Grummer
Active Member
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2006
- Messages
- 14,707
- Reaction score
- 18
There is a number of 'hearing dogs' organisation abroad, i feel there's a lot of hypocrisy going around when they call themselves "Hearing dogs for deaf people" when in fact they only serve 'hearing impaired people'
Dont you think they ought to change their names to 'listening dog for hearing impaired' ?? or similar
Sure it is 'old fashioned' for the terms hearin impaired is horrendeous to us, but in practical terms of being true to their intend on who they actually serves is far from being 'politically corect' since it is not about serving deaf people, its more about serving the 'was or has-been hearie !' the very hearing attitudial hearie gone 'deaf' if NOT "Deaf" ! !
SO, to twist it inside out to be clearer, it IS politically correct BECAUSE they trained themselves and prefered to work with HEARING IMPAIRED people or late deafen as the 'nominal mode of communication is done in pre-dominantly English , Not Sign language or even at a 'level' of hearie-acented spoken English !
To me, thats just blatent discrimination !
Since they only' really' understood hearing people, they dont understand nor want to , understand or work with Deaf people, nope.
its just a namesake to 'look' angelic or 'appropriate' in the 'modern way of defining terms', we aren't the gulliable are we? where's the real deal? practically non-existent, for if they mean it to be for the fashioanable term - Deaf people, then they should learn signlanguage and realise that deaf people are visual people, emails for helps dont cut it. actual demonstrations, and actual visits to help. Otherwise i reckon they should change their names to be honest and call it "Listening dog for Hearing Impaired'
I want to see what other deaf /Deaf people thinks about that, what are you own views, maybe you wont agree it and rather it to be called something else , then what?
In summary, my post, its not about what dogs are , or who should have it, its more about who there will give oppurtunity are first chance or even given second chances without Hesitation. it is merely about words, the very fashion of words, for all i know, it feels like it's just seemed to be abused......to a 'fashionable mind-fuck ways of schemes', that doesnt do squat in real-world terms.
I guess this post might open up a floodgate of a whole slew of subtle discrimination to be "out in the open" well i certainly hope so too
Cheers
Dont you think they ought to change their names to 'listening dog for hearing impaired' ?? or similar
Sure it is 'old fashioned' for the terms hearin impaired is horrendeous to us, but in practical terms of being true to their intend on who they actually serves is far from being 'politically corect' since it is not about serving deaf people, its more about serving the 'was or has-been hearie !' the very hearing attitudial hearie gone 'deaf' if NOT "Deaf" ! !
SO, to twist it inside out to be clearer, it IS politically correct BECAUSE they trained themselves and prefered to work with HEARING IMPAIRED people or late deafen as the 'nominal mode of communication is done in pre-dominantly English , Not Sign language or even at a 'level' of hearie-acented spoken English !
To me, thats just blatent discrimination !
Since they only' really' understood hearing people, they dont understand nor want to , understand or work with Deaf people, nope.
its just a namesake to 'look' angelic or 'appropriate' in the 'modern way of defining terms', we aren't the gulliable are we? where's the real deal? practically non-existent, for if they mean it to be for the fashioanable term - Deaf people, then they should learn signlanguage and realise that deaf people are visual people, emails for helps dont cut it. actual demonstrations, and actual visits to help. Otherwise i reckon they should change their names to be honest and call it "Listening dog for Hearing Impaired'
I want to see what other deaf /Deaf people thinks about that, what are you own views, maybe you wont agree it and rather it to be called something else , then what?
In summary, my post, its not about what dogs are , or who should have it, its more about who there will give oppurtunity are first chance or even given second chances without Hesitation. it is merely about words, the very fashion of words, for all i know, it feels like it's just seemed to be abused......to a 'fashionable mind-fuck ways of schemes', that doesnt do squat in real-world terms.
I guess this post might open up a floodgate of a whole slew of subtle discrimination to be "out in the open" well i certainly hope so too
Cheers
Last edited: