Audism - The Definition and the Audist View

[rebeccalj]

Not letting deaf people join the military because of their hearing loss is a form of audism as well as discrimination.

Is it dangerous? Let us choose what we are capable of doing. Don't choose for me.

^^^^^^ Yeah that!

 

[rebeccalj]

Allowing people to talk on the phone, but disallowing them to text on the phone because they might fall in a water foundation is audism.

 

[BecLak]

Why give a negative label to someone that is "ignorant" of the issues? IMO the negative labels should be saved for people who KNOWINGLY hold negative views. I don't see how anyone is served by labeling people .

Perhaps for want of a better word and not a 'label' (in context, I was not labelling specifically, but describing a perception) Thank you for bringing it to my attention to clarify.

A Hearing person automatically perceives that to be Hearing is superior to being Deaf because they cannot for the life of them, imagine what it would be like to be non-hearing. Many spout audist views unintentionally and without ill-intent steming from ignorance. But they need to be educated that it is unacceptable.

 

[Bebonang]

I remember someone saying to me on a different forum that deaf shouldn't get terps or note takers if they can talk but refuse to speak and refuse to get a CI. :roll:

They forget about the hearing when they can not hear what the person say. They can talk. They did not know that interpreters help them understand what is being said in classes and public places like hospital and courts. CI is a total different thing for the profound deaf. That is what make me mad as it is audism.

 

[BecLak]

Well, there is a difference between audism and an audist. Personally, I believe that all hearing people will, from time to time say something or do something that would be considered audism, simply because it is natural to think from one's own perspective. However, the person that is then educated regarding the practice of audism, and continues to behave and think in that vein is an audist. They have had the opportunity to learn and to change what it offensive, but refuse to do so because they refuse to validate any perspective other than their own. Audism labels the mind set that leads to the behavior of seeing things as a hearing person would. Audist labels the person who refuses to consider that they may have unintentionally offended and chooses to continue offending.

Jillio, for that clarification. I just now saw your post (It is early morning here, many have posted 'overnight' and I am just catching up). I responded to TXGolfer's post before yours. He picked me up on using the term 'audist' incorrectly. I stand corrected in that post.

 

[rebeccalj]

The problem I have with that is when I've listened to degrading comments for 40 years, it gets old. Fast.

I've had the same -- people that are amazed I can even speak, even drive, even do anything. It seems like they think I should be a simpering idiot for being deaf. And, after 40 years of listening to that ... ugh.

I *SO* know what you mean.

 

[BecLak]

No,

IMO it would be better to focus on what is harmful or unfair, and stop being offended by questions and phrases. For example when someone asks "Why don't you get a CI?" One has a choice......they can explain why realizing this person is actually asking with good intentions.....or they can choose to be offended by the question. To me answering the question seems more productive. I believe the deaf need to realize that we have something that is different, for better or worse, and people are going to be naturally curious about that. I tend to believe polite conversation is much more productive than choosing to be offended. Which is more beneficial.....that person leaving the conversation thinking "wow I never thought of it like that" or thinking "wow, what a jerk, I guess they are bitter" Then again, maybe they leave the conversation without an understanding.....at least you tried.

This is an excellent approach with the general public who are ignorant.

However, you would know well the term 'damage control'. There has been a lot of 'damage' made by professionals in the medical fields and some authority figures that indoctrinate unsuspectabily the public into believing that it is 'for the better good of the minority group'. (This happens all around the world, especially to indigenous peoples who generally get pushed into a 'minority' category.) All options available should be presented in a balanced and unbiased way, making way for a informed choice. Media often swings the public view. The general public are influenced primarily by public view, few go beyond what they hear/see in the news.

This 'damage' can only be corrected by educating, and in its time and place, advocacy. Educating is a more passive approach. Advocacy takes on a stronger approach.

 

[rebeccalj]

I'm sorry but that just cracked me up. I got this image in my head of hearing people at a formal party:

Man: "Look at me. I can articulate each word perfectly."
Woman: "Wow. You sure can. I want to improve my intonations. Do you have a speech therapist you could recommend?"
Man: "Oh, your intonation is just fine."
Woman: "Aww, thanks. Perhaps after this party, I can show you how good my intonations can get."

(Sorry, off topic. Couldn't resist)

Hahahaha!!! Not really off topic since it is an example of audism because hearies would never do that to each other.

 

[rebeccalj]

There's a difference between feeling offended and feeling oppressed.

I've known many Deaf people who were both. In fact, I was a little shocked to meet Deaf people and find them feeling so oppressed. It was sad to me.

 

[rebeccalj]

Audism is the belief that the hearing view is superior than the deaf view. Thus, it is the trigger for oppression.

When I feel oppressed, it's because I'm experiencing oppression.

There is a large group of people who makes decisions about me and for me in regards to deafness without ever considering asking me as a deaf person for input. They even define me for me. That's audism.

