Originally Posted by shel90

Rick, u said something about oral deaf people...I am sorry I dont think your daughter and her friends are really a part of the deaf community if they dont know sign language...

It made me think if all these children who get CIs and do well with them which is great but are not exposed to sign language, they wont be part of the deaf community even though they are still deaf themselves. Maybe it is not important to you or to the oral deaf people not to be a part of the deaf community but to say that u dont need us is kinda hurtful in a way. Like we are beneath u all.

Originally Posted by me_punctured

Very interesting to see how you define what constitutes the deaf community, though no one should be surprised at the social circumstances leading to the exclusivity through the process of requirements and qualification for membership. I personally consider any oral deaf person to be part of the deaf community, whether they elected it or not and whether they know or not, and even more, part of an invisible minority group threaded to a colorful history. Often, it seems more deafies who use ASL know more about deaf history than deafies who don't, unless the latter happen to be well-educated.

If I meet another deaf person who doesn't know any sign language, it doesn't stop me from communicating with her. Nor does it influence my judgment of that person. But it does produce a gap, one I'm conscious of, as it would with a monolingual and a bilingual speaker, the latter forced to accommodate the former with no language choices. I am at my best when I can code-switch in both ASL and English.

Originally Posted by rick48

Can you please name those specific mainstream programs and public school systems? I think it would be a wonderful service to any parent who has a deaf child in one of those programs/schools or is considering them for their child.

Originally Posted by rick48

You missed the point, I am not asking you to educate yourself, just provide the factual basis for your statement about myself and my child.

"Just the facts Ma'am" - Jack Webb

Originally Posted by rick48

"He has been doing that all along for almost ten years that has not bit changed in his own audist attiude in here and other deaf forums.. Believe it or Not! "


Actually SM, its closer to 20 years that I have advocated for the rights of individuals and parents to make reasoned and well informed choices on behalf of themselves or their children and that the ci remain as one of those choices. Unlike you, I am willing to accept diversity within the deaf community and to accept that parents may take many different paths in raising their children.
Rick

Originally Posted by jillio

One of the criteria for defining a separate culture is a separate language. Oral deaf would be considered to be more of a subculture of the hearing or dominanat culture. IDing as deaf is not based on lack of auditory function alone.

Originally Posted by rockdrummer

Jillio, I've seen you refer to the hearing population as "the dominant culture" on a couple of occasions. Can you elaborate on your definition please.
Thank you!

Originally Posted by Boult

deaf and hoh community numbers 30 millions thereabouts.

while Deaf community numbers less than 1 millions thereabouts.

Originally Posted by me_punctured

Very interesting to see how you define what constitutes the deaf community, though no one should be surprised at the social circumstances leading to the exclusivity through the process of requirements and qualification for membership. I personally consider any oral deaf person to be part of the deaf community, whether they elected it or not and whether they know or not, and even more, part of an invisible minority group threaded to a colorful history. Often, it seems more deafies who use ASL know more about deaf history than deafies who don't, unless the latter happen to be well-educated.

If I meet another deaf person who doesn't know any sign language, it doesn't stop me from communicating with her. Nor does it influence my judgment of that person. But it does produce a gap, one I'm conscious of, as it would with a monolingual and a bilingual speaker, the latter forced to accommodate the former with no language choices. I am at my best when I can code-switch in both ASL and English.

Originally Posted by Cloggy

Sweetmind ... back again, and cursing and insulting people within a few paragraphs.
You're a wonderful example for Deaf culture...
I hope Deaf people will ask you to leave, because I think that you are embaressing them... But, I'll leave that to them..



So SxyPorky did get that stupid lie fed from you....
Thank you for confirming that....

Now, wash your mouth!!

Originally Posted by Sweetmind

NICE TRY Cloggy Leave SexyPorkie out of it because she has nothing to do with me or I dont speak with her for a long time since she had her heart attacks few times and ended it up in the hopsital. Stop attacking at SexyPorkie or anybody else who doesnt agree with you. yeah you lied about me as being SexyPorkie from a start. LA LA I wouldnt dare to use the term " sexy' for myself. Scoffs!

Anyway back to topic please!

Originally Posted by me_punctured

Very interesting to see how you define what constitutes the deaf community, though no one should be surprised at the social circumstances leading to the exclusivity through the process of requirements and qualification for membership. I personally consider any oral deaf person to be part of the deaf community, whether they elected it or not and whether they know or not, and even more, part of an invisible minority group threaded to a colorful history. Often, it seems more deafies who use ASL know more about deaf history than deafies who don't, unless the latter happen to be well-educated.

If I meet another deaf person who doesn't know any sign language, it doesn't stop me from communicating with her. Nor does it influence my judgment of that person. But it does produce a gap, one I'm conscious of, as it would with a monolingual and a bilingual speaker, the latter forced to accommodate the former with no language choices. I am at my best when I can code-switch in both ASL and English.

