All The Young Dudes

Food For Thought

I was just reading Blogs disclosing professional relationships earns trust, Drama in DeafBlogLand,and thinking about all the issues that were raised by the fracas caused by Rachel being sent to Coventry.

It occurred to me, that never have I ever known such a spirited defence of a piece of technology like the cochlear implant. It is obsessive, and proselytising. It’s a frigging religion.  It’s adherents are constantly singing:

Kumbaya, my Lord, kumbaya
Kumbaya, my Lord, kumbaya
Kumbaya, my Lord, kumbaya
O Lord, kumbaya [Kumbaya]

But being a bitch, I have changed the words to:

Cochlear Implants my Lord, Cochlear Implants
Cochlear Implants my Lord, Cochlear Implants
Cochlear Implants my Lord, Cochlear Implants
O Lord Cochlear Implants

Somebody is hearing my Lord, somebody is hearing
Somebody is hearing my Lord, somebody is hearing
Somebody is hearing my Lord, somebody is hearing
O Lord Somebody is hearing.

Somebody is twittering my Lord, somebody is twittering
Somebody is twittering my Lord, somebody is twittering
Somebody is twittering my Lord, somebody is twittering
O Lord I meant speaking!

Let’s go proselytising my Lord, let’s go proselytise
Let’s go proselytising my Lord, let’s go proselytise
Let’s go proselytising my Lord, let’s go proselytise
O Lord, let’s proselytise

I’m obsessed my Lord, I’m obsessed
I’m obsessed my Lord, I’m obsessed
I’m obsessed my Lord, I’m obsessed
Oh Lord I’m obsessed with speaking and hearing
Oh Lord it hurts my brain to think!

I’ve used hearing aids all my life, while they are useful, I’ve never been obsessed them that I felt the need to endlessly pontificate about them. I’ve never known Deafies or deafies to worship them, the way the implant is.

Come and partake the aural feast,
Be saved from silence, in Implant rest;
O taste the goodness of our Cochlear Implants,
and wear his technology and continue his marketing spiel.

They are useful pieces of technology, not frigging miracles wrought by GOD for the salvation of a wretched people.

Further Reading:

DeafRead, Community, Censorship and Freedom Of Expression P3: New Aggregator
DeafRead, Community, Censorship and Freedom Of Expression P2
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
Behind The Creation Of Deaf Village
Deaf America Syndrome

DeafRead, Community, Censorship and Freedom Of Expression P3: New Aggregator

I have just attended the unveiling of the new “aggregator” Deaf Village, or the new home of Rachel and her friends. I hate to be a spoilsport [that is party pooper], but I am not in the least bit impressed with their response to DeafRead’s “censorship”. Which is what it is.

Sure, they have done something to rectify their complaint, instead of just moaning, and that is a good thing. For that they are to be commended. I’m just not convinced that their response improves on the main issue that continues to plague DeafRead. Only time will tell.

DeafRead’s Achilles Heel continues to be their editorial policy,and Deaf Village doesn’t have one. Now an editorial policy does not have to be onerous, but it does help to have basic guidelines, or Terms Of Service, as to what bloggers can expect upon registering with an aggregator.

Rachel in her post, Welcome to a new home! says:

To be welcomed to Deaf Village, all we ask you is to play by the Golden Rule.

That is all very well, but the question is, “What is this Golden Rule?” It’s not spelt out, and it is left to the reader to workout what it is. But if by the Golden Rule she means, being polite and respectful towards different opinions, then it needs to be spelt out on the aggregator. Furthermore, being polite and respectful need to be defined. Do they mean no swearing, no heated language, what?

One can still display respect without resorting to polite and restrained writing. There is also the issue of respecting alternative methods of emotional expression. I don’t have a problem with swearing, sarcasm, humour, hostility [upon occassion], being blunt, or downright heated. Though this levity does extend to issues such as racism, sexism, homophobia, which are big no no’s in my book.

This also raises the question, “What influence will this have on writing style?” A perfectly valid one, seeing that negative attitudes, for example, can be expressed in more ways than the use of hostile language. But that point is lost on the Deaf Village team. If I were to register with Deaf Village, would it mean that, I [pronounced, "eye"], would have to further modify my writing style to fit in with Rachel and friends ethos of politeness and respect?

That’s not to say, that everyone has to agree with my style, or that they have to read what I write. But to refuse to engage with a piece of writing, or allow a blog onto an aggregator, because it expression does not agree with you, is in itself a form of censorship.

