we fell there. Some of us use ASL, some don't. We're all deaf to some degree. None of us is better than anyone else. We all deserve compassion and respect. You’ve all given me smiles, even those of you I disagree with.



Please keep blogging because I‘m captivated.

20 comments:

Anonymous said...

I agree with alot of what you said Kim. Like you i was perplexed when i found out that there was a perception within deaf culture of some who had a different definition of what it means to be deaf. The way i see it, they are only cheapening themselves by excluding others who don't fit their definition.

Going by some within deaf cultures definition i would be considered oral deaf. You know what i say to that? So what? I have always considered myself deaf. Not 100% deaf but i have always saw myself that way. That didn't change simply because of someone else's idea of what i should be. Deaf is deaf, black is black, white is white, etc...


Dennis

Anonymous said...

Hmm, can you explain further why are you "taken aback by those who reject the medical model of deafness"?

Can you explain (without referring to any sources via internet or anywhere else) what does the "medical model of deafness" mean to you?

I'm curious.

Thanks-

Kim said...

Brenster--I'm not sure why you don't want me to refer to internet sources. Are you asking for personal examples of what a "medical model" would look like?

I fit the medical model. I wear hearing aids and at my last hearing exam I had a speech discrimination of 12% on my right side and 0/7% on my left with hearing aids. By medical standards I'm profoundly deaf. My tones are not as bad as some. I'm at 100 dbs between 1500 and 6000 hertz. In the low tones, I actually have one normal frequency and some moderate to severe. It's a steep ski-slope deafness pattern.

I used to have better speech discrimination, then suddenly it changed this past year after I had sinus surgery. I guess that happens sometimes.

I fully realize I do NOT fit in deaf culture because I'm late-deafened. I'm OK with that REALLY :-). But you asked for one example of a medical model with my referring to an internet source. I think I fit, but I'm late-deafened. I have a friend who was born with almost the same deafness as me and she was mainstreamed in school. She's deaf-oral. She knows ASL, but she's not part of Deaf Culture. I think she fits the "medical model" too. What are your thoughts?

Kim

Anonymous said...

Kim,

As far as I'm concerned, you're part of us. You're right - it's only a small group practicing exclusion, and I'm tired of others blaming all of us for the actions of a few. *smile*

We are all in this together, and skill in signing, graduating from a deaf school, or being born deaf is NOT a prerequisite for being culturally deaf.

What IS a prerequisite is the right attitude; namely, that to be deaf is okay and to have a positive attitude about sign language (regardless of your own fluency) and about the deaf community in general, even if you don't embrace every single thing about the community.

It seems like you have that attitude, and that's great. Most of us would welcome you, and others like yourself, with open arms.

moi (randomthoughtsnmusings.blogspot.com)

Anonymous said...

KW- Thanks for your response :-) I typed a response, but I realized that this topic is way too intense and complex to give a brief response. So, I stopped typing.

Here, I will try to give a brief response related to why "those who reject the medical model of deafness."

From what I understand, the "medical model" views deafness as a "problem" that must be fixed. One source from the Wikipedia's website, it states: "The medical model sees deafness as an undesirable condition to be treated."
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Models_of_deafness).

We reject this notion of our deafness as "an undesirable condition." We acknowledge that we are "DEAF" and embrace silence. We don't deny that we are deaf; we reject being viewed as being inferior to people who speak. We reject the belief by medical professionals that unless we reject the use of sign language, and try to speak, we would never have fulfilling lives.

Other thoughts will have to be continued at another time :-)

Thanks-

Kim said...

Moi--Thanks so much!! :-) So far I've had really positive experiences with all the Deaf people I've met in person. I know many late-deafened who shy away from even trying to learn ASL for fear of being rejected by Deaf militants. It's a shame because I feel that's way overblown. We get rejected by hearing people too. There are rude people in every group. :-)

Stephen J. Hardy said...

When you open that Deaf door and suddenly you are transposed into the Deaf world also audiograms are not required. Adventure awaits and yes you will see wonderful and terrible people on the path. If the roller-coaster ride is too much and get off and find other rides. There are so many to choose from.

Karen Mayes said...

You pretty summed up how I felt about the d/Deaf culture. Yup, sometimes I feel that the perspective of ASL is sometimes overblown, since the majority of us use different communication modes (right or wrong) to help us succeed in our walks of lives.

*Shrugging* If some people feel strongly, good for them. We need them to keep a balance in our deaf community, even if we don't always agree with them ;o).

Anonymous said...

Click here for Candace McCullough and Sharon Duchesneau's article According to them, Deaf is an inclusive term: They said, "Far from viewing “Deaf” as a way of excluding people, we see the term as an inclusive one. To us, “Deaf” refers to any people who happen to be Deaf. It has nothing to do with having Deaf or hearing parents, or using ASL, SEE, spoken English, cued speech, or any other communication modality. Neither does it matter if one was mainstreamed, educated at a Deaf school, or homeschooled. Degree of hearing loss, being Deaf from birth or being late-Deafened, using a hearing aid or a cochlear implant - none of these, in our minds, precludes anyone from being Deaf."

