I am against oralism because.... - Page 2

Miss-Delectable · 06-10-2008, 01:41 AM

It proves that many deaf kids in oral schools feel the need to sign even if they're banned from it.

Buffalo · 06-10-2008, 02:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bottesini

The point here being that deaf people must be in control of education for deaf children. Correct?

Yup!!

lilylover72 · 06-10-2008, 09:28 AM

I remember old oralish students from jr high school and high school long time ago. They used made fun of our sign sometime but my asl classmate and I got even with them. I didn't see old oralish students for long time. After gradution, I saw them again and i was so shocked to see them sign. I came to them and asked them do they know asl? They said yes, they realize oralish always being misunderstand and asl is so clear. I was so suprised about that. Wow

Bottesini · 06-10-2008, 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buffalo

Yup!!

Should have been that way when I was young.

Chase · 06-10-2008, 07:48 PM

Not all oralists are audists, but Kaelei's experience certainly shows that some of them have serious screws loose.

Bebonang · 06-10-2008, 09:44 PM

[quote=~*Kaelei*~;1001205][color="Purple"]
I don't know what you guys would call me. But I'm Oral, I have ever since my parents enrolled me into Tucker Maxon Oral school when I was 16 months old. However I've been using ASL since 8th grade whenever I'm speaking to Deaf people/friends.

I remember ever since as a little child, and my friends from Tucker also remembers this, if we ever use any movement of our hands or gesture with our hands, we get into big trouble like teacher would slap my hands just because I used movement of my hands as I was talking. Once I remember, I told the teacher that I needed to go to the bathroom and as I was saying bathroom, I also used the sign "bathroom"...boy wasn't my teacher pissed. After I went to the bathroom, I was sent to sit in the hallway for ten minutes just because I used the sign Bathroom.

Even my parents didn't want me to learn ASL, because they want me to speak like a normal hearing person. I don't regret that my parents has sent me to Oral School to learn how to speak because I do truly like to speak and I'm able to speak to my hearing fiance. But I just wish that my parents would accept that I'm deaf and that ASL is my culture too. The weirdest thing is that all the people that I met from Tucker that were students there are using ASL too...they have learned ASL after they left Tucker and we would sign to each other, even though we can speak.

Last time I went there was two years ago and I was signing to Heather, a friend of mine who also went to Tucker, we were there visiting a friend of ours who's still attending there, the professors/teachers were pissed that we were signing...

never less Heather and I quite enjoyed it that we were signing where it was actually forbidden when were students there!

Here's a saying, "You may prolong something from us but you can never forbid us to learn what we want to learn."

That actually true to me and the students that has attended to Tucker, because eventually at the end, we end up learning/using ASL around each other (deaf people) It's our culture, we feel drawn to it.

Exactly what happen to me when I was in the oral only method in the mainstream elementary and high school (both of them in oralism which I hate that) back in the fifties and sixties. I am for the spoken English with ASL which is fine and I support that but not oralism, no way. The audists had make my life miserable and I could not lipread that well, but some hearies said or still saying that I do lipread very well. Not true, as lipreading is not one hundred percent accurate. I get misunderstand a lot more on lipreading than ASL. I love to use ASL so that I can understand with visual better than lipreading. Yeah, the audists are still at it with them and trying to put them through oral only approach today to our deaf children in many schools whether in the regular schools or deaf schools. It make me want to throw up, because it is not fair to have us go through pressure from audists and hearing parents, too. It is going to be a long battle to fight oralism. How can we get through their stubborn mind that we really need ASL more than oralism only method? They don't understand that we are perfectly happy with ASL along with Spoken English. It is the visual that helps us understand better than lipreading, so there I have said it. All hearing people are dreaming and trying to fix us many times over and over and over that I am sick of that.

kipourgos · 06-15-2008, 05:22 AM

When I read about this debate, I think of my Greek aunts who came to the US at an age where learning a new language is a much greater challenge than for kids. They learned basic things; they could do their shopping, pay their bills, etc. But their social lives were in the Greek community. It really went far beyond the ability to speak English or not - it was also about common experience and challenges, a real understanding. (Just as I can talk about a typical day here in Istanbul but unless you've lived here, you only get a superficial idea of what it is like.) Anyone outside that community who really wants to understand them will have to make the effort. Some might, some might not; so be it.

