Difference between Audism & Racism

[AJWSmith]

AJW, read up on Tom Humpries he coined the term back in 1974...

Grummer, I haven't read Tom Humphries book but I know of his definition of audism:

The notion that one is superior based on one's ability to hear or behave in the manner of one who hears. (Humphries 1977)

But the area I'm interested in exploring in this thread is what about people who don't think they're superior because of their hearing, but are aware that they have a function valuable to themselves that a deaf person doesn't have.

 

[Grummer]

Freud detailed the 3 types of communication long before Berne. Id (child), Ego (Adult), and Superego (Parent).

Sorry...just had to point that out.:P

ah, that old Transactional analysis theory
(took me a while to recall it, so i had dinners, dropped last weeks dvd, picked up another two then home now i recall it)

 

[Grummer]

Grummer, I haven't read Tom Humphries book - i havent either i think i vaguely recall its in an unpublished thesis im not sure, - but I know of his definition of audism:


But the area I'm interested in exploring in this thread is what about people who don't think they're superior because of their hearing, but are aware that they have a function valuable to themselves that a deaf person doesn't have.

not sure about that one, but straight from top of my head the closest description would be ethical interpreters who were raised as a CODA...or similar?
or someone who believes sign language is genuinely owned by deaf people, as in a 'matter of fact they sign' attitude at the same time has made no unconscious (or very small but slapped it off mentally) to judge deaf people overall ability or intelligence against the hearing cohorts

is it unconscious audism? no, is it unconscious deafism? no...
hmm

 

[Berry]

There's something here about going beyond our self-centredness, individual circumstances and tribal thinking to connecting with our core identity as a human being and recognizing that we share our humanity with a very wide variety range of people who are not "one of us".

Tribal thinking has received a very unfair rap sheet by people who do not understand it and given by those who believe you should be willing to burn your mother at the stake for the "greater good" of people you don't know and might not like if you did know them.

Us vs. Them

and

Tribal thinking

ARE NOT THE SAME.

Although they may both have their roots in the same mindset.

A lot of "Us vs. Them" thinking is caused by people who have no real tribal connections and seek to substitute "false" tribal connections to fill the gap.

Just because you like wine or whisky, or deplore alcohol, does not make you better than those of us who like beer.

And just because you like beer does NOT make you a part of my tribe.

 

[dogmom]

another very intriguing <from my perspective> discussion - I really like the thoughts of connection of audsim and racism....I have a button I got some years ago that reads - "sexism anti-Semitism homophobia racism Recognize the Connections" certainly audism is in that circle too.

here's something else I was thinking about, what makes someone using a wheelchair "inspirational"?

I believe tribal thinking recognizes shared cohesiveness, internal thought and characteristics without denouncement.

"us vs. them" is a facade of tribal unity, based on fear and isolation

 

[AJWSmith]

here's something else I was thinking about, what makes someone using a wheelchair "inspirational"?

The person I was referring to would be inspirational even if he wasn't in a wheelchair. It was his personality & his ability to relate to people. There are many other people in the UK who would echo what I've just written. His name is Phil Friend and I've just discovered that he has his own website.
www.philandfriends.co.uk

 

[jillio]

There's something here about going beyond our self-centredness, individual circumstances and tribal thinking to connecting with our core identity as a human being and recognizing that we share our humanity with a very wide variety range of people who are not "one of us".

Agreed.

 

[jillio]

Tribal thinking has received a very unfair rap sheet by people who do not understand it and given by those who believe you should be willing to burn your mother at the stake for the "greater good" of people you don't know and might not like if you did know them.

Us vs. Them

and

Tribal thinking

ARE NOT THE SAME.

Although they may both have their roots in the same mindset.

A lot of "Us vs. Them" thinking is caused by people who have no real tribal connections and seek to substitute "false" tribal connections to fill the gap.

Just because you like wine or whisky, or deplore alcohol, does not make you better than those of us who like beer.

And just because you like beer does NOT make you a part of my tribe.

Agreed. Tribal thinking is a cultural strength. "Us vs them" is borne of paranoid thinking.

 

[faire_jour]

Wirelessly posted

AJW, read up on Tom Humpries he coined the term back in 1974...