Originally Posted by jillio

Look it up, dude. If you are so intent on advocating, I suggest to take the necessary stepts to educate yourself. They are all over the United States and Great Britain. You shouldn't have any trouble at all locating them.

Originally Posted by shel90

Rick48 and Cloggy,

I have read posts where u say stuff like sign language is not needed. U both need to understand by saying stuff like that here, u will have people attacking u because sign language is very valuable to us and we cherish it. No, it doesnt make them right for attacking u but I can understand why. There are times, that I attack u in my mind but I wont do it here cuz I am not like that.

I know that the general hearing population dont use sign language and that you want your daughters to fit in with the hearing world but what about having the option to interact with the deaf community too? Rick, u said something about oral deaf people...I am sorry I dont think your daughter and her friends are really a part of the deaf community if they dont know sign language. I wasnt a part of the deaf community growing up and I was completely rejected by the deaf community when I tried learning sign language. Yes, it made me angry but I can understand cuz if I dont know ASL, how can I interact with the deaf community? Yesterday, I met a deaf guy at the store and he knew very very little signs and he was asking me questions about CIs...it felt VERY awkward not to be signing to another deaf person. I kept signing to him cuz in my mind, I saw him as a deaf person and my ASL kept taking over. It was very awkward and he kept misunderstanding me. It would be hard for me to be friends with him if he refuses to learn ASL which he even told me when I asked him about learning it. I just think that is sad..cuz even hearing people who have no ties to the deaf community or deaf people do try to learn ASL when they befriend deaf people. My husband was one of them. I admire that...refusal to learn ASL makes me feel turned off.

It made me think if all these children who get CIs and do well with them which is great but are not exposed to sign language, they wont be part of the deaf community even though they are still deaf themselves. Maybe it is not important to you or to the oral deaf people not to be a part of the deaf community but to say that u dont need us is kinda hurtful in a way. Like we are beneath u all.

That's all I have to say.

Originally Posted by jillio

Sure. It's a sociological distinction. In the United States, there are more hearing people than there are deaf people, so the enculturation would demand that the Deaf culture not just adapt, but completely adopt the hearing perspective, as the hearing are dominant. Dominant culture has more sociological, political and economic poer than non-dominanat cultures.

Originally Posted by rick48

Shel,

First, Cloggy's daughter is being taught sign and second, I do not recall either of us saying that sign language was not needed. I am not going to repeat reasons we chose to raise our daughter orally but just say briefly, that our decision was one that was constantly reevaluated and reassessed. I think you should also know that many of my daughter's friends do know sign and that she is learning as well.

Whether you or your friends think she is part of the deaf community or not, is something she cannot control but the reality is that she and her friends are deaf and share a bond with each other. If you cannot welcome these people into your community then the loss is yours, not theirs but they are definitely part of some deaf community. I am not going to repreat things I have said many times but just say that my daughter has always been around deaf people since she lost her hearing. I cannot change your perceptions or how you interpret things other than to say that the things you have attributed to me in your above post are not correct.
Rick

Originally Posted by shel90

This was from Cloggy's post...

Why adults choose CI's for their children

Every parent wants to communicate and signing with your deaf child should start as soon as possible. Having said this, there are now babies being inplanted soo early that they have not had any contact with either sign or speech. Parents of these children will focus on speech and will not see the need for sign since neither the child nor the parent knows it.

I have seen other few posts with the comment "sign is no longer needed or no need for sign language"

I understand where Cloggy is coming from with those comments but I can understand why he got attacked by other members because it seems like it is not important to expose the child to the deaf community.

Rick, when I referred to u..I know u never said "not needing sign"..that was meant for Cloggy but u keep saying your daughter is oral and her friends are oral deaf....so it seems like there is no interest in being involved with the deaf community? Yes, it is your decision and everything but u have to understand why the deaf community in general wont consider them a part of the deaf community unless they want to learn ASL.

My point of that is that it would sure suck if all deaf children of the future who are implanted never learned sign or be exposed to (probably a better word) to the signing community because it would create a gap. If their parents dont take their deaf children to deaf events and deaf socials for children because they felt there is no need for it, it would seem like a rejection to the signing community. Of course we dont want to reject them intentionally but it happens only simply due to the inability to communicate with each other freely.

That was my whole point of it. We dont want that gap, u know, so how can deaf signers who cant lipread or speak if their lives depended on it interact with deaf non signers? The bonding will be difficult unless the deaf non signer say they want to learn ASL. If they say they dont want to nor need it, then it feels like a rejection...like I stated when I met that deaf oral guy in the store. What he said about sign language really gave me a bad feeling so I guess to describe that feeling would be as a "turn-off".

I am not arguing with u or your decision but just to hope show why many people feel threatened by the concept of not needing sign if the CI works so well.

Originally Posted by shel90

I am not arguing with u or your decision but just to hope show why many people feel threatened by the concept of not needing sign if the CI works so well.

