Crack the myth: Reverse Audism does NOT exist.

Status
Not open for further replies.
jillio said:
Just because there are the few that misuse the word doesn't mean that the construct is not valid.
Click to expand...

I never said that it was invalid though, all I'm saying that it there needs to be different terms. I don't know what to call it cause I don't think I'm the one in charge.

What I'm saying is that there needs to be a distinction made (someone to do it) so we can all understand the situation and not become confused over what it's about, hence the concept of this topic. :|
 
naisho said:
I never said that it was invalid though, all I'm saying that it there needs to be different terms. I don't know what to call it cause I don't think I'm the one in charge.

What I'm saying is that there needs to be a distinction made (someone to do it) so we can all understand the situation and not become confused over what it's about, hence the concept of this topic. :|
Click to expand...

The deaf going off on Marlee Matlin can be called a bunch of belligerent dumbasses. That said I also don't like what Marlee is doing. :D
 
posts from hell said:
There is a specific reason I posted that example. It wasn't about discussing the stats behind the theory. It wasn't about discussing who was at fault either.

The very example had a person accusing the person who said the hearing parents were ill equipped to have a deaf child of being audist. I disagree, and plenty here disagree too.
Click to expand...

This was the post that bothered me - and I had to think about it for a few days and presented my case here.

http://www.alldeaf.com/1958423-post142.html
 
naisho said:
I never said that it was invalid though, all I'm saying that it there needs to be different terms. I don't know what to call it cause I don't think I'm the one in charge.

What I'm saying is that there needs to be a distinction made (someone to do it) so we can all understand the situation and not become confused over what it's about, hence the concept of this topic. :|
Click to expand...

I'm not looking for that to happen. People are still denying that prejudice, discrimination, and audism or racism are separate constructs reinforced by power differentials in society.
 
DeafCaroline said:
If a deaf child is not performing well academically and/or socially in mainstream settings, then their parents were not well-equipped. This is not a blame game on parents - I don't blame my parents at all for how I fared in school and in my social life. They followed the advice of the medical community with the sole intention of doing what was believed to be best for their child.

As far as being able to communicate - how do you define that? You think it's enough to have speech skills and only comprehending a percentage of what was said to them either at the dinner table with family or in mainstream school settings? That's good enough for you?
Click to expand...



No, I think people should be taught and learn to communicate the best they can, but no matter how you look at it speech skills is a relative thing because, in fact, speech and language itself is not perfect.

Would you say someone who has no speech skills, but plays in the NFL and makes millions a year has learned to survive? I would say that person has and that his parents did a good job.

The statistics of failing is not a representation of audism so much as a failed school system which is not perfect for either hearing nor non-hearing students.
 
VacationGuy234 said:
No, I think people should be taught and learn to communicate the best they can, but no matter how you look at it speech skills is a relative thing because, in fact, speech and language itself is not perfect.

Would you say someone who has no speech skills, but plays in the NFL and makes millions a year has learned to survive? I would say that person has and that his parents did a good job.

The statistics of failing is not a representation of audism so much as a failed school system which is not perfect for either hearing nor non-hearing students.
Click to expand...

The deaf suffer disproportionately from the rotten school system. That is the result of audism.

The individual you used as an example: HE is responsible for his achievements. One does not develop survival skills unless one is placed in a position of having to learn them. In an environment that addresses their needs, deaf children don't learn to survive. They learn to thrive.
 
rolling7 said:
What is there to understand???

You show animosity toward me and other AD members all the time.
Click to expand...

If you have to ask what there is to understand, you need to go back to square one and start all over again.
 
posts from hell said:
How is that oppressing the hearing people?
Click to expand...

Simple, there are those in the deaf community (note: I did not say all) who take the position that the hearing world "owes" them. Their situation, in their opinion, is the fault of the hearing. Therefore, the stay on SSDI all their life.
I see this each week at CRR, our assistance program for the deaf community. Very few want to take the resource available to them and better their life, most are content to stay with SSDI. Although there are deaf such as I and others I know who pay for SSDI (and other entitlement programs) the greater number is the hearing population.
IMO that is the deaf sticking it to the hearing.
 
jillio said:
I'm not looking for that to happen. People are still denying that prejudice, discrimination, and audism or racism are separate constructs reinforced by power differentials in society.
Click to expand...

Nobody on this thread is denying that. :confused:

I'm very curious to know what your definition of racism is. You said minority groups cannot be racist, but then you did say they can be discriminatory. But isn't discrimination based on racial prejudice an act of racism??? I just don't understand what your definition of racism is. I think you are mixing ideological racism with institutional racism, which are two separate but related things.

Lastly, I would caution against equating audism with racism. That is a very, very tricky call to make. There are certainly similarities at play, but not enough to use them analogously.
 
jillio said:
If you have to ask what there is to understand, you need to go back to square one and start all over again.
Click to expand...