I can only imagine what my aunts' lives would have been like if they had been forced to speak English, slapped every time they uttered a word of Greek. They might have learned more English and been more "functional" in a way but they would also have been isolated from those people who could truly and deeply understand them.

And I think, "what would be the motive for forcing them to speak only English?" Several possible answers come to mind:

1. A belief that English is somehow superior.

It's surprising how much you run accross the attitude that one language is 'better' than another.

2. The desire of the majority to interact on their own terms.

It is frustrating to want to communicate with someone whom you can't understand and who doesn't understand you. It's such a natural desire. But if you really want to communicate, it's a two-way street; that's true even for people who speak your own language, and how often people forget even that. I think many hearing people assume that being a deaf American/Turk/whatever is just like being a hearing American/Turk/whatever, and don't really think about how profoundly different one's experience is. Just as many people think that "respect for other cultures" as something interesting in a touristic sort of way but never consider how stuck they are in their own cultural way of viewing the world and other people. They just assume that what they know is "the right way."

2. a belief (even if 'well-intended') that if they could only be "like us" their lives would
be of higher quality.

It's so easy to project your (perceived) needs on another and then say "oh how sad, they don't have that." Heck, I've had people express disbelief, even concern, that I've never owned a television set, and argue why I should have one. They go on and on about what I'm missing, without thinking about what they are missing by focusing so much time a day on the TV.

My aunts were quite happy. They had a decent income, close friends, a community who accepted them and loved them. All the things a human needs to be happy. As well as the ability to function quite well in American society, even if not in the same way as Americans. Yes, they would have felt out of place in many areas. But they definitely had places where they felt perfectly at home. So when one feels inclined to pity another because they don't function in the way they do, they need to stop and consider what they also don't have and the view of the world that they themselves have never experienced.

Sooo.. (wrapping it up here):

I'm all for learning to deal in a foreign language, it's clearly helpful. But everyone's ability is different, and everyone's need and desire is different too. As long as one can cope and is happy in this life, who's to judge how one copes or what makes him happy? It seems to me that having a community, having real communication with people who understand you is much more important. The eagerness of deaf kids to pick up sign language, mentioned above, seems to be very clear evidence of that need.

Our country feels shame about the times when Native American kids were punished for speaking their languages. To deprive kids of free communication when they're growing up seems nothing less than cruel.

RedFox · 06-16-2008, 02:42 AM

My mom told me about stuff the oralists did when teaching me some Deaf history like the oralists making deaf students sit at their desks with their hands under their bottoms so they had to speak. I was glad that this dark age passed away before I was born, but apparently, they are making a comeback.

If an oralist slapped me for signing, I'd write to them to show how good my English is despite me speaking words only a handful of times in my entire life. I'd also tell them that it'd be a waste of time for me to learn to speak because I live and work just fine with signing, writing and typing. It's also long past the developmental stage where learning how to speak would be easy. If they keep slapping me, I'd get them arrested for assault.

It looks like they see deaf people as broken and in need of being fixed by communicating in the same way as hearing people. They ban sign languages because they see it as a threat to speaking ability, but there are people who can do both. I wonder if the hearing oralists ever tried to lipread themselves because they apparently don't realize that not all speech is lipread easily, causing oralism to get in the way of learning quickly.

I wonder what oralists think of the plains native American sign language used for intertribal communication.

I also wonder if the oralists realize that it's risky to depend on just lipreading, speaking and the CI because lipreading doesn't give you 100% of the information and someone could use an EMP weapon to fry the CI, as well as lots of other electronics within range. Or they could just put it into water or smash it up.

There's also no being put into or using a MRI scanner with the CI magnets.

***VamPyroX*** · 06-26-2008, 01:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedFox

My mom told me about stuff the oralists did when teaching me some Deaf history like the oralists making deaf students sit at their desks with their hands under their bottoms so they had to speak. I was glad that this dark age passed away before I was born, but apparently, they are making a comeback.

