Crack the myth: Reverse Audism does NOT exist.

[posts from hell]

In a socioeconomic point of view it is impossible for the Deaf to oppress the hearing people.

Sure, rejections. But oppress? Laughable.

Even if a person say that hearing parents are ill equipped to be a parent of the deaf.
The reason for the previous sentence: It's a fact. 90%++ of the deaf are born to the hearing and 90%++ are failing in schools. That is not reverse audism or so.

I, for one, now refuse to accept or tolerate the use of audism in reference of the hearing population being oppressed.

 

[shel90]

Good point..

Deaf people have never in history denied heairng people access to language, discriminated hearing people from getting most jobs, make them use their weakest sense to communicate, isolate hearing kids from other hearing kids, and so on.

Rejection makes more sense.

 

[sallylou]

That's what privileged people do because they have the luxury of ignoring their power and its consequences. The powerful people blame the victim. If the victim deserved what ever happened, that absolves the people in power of any responsibility.

 

[shel90]

That's what privileged people do because they have the luxury of ignoring their power and its consequences. The powerful people blame the victim. If the victim deserved what ever happened, that absolves the people in power of any responsibility.

Shows lack of empathy on their part.

 

[sallylou]

There is a lack of empathy. The "other" is not regarded as people on the same level as the privileged people. Sometimes, the "other" is not regarded as human. How else can you kill people just because they are not like you?

 

[posts from hell]

Another illustration:

Hearing person goes to a small Deaf organization to compete for a contract. The organization tells the hearing person "Since you do not have the experience as a Deaf person we felt that it was in our best decision to give this contract to a Deaf business that understands exactly what we want to be done."

Of course, that is not nice. Not a look-upon behavior. It is still not audism. The hearing person has 5,000 other organizations that they have *full access* to compete with. The Deaf person going to these 5,000 while having the equal access? Doubtfully so.

In the end, the hearing person still reins the privileges.

Dare they say that we are oppressing THEM.

 

[posts from hell]

There is a lack of empathy. The "other" is not regarded as people on the same level as the privileged people. Sometimes, the "other" is not regarded as human. How else can you kill people just because they are not like you?

uh oh, i see what you done there.

 

[sallylou]

We don't have to go far from our own backyard to see this. Aren't people saying "Get a job?" to the unemployed?

 

[shel90]

Another illustration:

Hearing person goes to a small Deaf organization to compete for a contract. The organization tells the hearing person "Since you do not have the experience as a Deaf person we felt that it was in our best decision to give this contract to a Deaf business that understands exactly what we want to be done."

Of course, that is not nice. Not a look-upon behavior. It is still not audism. The hearing person has 5,000 other organizations that they have *full access* to compete with. The Deaf person going to these 5,000 while having the equal access? Doubtfully so.

In the end, the hearing person still reins the privileges.

Dare they say that we are oppressing THEM.

No wonder I have always felt like something wasnt right whenever we got accused of reverse audism but I couldnt put my finger on it.

You just did. Thank you.

 

[deafskeptic]

No wonder I have always felt like something wasnt right whenever we got accused of reverse audism but I couldnt put my finger on it.

You just did. Thank you.

Same here. I think PFH has made an excellent post here.

 

[dogmom]

I agree with this, PFH. I really get what you mean
People seem to mix up individual exclusionary acts which anyone can do, with actual acts of PRIVILEGE which is based on who as a group in society has more historical <like Shel mentioned> and current access to that which makes up the society - things like: access to healthcare, jobs, safe working conditions, loans, ability to get basic needs met on a broad scale.

yes, privilege also relates to refusing to see it, then we can go to victim-blaming, like Sally wrote.

 

[naisho]

It's just a grapple over the terminology. I'm sure use of the word audism turns up an ugly taste from any kind of deaf group, the same way 'deafism' is making those hearing wanderers who come here and find the 'what do you hate about hearing people' thread and say stuff like "These guys have prejudice against hearing".

The problem is that the word audism is being used to group nearly everything negatively associated with deafness. From discrimination, to 'handicappedness' to 'disability'. If the usage of terminology was properly divided up, it might not have came to be called reverse audism.

See this example: Some black guy is put down for whatever issue, mainly for the reason of his color.
For some, it can be seen as racism: not allowing blacks to achieve.
For others, it's a form of discrimination: failing to recognize them as a different group or minority
Another person may think teh black guy's opressor is prejudiced against blacks: being biased solely for the reason of an individual (or group's) opinion.
There's also stereotyping: opinion that blacks can't or can do this.