I think they have a point and I agree with them. They will consider you to be a Deaf person. You are a member of the Deaf community.

Anonymous said...

Your perspective on the MSSD incident is refreshing-- I never quite thought about it that way. I'd love to know more about your thoughts as you learn more about our community. Keep on blogging.

Kim said...

Hi Brenster,
Thanks for sending defining further. I really want to discuss this more. At this point I don't believe we have a cure for deafness. Even with cochlear implants people are still deaf in my opinion, because the CI malfunctions, needs batteries, and comes off at night, in the shower, when swimming, water skiing, kayaking, etc, etc. As far as I'm concerned it's just another aid--albeit a much more complex one that. Also-- it doesn't give the user a perfect correction when wearing it, though it works better than hearing aids for those who have profound deafness. For this reason I think people who use cochlear implants have not been "fixed". They are still deaf and could still benefit from using ASL. Everyone in the late-deafened community knows this. I personally know at least ten people with CI's and I see how they function. The media promotes the CI as a "cure" but it's not. This is why your speech discrimination scores have to be less than 50% with aids before they even think of implanting-- because the truth is the risk of failure is so high, that unless you are quite deaf the risk to hearing does not outweigh the benefit.

For those who are frightened of meningitis and call it unnecessary, I would point out that circumcision on baby boys is also an unnecessary medical procedure and babies have died from that too.

I do respect your belief that deafness doesn't need to be "corrected" though. It can't be anyway.

Kim said...

Hi Brenster--I have more to say about your wikipedia article. I feel my response was inadequate, but I'm at work. I see an overlap between needing aids for social function within hearing world when someone is late deafened. Still-- I strongly feel ALL deaf people benefit from learning ASL whether late-deafened or they get a CI as babies. I think Jane Fernandes was way out of line suggesting implanted children don't need to learn ASL, but I haven't read her exact statement yet, only read blog headlines.

Kim said...

Hi Stephen--I understand what you mean :-) I used to cry every time I lost hearing, until my audiologist told me it was getting to the point he couldn't help me anymore. Then I realized I was deaf and could get on with my life. The worst part about it is social isolation, which I realized wouldn't be as much of a problem if I knew ASL. I'm actually kinda mad HLAA puts so much emphasis on dependency on technology instead of learning ASL-- (thought to be fair the chapter in my area did offer basic ASL last spring--this is rare for HLAA). The first time I had a conversation in ASL in a noisy restaurant without my hearing aids-- WOW!!! :-) Kim

Anonymous said...

A 'comment to your comment' about people with CI's. I have to disagree with your comment that the risk of failure is too high to risk the hearing, unless your comprehension scores are very low. I admit that I used to believe this, though, before my own CI surgery. To the point where I panicked, and nearly cancelled it, because I was so afraid to lose the tiny bit of unuseable hearing that I had left. It didn't benefit me in any way. I couldn't even hear thunder. Hearing 'again' is often important to the late deafened. If it wasn't all this technology wouldn't exist. Of course it isn't important to the Deaf, and that is understandable. With the CI, I hear 'again', albeit through a different pathway than before. The hearing, such as it was, that I lost with the CI surgery, was useless to me, anyway. There was nothing to lose, only gain. This is an interesting topic and I'm glad to see you're getting responses from the Deaf community.

Kim said...

Hi Karen-I was hoping you'd pop in. :-) I've been reading your level-headed comments in other blogs. I don't think there's a right or wrong way to communicate or handle one's deafness. We all have to do whatever works for us. None of us have been walked in each other's shoes. There are so many variables in deafness and how family's deal with it, how they support it or don't support that can impact us in powerful ways. We need to be gentle with each other. . .

Matt-- Thanks so much for sending the article by Candace McCullough and Sharon Duchesneau. I think they made a compelling argument for uniting the Deaf under one name. I have been thinking about this a long time. I feel the term Hard-of-hearing is misleading. The hearing public is so confused about deafness. Maybe it's because we have too many labels with unclear definitions.

Kim said...

Hi Linda,
Yeah, yeah. ;-) We've been goin' around and around about that, because you know how I feel about my low tones and my drum. I am NOT having anyone messing with my cochleas if they have to take out my lows. I just heard from them yesterday and they moved my appointment back another week so I don't see Dr. Rubenstein until Nov. 13th now.

It's good to see you in here.

I leave for Mexico in the wee hours Tues morning. . .

Anonymous said...

Please, upload the "question mark" image to your own server, because is affecting my bandwitch.


Thanks!


ARTEgami.com

Anonymous said...

Please upload the "question mark" image to your own server.

Because is affecting my bandwitch

thanks

Kim said...

Hi Artegami-- Sorry about the question mark. this is the first conmplaint I've had. I'm just going to delete it. The picture isn't that important to me. Hope that helps? :) Thanks for letting me know there was a problem. I'm sure you weren't the only one. You were the simply the only one who spoke up.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for your comprehension :)