If an oralist slapped me for signing, I'd write to them to show how good my English is despite me speaking words only a handful of times in my entire life. I'd also tell them that it'd be a waste of time for me to learn to speak because I live and work just fine with signing, writing and typing. It's also long past the developmental stage where learning how to speak would be easy. If they keep slapping me, I'd get them arrested for assault.

It looks like they see deaf people as broken and in need of being fixed by communicating in the same way as hearing people. They ban sign languages because they see it as a threat to speaking ability, but there are people who can do both. I wonder if the hearing oralists ever tried to lipread themselves because they apparently don't realize that not all speech is lipread easily, causing oralism to get in the way of learning quickly.

I wonder what oralists think of the plains native American sign language used for intertribal communication.

I also wonder if the oralists realize that it's risky to depend on just lipreading, speaking and the CI because lipreading doesn't give you 100% of the information and someone could use an EMP weapon to fry the CI, as well as lots of other electronics within range. Or they could just put it into water or smash it up.

There's also no being put into or using a MRI scanner with the CI magnets.

That reminds me of a teacher I had who forced a left-handed student to write and sign right-handed.

jillio · 06-26-2008, 08:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kipourgos

When I read about this debate, I think of my Greek aunts who came to the US at an age where learning a new language is a much greater challenge than for kids. They learned basic things; they could do their shopping, pay their bills, etc. But their social lives were in the Greek community. It really went far beyond the ability to speak English or not - it was also about common experience and challenges, a real understanding. (Just as I can talk about a typical day here in Istanbul but unless you've lived here, you only get a superficial idea of what it is like.) Anyone outside that community who really wants to understand them will have to make the effort. Some might, some might not; so be it.

I can only imagine what my aunts' lives would have been like if they had been forced to speak English, slapped every time they uttered a word of Greek. They might have learned more English and been more "functional" in a way but they would also have been isolated from those people who could truly and deeply understand them.

And I think, "what would be the motive for forcing them to speak only English?" Several possible answers come to mind:

1. A belief that English is somehow superior.

It's surprising how much you run accross the attitude that one language is 'better' than another.

2. The desire of the majority to interact on their own terms.

It is frustrating to want to communicate with someone whom you can't understand and who doesn't understand you. It's such a natural desire. But if you really want to communicate, it's a two-way street; that's true even for people who speak your own language, and how often people forget even that. I think many hearing people assume that being a deaf American/Turk/whatever is just like being a hearing American/Turk/whatever, and don't really think about how profoundly different one's experience is. Just as many people think that "respect for other cultures" as something interesting in a touristic sort of way but never consider how stuck they are in their own cultural way of viewing the world and other people. They just assume that what they know is "the right way."

2. a belief (even if 'well-intended') that if they could only be "like us" their lives would
be of higher quality.

It's so easy to project your (perceived) needs on another and then say "oh how sad, they don't have that." Heck, I've had people express disbelief, even concern, that I've never owned a television set, and argue why I should have one. They go on and on about what I'm missing, without thinking about what they are missing by focusing so much time a day on the TV.

My aunts were quite happy. They had a decent income, close friends, a community who accepted them and loved them. All the things a human needs to be happy. As well as the ability to function quite well in American society, even if not in the same way as Americans. Yes, they would have felt out of place in many areas. But they definitely had places where they felt perfectly at home. So when one feels inclined to pity another because they don't function in the way they do, they need to stop and consider what they also don't have and the view of the world that they themselves have never experienced.

Sooo.. (wrapping it up here):

I'm all for learning to deal in a foreign language, it's clearly helpful. But everyone's ability is different, and everyone's need and desire is different too. As long as one can cope and is happy in this life, who's to judge how one copes or what makes him happy? It seems to me that having a community, having real communication with people who understand you is much more important. The eagerness of deaf kids to pick up sign language, mentioned above, seems to be very clear evidence of that need.

Our country feels shame about the times when Native American kids were punished for speaking their languages. To deprive kids of free communication when they're growing up seems nothing less than cruel.