Originally Posted by SxyPorkie

There you go.... I completely agree with you.... YOu had been there as oralist.. you went through lots of frustrations...
Then you learned the sign langauges... you feel like you finally broke the barrier??? I mean the barrier crumbled down....you now feel comfortable with sign langauges,,,I am sure you still speak to hearies,, is ok about it... I feel that you like sign langauges better..
Am I right???? you have good posting.

My first langauges was ASL... at age of 5 I learned to speak... I was HOH... i feel more comfortable with ASL.....

Originally Posted by deafdyke

Actually shel90, second language ASLers ARE a part of the Deaf community. I know that the research indicates that the gross majority of "oral" kids DO eventually learn ASL.
I grew up oral, but consider myself "very" deaf. I think the only dhh people who aren't part of the deaf community, are the ones who look down on ASL. I think right now the debate is over which language should be the child's first language, and when the second language should be introduced. There's nothing wrong with chosing oral FIRST!

Originally Posted by rick48

Shel,

I am not arguing with you either! Thanks for that post from Cloggy because it does help me to better understand what you are saying.

Let me just step back and say two things as clear as I can. We have always involved our child with the deaf community from day one and have always viewed that as extremely impoartant. She has not grown up in a family that pretends she is not deaf. She was deaf before her ci and is still deaf with it but it does allow her to hear and has allowed her along with very good speech reading abilities, to speak.

Second, frame of reference is very important, my daughter was implanted in 1989 at a time when there were less than 500 kids nationwide with cis. I have already told you of the horrible things that we, as her parents and she, as our child were called by the Deaf community. We had so called "Deaf leaders" such as Harlan Lane comment on our decision to implant our daughter even though he has never met either her or us. I already mentioned what the then NAD President said about our ci decision. So when you tell me that I should understand how some people may feel "threatned" by our decision, my only response is to tell them to "get over it" and realize that for us, it has and never will be about them and their community but always about what was and is best for our daughter.

If they cannot understand nor accept that, then it really is their problem.

Again, Shel not arguing with you, just trying to let you see where I am coming from
Rick

Originally Posted by rick48

Just figured that someone who says that she has such "sensitivity to the plight of the Deaf in the US" and possesses the information would readily share it with others.

Originally Posted by rick48

Shel,

First, Cloggy's daughter is being taught sign and second, I do not recall either of us saying that sign language was not needed. I am not going to repeat reasons we chose to raise our daughter orally but just say briefly, that our decision was one that was constantly reevaluated and reassessed. I think you should also know that many of my daughter's friends do know sign and that she is learning as well.Whether you or your friends think she is part of the deaf community or not, is something she cannot control but the reality is that she and her friends are deaf and share a bond with each other. If you cannot welcome these people into your community then the loss is yours, not theirs but they are definitely part of some deaf community. I am not going to repreat things I have said many times but just say that my daughter has always been around deaf people since she lost her hearing. I cannot change your perceptions or how you interpret things other than to say that the things you have attributed to me in your above post are not correct.
Rick

Originally Posted by flip

Regarding oralists learning sign language late in life; I have seen many oralist stuck in a SEE style. I find this interesting, because interpreters are often way more fluent in ASL than those with oral background. Interpreters are as we know, hearing, and often learned sign language late in their life. To me it looks like interpreters are proud to be fluent in ASL, and other hearings are impressed by their skills. Interpreters got the motivation, it gives them some prestige, while oralist sometimes feel they "have to", and have some resistance becoming so called deaf and dumb, climbing down the society ladder.

But if oralist are truly motivated, and still not get fluent in ASL, and complains about getting rejected by the deaf society, I can only think of one reason; lack of early language, that makes it harder to learn a second language. Sure they got speech early on, but they did not use english it in it's whole like hearing kids, for example like in interactions in groups. So if your kids wants to, but never gets fluent in ASL, though they know deafs who sign, can that be a reason to worry?

I see that lack of early language often is used to explain why ASL kids have trouble learning english, but it should be the other way, too, right?

Originally Posted by flip

Regarding oralists learning sign language late in life; I have seen many oralist stuck in a SEE style. I find this interesting, because interpreters are often way more fluent in ASL than those with oral background. Interpreters are as we know, hearing, and often learned sign language late in their life. To me it looks like interpreters are proud to be fluent in ASL, and other hearings are impressed by their skills. Interpreters got the motivation, it gives them some prestige, while oralist sometimes feel they "have to", and have some resistance becoming so called deaf and dumb, climbing down the society ladder.

But if oralist are truly motivated, and still not get fluent in ASL, and complains about getting rejected by the deaf society, I can only think of one reason; lack of early language, that makes it harder to learn a second language. Sure they got speech early on, but they did not use english it in it's whole like hearing kids, for example like in interactions in groups. So if your kids wants to, but never gets fluent in ASL, though they know deafs who sign, can that be a reason to worry?

I see that lack of early language often is used to explain why ASL kids have trouble learning english, but it should be the other way, too, right?