Crack the myth: Reverse Audism does NOT exist.

[jillio]

Is discrimination not a crime?

Depends.

You still can't use rape as a comparison. You are showing yourself to not only be audist, but sexist, as well. Keep goping, though. I'm sure there are a few more isms hiding in there.

 

[naisho]

You AD'ers are all beautiful when you argue. :fly3:

 

[jillio]

All roads lead to Rome:

Terms of discrimination:
Sexism
Ageism
Civil Rights Violation
Racism
(And yes) Audism

But lets not stop there as there are synonmyms as well:

Main Entry:
discrimination  [dih-skrim-uh-ney-shuhn] Show IPA
Synonyms: bigotry, favoritism, hatred, inequity, injustice, intolerance, partiality, prejudice, unfairness, wrong

You are still not making sense.

 

[VacationGuy234]

You're not HOH or deaf?

I am. That is why I was laughing, but I can hear with the aids so some people see that a privilege(you could have fooled me).

I understand the points Nashio, Jillio, Cheetah and everyone else made(if I have to go back 5 pages to read everything). It's a good debate.

 

[jillio]

Then, if audism doesn't physically happen nobody is getting hurt?

Wrong.

 

[VacationGuy234]

You are still not making sense.

Go back and read my reply to Cheetah.

 

[VacationGuy234]

Wrong.

Then, there is no such thing as audism being the idea and discrimination being the act, right?

 

[jillio]

It's sarcasm not rudeness. His post is just using the numbers as a reason and it is not a reason, it is a description. The description is just a label.

As far as the roads to Rome goes, when you say Audism is not the same thing as discrimination, first of all it is, and if you give another example of discrimination you are just using a different name for the same thing. If you argue that it is too narrow to use that definition, it doesn't hold water because discrimination is very broad as you can see by the terms used to describe it.

No pun was intended in my post... other than sarcasm.

No, it's rudeness.

No, it is not the same thing as discrimination.

No, it is not a synonym.

Those terms do not describe discrimination.

Your sarcasm is ineffective. Try using intelligence instead.

 

[jillio]

Then, there is no such thing as audism being the idea and discrimination being the act, right?

Wrong.

 

[jillio]

Go back and read my reply to Cheetah.

I did. It still doesn't make sense. I think we are over your head on this one.

 

[jillio]

I am. That is why I was laughing, but I can hear with the aids so some people see that a privilege(you could have fooled me).

I understand the points Nashio, Jillio, Cheetah and everyone else made(if I have to go back 5 pages to read everything). It's a good debate.

So, you are an HOH audist. Nothing new. We have another one around here a lot like you.

 

[DeafCaroline]

Then, if audism doesn't physically happen nobody is getting hurt?

what do you mean by physically happen?

 

[VacationGuy234]

Then you are wrong.

And your second statement would make you a patronizing sexist, as well.

Then I guess I'm discriminating, but that's OK because you won't hold me accountable for it, right? Or perhaps, you've just proved my point.

 

[Cheetah]

The first example is a truthful expression of knowledge(or ignorance as you point out).

The second example is an opinion.

I disagree that these two things constitute audism(ignorance and opinion), however, I see the point you are trying to make(to show me as bigger picture), but can you explain to me how if either of these statements are said by a deaf person, would not also be ignorance or opinion(hurtful as you might say) to a hearing person? And, why it would not matter because it was said by someone who is deaf?

If your reason is because there are not enough deaf people and that deaf people don't have enough money, I'm sorry, I don't agree with it. You'll have to give me something better than that to change my opinion.

Oy, I almost don't know where to start. If you firmly believe that audism is nothing more than descrimination and the above examples are not audism then I highly doubt we are going to have any meaningful discussion.

Yes, deaf people can practice audism as well. They (we) are part of society so we fall under all the same rules, we are also a subset of that society. :roll:

 

[Frisky Feline]

some guys dont support any gals who dont work. :P

 

[DeafCaroline]

I am. That is why I was laughing, but I can hear with the aids so some people see that a privilege(you could have fooled me).

I understand the points Nashio, Jillio, Cheetah and everyone else made(if I have to go back 5 pages to read everything). It's a good debate.

She was addressing CSign who is hearing and as such, inherently born with the hearing privilege. jillio was not talking about HOH/deaf having hearing privilege because it doesn't apply to them. You are HOH, you do not possess the hearing privilege.

It's like white people are born with the white privilege. No matter how white a black person could act and even feel, they still won't ever have the white privilege because...they are not white.

You are not a hearing person, therefore you do not have the hearing privilege .

 

[naisho]

some guys dont support any gals who dont work. :P

Oh yeah?? Like who? Not me I hope!

 

[Frisky Feline]

Oh yeah?? Like who? Not me I hope!

 

[VacationGuy234]

Yes, deaf people can practice audism as well. They (we) are part of society so we fall under all the same rules, we are also a subset of that society. :roll:

Finally! Thank you, I really appreciate that statement.

Sorry about the discussion. I owe you one.

 

[DeafCaroline]

Yes, deaf people can practice audism as well. They (we) are part of society so we fall under all the same rules, we are also a subset of that society. :roll:

I've seen oralists come here and express very audist beliefs and it was pretty appalling at times and quite sad.