What does "audism" mean to the deaf community?

[sallylou]

There have been several threads mentioning audism, and I'd like to know what it means to the deaf community. What does audism mean to you?

Is it being forced to have speech? Is it implanting a CI in a very young child? I don't know.

Please enlighten me. Thanks in advance!

[shel90]

Audism to me means the attitudes and views of hearing being superior to being deaf. There are so many examples of behaviors that reflects these attitudes and views. Frankly, I have such a deep hatred for audism.

[Bottesini]

LIPREADING & ORALISM
In general, Oralism is the avocation of deaf people to communicate by lipreading and speech alone--no sign language. Many people incorrectly believe that if a child is taught to sign, they will never develop speech skills.

LIPREADING & ORALISM

Audism is really oralism and it makes Deaf people really mad as it holds that spoken language and lipreading are the only way for the Deaf. It discounts sign language.

[sallylou]

I did not know that audists were against sign language. That is wrong. Thanks for the information.

[shel90]

Originally Posted by sallylou

I did not know that audists were against sign language. That is wrong. Thanks for the information.

Actually, not always. Some of them dont mind sign language but put speech, hearing, and oral skills first over sign language. They see sign language something for social situations but not to be used in the educational setting or for language acquisition. That view historically has put many deaf children at risks for language delays or deficients.

[CJB]

Hearing-centered thinking. Such as "deafness" is the "lack of hearing" and "Deaf people" are "people without the ability to hear." Defining deafness in terms of hearing.

[sallylou]

So it's really a matter of whether ASL or English is a deaf child's primary language?

[Bottesini]

Originally Posted by sallylou

So it's really a matter of whether ASL or English is a deaf child's primary language?

No it is also attitude that Deaf are inferior. Like racism.

[shel90]

Originally Posted by sallylou

So it's really a matter of whether ASL or English is a deaf child's primary language?

I am not sure if I understand your question. There are many deaf children who arent able to develop speech skills and have to be exposed to ASL to be able to develop a language but it is usually at the later years rather than during their formative years when it is critical.

I have met educators at the public schools who say that sign language is so cute BUT can these children talk? That's an example of someone who is accepting of ASL but still audist in their views. They dont take ASL as seriously as spoken English.

[sallylou]

Thank you, Botte and Shel. It seems to come down to a condescending attitude. The examples you provided help me understand how audists consider themselves superior to the deaf. Now that I understand, I can unequivocally say that I oppose audism. I want to advocate for deaf people against audism.

[Loghead]

Thank you to Sally for making this thread, and thank you to Shel & Botts for answering our question!

I was not aware that people had such views. I wouldn't think that a hearing person would feel like they could criticize deaf people and deaf culture without knowing or experiencing being deaf first hand.

[Berry]

Okay, I am not deaf, but I would like to pitch in on the "What does audism mean to you?"

To me audism means the end of Deaf Culture. It means the end of all signed languages, ASL included.

Before people discussed Deaf Culture: Before ASL was considered to be a language: There was "The Deaf World". I was introduced to both as a child because my best friend was CODA. I was 7 or 8 years old and I loved it.

I believe Deaf Culture and ASL bring something wonderful to the world and it would be a sad day were they to be destroyed.

[souggy]

I have a very strict definition for audism. To me, it's based on hearing status, ie. you're not deaf enough if you can hear half of what people are saying, or you're inferior because you can't hear what people are saying; you can't get a job because employees are worried about forklifts running over you and so on.

The whole ASL/oral thing is more of linguicism to me. Why? I see First Nations people being belittled and deprived of their languages in the same fashion as ASL signers go through.

[TheWriteAlex]

Originally Posted by souggy

I have a very strict definition for audism. To me, it's based on hearing status, ie. you're not deaf enough if you can hear half of what people are saying, or you're inferior because you can't hear what people are saying; you can't get a job because employees are worried about forklifts running over you and so on.

The whole ASL/oral thing is more of linguicism to me. Why? I see First Nations people being belittled and deprived of their languages in the same fashion as ASL signers go through.

That brings up a good point. I think audism swings both ways. Some Deaf people, though I don't think it is frequent, hold the opinion that all hearing people are bad or inferior simply because they can hear, or that that other deaf people who use voice or have strong English skills but aren't as good signers are also inferior.

[CJB]

Originally Posted by souggy

I have a very strict definition for audism. To me, it's based on hearing status, ie. you're not deaf enough if you can hear half of what people are saying, or you're inferior because you can't hear what people are saying; you can't get a job because employees are worried about forklifts running over you and so on.

The whole ASL/oral thing is more of linguicism to me. Why? I see First Nations people being belittled and deprived of their languages in the same fashion as ASL signers go through.

[Maria]

I hate audism. No offense, friends.

[souggy]

Originally Posted by Maria

I hate audism. No offense, friends.

Why would it be offensive?

If you LIKE audism, then there's something wrong.

[Maria]

Originally Posted by souggy

Why would it be offensive?

LOL Well, it is very annoyin'. Yikessss... it cringes me. Sheesh, I mean hearin' people. I've had enough goin' through all this in my life.

If you LIKE audism, then there's something wrong.