Well said!!

deafskeptic · 06-28-2008, 12:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kipourgos

When I read about this debate, I think of my Greek aunts who came to the US at an age where learning a new language is a much greater challenge than for kids. They learned basic things; they could do their shopping, pay their bills, etc. But their social lives were in the Greek community. It really went far beyond the ability to speak English or not - it was also about common experience and challenges, a real understanding. (Just as I can talk about a typical day here in Istanbul but unless you've lived here, you only get a superficial idea of what it is like.) Anyone outside that community who really wants to understand them will have to make the effort. Some might, some might not; so be it.

I can only imagine what my aunts' lives would have been like if they had been forced to speak English, slapped every time they uttered a word of Greek. They might have learned more English and been more "functional" in a way but they would also have been isolated from those people who could truly and deeply understand them.

And I think, "what would be the motive for forcing them to speak only English?" Several possible answers come to mind:

1. A belief that English is somehow superior.

It's surprising how much you run accross the attitude that one language is 'better' than another.

2. The desire of the majority to interact on their own terms.

It is frustrating to want to communicate with someone whom you can't understand and who doesn't understand you. It's such a natural desire. But if you really want to communicate, it's a two-way street; that's true even for people who speak your own language, and how often people forget even that. I think many hearing people assume that being a deaf American/Turk/whatever is just like being a hearing American/Turk/whatever, and don't really think about how profoundly different one's experience is. Just as many people think that "respect for other cultures" as something interesting in a touristic sort of way but never consider how stuck they are in their own cultural way of viewing the world and other people. They just assume that what they know is "the right way."

2. a belief (even if 'well-intended') that if they could only be "like us" their lives would
be of higher quality.

It's so easy to project your (perceived) needs on another and then say "oh how sad, they don't have that." Heck, I've had people express disbelief, even concern, that I've never owned a television set, and argue why I should have one. They go on and on about what I'm missing, without thinking about what they are missing by focusing so much time a day on the TV.

My aunts were quite happy. They had a decent income, close friends, a community who accepted them and loved them. All the things a human needs to be happy. As well as the ability to function quite well in American society, even if not in the same way as Americans. Yes, they would have felt out of place in many areas. But they definitely had places where they felt perfectly at home. So when one feels inclined to pity another because they don't function in the way they do, they need to stop and consider what they also don't have and the view of the world that they themselves have never experienced.

Sooo.. (wrapping it up here):

I'm all for learning to deal in a foreign language, it's clearly helpful. But everyone's ability is different, and everyone's need and desire is different too. As long as one can cope and is happy in this life, who's to judge how one copes or what makes him happy? It seems to me that having a community, having real communication with people who understand you is much more important. The eagerness of deaf kids to pick up sign language, mentioned above, seems to be very clear evidence of that need.

Our country feels shame about the times when Native American kids were punished for speaking their languages. To deprive kids of free communication when they're growing up seems nothing less than cruel.

This is a very thought provoking post.

I remember sharing my oral upbringing with a group of American Indians (many of them don't like being called Native Americans in much the same way we dont' like being called hearing impaired) and they said that their parents' schools were very similar to the oral school.

shel90 · 06-28-2008, 07:56 AM

Great posts here..I dont need to state my reasons for being against oralism. There are too many threads with my reasons.

jillio · 06-28-2008, 08:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deafskeptic

This is a very thought provoking post.

I remember sharing my oral upbringing with a group of American Indians (many of them don't like being called Native Americans in much the same way we dont' like being called hearing impaired) and they said that their parents' schools were very similar to the oral school.

Unfortunately, it is all about ethnocentricsm. Manifest Destiny is alive and well.

jasin · 07-06-2008, 10:42 PM

I myself prefer Asl, its a very beautiful language and you can use it in places you cant use speech, talk, voices, etc.

jasin · 07-06-2008, 10:48 PM

I have nothing against hearies having their opinions on this, so be it, but this is about our (deaf peoples) methods of communication and sign languages.

jasin · 07-06-2008, 10:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oddball

I personally think oral Deaf children should have more options to supplement their skills (ASL, cued speech, etc). I am totally against oral only approach.

I was educated oral only. Worst thing that ever happened to me. I wont go into the many reasons why, but it was very oppressive.

jillio · 07-07-2008, 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jasin

I have nothing against hearies having their opinions on this, so be it, but this is about our (deaf peoples) methods of communication and sign languages.

Uh, hearing people communicate with ASL, too.

