All The Young Dudes

MEDIA WATCH: DeafSide [Much Ado About Nothing!]

I still fail to see what some people are objecting to about DeafSide. The latest post, Segregation and the deaf blogging community, by Dyniece, trawls the assumption that DeafSide is an exercise in discrimination.

I hate to break it to you, but DeafSide is an aggregator that aggregates a specific group of blogs/ bloggers. What is so wrong about that? Why is it that everytime Deafies establish some space, we have to work to make it inclusive of deafies of all persuasions? Why is it that we are obliged to become paragons of virtue? Why can’t we be human beings with diverse [and divergent] needs?

Now, I do understand the issues that Dyniece raises in her post Segregation and the deaf blogging community, but DeafReads move has nowt to do with oppression, discrimination in the sense that people are being barred form blogging or expressing themselves online. You will still have DeafRead, you can even go and establish your own aggregator. That’s the beauty of the internet.

And yes, I for one want to see a Deaf Culture aggregator - there will be problems with DeafSide, I can see that - but doesn’t mean the other voices will be silenced. You can still read, you can still feedback/ comment. It’s just that the aggregator will be presenting a specific set of blogs.

Embracing diversity does not mean, you have be inclusive all the bloody time. Embracing diversity also means, allowing people to go off and do their thing, without having to always want to be a part of it. Or feel threatened when somebody else does something for reasons not agreeable to you.

To insinuate that this is some sort of slippery slope, is ridiculous:

I believe this is a slippery slope - what’s next? An aggregator for those with
CI’s only? Maybe one just for adults and one just for children? An aggregator
for those who use cued speech? One for those who are parents of CI-implanted
children, and one for those who only lipread? Where does it stop? As one
commenter named Nesmuth responding to the post about this upcoming change said,
“This paves the way to the balkanization of the deaf community.”

So by that argument, what do we say about aggregators that feed blogs by women, IT/ Tech sites, Gay and Lesbian blogs, African American Blogs, aggregators by nationality, et al. Are they the slippery slope to the fragmentation of humanity? The fact that people post to the web in different languages, does this lead to the balkanization of humanity too? What about the fact that we all blog individually, instead of contributing to a common blog, mean we are discriminating? No, I wouldn’t think not. We commonly think of that as a wonderful expression of diversity.

I seriously think people need to get a grip on themselves when they discuss deaf issues. DeafSide is no the end of civilisation as we know it!

Reading To Pass The Time Away:

ASL-only issue
Giving in to ASL-Only Demands Is Not The Answer
DeafSide: What A Great Idea!

Sphere: Related Content

MEDIA WATCH: DeafRead New Offshoot, DeafSide

New ventures in the Deaf sphere, online or elsewhere, are always exciting developments to watch. Especially those initiated by Deaf people themselves. Because, they represent a progression in Deaf Culture and Deaf people, rarely matched by the self serving organisations that purport to serve Deaf people.

Done well, initiatives by Deaf people, go along way to vindicating our belief in ourselves, our culture and community. Done half-heartedly, they are guaranteed to lose interest, and make it harder for the next venture to gain any traction, let alone interest.

DeafSide, DeafRead new offshoot, garners mixed feelings. A Deaf specific aggregator that is devoid of hum-hallelujahs to the CI, AVT and The Oral Method, would be a welcome sight indeed. I don’t need yet another site devoted to solving tinnitus, where to get the latest frequencies, how to live with sound, or yet another meaningless debate about how the CI is changing deaf lives for the better.

The name DeafSide, I quite like. When I read the name I immediately thought of WestSide story, and to my mind, is synonymous with rebellion and independence. Of course, if you believe assinine [the correct spelling is asinine, but this spelling is better as it emphasises the ass in ignoramass] comments such as this, The New Divided Deaf.read, that contribute nothing whatsoever to the development of Deaf Culture, Deaf Community, Deaf space, and is ignorant as to how the internet and cyberspace works, then summat like DeafSide is taking a step backwards.

The problem with DeafSide, is not in the setting up of an aggregator to cater for Deaf Culture, but that there are problems with DeafRead that need to be resolved.

The numerous side projects by the team behind DeafRead, detract rather than address these issues. Two of the most important ones being, internationalisation and the editorial policy. Without reiterating what G.O.D. has written, resolution of these two issues would go a long way in enhancing DeafRead’s status as a purveyor of quality reading. While quality control is a good thing, the current editorial policy AND editorial skills need upgrading.

Contrary to naysayers and doomsayers, DeafSide does not represent a dangerous slide into division and secularism. Besides Jamie, there are already specialised aggregators out there. Think of Gay and Lesbian, Technology, Arts, Business, et al., all catering for a specific market. Furthermore, we already know that the internet and cyberspace are big enough to cater for various groups and interests, so really, what is this issue with division?