That drive me insane!! Hearing people defining 'me!' Uggh!

 

[BecLak]

True, no doubt. But it doesn't change my opinion that by showing up, doing great work and maintaining a positive attitude I had a more positive effect on this person than if I had gently corrected her. I could be wrong but I don't think so.

Another example (I have mentioned this before).....One of the insurance companies once pulled me off of a job because the homeowner was uncomfortable with the limited ways to contact me with questions. See now that IS harmful and I dealt with that in a different manner.

It is true that we should approach things in the spirit in which they were intended. Yes, actions do 'speak louder than words'. Like I said, there is a time and place for both passive and stronger approaches. We need the balance and the wisdom to discern which is appropriate at the given time to get our message across effectively.

 

[BecLak]

I wonder if Beethoven wished he could hear his own music?

That, my dear TXgolfer, is going into a whole different ballfield! It would need a thread of its own that one

 

[BecLak]

From the OP




Just attempting to clear up the misunderstandings.

I can see where you are coming from TXgolfer....it is actually drawing out some very valid points in a non-directly 'defining' way (your preference is it not )

 

[drphil]

If the word "superior" is taken out and "alternate" inserted does "audism" collapsed? Is it reality if the same "words" are spoken VS signed can "classified to show differences"? Isn't it the "belief that ASL et al" is equal to English et al? How can the users of ASL et al believe it is "inferior"?
How was it determined if the underlying supposition is in fact true? Random sample? Google search?
Some thoughts on a snowy night.

Implanted Advanced Bionics-Harmony activated Aug/07

 

[BecLak]

If the word "superior" is taken out and "alternate" inserted does "audism" collapsed? Is it reality if the same "words" are spoken VS signed can "classified to show differences"? Isn't it the "belief that ASL et al" is equal to English et al? How can the users of ASL et al believe it is "inferior"?
How was it determined if the underlying supposition is in fact true? Random sample? Google search?
Some thoughts on a snowy night.

Implanted Advanced Bionics-Harmony activated Aug/07

This is why definitions are put in place. Changing a word such as 'superior' to 'alternative' does not change the mindset from which the orginial definition was derived and defined.

 

[Daredevel7]

To me, audist view is simply the definition as stated in the OP:

Audism: The notion that one is superior based on one’s ability to hear or behave in the manner of one who hears.

Nothing more, nothing less. I don't really agree with the most of comments made in this thread. A lot of them simply comes from the idea that ASL is superior to English.

Which is fine by me. It's okay to think that ASL is superior to English, but it's obvious that some people mask it with that label "audist". It seems like a few people are combining anything that isn't pro-ASL with audism.

 

[faire_jour]

Wirelessly posted

To me, audist view is simply the definition as stated in the OP:

Audism: The notion that one is superior based on one’s ability to hear or behave in the manner of one who hears.

Nothing more, nothing less. I don't really agree with the most of comments made in this thread. A lot of them simply comes from the idea that ASL is superior to English.

Which is fine by me. It's okay to think that ASL is superior to English, but it's obvious that some people mask it with that label "audist". It seems like a few people are combining anything that isn't pro-ASL with audism.

completely agree.

the idea is that asl is EQUAL to english, not superior. It is perfectly appropriate to value both. It is not audism at all.

 

[Speedy Hawk]

Deaf people dont go around bragging about their ASL skills at Deaf socials, to their friends, and etc. That's stupid.

We do compliment each other on good analogies, ideas, and etc, not on ASL skills. I have never met a Deaf parent bragging to others about their children's ASL skills. Maybe about good grades, creativiness, and science projects but about speaking skills? Not that I have seen and it would have been a turn off.

I dont think hearing people go around bragging about each other speech's skills, do they?

Yep, I never seen Deaf person brag about their signing skills ever. Funny image in my head that hearing bragging speech

I'm sorry but that just cracked me up. I got this image in my head of hearing people at a formal party:

Man: "Look at me. I can articulate each word perfectly."
Woman: "Wow. You sure can. I want to improve my intonations. Do you have a speech therapist you could recommend?"
Man: "Oh, your intonation is just fine."
Woman: "Aww, thanks. Perhaps after this party, I can show you how good my intonations can get."

(Sorry, off topic. Couldn't resist)

I got similiar image in my head after reading Shel's post. Quite funny!

Wirelessly posted



i'm gonna disagree with this. I have seen LOTS of Deaf people notice and complement childrens' ASL skills. Both deaf children and CODAs.

From what I read from Shel post, she seem to say to me that she don't see Deaf people brag about their ASL skills. Your answer seems to be complement other Deaf people/kids ASL skills, that different from bragging their own ASL skills, isn't it?

 

[dogmom]

-equating sound with "opportunity"

- that the deaf person is "missing out"

 

[BecLak]

-equating sound with "opportunity"

- that the deaf person is "missing out"[/QUOT