Grummer, I haven't read Tom Humphries book but I know of his definition of audism:

The notion that one is superior based on one's ability to hear or behave in the manner of one who hears. (Humphries 1977)

But the area I'm interested in exploring in this thread is what about people who don't think they're superior because of their hearing, but are aware that they have a function valuable to themselves that a deaf person doesn't have.

i agree with you.

as a hearing parent of a deaf child, i do NOT view my child as somehow defective or lower because she can not hear. The idea is ridiculous. I do, however, see hearing as useful and want to give her the option of having that useful tool.

 

[Grummer]

Audism is the same thing as ethnocentricism.

not really, how can culture and medicine occupy the same space?
also the world have many variation of cultures, some are more forgiving to Deafness/Deaf cutlure ,others ban it throughoutly, orhter even consider Deaf is incapable of languages!...

what gives?

 

[jillio]

ah, that old Transactional analysis theory
(took me a while to recall it, so i had dinners, dropped last weeks dvd, picked up another two then home now i recall it)

Yep. Berne is the originator of transactional analysis based on a cybernetic view of communication. Rarely used any more and considered to be relatively outdated.

 

[jillio]

Wirelessly posted



i agree with you.

as a hearing parent of a deaf child, i do NOT view my child as somehow defective or lower because she can not hear. The idea is ridiculous. I do, however, see hearing as useful and want to give her the option of having that useful tool.

You do realize, don't you, that you see hearing as useful simply because you HAVE hearing. Again, this is approaching deafness from a hearing perspective. See AJWSmith's post regarding stepping outside of one's own perpsective.

Essentially, adopting a hearing perspective to address the issues of deafness is audist, as if one did not believe the hearing perspective to be superior, one would not refuse to, or have such difficulty with, letting go of their hearing perspective and adopting a deaf perspective in all things impacting the deaf individual.

 

[jillio]

not really, how can culture and medicine occupy the same space?
also the world have many variation of cultures, some are more forgiving to Deafness/Deaf cutlure ,others ban it throughoutly, orhter even consider Deaf is incapable of languages!...

what gives?

Because medical decision are directly influenced by cultural norms, beliefs, and practices.

 

[faire_jour]

Wirelessly posted

Wirelessly posted



i agree with you.

as a hearing parent of a deaf child, i do NOT view my child as somehow defective or lower because she can not hear. The idea is ridiculous. I do, however, see hearing as useful and want to give her the option of having that useful tool.

You do realize, don't you, that you see hearing as useful simply because you HAVE hearing. Again, this is approaching deafness from a hearing perspective. See AJWSmith's post regarding stepping outside of one's own perpsective.

Essentially, adopting a hearing perspective to address the issues of deafness is audist, as if one did not believe the hearing perspective to be superior, one would not refuse to, or have such difficulty with, letting go of their hearing perspective and adopting a deaf perspective in all things impacting the deaf individual.

i also choose not to ignore the deaf people who do choose to hear and say that it is useful to them.

 

[jillio]

Wirelessly posted



i also choose not to ignore the deaf people who do choose to hear and say that it is useful to them.

What does that have to do with your position? Deaf people can be audist, as well. In fact, when they have been raised by hearing parents in an all oral environment they generally have to work to overcome their audist beliefs on their journey to becoming Deaf.

 

[faire_jour]

Wirelessly posted

Wirelessly posted



i also choose not to ignore the deaf people who do choose to hear and say that it is useful to them.

What does that have to do with your position? Deaf people can be audist, as well. In fact, when they have been raised by hearing parents in an all oral environment they generally have to work to overcome their audist beliefs on their journey to becoming Deaf.

why can't you accept that not every person with a hearing loss has to be Deaf? Just because they don't choose that identity does NOT make them ignorant or audist or brainwashed, they just want to be who they want to be. Who are you (especially as a hearing person) to judge their choices and beliefs?

 

[Berry]

ah, that old Transactional analysis theory
(took me a while to recall it, so i had dinners, dropped last weeks dvd, picked up another two then home now i recall it)

Yep. Berne is the originator of transactional analysis based on a cybernetic view of communication. Rarely used any more and considered to be relatively outdated.