But some of the comments do point to another problem that DeafRead team have. How do you define Deaf! How are you going to define the criteria of eligibility to join DeafSide. Are they going to dictate what or what can’t be written? The same sort of questions that have been raised by DeafRead, but not dealt with.

If the editorial policy as it currently stands, is implemented at DeafSide, it will only exacerbate the problems and not resolve them.

As for MM, if you really begrudge us our own space that much, then go live in Coventry!

Reading To Pass The Time Away:

ASL-only issue
Giving in to ASL-Only Demands Is Not The Answer
DeafSide: What A Great Idea!

Sphere: Related Content

PRESS RELEASE: The Oral Tour Starring The Implantees

Oral Productions are proud to announce the forthcoming tour by The Implantee’s.

Famous for their recitals, Speaking in D Minor, Mozart’s Moonlight Speech, and Listening To The Birds Singing, they are about to embark on a world tour where they will demonstrate their oral and aural prowess, by reciting the alphabet and selected words from the Oxford Unabridged Dictionary.

They will be backed by the Washing Machines, famous for their recording, “Wobble, Wobble, Rmmmmmmmm!”

Supporting The Implantee’s with be the AVT’s, formerly known as Cover My Mouth While I talk. British celebrity Mary Madrow, was originally signed up as support act, but pulled out due to concerns of access. She expressed concerns that the access would be inaccessible.

But the word on the ground says she pulled out due to concerns about mixing with foreigners.

The Implantee’s caused much controversy when they chose to recite the alphabet in English. The are currently in the recording studios laying down the vocals for the Chinese translation of the Tibetan National Anthem, to be unveiled at the Opening Ceremony of the 2008 Olympic Games, in Beijing.

Cynthia Cyborg, the group’s leader, said that, “They are looking forward to this tour, and hope to bring the joy of listening to the people.” The performances will be interactive. Each concert goer will be given a dictionary at the door, which they will use during the concert to call out words they want The Implantee’s to recite. Concert goers will be encouraged to use their hands to cover their mouths while they speak.

“This”, Cynthia stated, taking a potshot at the Deaf Community, “Goes to show that we are not adverse to using our hands, as they make out we are!”

The tour will begin with a performance at the Opening Ceremony of the 2008 Olympic Games, in Beijing. For which they composed a special alphabet, called “2000 Letters And I Don’t Have Much Time!”

Sphere: Related Content

MEDIA WATCH: Sweet Nothings In My Ear: Critiquing The Reviews

Unlike you lucky Northern Hemispherians or Hemispherans. [I'm an oral success, I can make up new English words. Respect me please!], I have not seen the movie SWEET NOTHINGS IN MY EAR. Nor am I concerned with the depiction of of deafness and the CI in TV and Film. Though, Allison Kaftan in her piece, “Sweet Nothing” Portrays Ongoing Struggle for Recognition, tells me all I need to know, so please forgive me, if I don’t appear to be excited at the prospect of a yet another DEAF movie, that doesn’t break new ground [I'll eat my words if when I watch it, I am proven wrong].

Movies, indeed, mainstream culture [read: Western Culture], is one long continuous expression of heterosexuality, and a particular view of heterosexuality too [an analysis, I have no desire go into]. Everything else is incidental to this great expression, of boy meets girls and the trials and tribulations that the boy goes through, just to get laid. Bolstered by that great pearl of wisdom: “God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve.”[ but if he did, we woulda seen more parties in Eden!]

And so it is with SWEET NOTHINGS IN MY EAR. I’m sure I will see it, one day, someday, sometime, soon, but in the meantime there are more pressing matters at hand. Such as the various responses about the movie, rather than the movie itself. Like hearing people parading their ignorance about a subject that they think they can logically derive a conclusion by, logical deduction.

Even though they may appear to be knowledgeable, a person’s response can betray their prejudices in a number of ways, which a careful arrangement of words cannot disguise. More than being about the topic that has been written about, and they become platform upon which to pontificate the relative merits of Deafness vs hearing, and the best frigging communication methods. Lines drawn in partisanship, from which one refuses to budge, and expressing patronising condescension about this interesting viewpoint and that interesting viewpoint, from which no one emerges any wiser. One can only shake their heads at the missed opportunity for [you insert "the lost opportunity here"].

