Should the Deaf Be Considered an Ethnic Group?

naisho

Forum Disorders M.D.,Ph.D
Short answer:

Socially in cultural contex: Yes, it can, just like how gays, lesbians, Beiber-lovers are.
Scientifically: No, it never will and never can.



At least not until every human on earth has reproduced enough that the gene difference in the world human population is in equlibrium via the Hardy-Weinberg law.

That's it in a nutshell.
 

flip

New Member
I wish some people would realize that all hearing individuals are not the enemy.
Using the word "all" imply that only some hearing people are the enemies, not all of them. I'm curious who those few or many hearing enemies are, so I can protect myself?
 

naisho

Forum Disorders M.D.,Ph.D
1. Deafness is biological, you don't choose it. You are born into it.
2. Deaf culture is not self defined in a purely cultural manner, but based on how deaf people experience the world as full human beeings.

The bigger issue is when to classify it as a group.

One could classify it biologically as an 'group' when a question pertains to a linguistic issue, such as sharing languages, similar values.


On a legal form such as a medical record, it makes no sense and does not assist in any way other than saying "This person is deaf" twice, the physician/MD would have to ask "what race are you" or another question to ask to explicitly identify race when someone is treated for a race-specific disease. Such as Tay-sach's or Multiple sclerosis, in mutations that are genetically bound, race is a prominent identifying factor.
 

posts from hell

New Member
The bigger issue is when to classify it as a group.

One could classify it biologically as an 'group' when a question pertains to a linguistic issue, such as sharing languages, similar values.


On a legal form such as a medical record, it makes no sense and does not assist in any way other than saying "This person is deaf" twice, the physician/MD would have to ask "what race are you" or another question to ask to explicitly identify race when someone is treated for a race-specific disease. Such as Tay-sach's or Multiple sclerosis, in mutations that are genetically bound, race is a prominent identifying factor.
Then that means the medical world got too politically correct in my eyes. If it is the race itself, they should ask for the race.
 

GrendelQ

41°17′00″N 70°04′58″W
Premium Member
Then that means the medical world got too politically correct in my eyes. If it is the race itself, they should ask for the race.

Probably because they are looking for something more specific than race, which wouldn't encompass some of the ethnicities that have distinct needs and medical issues.
 

naisho

Forum Disorders M.D.,Ph.D
PFH, you might not be catching it.

Tay-sach's is exclusive in Ashkenazi Jewish ethnic groups. They have a higher prevalence of the mutation than any other race or ethnic (Jewish) group.

There is an ethnic group that is resistant to MS. The name escapes me at the moment, but they're European.

This is biologically, by racial genetic makeup.

Being a deaf ethic group does not grant any of the above in medical fashion, and it never will until Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium of the genetic pool. The questions asking to identify ethnic groups on forms are used sometimes for specific questions or reasons, other times they're just casual such as getting to know someone. To which I was saying earlier, the question is when to use it, not that it shouldn't exist.
 

posts from hell

New Member
PFH, you might not be catching it.

Tay-sach's is exclusive in Ashkenazi Jewish ethnic groups. They have a higher prevalence of the mutation than any other race or ethnic (Jewish) group.

There is an ethnic group that is resistant to MS. The name escapes me at the moment, but they're European.

This is biologically, by racial genetic makeup.

Being a deaf ethic group does not grant any of the above in medical fashion, and it never will until Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium of the genetic pool. The questions asking to identify ethnic groups on forms are used sometimes for specific questions or reasons, other times they're just casual such as getting to know someone. To which I was saying earlier, the question is when to use it, not that it shouldn't exist.

Gotcha.
 

CSign

New Member
Using the word "all" imply that only some hearing people are the enemies, not all of them. I'm curious who those few or many hearing enemies are, so I can protect myself?