Hey Queen of Deflect, you are the one who posted that it is not possible for blacks to be racist. That is square one and to start over.....you are still wrong...they can!
 
rolling7 said:
Simple, there are those in the deaf community (note: I did not say all) who take the position that the hearing world "owes" them. Their situation, in their opinion, is the fault of the hearing. Therefore, the stay on SSDI all their life.
I see this each week at CRR, our assistance program for the deaf community. Very few want to take the resource available to them and better their life, most are content to stay with SSDI. Although there are deaf such as I and others I know who pay for SSDI (and other entitlement programs) the greater number is the hearing population.
IMO that is the deaf sticking it to the hearing.
Click to expand...

Thankfully that is an opinion.
 
rolling7 said:
Simple, there are those in the deaf community (note: I did not say all) who take the position that the hearing world "owes" them. Their situation, in their opinion, is the fault of the hearing. Therefore, the stay on SSDI all their life.
I see this each week at CRR, our assistance program for the deaf community. Very few want to take the resource available to them and better their life, most are content to stay with SSDI. Although there are deaf such as I and others I know who pay for SSDI (and other entitlement programs) the greater number is the hearing population.
IMO that is the deaf sticking it to the hearing.
Click to expand...

That is not reverse audism.

Entitlement? Laziness? Perhaps. But it is not reverse audism. You're not even near the ballpark on this one, dude.
 
rolling7 said:
Hey Queen of Deflect, you are the one who posted that it is not possible for blacks to be racist. That is square one and to start over.....you are still wrong...they can!
Click to expand...

I've never seen jillio say anything close to "it's not possible for any minority group to be racist or prejudiced."
 
VacationGuy234 said:
No, I think people should be taught and learn to communicate the best they can, but no matter how you look at it speech skills is a relative thing because, in fact, speech and language itself is not perfect.

Would you say someone who has no speech skills, but plays in the NFL and makes millions a year has learned to survive? I would say that person has and that his parents did a good job.

The statistics of failing is not a representation of audism so much as a failed school system which is not perfect for either hearing nor non-hearing students.
Click to expand...

And what are the chances that a non-speaking adult would make millions in NFL? If you are going to list such examples, then you are proving that it's practically a one in a million chance a child would survive and succeed enormously despite being left out in classrooms and social settings. Due to stats - yeah, the deaf demographic is not doing that great economically. As you say, they're "surviving" - if they're still alive and breathing, then they're "surviving". that's not a good indicator that their parents were well-equipped or made the right choices.

To me, like jillio illustrated - there's surviving (whatever that means - surviving failing school? surviving non-existent social lives? Subsisting on welfare or minimum wage jobs?) then there's thriving because their parents made the right choices and selected the appropriate services due to being well-equipped and well-informed that gives the child a better chance to succeed as adults.
 
rolling7 said:
Simple, there are those in the deaf community (note: I did not say all) who take the position that the hearing world "owes" them. Their situation, in their opinion, is the fault of the hearing. Therefore, the stay on SSDI all their life.
I see this each week at CRR, our assistance program for the deaf community. Very few want to take the resource available to them and better their life, most are content to stay with SSDI. Although there are deaf such as I and others I know who pay for SSDI (and other entitlement programs) the greater number is the hearing population.
IMO that is the deaf sticking it to the hearing.
Click to expand...

Oh, puh-leeze! If the deaf had not been oppressed throughout history by the majority hearing, the situation you are describing would never have occurred. The hearing have set the deaf up for failure through oppressive and audist policies. Then want to turn around and blame the deaf for their plight. And obviously, you have bought into it.

Whether you realize it or not, there are far more hearing who receive SSDI than deaf.
 
rolling7 said:
Hey Queen of Deflect, you are the one who posted that it is not possible for blacks to be racist. That is square one and to start over.....you are still wrong...they can!
Click to expand...

Again, you are misreading because you are incapable of understanding in anything more than a superficial way what is being discussed.
 
TheWriteAlex said:
That is not reverse audism.

Entitlement? Laziness? Perhaps. But it is not reverse audism. You're not even near the ballpark on this one, dude.
Click to expand...

Right. And entitlement and laziness are two completely different topics.:P
 
TheWriteAlex said:
Nobody on this thread is denying that. :confused:

I'm very curious to know what your definition of racism is. You said minority groups cannot be racist, but then you did say they can be discriminatory. But isn't discrimination based on racial prejudice an act of racism??? I just don't understand what your definition of racism is. I think you are mixing ideological racism with institutional racism, which are two separate but related things.

Lastly, I would caution against equating audism with racism. That is a very, very tricky call to make. There are certainly similarities at play, but not enough to use them analogously.
Click to expand...

Discrimination can be based on prejudice. But for racism to have an effect on an entire group it has to have a societal basis that reinforces it so that it applies without conscious application. That is why I said that it occurs from a position of power and from the dominant culture. Does a Black person discriminating against a whilte person result in wide spread reduction of opportunity for the whole white population? No. It is a rarely occurring thing and effects no more than that one individual. It is the institutional racism that is enacted every day that continues to oppress on a group level.

I guess you might say that a singlular Black man that dislikes whites because of past experience with a few white people might be being "racist". I see it more as stereotyping and prejudice. That Black man, or the Black population as a whole, at this point in time, do not have the power to reverse the effects of racism this country still suffers under. Therefore, they cannot oppress an entire population of whites simply because they are white. They cannot enact racism.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top