Crack the myth: Reverse Audism does NOT exist.

Status
Not open for further replies.
posts from hell said:
Okay. Enough with the other countries.

Now back to the deaf being able to oppress the hearing being not possible.

Any more discussions?
Click to expand...

Nope, because it is possible.
 
rolling7 said:
Nope....Nelson Mandela's party.
Click to expand...

And do you know why even the whites voted for a change in rule in South Africa? It had nothing to do with race. :cool2:

After a referendum in 1992 a majority of white people voted for a new democratic South Africa.
 
<forewarned-excuse amount of quotations below>

putting "d/Deaf" into category of "special needs/disability" as opposed to language or cultural group - creates oppression

a pattern of thinking: something is "wrong" with "them" <deaf=minority group>
"they" need to be like "us" <majority group>
so we will "fix them" by controlling resources and legislation <who has the power?>
 
dogmom said:
<forewarned-excuse amount of quotations below>

putting "d/Deaf" into category of "special needs/disability" as opposed to language or cultural group - creates oppression

a pattern of thinking: something is "wrong" with "them" <deaf=minority group>
"they" need to be like "us" <majority group>
so we will "fix them" by controlling resources and legislation <who has the power?>
Click to expand...

exactly. who has the power indeed?
 
deafskeptic said:
Why would these countries need to be ruled by whites? I can cite the Opium war in the Victorian Era as an example for starters. Hong Kong is a reminder of white rule.
Click to expand...

I've re-read this and I had official rulers like kings, queens and emperors in mind and now I'm thinking I should have indicated that before showing examples of white rulers. I was thinking of whites ruling as a group.
 
If you don't believe that white men have power, look at the Senate. Women make up 17% despite the fact that women are half of the population. All of the women senators are white. There are only 3 ethnic minorities in the Senate (2 Hispanic men and 1 Asian man).
 
sallylou said:
If you don't believe that white men have power, look at the Senate. Women make up 17% despite the fact that women are half of the population. All of the women senators are white. There are only 3 ethnic minorities in the Senate (2 Hispanic men and 1 Asian man).
Click to expand...

I didnt want to bring in the abortion debate and the women has to ask men for permission to do whatever they want with their bodies, despite the fact women are the slight majority here in America.
 
I didn't bring up the abortion debate. Since you mention it, it's unfathomable to me that I would have to ask my husband permission for anything. What am I, chattel? Supposedly not anymore.
 
sallylou said:
I didn't bring up the abortion debate. Since you mention it, it's unfathomable to me that I would have to ask my husband permission for anything. What am I, chattel? Supposedly not anymore.
Click to expand...

Its one of the many situations where power comes in play.
 
rolling7 said:
Get a clue! "Stick it" has nothing to do with sex. As in Dem. stick out to Rep.
Click to expand...

rolling7 said:
Answer this

a) If the hearing stick it to the deaf, what is that? (the OP calls it audism)

b) If the deaf stick out to the hearing, what is that?

b is the reverse of a
Click to expand...

jillio said:
Stick out what?
Click to expand...

rolling7 said:
As in Dem. stick it to Rep.
Click to expand...

Ahhh ... You modified two of your posts.

We all saw one originally say "As in Dem. stick out to Rep."

Sneaky of you to get the edit in before 10 mins when the Edit comment shows up at the bottom. But none of us are stupid. Too many of us in this thread right now. Each and every one of us saw your original posts. Why do you keep arguing it? Nice try at covering up nonsense; I already reported it. They can see the original posts with the reports.
 
AlleyCat said:
Ahhh ... You modified two of your posts.

We all saw one originally say "As in Dem. stick out to Rep."

Sneaky of you to get the edit in before 10 mins when the Edit comment shows up at the bottom. But none of us are stupid. Too many of us in this thread right now. Each and every one of us saw your original posts. Why do you keep arguing it? Nice try at covering up nonsense; I already reported it. They can see the original posts with the reports.
Click to expand...

I saw it too.
 
Is it possible for a "reverse" audism to play out in a family that is all deaf except for one or two children that are fully hearing?

Although a child might be excluded because of their ability to hear, this is not reverse audism because the other children/adults are not requiring the hearing children to pretend to be deaf or to change the way they communicate with the world. This is simple discrimination and perhaps a bit of prejudice.

For this to be a "reverse" audism the hearing child would have experienced society demanding that they never use their voice and only use sign language. Society requiring (or very strongly demanding) that implants be used to restrict the use of speech. That hearing children pretend to understand what is going on when they are not able to fully participate... ect...

The more I type, the more silly "reverse audism" starts to sound. Yes, the deaf can choose to exclude heries from an activity, but that act itself is not a form of audism. It is unfair at times, and perhaps uncalled for at times. But excluding hearies from an activity does in no way restrict their ability to fully participate in society (including receive a fully accessible education).

Note: I tried really really hard to create a scenario that might qualify as a reverse audism only to fail each time.
 
posts from hell said:
I didnt want to bring in the abortion debate and the women has to ask men for permission to do whatever they want with their bodies, despite the fact women are the slight majority here in America.
Click to expand...

Well, there were other things to bring besides, but that is more of a conservative issue then a male/female one.

If every female voted 'pro-choice' this would be a non topic...

it's conservatives vs liberals... Political, and still split almost 50-50
 
CODAS have ASL as their first language. Is that reverse audism? I don't think so. It's just a language different than English.
 
Firetiger, if you don't have a uterus, I'm not interested in your opinion. If you do, by all means, go on....
 
sallylou said:
Firetiger, if you don't have a uterus, I'm not interested in your opinion. If you do, by all means, go on....
Click to expand...

Well I do have a uterus, at least for the foreseeable future, however you would not value my opinion on this (Off-Topic) if I had a full hysterectomy?

We'll need a new topic in the ' ON-Topic' forum if you want to talk about the politics of abortion in USA currently.
 
FireTiger said:
Well, there were other things to bring besides, but that is more of a conservative issue then a male/female one.

If every female voted 'pro-choice' this would be a non topic...

it's conservatives vs liberals... Political, and still split almost 50-50
Click to expand...

you bring up a good point. Often in a group that is continuously repressed individuals often make choices that are in line with those in power. Even if it's not ultimately in their best interest.
 
PFH is the one who brought up the topic. It illlustrates his point nicely.

I would only care about your hysterectomy if I thought that women's sole purpose is to push out babies. I assure you that's not the case.
 
sallylou said:
PFH is the one who brought up the topic. It illustrates his point nicely.

I would only care about your hysterectomy if I thought that women's sole purpose is to push out babies. I assure you that's not the case.
Click to expand...

*ok* You asked about the state of my Uterus and neither of us believe we are supposed to have children or ask hubbies about -our- bodies...

...WAY off topic here... ;)

Um... Audism...

right...

anything constructive to add -

At the end of all of this I see why it can stated that 'reverse-audism' cannot exist based on the definitions pulled from well AWSmith, Jillo and myself at least.

We would have to discuss other definitions separately.

My question is what can we call it when a bigoted deafie has a horrible attitude and stereotypes all hearies?

Can well call it anything at all?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top