Buffalo · 07-07-2008, 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

Uh, hearing people communicate with ASL, too.

Unfortunately, only some of hearing people know ASL. It would be really nice if all hearing people do know ASL, kind of like Martha's Vineyard in bygone days.

jillio · 07-07-2008, 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buffalo

Unfortunately, only some of hearing people know ASL. It would be really nice if all hearing people do know ASL, kind of like Martha's Vineyard in bygone days.

Couldn't agree with you more on that. I was referring to the comment about hearies not having any business commenting on this thread just because they aren't deaf. Not all deaf use ASL either, unfortunately. And that is the result of oralism, which all hearies do not support.

jasin · 07-07-2008, 04:02 PM

"ASL is the recognized sign language of the deaf community in the United States of America."

http://blogs.nad.org/president/?p=13

jasin · 07-07-2008, 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buffalo

Unfortunately, only some of hearing people know ASL. It would be really nice if all hearing people do know ASL, kind of like Martha's Vineyard in bygone days.

Hearing people using Asl to communicate with other hearing people for reasons other then to accomidate some kind of disability, learning asl in a classroom, or for the understanding of a deaf person who is with them are mocking the deaf.

jasin · 07-07-2008, 04:33 PM

YouTube - NAD Position Statement on ASL

RedFox · 07-07-2008, 05:29 PM

Where in that video or in other NAD materials does it say hearing people can't use ASL except for the purposes you've listed? Hearing people using ASL with other hearing people can encourage ASL to spread and be known about by more people.

jillio · 07-08-2008, 09:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jasin

Hearing people using Asl to communicate with other hearing people for reasons other then to accomidate some kind of disability, learning asl in a classroom, or for the understanding of a deaf person who is with them are mocking the deaf.

You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. You seem to forget that the one person that was most influential in having ASL recognized as a complete and total language, and thereby elevating it to the status it has today was hearing.

So, Stokoe was mocking the Deaf?

What about hearing individuals with apraxia, or CPD, or disorders that result in muteness? They aren't permitted to utilize ASL for communication? They are mocking the Deaf?

Given the fact that you are just learning the language, you make some incredibly naive statements.

jillio · 07-08-2008, 09:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedFox

Where in that video or in other NAD materials does it say hearing people can't use ASL except for the purposes you've listed? Hearing people using ASL with other hearing people can encourage ASL to spread and be known about by more people.

Exactly!!! The whole point is to get more hearing individuals to be fluent in ASL, not fewer! Its the most effective way to bridge the communication gap, and to provide for effective education of deaf students.

To say that hearing people must not use ASL is the same as saying all deaf people must speak. Its oralism in reverse.

And, I find it particularly odd that this attitude would come from someone who has jsut begun to learn the language.

06-10-2008, 01:41 AM	#31 (permalink)
Miss-Delectable Capt Tony Nelson, Jeannie Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: No.1 Shopping Capital in Australia Posts: 8,487 Blog Entries: 3	It proves that many deaf kids in oral schools feel the need to sign even if they're banned from it. __________________