Which brings me to the one review that ****ed off. Supposedly a balanced critique, Political Correctness on TV Sometimes Goes Too Far: Is it Really Better to Be Deaf?, by Michael Russnow. The problems with the piece can be summarised by the following quotes lifted from Michael’s review:

• I was baffled by the struggle, which struck me as a no-brainer. True, I can hear, but I don’t feel I am prejudiced when I say that it is not better to be deaf as some of the characters in this film appear to say
• That said, and although there was an attempt to balance the two sides, I cannot for the life of me see how any reasoned person would not want to improve, dare I say fix, a young boy’s life………………….there is no way that anyone will convince me that the absence of sound will better that person’s life.
• They might also be smart and talented and should be able to thrive in spite of their handicap.
• ….and to deny the possibilities of a fuller, yes fuller, life to utilize all of our senses is extraordinary.
• This is all well and good, but it’s delusional to dismiss the fact that hearing would probably be better.

I am abstaining from a full on analysis, as it would be pointless. Those would would benefit most from this analysis, are blind to it, and those who do “listen” refuse to budge from their time honoured opinions.

Still, the values inherent in hearing culture, and perfectly illustrated by the above series of quotes, are ignored in many debates about deafness vs hearing. To quote Richard Eckert, from the Deaf Academics email list:

[The] idea that differences or causes inequalities conveniently allows the majority to navigate around having the courage to become enlightened. Worse still, the dominant majority passes off inequalities as “natural”. This too has been a part of racism and sexism. Is there really any reason to assume that it would not also underpin audism?What can be seen in Michael Russnow’s question is a reflection of errors in the logic of causal order with auditory/oral differences being identified as the cause of inequalities, that Russnow’s question constructs those differences, and that his statements reproduce inequalities by making the inequalities appear to be “natural” and not social constructed to start with.

This is the problem with Michael’s position as a hearing person, the positions of hearing people and the many deaf advocates of education via the oral method [it sounds dirty doesn't it?], and assistive technologies such as the CI. The fact that they are built on cultural assumptions and value judgments, is lost on him, and them. If he is aware of these, then there is no real attempt to address these issues, which underpin these beliefs. On one blog that I frequently read, there is no attempt whatsoever to actually engage in these questions.

And John Walker, also from the Deaf Academics email list, adds:

Disability is a social phenomenon created by society because of the assumptions made about how people function in every day life. If someone does not follow the social rules of how a person should function, a medical classification is used to justify it (hegemony?). What is even more phenomenal is that Deaf community(s) have established their own set of norms in contrast to the national agenda, and therefore should not be classed as a disability.

But what confuses about Michael’s position, is the following quote:

And I certainly would urge everyone — not just the deaf community — to instill a positive self in those who cannot hear and promote a life fulfillment that encourages people to overcome their limitations by circumventing methods which strengthen the abilities they have, whether physical, creative or intellectual. In so doing, I would also use educational and communication means to tear down stereotypes so that discrimination is not pervasive.

Disregarding the words “overcome their limitations” for a minute, and focusing on the spirit of the message, which is, instill positive self esteem, encourage self fulfillment, access, and using education to tear down stereotypes and do away with discrimination, wouldn’t such a scenario actually encourage hearing people to learn about deafness, Deaf people and Deaf culture? And in doing so, and in the process, overcome long held stereotypical views, find that one no longer thinks in this manner? That one would or could start to embrace the idea that deafness is a different way of being, than merely a handicap/ disability? Wouldn’t they find themselves actually embracing diversity, and acquiescing that to hear is neither here or there? Wouldn’t they actually learn summat about value judgments, and how cultural assumptions shape how we think and act?

Shall I go on?

Get the dichotomy here?

But the kicker is when Michael says:

We are not talking about a culture of nations or even ethnicity here. We are talking about a culture born out of necessity, which hopefully will be consigned to a museum when and if deafness is eradicated. And someday, I pray it will be.

In which case, he can go and live in Coventry!

Summat To Read To Pass The Time:

Jeff Daniels - His Views on His Role in “Sweet Nothing In My Ear”
My Thoughts on Sweet Nothing In My Ear
“Sweet Nothing In My Ear”: Rachel’s Opinion
“Sweet Nothing In My Ear”: Elizabeth’s Opinion
“BITTER SOMETHING OUT YOUR THE EYES”
“Sweet Nothing” Portrays Ongoing Struggle for Recognition
SWEET NOTHING IN MY EAR: A Message To Leave Children out Of Politics

Powered by ScribeFire.

Sphere: Related Content

ASSASSINATING ALISON BRYAN - The Foaming Jaws Of The Poison People: The Sequel To The Prequel.

