A Violation of Human Rights Re: Forcing A Deaf Child to Wear CI

[BecLak]

Wirelessly posted



Rick is not the parent of those hundreds of thousands who had audist parents-- how can you possibly ascribe their audist behavior to them?

There are hundreds of thousands of people who have been molested by family members. Does that make you culpable for those horrors just bc you are someone's family member?

Molestation is not a belief system.

 

[GrendelQ]

Wirelessly posted

Wirelessly posted



Rick is not the parent of those hundreds of thousands who had audist parents-- how can you possibly ascribe their audist behavior to them?

There are hundreds of thousands of people who have been molested by family members. Does that make you culpable for those horrors just bc you are someone's family member?

Molestation is not a belief system.

I would rather not use Christianity as an analogy for audism. Flip argues that because many deaf have had audist parents, the assumption should be that Rick also thinks his daughter inferior to hearing children despite the admiring way he discusses her.

 

[BecLak]

Where on earth did you get the idea that Audism is being compared to Christianity or any other faith? Oh really! That is pushing it a bit much.

Perhaps 'value system' would be a better way to describe it?

 

[GrendelQ]

Where on earth did you get the idea that Audism is being compared to Christianity or any other faith? Oh really! That is pushing it a bit much.

Perhaps 'value system' would be a better way to describe it?

? What are you talking about? YOU complained that I used molestation as an analogy instead of a belief system and I responded that I would rather not use something like Christianity (a belief system!) as a comparison with audism.

 

[BecLak]

Wirelessly posted



I would rather not use Christianity as an analogy for audism. Flip argues that because many deaf have had audist parents, the assumption should be that Rick also thinks his daughter inferior to hearing children despite the admiring way he discusses her.

No one is saying that Rick or anyone thinks that their child is inferior. Only that 'being deaf' is inferior to 'being able to hear'

Can you in all honesty say that you as a hearing parent have never thought at some point or other or from time to time 'I wish my child could hear. She is missing out on so much'? This does not make you audist. But to make it mandatory that she has to hear otherwise she will miss out....that is audist.

 

[BecLak]

? What are you talking about? YOU complained that I used molestation as an analogy instead of a belief system and I responded that I would rather not use something like Christianity (a belief system!) as a comparison with audism.

A question of semantics once again. Molestation is not a value system - is that better? And for you to suggest that I would think to compare Audism to Christianity or any other faith....absurd!

 

[GrendelQ]

Beclak, I agree that this is absurd. You are the one who wants belief systems or value systems or whatever you change the same concept to in the next post (faith, religion, worldview, ethics...) to be placed on par with audism, not me.

I mean to put a brutal or negative action perpetrated by parents on a child in the same negative category as audism and say that because 1 or 1000 parents commit these terrible actions, not all do, by default. Please don't put your words in my mouth.

 

[Oddball]

I get so sick and tired of speech skills=deafness.

It is stupid.

Yes, me too. Tell that to my oral school. It wasted my time practicing my speech skills because I knew I can not speak well like a hearing person does.

 

[faire_jour]

Wirelessly posted

Wirelessly posted



look around here, people say it on this site every day.

The reason I say that is because you say that too.... Practice what you preach.

Now, I do honestly have a request for you.. Just nicely leave. Things were fine when you weren't posting much.

yeah when you get rid of anyone who disagrees with you, things turn into what you want. That's why you are trying to get a ban for what you call audism, so you can silence everyone you don't like, including the deaf people who don't fall into line. It's crap. No, i won't leave. This isn't your site.

 

[flip]

Wirelessly posted

So often I read that the Deaf do not want to be defined by the hearing. I've repeatedly said that I don't want to and don't feel it's my place to categorize the people in my community at one thing or another. That I prefer to respect how each person defines himself or herself. Why are youinsisting that I define you? If you are unclear about your motivations, you need to look inward, not to me for reasons.

You identified as anti-CI, as have several others over the years said they are against cis-- nit just in an individual case, but en masse. That's your prerogative.

You are one of few posters(less than three?) here using the term 'anti-CI', and claim several posters here belong to that label. Yes, you feel it's your place to categorize people as long you use it.

So far, you show resistance to define what your 'anti-CI' term means, and refuse to name those people who are 'anti-CI'. It's telling. Just saying.

 

[faire_jour]

Wirelessly posted

What I don't understand that she want the CI to work like miracle, yet her daughter can not understand the English language. I am glad that Miss Kat can understand with ASL. FJ kept talking about listening for the CI to work without the aid of lipreading and paper/pen, even the stranger. She think that it is possible for a CI to listen and have spoken language without ASL or lipreading. We have been trying to tell her that CI is only a hearing aid device that will only hear the sounds, not to pick up words. A profound deaf child still can not do that. So FJ is wrong at all level of making us being put down as we are wrong and she is right. Hogwash!

everything about this post is false

 

[flip]

Wirelessly posted
Rick is not the parent of those hundreds of thousands who had audist parents-- how can you possibly ascribe their audist behavior to them?