Then there is the question of their categories. At the moment, the categories in Deaf Village are listed according to communication methods. Now the categories may well evolve over time, but as they stand, I find them, what’s a polite term, extremely awkward.

I know what they are trying to achieve [prove] with Deaf Village, and it is highly commendable, but Deaf Pulse, displays the level of diversity that Deaf Village aspires to. Furthermore, the irony, given the problems that DeafRead’s Editorial Policy engenders, DeafRead actually displays more diversity than it’s given credit for.

Though, it is going to be interesting to see how the moderators fare on Deaf Village. Trust me, I will be watching, nah reading, with a jaundiced eye and arched eyebrow!

Further Reading:

Behind The Creation Of Deaf Village
Deaf America Syndrome
DeafRead, Community, Censorship and Freedom Of Expression P2
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

MEDIA WATCH: Lessons Of Silence

If I had a dollar, for every time a Hearing person makes the observation that Deaf culture is silent, I would have enough money to take a contract out on all hearing people, and restore peace and prosperity for Deaf people. In fact, I would have more than enough money to buy out the patent rights to the cochlear implant and immediately cease production of the said devices. Instead, we have to be content with being damned with faint praise in articles such as Lessons Of Silence.

“…As I immersed myself in their visual, intensely expressive language, I realized that through their “handicap,” deaf people had developed certain communication skills more thoroughly than most hearing people, which made them uncommonly effective at getting their point across…”

I must admit it does make for a nice change from being called evil, morally repugnant, et al, that pervades hearing discourse about some Deaf issues.

What amazes me, is the amount of knowledge about Deaf people and Deaf culture that a hearing person can glean from surfing a solitary website, Web Sourd a French site that offers online sign language translation services. Then again, I have been able to glean a similar amount of knowledge about hearing people by flushing the toilet and listening intently to the churn as the cistern refills!

Irony moments abound:

“….Thus a radical experiment was born: to work with deaf people as communication consultants for our corporate clients. The idea was not to teach our clients sign language — although some of our deaf trainers remain convinced that such training would resolve many problems — but to help them adopt communication skills from the deaf world that would make them better colleagues and managers…”

This is backhander if there ever was one. We, Deaf people have enough problems trying to live a decent life, with all the access to information and services that hearing people take for granted. When a hearing person comes up with the novel idea of mining Deaf communication skills to show hearing people how to improve theirs, that’s the sound of knuckles scraping the ground and not the eureka moment of two brain cells colliding.

As much as I am proud of my Deafness, Deaf culture and sign language, I hate the pedestal the writer of this article has put us on:

“…When they interact with one another, deaf people act in ways that let them communicate more rapidly and accurately than hearing people…”

As I said, I like irony moments, and this article has them in abundance, in the first two paragraphs of which the following killer line, has been obvious to Deaf and deaf people for quite some time:

“…Some of these behaviors are simple and obvious, but it’s remarkable how often hearing people do the opposite…”

All I can think of when I read this article, is how the hearing world continually denies us, then mines us!

Meanwhile, and I am thinking of setting up a training course teaching people how to lift your knuckles off the ground!

Further Reading:

What The deaf can teach us about listening… | Bruno Kahne

The Human Fertilisation And Embrology Bill

As I was writing the last post in the Human Fertilisation And Embryology Bill, I realised eradicating deaf people would have far greater consequences than most people realise.

It would be in the interests of the Cochlear Industries, and hearing aid manufacturers, and other firms specialising in assistive listening technologies to get their fat arses behind the STOP EUGENICS campaign against the Human Fertilisation And Embryology Bill

All told, not does the Human Fertilisation And Embryology Bill affect Deaf people, it has serious implications for the livelihood of all the firms that produce their miraculous cures for deafness, and help the deaf to hear. Their cash cow would be effectively eliminated by medicine. Which has flow on effects, not only the CEO’s salaries, but the economy as a whole.

If anything, this is proof, just how much deaf people contribute to the economy.

Dame Baroness Deech, think again!

Oh Lord! Praise Be They That Drag Their Knuckles…..

Oh Lord! Praise Be They That Drag Their Knuckles and Lag Their Brains. For theirs is the nadir of human progression.

Exactly what I thought when I read the latest media report on the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill,
Couples Could Win Right To Select Deaf Baby, by Richard Gray, The Telegraph’s Science Correspondent, but more accurately, a Misrepresentation [or Misinterpretation] Correspondent. Positions which are pretty common in the media.