These words might seem like they all mean the same, but they can actually convey different meanings depending on the situation, and that is the problem with using the word audism - it is a group all for any form of intolerance of deaf people. That is also what causes the problem with the reverse audism definition.

In the end, some people from all groups will inadvertently put down another group in one form or another. This is a focus to bring light into what the issue really is.

 

[posts from hell]

It's just a grapple over the terminology. I'm sure use of the word audism turns up an ugly taste from any kind of deaf group, the same way 'deafism' is making those hearing wanderers who come here and find the 'what do you hate about hearing people' thread and say stuff like "These guys have prejudice against hearing".

The problem is that the word audism is being used to group nearly everything negatively associated with deafness. From discrimination, to 'handicappedness' to 'disability'. If the usage of terminology was properly divided up, it might not have came to be called reverse audism.

See this example: Some black guy is put down for whatever issue, mainly for the reason of his color.
For some, it can be seen as racism: not allowing blacks to achieve.
For others, it's a form of discrimination: failing to recognize them as a different group or minority
Another person may think teh black guy's opressor is prejudiced against blacks: being biased solely for the reason of an individual (or group's) opinion.
There's also stereotyping: opinion that blacks can't or can do this.

These words might seem like they all mean the same, but they can actually convey different meanings depending on the situation, and that is the problem with using the word audism - it is a group all for any form of intolerance of deaf people. That is also what causes the problem with the reverse audism definition.

In the end, some people from all groups will inadvertently put down another group in one form or another. This is a focus to bring light into what the issue really is.

Can the white population claim that the black population is being racist towards them?

In a nutshell, they really can't. They do it just to rein power by victimizing, oppressing the black population even further.

Accepting it only lends the people with privileges and power more power.

 

[jillio]

In a socioeconomic point of view it is impossible for the Deaf to oppress the hearing people.

Sure, rejections. But oppress? Laughable.

Even if a person say that hearing parents are ill equipped to be a parent of the deaf.
The reason for the previous sentence: It's a fact. 90%++ of the deaf are born to the hearing and 90%++ are failing in schools. That is not reverse audism or so.

I, for one, now refuse to accept or tolerate the use of audism in reference of the hearing population being oppressed.

The minority cannot oppress the majority. Oppression comes from power, and the majority hold the power. Therefore, the majority can oppress the minority, but not vice versa.

 

[jillio]

That's what privileged people do because they have the luxury of ignoring their power and its consequences. The powerful people blame the victim. If the victim deserved what ever happened, that absolves the people in power of any responsibility.

In, by extension, increases their power.

 

[posts from hell]

The minority cannot oppress the majority. Oppression comes from power, and the majority hold the power. Therefore, the majority can oppress the minority, but not vice versa.

Thank you.

 

[naisho]

Can the white population claim that the black population is being racist towards them?

See, you only tackled out a part of the term issue. Racism is one where the majority overtakes the minority.
What about Discrimination? Prejudice? They have and had in the past. Look at discrimination suits, they are pretty popular with major employers..

 

[jillio]

I agree with this, PFH. I really get what you mean
People seem to mix up individual exclusionary acts which anyone can do, with actual acts of PRIVILEGE which is based on who as a group in society has more historical <like Shel mentioned> and current access to that which makes up the society - things like: access to healthcare, jobs, safe working conditions, loans, ability to get basic needs met on a broad scale.

yes, privilege also relates to refusing to see it, then we can go to victim-blaming, like Sally wrote.

And the privileged receive their privilege so unquestioningly that they do not even recognize the power they exert over others. The very fact that they never have to consider that privilege is a fact of the privilege and power.

 

[posts from hell]

See, you only tackled out a part of the term issue. Racism is one where the majority overtakes the minority.
What about Discrimination? Prejudice? They have and had in the past. Look at discrimination suits, they are pretty popular with major employers..

I just did not want to write out a long winded post. *shrugs*

Same thing applies to discrimination, prejudice.

This thread is about hearing people claiming that the deaf are oppressing them. I am saying that is not possible.
When blacks, deaf, women, etc control 90% of the corporations, the government, etc, we can talk about them being able to oppress the then powerless.

 

[jillio]

Can the white population claim that the black population is being racist towards them?

In a nutshell, they really can't. They do it just to rein power by victimizing, oppressing the black population even further.

Accepting it only lends the people with privileges and power more power.

Exactly. Racism is an act expressing power.