The issue of Rachel’s blog being “censored” still rankles, that her sister Elizabeth has weighed with in with her own response DIG IT! Personally, I couldn’t care less if the blog Cochlear Implant Online sank without a trace. But that doesn’t resolve the issues at the centre of this whole fracas. With the problems inherent in DeafRead, DeafRead, Community, Censorship and Freedom Of Expression, I guess this was bound to happen sooner or later.
For all the accusations flung at Taylor and DeafRead, it doesn’t absolve the otherside from their own successful experiments in attitude. I find that the rebuttal to Taylor’s action, to be equally one sided.
Elizabeth, I’m not targetting you specifically, but using your post DIG IT!, as a springboard for things that need to be said.
I for one, am quite comfortable mixing with Deafies and deafies. Like you and Rachel, Elizabeth, I can speak, listen, and unlike Rachel, but like you, I can sign. Like you, and your sister, I too don’t take crap. Like you, your sister, your mother, et al, I too want the best for all Deaf and deaf people [not just children, but ALL Deaf and deaf people]. But unlike you, and your sister, and your mother, and the overweening minions who feed on your every word, I can actually see many of the issues for what they are, where they spring from, and why. A little bit of historical knowledge and understanding goes a long way.
Yes, Elizabeth, we know that Cochlear Implant Online is a pro-CI, pro-listening and spoken language blog. Reading it is like listening to a broken record. It’s like a vinyl record with a scratch, that causes the needle to stick in the groove, hereby repeating the same phrase over and over and over again. If you don’t know what a vinyl record is……… But why do I read it? Because I like to be challenged. If I don’t challenge the veracity of my views and perspectives, then I will never know if they have any intrinsic value.
The only thing you have never convinced me of, is how you practice diversity, and how you work towards unity between Deaf and deaf! I’m still trying to find the humanity amongst all those buzz words of CI user, ASL/ CI user, implantee, et al. To be fair, this dehumanisation of Deaf and deaf people, is done by many service providers and organisations working for Deaf and deaf people. Seriously, how can someone happen to be Deaf? Some one is or isn’t!
I would never dehumanise someone with labels such as these. My mate who has an implant, also has a name. When I introduce him to hearing family or friends, I introduce him by name, and let them work out the rest. Ditto for a friend who signs.
But I would never play interpreter for a deafie who can’t or won’t sign and a Deafie who signs but doesn’t speak. As far as I am concerned, if it is communication you want, and bridge building to make things more exciting, then you bloody well knuckle down and do it. If you don’t want to sign, then don’t frigging whinge when you get accused of insularity. I’m not going to play mothers and fathers with a group of petulant princes and princesses, whose sense of entitlement is way out of proportion to their efforts at engagement [overweened egos].
Now let’s talk about that word MILITANT. In the Deaf and deaf context, it’s only ever hurled in one direction, and that is at Deaf people who express themselves in ways not agreeable to you. And in a manner not agreeable to you. Well, it’s about time we reversed the trend, and started calling all you pro-CI, pro-speakers, pro-listeners, pro-aural, pro………….militants. If it walks like a duck, if it quacks like a duck, then it is a duck. Militancy is a positive term, but it has become a put down, used by people who don’t like their boat being rocked. Easier still, a buzz word to denote people who express strident anger, who act without thinking.
Then there’s that other buzzword of yours, pro-listening. Which I consider to be an exercise in irony. Is the focus on listening meant as a focus on perceiving sounds, or for the meanings those sounds carry. Two very different things. Then again, the ability to listen is not confined to sounds alone. It also applies to the realm of the visual. So, if you are pro-listening, how is this exemplified by your blog? How do you take on board an expression of anger [as opposed to bad behaviour]? Are you able to see pass the style, the way the message is conveyed, at what is actually being said? That’s the real skill in listening. [I'm not going to play with semantics here, by discussing the need to hear the sounds et al, in the first place]
After all, hearing people listen all the time, but still don’t get it! If that’s what you aspire to……
Remember, by putting restrictions on how a person may express a point of view, is the same as saying I will listen, but on set terms [usually decided by the person wielding the power]. Which is one of the problems inherent in the DeafRead editorial policy. Now of course, that’s does not mean carte blanche on bad behaviour. Far from it. Having read some of the commentaries you receive on your blog, I too would be tempted to cut them off without recourse. In fact I do. This person At The Rim [among others], will never, ever, be allowed to participate in any of my blogs.
Having said that, dealing with strident anger, all the time, and childish retorts [from both sides] gets wearying. It gets even more wearying, when trying to debate with someone whose position is so partisan, that you wonder why you bother.
I can understand why one who say, “Enough is enough!” And I do agree wholeheartedly with Paula Rosenthal when she says:
“….that readers and commentors need to focus on the issue at hand..[comment number 8, DIG IT!]
Which I find sadly lacking, in both sides. Because argument regarding censoring, is only one aspect of a problem that most have ignored, as long as they were getting their piece of cyberspace. For all the caterwauling about Cochlear Implant Online being censored, not one blog [to my knowledge] commented when I posted, Deaf Blogging, Deaf Vidblogging, & Deaf RSS Aggregators,Trolls Discover AAD, Trolls Discover AAD: An Addendum, and G.O.D. wrote about Problems with DeafRead, and An example of how deafread doesn’t cater for an international audience.
So my charge as I outlined in DeafRead, Community, Censorship and Freedom Of Expression, still stands:
pot + kettle = black X (me, gimme, mine)/wahhhh!
Personally, I find the attitude displayed [or Canine Territorial Marking as the case may be] on Cochlear Implant Online, every a bit arrogant as those Elizabeth and Rachel [and their mother] accuse the “militant deaf” of displaying. Reducing comments, perspectives, et al, to the status of “that’s an interesting viewpoint”, is frigging patronising. With Elizabeth’s admission that she and her sister are basically two little college girls, she puts her foot right in it. I will abstain from baring my fangs here. Mother is there, lurking in the shadows.
But Elizabeth, DARLINK. I have seen it all before. We have all seen it before. It was boring then, and it is boring now. It was insular then, it is insular now. It was divisive then, it is divisive now. Come on, tell me a joke I haven’t heard before!
When all is said and done, Elizabeth, I am supporting you and your sister’s right to express yourselves. Even thought I think your blog is a waste of cyberspace. But, there is one commentator on your blog that is worth a damn. That saves your blog from being a mere, cheap and amateurish marketing spiel. That commentator goes by the name “Older And Wiser”. The one commentator for whom eating humble pie, just might be worth it!
Further Reading:
DeafRead, Community, Censorship and Freedom Of Expression
Deaf Blogging, Deaf Vidblogging, & Deaf RSS Aggregators
Trolls Discover AAD
Trolls Discover AAD: An Addendum.
Problems with DeafRead
An example of how deafread doesn’t cater for an international audience
Is Censorship Acceptable?
DeafRead chooses to remove CI Online from their site!
Deafread, you want full disclosure?!
Deafread.com Silences a Strong Deaf Voice- My Response
Sphere: Related Content