Jesus’s last word’s on the cross, have special significance for me now. “Forgive them Father for they know not what they do!”

Now I’m not going to refresh your jaded minds about this Bill, or the resulting campaign, you can do your own reading and research, by going to the source, STOP EUGENICS. Nor am I going to regale you with stark illustrations of hearing ignorance as to what constitutes disability, and how often it’s not the deafness that is the problem, and how their world actually contributes to the many of their perceived limitations of deafness [indeed, disability]. If you ask anything of the hearing, don’t ask them to think! The mop up operation would be just horrendous!

What I am gonna do, if I haven’t already, is throw out all pretense of impartiality and bi-partisanship, and go for the jugular. Hearing people are stupid. Hearing people are stupid. Come on Deafies, repeat after me. Insert as many four letter words as you feel appropriate. Then repeat the mantra. But really, you don’t have to do this to convince yourselves of their stupidity, they have already convinced us. By responding to a media misrepresentation of the issue, with their own uninformed views. How clever is that?

The irony in the hearing response to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill, is that are doing the exact same thing they accuse us of doing. You must remember, the scenario, if presented with two embryos, one with the hearing gene and one with the deaf gene, and they choose the hearing one, they have engaged in eugenics. They are just using the excuse of eliminating disabilities or other negative and undesirable traits as a guise for their eugenic act. They are creating perfect hearing people [that's an oxymoron if I've ever heard one. Where one says "I Believe", and the rest reply "Bah!"]

Now having said all that, and enjoying venting my spleen, there was one rather enlightening comment to the article, Couples Could Win Right To Select Deaf Baby, someone who actually understands and appreciates, the diversity and the glory of humanity. The quote speaks for itself. I can’t say anymore. I’m all vented out.

52.This is possibly the very point where the real debate on ethics in genetic research takes place; not cloning, not hybrids, but this. Since we began to unravel the secrets of DNA the question has surfaced time and time again; What if we could change this? What if we could change that? And then the final question, do we want to? There can’t be many who would want to see a child born disabled (and I can’t imagine many deaf or blind parents actually choosing this for their children, even if the option were available), but then disabilities are a fact of life. We are human not only because of our achievements and our improvements but because of our flaws. Take homosexuality, for example. On the surface it does nothing to advance the species, contributes nothing to our evolutionary journey, and yet it happens. Remove it from our genetic make-up, and what would the knock-on effect be? One geneticist once joked, “Less ballet”, but it could actually prove if not cataclysmic then at leist seismic. It is impossible to say how much of a part sexual desire and deviant (in the truest sense of the word) variations on that theme have had in our development over the centuries. Take away a significant aspect of human sexuality (an aspect present in almost every other warm-blooded species you could care to think of) and who knows what the end result might be? The same could very well apply to disabilities. While nobody wants to see a fellow human being struggle or suffer, it may just be possible that the role disabled people play in our society is a part of what makes us, well… us.

There’s more irony afoot this bill than is apparent. Particularly amongst the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill’s main proponents. I’m not going to elaborate on this one. You know how to use the net. You do the research.

Should I ever, highly unlikely, but please indulge me, if ever I am presented with two embryos. Both with the hearing gene. My question will be, is it intelligent. If the the answer is no, or they can’t confirm it’s intelligence, then I will direct them to destroy the frigging thing. There’s enough intellectually bereft hearing people in the world today, whose first language is “Bah!” add another “Bah!” and we can all sing, “Bah Bah Black Sheep!”

Readings Of Note:

Stop Eugenics
The Good Doctor
Disability Now Coverage
MEDIA WATCH: The Certainty Principle
Hearing Beethoven
The Right To Remain Silent
Telegraph on ‘deaf babies’ we are still failing to get the message across
Stop Eugenics
ANALYSIS: The HFEB & Clause 14(4)(9) Media Feeding and Talkback Frenzy: Part 4
ANALYSIS: The HFEB & Clause 14(4)(9) Media Feeding and Talkback Frenzy: Part Three
ANALYSIS: The HFEB & Clause 14(4)(9) Media Feeding and Talkback Frenzy: Part Two
ANALYSIS: The HFEB & Clause 14(4)(9) Media Feeding and Talkback Frenzy
Deaf People & Genetics: Media Coverage, Part 2
Deaf People & Genetics: Media Coverage
MEDIA WATCH: A Cacophonous Din of Ignorance & A Sane Voice [More Linx]