And even if you won your quest for prelingually deaf children NOT to be implanted
since its CI that is coming from without to us, from those like you, that is your quest. NOT ours.
WE, Deaf and that's the majority are opposed to DENTING sign language to Deaf babies and children. we are opposed to the practices and polices and actions that keep Deaf children away from other Deaf children so that they do not revert back to being Deaf
if you call that our quest ...
no argument here..
the same problem would still exist, just with hearing aids. CI is not the source of the philosophy.
there is a very real difference in the level of assimilation in regards to the technology and the therapies used with them depending..
also their is a very real difference in levels of penetration of Deaf bodies..
with products of no choice for the Deaf involved..
we oppose this..
NO one has ever stated orlaism began with CI..
no one!!
Even your own sources stress the importance of oral communication.
the importance is not the sole importance. not in my sources so pls demonstrate to me what sources i have posted that claim oral is the sole important factor. thank you.
the approach i support is a bilingual one. i have stated this repeatedly!!
Because as you like to say we do not live in a vacuum, though bubble would be more accurate. You need to equip children for life, and they'll be living and interacting with hearing people.
indeed thats why gaining fluency in a mode of language Deaf can perceive right form the start is a MUST!!!!
thats why SIGN LANGUAGE acquisition for Deaf babies and children is a necessity!!! it is our birthright!!
Deaf have a right to be Deaf!!
This makes your constant bashing of CIs and arguments against them thin and rather stupid. You have a short view not a long one.
then let us be stupid, (roll eyes)
and kindly leave us alone..
(if only those like you would of.....if only)
Irrelevant, I don't have be Deaf to under the issues at hand.
you don't have to be Deaf to discuss the issues at hand, and i don't have to be a women to go to a women's board and discuss women's rights issues either, i can go to a black board and post but the fact m not a women, and im not black, and your NOT Deaf will be brought to the front of the conversation.
In fact maybe it gives me a better perspective. My opinion isn't colored with bitterness and anger that causes me to fail to look at this logically, intellectually and philosophically.
your opinion is colored by product loyalty and religious conviction. that hardly qualifies you to make nay remarks regarding us.
you hardly are looking at this philosophically but by all means, which philosopher and works of the west would you like to discuss in regards to this topic? or would you prefer the east? should we start with pre socratics? or neoplatonist of the late classical? or with perhaps the madhymaka and yogacara? perhaps later takuin? of rinzai zen myshunji lineage? in regards to orlaism and sign the enlightenment offer some interesting philosophical speculations?
so pls ambrosia.
lets discuss philosophy?
perhaps another thread?
what do you think is the fundamental difference between the phenomenology of husserl and that of heidegger and can that difference be in anyway tossed into a discussion of bergsonian vitalism in relation to having a Deaf daughter?
or maybe you wan to discuss foucault's technology of normalization?
or given your sharp philosophical intellect (roll eyes), you want to have a go at the subtle nuances of Deaf epistemology in your gaining knowledge of hoichis Deafie ontology?
mmmm......
your certainly NOT looking at this intellectually either, after all you don't even read any cites or sources.
first step in the above ambrosia
read, and read the cites and sources, you didnt even know what a research article was....so..spare us..for heaven's sake
the fact is your NOT Deaf. so regarding what WE do, or what WE wish, or how WE decide to do what WE do, and what is best for US,.... you ave NO state at all in regards to our children, OUR future, and ourselves..
YOUR NOT DEAF.
I know. If you'd paid any attention you'd have noticed I too am pro bilingualism.
i never stated you weren't pro bilingualism. but your facade is starting to crack re your posts.
Except, you're not really. You're missing the fact that the other half of that bilingualism is ORAL.
NO you are incorrect and in factual error here. the other half is not oral. english is NOT just an oral language. far far from it.
one can and people do learn to read and write fluently in english without speaking it..every damn day, ..english is not only an oral language ambrosia....
so much for your intellectual fortitude...(rolls eyes)
You seem to think sign is the ONLY solution,
SIGN language is the best solution for Deaf babies and children. it is the perfect mode of language for Deaf...its the natural mode of communication for for Deaf
this does NOT negate at all the acquisition of another language such as english, actually it aids in it. by gaining fluency in sign one can cross fertilize that fluency in gaining another language fluently, even more so in the golden window
well if you will classify a language as a skill. then fine. your plm is i have NEVER EVER stated a monolingual approach, i grew up bilingual so the ideal of a monolingual approach with any language i've always found to be rather silly.
I feel that CI has a better chance of reaching successful oralism than hearing aids in the profoundly deaf.
leave your mask of benevolence at the door pls!!
yes you do feel that.
too bad for you
YOUR NOT DEAF. so what ever you feel or not regarding US is irrelevant..
your a blond hair blue eyed girl .....so go to a black board and tell them "you feel" whats best for them..
or a native board, or any board of any minority...go on lady try it!!
The research supports that.
no it doesnt. so pls, how much research have you read? your not even familiar with our cultural mores and beliefs of the end users of your product...so your in no position to claim whats best or not..
Fact. Will it work 100% in 100% of kids? No, NOTHING has guarantees like that. nothing.
if nothing is even like that then why bring up a "nothing"? instead discuss the "things" we know...
and your actually wrong.
in regards to language acquisition. all Deaf babies can acquire a sign language far easier after all, it's natural, and faster, and attain fluency in sign language. that is a FACT
But better support systems should be in place.
indeed and the best support for Deaf babies and Deaf children is immediate and early sign language acquisition!!!
Sign language is the best support..
Even if a parent puts off sign they're should be requirements set in place that IF a kid happens to be one that isn't developing oral language that sign should be required, to avoid language deprivation. But still bilingual would be better.
sorry we disagree with you here, and Deaf culture very much disagrees with here. Sign isn't just a secondary option just in case a Deaf kid doesn't become the oral star (which is the majority, the majority of orla kids are not the stars paraded..),
NO....!!
we OPPOSE DENYING sign language to Deaf babies and children!!!!
it denies them their birthright!!
and WE as a majority that is Deaf are opposed to denying Deaf babies their birth right.
Oh really??????! Stop, just stop that. You look foolish denying what she said, he'll you look foolish denying things you've said.
so much denying with you.....telling..
That last one was the most ludicrous claim btw. One I asked her to back up the claim for but she didn't. She's Jezie, the fortune telling gypsy hmmmmmm
which claim?
by the way my nani was gypsie. your scoffing or dismissing jeize for being a gypsy i find insulting and racist!!.
your a white blond hair blue eyed majority women...
both in regards to Deaf and Gypsies...
your supremacist face and attitude bleeds through your posts..
bleeds
