Audism

jillio said:
And that is where we run into problems. With the hearing attempting to correct the deaf individual's experience.

Validate it, damn it, don't correct it!!! Then you can claim the status of being non-audist.
Click to expand...

I think you are very much mistaken if you think I was correcting sallylou's experience by stating my own. In fact I very explicitly acknowledged that hers was very different from mine and that I cannot speak as a deaf person, only on behalf of my daughter and with her in mind for the time being.
 
sallylou said:
Of course, Deaf/HOH/deaf people face discrimination. I don't know where you got the idea that I disagree with that.

We differ on three points:

(1) Hearing people don't understand what it's like to be Deaf/HOH; this is my perspective.

(2) Hearing people expect Deaf/HOH people to conform to their expectations; and

(3) When Deaf/HOH people do not conform to the expectations of hearing people, hearing people consider this rejection of the hearing world.

To quote JK Rowling:
Click to expand...

Sallylou, I disagree with you only on #3. I wholeheartedly agree on all other points you've made, not sure why you think otherwise.

On #3, I don't think most hearing people--and I can speak from this perspective--are aware that there is a rejection Being made, that there is any alternative to the hearing world. They may just see someone who "can't" hear or speak, not someone who is consciously not conforming.
 
Last edited:
Mountain Man said:
Then would you settle for needlessly pedantic? BecLak's definition was accurate enough for the purposes of this thread, and your pointless hair splitting has added nothing to the discussion.
Click to expand...

Yes, I would settle for pedantic over rude and insulting, as is your comment.

You may see it as hairsplitting, but I think there's a significant difference between defining audism as the unwillingness to validate a separate Deaf culture vs. "the notion that one is superior based on one’s ability to hear or behave in the manner of one who hears," as described by Tom Humphries. I don't think the former is accurate or sufficient or measurable and I don't think most Hearing people see Deaf as rebels or non-conformists and are punishing them for that. I think they are behaving in an audist way because they think the deaf -- all deaf, not just Deaf -- are physically different, not culturally different, and that this makes one better than the other.
 
GrendelQ said:
Yes, I would settle for pedantic over rude and insulting, as is your comment.

You may see it as hairsplitting, but I think there's a significant difference between defining audism as the unwillingness to validate a separate Deaf culture vs. "the notion that one is superior based on one’s ability to hear or behave in the manner of one who hears," as described by Tom Humphries. I don't think the former is accurate or sufficient or measurable and I don't think most Hearing people see Deaf as rebels or non-conformists and are punishing them for that. I think they are behaving in an audist way because they think the deaf -- all deaf, not just Deaf -- are physically different, not culturally different, and that this makes one better than the other.
Click to expand...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=356mE1KcXQw]YouTube - rebirth[/ame]

27 seconds and to the point, again.
 
GrendelQ said:
Sallylou, I disagree with you only on #3. I wholeheartedly agree on all other points you've made, not sure why you think otherwise.

On #3, I don't think most hearing people--and I can speak from this perspective--are aware that there is a rejection Being made, that there is any alternative to the hearing world. They may just see someone who "can't" hear or speak, not someone who is consciously not conforming.
Click to expand...

What rejection is there being made? I was not aware of rejecting the hearing world. Can you tell me, all knowing hearie?
 
posts from hell said:
What rejection is there being made? I was not aware of rejecting the hearing world. Can you tell me, all knowing hearie?
Click to expand...

:laugh2: Exactly. I agree with you. I don't see that there's a rejection being made OR perceived. I'm speaking contrary to those on this thread who argue that audism is when hearing people see being Deaf as a rejection of Hearing culture. As a hearing person, I haven't experienced this as a common Hearing reaction to those who are deaf. I see them as behaving in an audistic way because they think that hearing ability has something to do with being inferior or superior.
 
sallylou said:
Flip, I read your previous post and now I understand.

The issue is:
Is demanding the right to chose between ASL/Deaf school and oral audist?

Notice that this is all about the parent's right, not the child's. I have a problem with the fact that children have no rights in general.
Click to expand...
Going low context, I would say that it's audist to demand the right to choose between ASL and oral because, oralism is audist.
 
GrendelQ said:
I don't think Oralism was under discussion or debate in this thread. I dont care to place a judgment on how you grew up or how you choose to educate your kids: if you are an oralist or choose that, I take no issue with it. I just choose a different path for my family and my child is at an ASL - based school.
Click to expand...
Ok. You defend oralism as a valid, unproblematic philosophy and choice in the american society. Confusion cleared up. Thanks.
 
flip said:
Ok. You defend oralism as a valid, unproblematic philosophy and choice in the american society. Confusion cleared up. Thanks.
Click to expand...

Do you really think it's OK to make extremist statements like that, that just aren't true at all? Don't you think it does serious damage to any credibility you might have had?