I wrote that statement bearing in mind that some individuals who are deaf have had a negative experience with a hearing person. Just as some hearing individuals have had a negative experience with an individual who was deaf. So if they choose to perceive that individual as an enemy, I respect that.
I would like to think that people who are hearing are actually not the enemy at all, and want what's best for everyone. I think the negative experiences some have had all go back to the person being uninformed about deafness.
I get tired of reading posts that refer to "hearing people" as if we are the enemy and are incapable of making informed decisions. It gets old fast.
 

posts from hell

New Member
I wrote that statement bearing in mind that some individuals who are deaf have had a negative experience with a hearing person. Just as some hearing individuals have had a negative experience with an individual who was deaf. So if they choose to perceive that individual as an enemy, I respect that.
I would like to think that people who are hearing are actually not the enemy at all, and want what's best for everyone. I think the negative experiences some have had all go back to the person being uninformed about deafness.
I get tired of reading posts that refer to "hearing people" as if we are the enemy and are incapable of making informed decisions. It gets old fast.

Supporting eugenics?
 

CSign

New Member
OMG. No. It was sarcasm. PFH is attempting to put words in my mouth. "what's best for everyone" does not mean it is the same for each individual person. What I meant by that was that I'd like to think people want what's best for everyone as individuals. Maybe that's clear enough for you PFH. I am pretty sure you understood my intent, you're just being obstinate.
 

Bottesini

Old Deaf Ranter
Premium Member
OMG. No. It was sarcasm. PFH is attempting to put words in my mouth. "what's best for everyone" does not mean it is the same for each individual person. What I meant by that was that I'd like to think people want what's best for everyone as individuals. Maybe that's clear enough for you PFH. I am pretty sure you understood my intent, you're just being obstinate.

Glad it was sarcasm. I am not the only literal thinker here. :P is a good sign for sarcasm.
 

flip

New Member
I wrote that statement bearing in mind that some individuals who are deaf have had a negative experience with a hearing person. Just as some hearing individuals have had a negative experience with an individual who was deaf. So if they choose to perceive that individual as an enemy, I respect that.
I would like to think that people who are hearing are actually not the enemy at all, and want what's best for everyone. I think the negative experiences some have had all go back to the person being uninformed about deafness.
I get tired of reading posts that refer to "hearing people" as if we are the enemy and are incapable of making informed decisions. It gets old fast.
Most hearing people have proved themselves to be incapable of making totally indepedent "informed decisions". In reality, it's more a luck and go choice than a real informed decision.

I don't care if that makes you tired to read this, and me an enemy of you, because it's a fact. Else you wouldn't get this tired by chanting "parental decision" to deaf ears that don't get what you are talking about.

The idea that some deaf people in this thread look at hearing people as the enemy is truly paranoid. I feel sorry for you.
 

flip

New Member
The bigger issue is when to classify it as a group.

One could classify it biologically as an 'group' when a question pertains to a linguistic issue, such as sharing languages, similar values.


On a legal form such as a medical record, it makes no sense and does not assist in any way other than saying "This person is deaf" twice, the physician/MD would have to ask "what race are you" or another question to ask to explicitly identify race when someone is treated for a race-specific disease. Such as Tay-sach's or Multiple sclerosis, in mutations that are genetically bound, race is a prominent identifying factor.
I would say I agree with this. It works at different levels and one have to look at the context, kind of ethnicity and so on. I haven't seen a good explaination with a clear pure "yes" or "no" to the existence of a deaf ethnic group.

All I know, is that it's possible to say it exist, and some people don't like the idea. This is the interesting part. Can we agree on when we can use the term "ethnic deaf"?
 

CSign

New Member
Most hearing people have proved themselves to be incapable of making totally indepedent "informed decisions". In reality, it's more a luck and go choice than a real informed decision.

I don't care if that makes you tired to read this, and me an enemy of you, because it's a fact. Else you wouldn't get this tired by chanting "parental decision" to deaf ears that don't get what you are talking about.

The idea that some deaf people in this thread look at hearing people as the enemy is truly paranoid. I feel sorry for you.

That would be like me saying most deaf people have proved themselves incapable of making totally independent "informed decisions.". That's a ludacris statement based on ones feelings rather than fact.

I went so far as to respect those personal feelings in my prior post. I'm sorry you "don't get" what I'm saying, I thought I was pretty straightforward. Some individuals on this forum consistently tries to negate what people are saying based strictly upon the fact that they are hearing.

Nowhere have I chanted anything about "parental decisions" So I'm not really sure where you're getting your information from. Anyways buddy, I'm not paranoid and I don't need your pity.
 
Top