06-15-2008, 05:22 AM	#37 (permalink)
kipourgos Registered User Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Istanbul, Turkey Posts: 42	When I read about this debate, I think of my Greek aunts who came to the US at an age where learning a new language is a much greater challenge than for kids. They learned basic things; they could do their shopping, pay their bills, etc. But their social lives were in the Greek community. It really went far beyond the ability to speak English or not - it was also about common experience and challenges, a real understanding. (Just as I can talk about a typical day here in Istanbul but unless you've lived here, you only get a superficial idea of what it is like.) Anyone outside that community who really wants to understand them will have to make the effort. Some might, some might not; so be it. I can only imagine what my aunts' lives would have been like if they had been forced to speak English, slapped every time they uttered a word of Greek. They might have learned more English and been more "functional" in a way but they would also have been isolated from those people who could truly and deeply understand them. And I think, "what would be the motive for forcing them to speak only English?" Several possible answers come to mind: 1. A belief that English is somehow superior. It's surprising how much you run accross the attitude that one language is 'better' than another. 2. The desire of the majority to interact on their own terms. It is frustrating to want to communicate with someone whom you can't understand and who doesn't understand you. It's such a natural desire. But if you really want to communicate, it's a two-way street; that's true even for people who speak your own language, and how often people forget even that. I think many hearing people assume that being a deaf American/Turk/whatever is just like being a hearing American/Turk/whatever, and don't really think about how profoundly different one's experience is. Just as many people think that "respect for other cultures" as something interesting in a touristic sort of way but never consider how stuck they are in their own cultural way of viewing the world and other people. They just assume that what they know is "the right way." 2. a belief (even if 'well-intended') that if they could only be "like us" their lives would be of higher quality. It's so easy to project your (perceived) needs on another and then say "oh how sad, they don't have that." Heck, I've had people express disbelief, even concern, that I've never owned a television set, and argue why I should have one. They go on and on about what I'm missing, without thinking about what they are missing by focusing so much time a day on the TV. My aunts were quite happy. They had a decent income, close friends, a community who accepted them and loved them. All the things a human needs to be happy. As well as the ability to function quite well in American society, even if not in the same way as Americans. Yes, they would have felt out of place in many areas. But they definitely had places where they felt perfectly at home. So when one feels inclined to pity another because they don't function in the way they do, they need to stop and consider what they also don't have and the view of the world that they themselves have never experienced. Sooo.. (wrapping it up here): I'm all for learning to deal in a foreign language, it's clearly helpful. But everyone's ability is different, and everyone's need and desire is different too. As long as one can cope and is happy in this life, who's to judge how one copes or what makes him happy? It seems to me that having a community, having real communication with people who understand you is much more important. The eagerness of deaf kids to pick up sign language, mentioned above, seems to be very clear evidence of that need. Our country feels shame about the times when Native American kids were punished for speaking their languages. To deprive kids of free communication when they're growing up seems nothing less than cruel. Last edited by kipourgos; 06-15-2008 at 05:44 AM.

06-28-2008, 07:56 AM	#42 (permalink)
shel90 Sun Whorshipper Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: A Desert Rat that has found herself in Maryland Posts: 13,806 Blog Entries: 1	Great posts here..I dont need to state my reasons for being against oralism. There are too many threads with my reasons. __________________ ~Shel~

Today
Deafness	Sponsored Links __________________ This advertising will not be shown in this way to registered members. Register your free account today and become a member on AllDeaf.com

06-10-2008, 09:28 AM	#33 (permalink)
lilylover72 I love purple! Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: USA Posts: 2,790	I remember old oralish students from jr high school and high school long time ago. They used made fun of our sign sometime but my asl classmate and I got even with them. I didn't see old oralish students for long time. After gradution, I saw them again and i was so shocked to see them sign. I came to them and asked them do they know asl? They said yes, they realize oralish always being misunderstand and asl is so clear. I was so suprised about that. Wow

06-10-2008, 07:48 PM	#35 (permalink)
Chase Premium Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 2,316	Not all oralists are audists, but Kaelei's experience certainly shows that some of them have serious screws loose.