Even when I read it the first time I recognized both its weakness and its rigidity - Which was only exacerbated by his followers who turned his ideas into a religion that allowed no growth or deviation.

My experience in self defense schooling where those students who were more advanced were "Big Brother" to those who were less advanced, even though it might be a girl half your age gave me insight into the flaws.



But Eric Berne's theory has a lot of value to offer. Once read you can spot "games" people are running on each other quickly, easily, and gives you some handy tools for putting a stop to them.

The Audist Game could easily be lumped in with the "I'm better than you because I have an advantage over you" game. The "Advantage" could as easily be wealth, strength, knowledge, height, speed, race, color, creed, or friendships ("I'm a friend of the Mayor," he told the policeman.)

In essence once you spot a game simply refuse to play, or react in an unexpected manner.

I also learned something Eric Berne did not teach -- From what Eric Berne implied in what would now might be called a dysconscious manner.

You internalize the people you come into contact with in ways that defy physical limitation:

Thus I can look around internally and find an Aunt Jillio, and a cousin AJWSmith, and a cousin Grummer.

As my mother taught me: "Those who only read what is on the page are only half reading -- At best."

 

[Smithtr]

That is very big serious reason reading, I aware it I am pretty reading on commments, complication is very audisom,
racism is means on discrimmation critism to people because

Audism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I reading on audism means on against to deaf and hearing serious I notice it sound on harment, because reason point,

Racism is the belief that there are inherent differences in people's traits and capacities that are entirely due to their race, however defined, and that, as a consequence, racial discrimination (i.e. different treatment of those people, both socially and legally) is justified.
In the modern English language, the term "racism" is used predominantly as a pejorative epithet. It is applied especially to the practice or advocacy of racial discrimination of a pernicious nature (i.e. which harms particular groups of people), and which is often justified by recourse to racial stereotyping or pseudo-science. Modern usage, in fact, often equates "racism" and "racial discrimination" and defines the latter term only as applying to pernicious practices. Differential treatment of racial groups that is intended to ameliorate past discrimination, rather than to harm, goes by other names (e.g. affirmative action); the characterization of this practice as "racism", "racial discrimination" or "reverse discrimination" is normally only done by its opponents, and typically implies a belief in the harmful nature of the practice with respect to the groups not receiving assistance.
Racism is popularly associated with various activities that are illegal or commonly considered harmful, such as extremism, hatred, xenophobia, (malignant or forced) exploitation, separatism, racial supremacy, mass murder (for the purpose of genocide), genocide denial, vigilantism (hate crimes, terrorism), etc.
"Racism" and "racial discrimination" are often used to describe discrimination on an ethnic or cultural basis, independent of their somatic (i.e. "racial") differences. According to the United Nations conventions, there is no distinction between the term racial discrimination and ethnicity discrimination.

reading I notice Racism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

bit on look angry and emotion outrage!

I reading

 

[Grummer]

Wirelessly posted



why can't you accept that not every person with a hearing loss has to be Deaf? Just because they don't choose that identity does NOT make them ignorant or audist or brainwashed, they just want to be who they want to be. Who are you (especially as a hearing person) to judge their choices and beliefs?

then again id' liken to address to hearing parents this same question; they just want to be who they want to be. Who are you (especially as a hearing person) to judge their choices and beliefs?

in so a way , what does Hearing parents have a right to Judge Deaf people's beliefs and in particular restraining their child's choices??!...

this is a little risky to post this as it is fresh straight out my head without much prolonged thoughts on this and how it compares with the oppositional thinking which typifying audist thinking that you displayed... but here goes!;;;... "but when you really think about it".... Hearing parents are judgeing on the basis of cultural superiority AND the medical paradigm which hearing cultures gets to enjoy its priviledge over science AND its fundings which supports their particular approach to science. Science in a way can be described as manifiesation of its monetary power in order to demonstrate cultural power (and medical power of cultures).

 

[faire_jour]

Wirelessly posted

i believe that most hearing parents are simply trying to provide their children with the option of hearing. The child is obviously still deaf and can choose to live as a fully non-hearing person, but if the child is not given early amplification, that can not be undone. The child (as an adult) can not go back and learn to hear.