There are hundreds of thousands of people who have been molested by family members. Does that make you culpable for those horrors just bc you are someone's family member?

I am not ascribing anything. I am saying that it's no reason to be surprised that a parent is an audist even if that person have a deaf child. Do you read what I write before you post?

One have to question how it's possible to make an 'informed choice' with this kind of logic you show here.

 

[flip]

Wirelessly posted
everything about this post is false

Agree, that post you wrote is totally false

 

[Banjo]

Agree, that post you wrote is totally false

Touché.

 

[flip]

 

[BecLak]

Beclak, I agree that this is absurd. You are the one who wants belief systems or value systems or whatever you change the same concept to in the next post (faith, religion, worldview, ethics...) to be placed on par with audism, not me.

I mean to put a brutal or negative action perpetrated by parents on a child in the same negative category as audism and say that because 1 or 1000 parents commit these terrible actions, not all do, by default. Please don't put your words in my mouth.

I never did put my words in your mouth. It was in want of a better word, Because you translated belief system = faith; value system = faith therefore you translated that I was placing audism on par with Christianity! If I had meant that I would have said so. I am not placing words in your mouth. FYI, belief system and value system were being used in another context. Belief system or value system can also mean convictions other than one's faith. You are the one translating it as all one and the same. Once again just a matter of semantics.

 

[drphil]

If one accepts that "deafness/Deafness" is SUPERIOR to hearing. An interesting supposition- to say the least. Reality?
Does the fact that human being appear to have cochleas suggest something?
Bilaterally deafness December 20, 2006

Implanted Advanced Bionics-Harmony activated Aug/07

 

[BecLak]

If one accepts that "deafness/Deafness" is SUPERIOR to hearing. An interesting supposition- to say the least. Reality?
Does the fact that human being appear to have cochleas suggest something?
Bilaterally deafness December 20, 2006

Implanted Advanced Bionics-Harmony activated Aug/07

Turning the tables doesn't do anything. The issue is that NEITHER IS SUPERIOR TO THE OTHER they are equal and should be respected as such. But deaf are deaf and have uniqueness pertaining to deaf and hearing are hearing and have uniqueness pertaining to hearing - both human beings - both equal.

 

[GrendelQ]

No one is saying that Rick or anyone thinks that their child is inferior. Only that 'being deaf' is inferior to 'being able to hear'

Can you in all honesty say that you as a hearing parent have never thought at some point or other or from time to time 'I wish my child could hear. She is missing out on so much'? This does not make you audist. But to make it mandatory that she has to hear otherwise she will miss out....that is audist.

Rick's child is deaf. If he is audist, he believes that a deaf person is inherently inferior to a hearing person (or discriminates on that basis), and therefore he would believe his deaf daughter inferior to a hearing person. I asked Flip if there were any posts that indicate Rick believes his daughter to be inferior based on her hearing status -- Flip responded yes.

My child is not missing out on anything because of her hearing status. Your belief that all of us must feel a deaf child is necessarily "missing out" might be a bit of audism of your own, passed to you by others, coming out. Much as I wish I had grown up with an understanding of deafness, the ONE benefit of not being exposed to any awareness of Deaf Culture, of what it really means to be deaf, is that I was not inculcated with any of the negative perceptions of being deaf so many here on AD describe (shame, feeling of inadequacy passed on by others). I didn't have a preconceived notion of what 'being deaf' would mean for my daughter. And although I learn from others what their varied experiences have been (no one the same as another), I can apply lessons, but I know too that these can never be exactly the same as what my daughter's experience is.

 

[GrendelQ]

You are one of few posters(less than three?) here using the term 'anti-CI', and claim several posters here belong to that label. Yes, you feel it's your place to categorize people as long you use it.

So far, you show resistance to define what your 'anti-CI' term means, and refuse to name those people who are 'anti-CI'. It's telling. Just saying.

? Ahh, no, that term is bandied about quite a bit. In fact, PFH set up a whole very active thread to discuss the topic. I didn't invent it.


You state that you are anti-CI and ask me to categorize other posters I think are audist and anti-CI, even though I repeatedly say that if someone wants a label, he can provide one for himself, I won't do that? You ask me to define a term that you use to describe yourself, and get cranky when I don't define the way you want me to? Because I won't play your little game you throw your little pieces at me and claim it's "telling?" OK. I guess you've been told. I'll tell the others too: I'm not the one who sits upon a throne declaring "You're an audist! Off with your head!" and "You are opposed to CI's -- go stand in that corner!"