Where do you see any defense of oralism in my posts? I have not discussed oralism. Given that my own daughter is an ASL-using student at a Deaf school and I'm a strong proponent of incorporating ASL into a deaf child's home and academic life as quickly as possible, I wouldn't feel qualified or interested in putting up a defense of oralism.

If you consider yourself an "oralist", I have no problem with that, go ahead and make your argument.
 
Last edited:
Can we all agree on the following statements:

1) A person who acts like what BecLack said in her post (see below for reference) is an audist.

BecLak said:
Audism is a non-acceptance of Deaf having their own Culture and Language. That if you don't adapt to Hearing (with aid of HA, CI or by being oral), you get treated as inferior or with disgust, like a 'broken toy'.
Click to expand...

2) An audist does not necessary have to follow BekLak's description. Audism can be manifested in many different ways.

Deal?
 
Daredevel7 said:
Can we all agree on the following statements:

1) A person who acts like what BecLack said in her post (see below for reference) is an audist.



2) An audist does not necessary have to follow BekLak's description. Audism can be manifested in many different ways.

Deal?
Click to expand...

Agreed!
 
Why do you have to call people names in the first place? Why not just admit that there are people in this world who disagree with some things you believe, and leave it at that?

(Grendel slipped.)
 
GrendelQ said:
:laugh2: Exactly. I agree with you. I don't see that there's a rejection being made OR perceived. I'm speaking contrary to those on this thread who argue that audism is when hearing people see being Deaf as a rejection of Hearing culture. As a hearing person, I haven't experienced this as a common Hearing reaction to those who are deaf. I see them as behaving in an audistic way because they think that hearing ability has something to do with being inferior or superior.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't the former simply be an extension of the latter, or vice versa?

I've seen, especially on online forums, people literally do say that Deaf culture is a rejection of majority/Hearing culture, typically when the subject of CI (and the implication that the choice to get/not get a CI shouldn't even be a choice) comes up.

You can view it whichever way you want (rejection of culture comes from view that hearing is superior, or hearing superiority comes from the rejection of Deaf culture), but I would guess that there is a strong correlation between the two views. But the "rejection of majority/hearing culture" definitely does happen, albeit more often online than offline.
 
GrendelQ said:
Do you really think it's OK to make extremist statements like that, that just aren't true at all? Don't you think it does serious damage to any credibility you might have had?

Where do you see any defense of oralism in my posts? I have not discussed oralism. Given that my own daughter is an ASL-using student at a Deaf school and I'm a strong proponent of incorporating ASL into a deaf child's home and academic life as quickly as possible, I wouldn't feel qualified or interested in putting up a defense of oralism.

If you consider yourself an "oralist", I have no problem with that, go ahead and make your argument.
Click to expand...
Ok. You think oralism is a bad idea. Confusion cleared up. Thanks.
 
flip said:
Yes, your question is actually not that bad.
Click to expand...

From the few things I've read in this post, that's what I gleaned, but I could be wrong. But the easiest way is to actually ask.

GrendelQ: Do you have any opinion on the Oralism educational method, and if so, what is it?
 
StSapphire said:
From the few things I've read in this post, that's what I gleaned, but I could be wrong. But the easiest way is to actually ask.

GrendelQ: Do you have any opinion on the Oralism educational method, and if so, what is it?
Click to expand...

I think talking about it opens up such a can of worms. :laugh2: would be a significant deviation from this thread.

I think in the same way Marschark does, quoted in my signature. There's no one right approach that fits all deaf children. I made a very clear choice about what was right for my daughter based on so much that's specific to her needs and abilities and on what we can provide. And we've Been so very happy about our decisions. But that doesn't mean our choice is necessarily right for others. I couldn't possibly give an opinion about what's right for Flip's children without knowing far more detail. And besides, why would Flip care what my opinion is on Whatever he or she thinks oralism is? I'm very qualified to make decisions for my child, but not at all qualified to tell anyone else what to do with their children. And no offense, but I feel the same applies to everybody else on this board.
 
GrendelQ said:
You may see it as hairsplitting...
Click to expand...
Because it is hairsplitting.

GrendelQ said:
...but I think there's a significant difference between defining audism as the unwillingness to validate a separate Deaf culture vs. "the notion that one is superior based on one’s ability to hear or behave in the manner of one who hears," as described by Tom Humphries.
Click to expand...
There is no significant difference between those two beliefs/behaviors, and claiming that someone who says "I validate your culture so long as you don't interact with mine" is not an audist by BecLak's definition is absurd.
 
Mountain Man said:
Because it is hairsplitting.


There is no significant difference between those two beliefs/behaviors, and claiming that someone who says "I validate your culture so long as you don't interact with mine" is not an audist by BecLak's definition is absurd.
Click to expand...

I disagree.
 
Back
Top