I was just ruminating on my previous post, ASSASSINATING ALISON BRYAN - The Foaming Jaws Of The Poison People: The Prequel, after writing, DEFINITION: Poison Person/ People.The memories of Deaf UK [even though it seems like so long ago, since I've participated in email lists and forums, preferring blogs and blogging] are still vivid. The memories are kept buoyant by the incessant warblings of MM, Andy, John Savva, and a scrag of other trolls, suffering delusions of

Of course, to the, uninitiated, the Deaf Community appears as an unruly mob. I thought that at first, until I learnt to apply the principle of human nature to them. They are human, just like hearies. They do things, just like hearies. Repeat that mantra, and you too will overcome your fear of Deafies, and the stereotypical depiction of them as a wild and unruly mob, will dissolve into a sweet mama loves you all, let me take you into my bosom embrace.

This vibrancy is reflected in cyberspace, take your pick

• “Hello darling, last night at the Catacomb was ace!”
• “Hey Jeff, Titter! Titter!”
• “Can anybody here help me with my thesis? I’m studying the effects of hearing people on deaf people during the Black plague. Was anybody alive then? Any help would be appreciated.”

I tend to avoid the ones that are devoid of any intellectual depth, or that harp on incessantly how about nothing in particular. I could forgive you for thinking that the Deaf Community in real life and in cyberspace, is like the Wild, Wild West, because its untamed nature manifests itself via scams, flame baits and trolls “reinforce”, that the civilised people, i.e. the hearies and hearie wannabes use to justify their image of Deaf people as an unruly mob.

How often have you read or heard about parents who were put off by this perception, and used this as a basis for deciding to raise their dead [I'm using the hearing spelling of deaf hear] children using aural means? How many times have you encountered snotty oralies, who are so fixated by their perception of hearing as being unlimited possibilities, that they use any opportunity to debate the relative merits of visual vs aural, by putting down the visual?

Sure, the Deaf Community has its share of errant people. What community doesn’t? Do the snot nosed oralies really think they have one up on us, because they think they are so civilised? Do the hearies that are quick to condemn Deafies for wanting to propagate their culture and population, ever reflect on their own actions?

“As GOD intended, but we are only making a few tweaks. To improve his creation. Honest!”

Unfairly, the entire Deaf Community is judged by the errant behaviour of a few scurrilous characters, just as unfairly the entire Hearing Community is judged by the scurrilous behaviour of its majority. The irony, is that they would be the first to howl and bawl should we judge them all by the same clothes.

Stupid is as Stupid does.

Anyway, my concern today is not with the relative merits of either communities relative moral standing, and relative is the operative word, but with the character assassination of my good friend, G.O.D., aka Alison Bryan. She has been everybody’s punching bag, and subjected to some serious character assassination for quite some time now.

Anybody who rises up to defend or support her, gets caught in the cross fire. They get a hefty does of the same medicine for daring to challenge the trolls received wisdom, that Alison Byran is a meddlesome wench! In fact, as some of you may already know, there are a few of us who inspire this Pavlovian response by mere association. In fact, Alison’s detractors, should all band together and form a business in manufacturing foam, considering the copious amounts that are generated everytime one of us make sense.

If you have read my previous post, ASSASSINATING ALISON BRYAN - The Foaming Jaws Of The Poison People: The Prequel,you will be aware there is a history behind all this, and to make you better, appreciate the absurdity of the tale, which I’m about to tell you,make sure you read that post.

It is seriously becoming quite ridiculous, when Little Lord Fauntleroy, spat the proverbial dummy early last week, because he couldn’t face up to a few issues and decided to, use his former friend Alison Bryan as a punching bag to vent his frustrations. He has done this previously. Compounding the situation, is Lord Fauntleroy’s sidekick, Sexy Betty, who has also worked herself up in a lather over some misconceptions about Alison.

This culminated in some aggressive approaches by Betty and Lord Fauntleroy towards Alison at a recent debate about the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill, in Cardiff, Wales, [UK for the geographically challenged]. Though to give Sexy Betty some credit, apparently, she showed some remarkable restraint in not hitting Alison Bryan with her handbag.

Now Lord Fauntleroy and Betty were there in a professional capacity, and their unprofessional actions have just alienated them from many of us.

This whole sorry situation developed from an incident when Lord Fauntleroy was caught deleting the
membership of another group that Alison had created, and worked hard to
build the membership and activity. Since then, Alison, along with Moi, Joe, and others, have long since been banned from Deaf UK. My crime is for calling him, a dickhead. A fairly innocuous term in Australia. Joe’s crime was for being so impertinent as to stand up to Lord Fauntleroy. Alison’s crime was for copying her own posts to Deaf UK, for her own posterity. Others have since being banned for disagreeing or standing up to the moderator.

There is more going on behind the scenes, which I will not divulge, but writing these posts, have invoked memories of my past experiences in committees. I’m left begging the question, “Why is this errant behaviour from D/deaf people tolerated?”

Powered by ScribeFire.

Sphere: Related Content