What does "audism" mean to the deaf community?

From what I've seen that some people on AD had used this term "austism" to describe and identity oral deaf people, because audists are more comfortable with spoken English and are able to use their residual hearing I don't see anything wrong with them using spoken language, while I don't see anything wrong with Deaf people using ASL.

I am so tired of seeing both the Deaf Community, the Audists at each others throat, all the bully and harassment. We don't need the dividing, we are all human beings. I have friends who were raised oral, SEE, PSE, ASL, cued speech we all respect each others. It shouldn't be deaf vs Deaf, or hard of hearing vs Deaf, or Audists vs Deaf or hearing vs deaf.
 
My friend who has a deaf daughter is PISSED. Her job hired a high priced consultant to teach her and her employees (she works as a probation officer) about deaf people and sign language. My friend put on her FB status "my boxing gloves are on"...because this woman was telling her and her coworkers how sign language limites deaf people and that because of it, many deaf people have limited skills. Now, that's VERY audist. My friend is going to file a complaint with the dept of correction services. Good for her! Vwe need to get rid of the audists from spreading inaccurate information like that.
 
shel90 said:
Audism to me means the attitudes and views of hearing being superior to being deaf. There are so many examples of behaviors that reflects these attitudes and views. Frankly, I have such a deep hatred for audism.
Click to expand...

I know this thread was intended for the deaf, but I just wanted to say that I agree completely with your definition. It is a feeling that speech and hearing, even a small amount, are preferable to sign and no hearing. It, indeed, shows up in various behaviors. One does not necessarily have to be completely orally oriented in order to be audist.
 
:wave: I have been reading here, too and was just doing that since I didn't think it was for me to write in, but I am agreeing with everyone here. If I could come in - this is my thought - I think it is a superiority thing - as in mis-perception that speech is "better than" signing. That signing <Allegedly> is not as complex as speech, is of somehow "lower" level :roll:; is not good enough in itself but is okay to be used as means to acquire speech only. Also has to do with peoples' mistakenly interchanging speech and language, that speech is necessary for language. I remember times as young child not being understood or not understanding certain things, going to speech therapy - yes for different reasons than what a deaf child goes for. And I remember how isolating it was because the speech therapy was in different section of school and playground, with its own play equipment, own buses, own doors - it was where they "stuck" all "those" kids.
But about audism - like any 'ism - IT is what "disables" or "handicaps". NOT ASL. Not Deaf.

:ty:for reading, if you did-
 
dogmom said:
:wave: I have been reading here, too and was just doing that since I didn't think it was for me to write in, but I am agreeing with everyone here. If I could come in - this is my thought - I think it is a superiority thing - as in mis-perception that speech is "better than" signing. That signing <Allegedly> is not as complex as speech, is of somehow "lower" level :roll:; is not good enough in itself but is okay to be used as means to acquire speech only. Also has to do with peoples' mistakenly interchanging speech and language, that speech is necessary for language. I remember times as young child not being understood or not understanding certain things, going to speech therapy - yes for different reasons than what a deaf child goes for. And I remember how isolating it was because the speech therapy was in different section of school and playground, with its own play equipment, own buses, own doors - it was where they "stuck" all "those" kids.
But about audism - like any 'ism - IT is what "disables" or "handicaps". NOT ASL. Not Deaf.

:ty:for reading, if you did-
Click to expand...

I've always said my biggest handicap is other people's attitude toward my deafness.
 
Great point, Souggy. The quickest way to destroy a culture is to destroy its language.

I haven't felt any reluctance from deaf people to accept me as a HOH person. Maybe part of the issue is how a HOH person approaches the deaf community a HOH's attitude. So far, deaf people have been kind in answering my questions and helping me learn (like this thread). :ty: :D
 
Well, I don't know why there's a desire to get audism into dictionaries everywhere. I know what it means and all but I can't understand why a lot of time and energy is being spent on a word that will be abused. Just as the term, racism, has gotten watered down, doesn't have the same impact it used to because of trigger-happy folks. What's wrong with words like discrimination and oppression which are spot on?
 
In another thread somewhere at some earlier point I wrote a bit my thoughts relating to what Souggy and Sally just now in here wrote - about the connection between attempted destruction of culture - specifically and most obviously language - of First Nations peoples, especially in earlier school settings - and same attempts with regard to ASL or signed languages in oral-only venues.
 
sallylou said:
Great point, Souggy. The quickest way to destroy a culture is to destroy its language.

I haven't felt any reluctance from deaf people to accept me as a HOH person. Maybe part of the issue is how a HOH person approaches the deaf community a HOH's attitude. So far, deaf people have been kind in answering my questions and helping me learn (like this thread). :ty: :D
Click to expand...

You are right. Because of your attitudes about your deafness and ASL, u are more likely accepted by the Deaf community even if u aren't fluent in ASL. If one wants to be a part of the Deaf community but shows an audist attitude toward their cultural values, then more likely the person wouldn't be fully accepted.
 
rockdrummer said:
You should because it is ugly.
Click to expand...

I know, my dear friend. But, I don't want them to think I hate them as persons for what/who they are. I just despite "audism" by how they TREAT deaf people. It bothers me. I love just bein' me and I accept "me" for what/who I am. That's my comfortin', not theirs. I am sorry if, I sound feisty or spunky. I am sometime bein' selfish about what and who I am. :lol:
 
Don't be an arrogant jerk really should cover it.
 
shel90 said:
You are right. Because of your attitudes about your deafness and ASL, u are more likely accepted by the Deaf community even if u aren't fluent in ASL. If one wants to be a part of the Deaf community but shows an audist attitude toward their cultural values, then more likely the person wouldn't be fully accepted.
Click to expand...

This is such a true statement, and one that so many just don't get. Acceptance isn't dependent upon knowing the language. What is most important is giving value to the language and the cultural values encountered. For instance, asking a deaf person what they would prefer, instead of telling them what they should do.

As a hearing person, I have always felt accepted by the Deaf, even prior to my becoming fluent in ASL. But I approached the people with a "Help me understand." attitude. I went into it asking that they teach me their way, rather than demanding that they do things my way. Consequently, I have never had problems feeling accepted inside of Deaf Culture. I would say the same thing holds true for sallylou as an HOH person. She is one of those people that is open to differing perspectives and views, and that comes across in the way she presents herself. Therefore, she has no problem being accepted by Deaf Culture.
 
Hmmm, when I think about it, I have met several oralists who admitted they wished they grew up with ASL, while I have never met an ASL user who wished to be oralists. Maybe it is just me, I dunno. But I do not see any controversy in the deaf community about the power of ASL. Whoever said that if an ape uses sign, it is language, but if a human being signs, it is not was undoubtedly hearing.
Yup, take this with a grain of slt, lol.
 
Beowulf said:
Hmmm, when I think about it, I have met several oralists who admitted they wished they grew up with ASL, while I have never met an ASL user who wished to be oralists. Maybe it is just me, I dunno. But I do not see any controversy in the deaf community about the power of ASL. Whoever said that if an ape uses sign, it is language, but if a human being signs, it is not was undoubtedly hearing.
Yup, take this with a grain of slt, lol.
Click to expand...

I can name a few...

And all of them are bitter because the Deaf community wouldn't concede to their "I am better than everyone" attitudes.
 
souggy said:
I can name a few...

And all of them are bitter because the Deaf community wouldn't concede to their "I am better than everyone" attitudes.
Click to expand...

Hmmm, I am wondering if this takes a back door to my post #29.....
 
Back
Top