06-10-2008, 09:44 PM	#36 (permalink)
Bebonang Registered User Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Manitoulin Island on Lake Huron in Canada Posts: 1,216	[quote=~Kaelei~;1001205][color="Purple"] I don't know what you guys would call me. But I'm Oral, I have ever since my parents enrolled me into Tucker Maxon Oral school when I was 16 months old. However I've been using ASL since 8th grade whenever I'm speaking to Deaf people/friends. I remember ever since as a little child, and my friends from Tucker also remembers this, if we ever use any movement of our hands or gesture with our hands, we get into big trouble like teacher would slap my hands just because I used movement of my hands as I was talking. Once I remember, I told the teacher that I needed to go to the bathroom and as I was saying bathroom, I also used the sign "bathroom"...boy wasn't my teacher pissed. After I went to the bathroom, I was sent to sit in the hallway for ten minutes just because I used the sign Bathroom. Even my parents didn't want me to learn ASL, because they want me to speak like a normal hearing person. I don't regret that my parents has sent me to Oral School to learn how to speak because I do truly like to speak and I'm able to speak to my hearing fiance. But I just wish that my parents would accept that I'm deaf and that ASL is my culture too. The weirdest thing is that all the people that I met from Tucker that were students there are using ASL too...they have learned ASL after they left Tucker and we would sign to each other, even though we can speak. Last time I went there was two years ago and I was signing to Heather, a friend of mine who also went to Tucker, we were there visiting a friend of ours who's still attending there, the professors/teachers were pissed that we were signing... never less Heather and I quite enjoyed it that we were signing where it was actually forbidden when were students there! Here's a saying, "You may prolong something from us but you can never forbid us to learn what we want to learn." That actually true to me and the students that has attended to Tucker, because eventually at the end, we end up learning/using ASL around each other (deaf people) It's our culture, we feel drawn to it. Exactly what happen to me when I was in the oral only method in the mainstream elementary and high school (both of them in oralism which I hate that) back in the fifties and sixties. I am for the spoken English with ASL which is fine and I support that but not oralism, no way. The audists had make my life miserable and I could not lipread that well, but some hearies said or still saying that I do lipread very well. Not true, as lipreading is not one hundred percent accurate. I get misunderstand a lot more on lipreading than ASL. I love to use ASL so that I can understand with visual better than lipreading. Yeah, the audists are still at it with them and trying to put them through oral only approach today to our deaf children in many schools whether in the regular schools or deaf schools. It make me want to throw up, because it is not fair to have us go through pressure from audists and hearing parents, too. It is going to be a long battle to fight oralism. How can we get through their stubborn mind that we really need ASL more than oralism only method? They don't understand that we are perfectly happy with ASL along with Spoken English. It is the visual that helps us understand better than lipreading, so there I have said it. All hearing people are dreaming and trying to fix us many times over and over and over that I am sick of that.

06-16-2008, 02:42 AM	#38 (permalink)
RedFox Registered User Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Bellows Falls, VT Posts: 1,016	My mom told me about stuff the oralists did when teaching me some Deaf history like the oralists making deaf students sit at their desks with their hands under their bottoms so they had to speak. I was glad that this dark age passed away before I was born, but apparently, they are making a comeback. If an oralist slapped me for signing, I'd write to them to show how good my English is despite me speaking words only a handful of times in my entire life. I'd also tell them that it'd be a waste of time for me to learn to speak because I live and work just fine with signing, writing and typing. It's also long past the developmental stage where learning how to speak would be easy. If they keep slapping me, I'd get them arrested for assault. It looks like they see deaf people as broken and in need of being fixed by communicating in the same way as hearing people. They ban sign languages because they see it as a threat to speaking ability, but there are people who can do both. I wonder if the hearing oralists ever tried to lipread themselves because they apparently don't realize that not all speech is lipread easily, causing oralism to get in the way of learning quickly. I wonder what oralists think of the plains native American sign language used for intertribal communication. I also wonder if the oralists realize that it's risky to depend on just lipreading, speaking and the CI because lipreading doesn't give you 100% of the information and someone could use an EMP weapon to fry the CI, as well as lots of other electronics within range. Or they could just put it into water or smash it up. There's also no being put into or using a MRI scanner with the CI magnets.

07-06-2008, 10:42 PM	#44 (permalink)
jasin Registered User Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Puyallup, Washington Posts: 779	I myself prefer Asl, its a very beautiful language and you can use it in places you cant use speech, talk, voices, etc.

07-06-2008, 10:48 PM	#45 (permalink)
jasin Registered User Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Puyallup, Washington Posts: 779	I have nothing against hearies having their opinions on this, so be it, but this is about our (deaf peoples) methods of communication and sign languages.

07-07-2008, 04:02 PM	#50 (permalink)
jasin Registered User Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Puyallup, Washington Posts: 779	"ASL is the recognized sign language of the deaf community in the United States of America." http://blogs.nad.org/president/?p=13

07-07-2008, 04:33 PM	#52 (permalink)
jasin Registered User Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Puyallup, Washington Posts: 779	YouTube - NAD Position Statement on ASL

07-07-2008, 05:29 PM	#53 (permalink)
RedFox Registered User Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Bellows Falls, VT Posts: 1,016	Where in that video or in other NAD materials does it say hearing people can't use ASL except for the purposes you've listed? Hearing people using ASL with other hearing people can encourage ASL to spread and be known about by more people.