Yea, right. Over my dead body, if you ask me.

[deafskeptic]

I rarely call people audist though I certainly think it exists. I've dealt with people who discount other deaf peoples' experience. Some things that really gets on my nerves is when they think I'm smart because of my speech. If they think hearing is better than deaf and try to rub our noses into it, i'll get offended or if they insist that we behave a certain way like being unhappy at being deaf, etc.. in short, an attitude of being superior based on hearing status is audist in my book.

[Frisky Feline]

some of audisms are in my office. *shudder*

[Cheri]

From what I've seen that some people on AD had used this term "austism" to describe and identity oral deaf people, because audists are more comfortable with spoken English and are able to use their residual hearing I don't see anything wrong with them using spoken language, while I don't see anything wrong with Deaf people using ASL.

I am so tired of seeing both the Deaf Community, the Audists at each others throat, all the bully and harassment. We don't need the dividing, we are all human beings. I have friends who were raised oral, SEE, PSE, ASL, cued speech we all respect each others. It shouldn't be deaf vs Deaf, or hard of hearing vs Deaf, or Audists vs Deaf or hearing vs deaf.

[shel90]

My friend who has a deaf daughter is PISSED. Her job hired a high priced consultant to teach her and her employees (she works as a probation officer) about deaf people and sign language. My friend put on her FB status "my boxing gloves are on"...because this woman was telling her and her coworkers how sign language limites deaf people and that because of it, many deaf people have limited skills. Now, that's VERY audist. My friend is going to file a complaint with the dept of correction services. Good for her! Vwe need to get rid of the audists from spreading inaccurate information like that.

[Frisky Feline]

Shel90, good for your friend's daughter to take action against them.

[jillio]

Originally Posted by shel90

Audism to me means the attitudes and views of hearing being superior to being deaf. There are so many examples of behaviors that reflects these attitudes and views. Frankly, I have such a deep hatred for audism.

I know this thread was intended for the deaf, but I just wanted to say that I agree completely with your definition. It is a feeling that speech and hearing, even a small amount, are preferable to sign and no hearing. It, indeed, shows up in various behaviors. One does not necessarily have to be completely orally oriented in order to be audist.

[dogmom]

I have been reading here, too and was just doing that since I didn't think it was for me to write in, but I am agreeing with everyone here. If I could come in - this is my thought - I think it is a superiority thing - as in mis-perception that speech is "better than" signing. That signing <Allegedly> is not as complex as speech, is of somehow "lower" level ; is not good enough in itself but is okay to be used as means to acquire speech only. Also has to do with peoples' mistakenly interchanging speech and language, that speech is necessary for language. I remember times as young child not being understood or not understanding certain things, going to speech therapy - yes for different reasons than what a deaf child goes for. And I remember how isolating it was because the speech therapy was in different section of school and playground, with its own play equipment, own buses, own doors - it was where they "stuck" all "those" kids.
But about audism - like any 'ism - IT is what "disables" or "handicaps". NOT ASL. Not Deaf.

for reading, if you did-

[deafskeptic]

Originally Posted by dogmom

I have been reading here, too and was just doing that since I didn't think it was for me to write in, but I am agreeing with everyone here. If I could come in - this is my thought - I think it is a superiority thing - as in mis-perception that speech is "better than" signing. That signing <Allegedly> is not as complex as speech, is of somehow "lower" level ; is not good enough in itself but is okay to be used as means to acquire speech only. Also has to do with peoples' mistakenly interchanging speech and language, that speech is necessary for language. I remember times as young child not being understood or not understanding certain things, going to speech therapy - yes for different reasons than what a deaf child goes for. And I remember how isolating it was because the speech therapy was in different section of school and playground, with its own play equipment, own buses, own doors - it was where they "stuck" all "those" kids.
But about audism - like any 'ism - IT is what "disables" or "handicaps". NOT ASL. Not Deaf.

for reading, if you did-

I've always said my biggest handicap is other people's attitude toward my deafness.

[ASLGAL]

But about audism - like any 'ism - IT is what "disables" or "handicaps". NOT ASL. Not Deaf.

I've always said my biggest handicap is other people's attitude toward my deafness.

Well stated

[sallylou]

Great point, Souggy. The quickest way to destroy a culture is to destroy its language.

I haven't felt any reluctance from deaf people to accept me as a HOH person. Maybe part of the issue is how a HOH person approaches the deaf community a HOH's attitude. So far, deaf people have been kind in answering my questions and helping me learn (like this thread).

[Tousi]

Well, I don't know why there's a desire to get audism into dictionaries everywhere. I know what it means and all but I can't understand why a lot of time and energy is being spent on a word that will be abused. Just as the term, racism, has gotten watered down, doesn't have the same impact it used to because of trigger-happy folks. What's wrong with words like discrimination and oppression which are spot on?

[dogmom]

In another thread somewhere at some earlier point I wrote a bit my thoughts relating to what Souggy and Sally just now in here wrote - about the connection between attempted destruction of culture - specifically and most obviously language - of First Nations peoples, especially in earlier school settings - and same attempts with regard to ASL or signed languages in oral-only venues.