Do we have a challenge ahead of us to avoid becoming Hearing?

Beowulf said:
That doesn't feel right. What about those who were born deaf? They never had any hearing to lose.
Click to expand...

That's exactly my point!!

When making a reference to people who have hearing problems it appears there is no word safe from being hotly contested. And that's a problem when you're trying to make a point about something and people start harping on the word you use to make the general reference instead of the subject matter itself. How can we begin to have dialogue and debates about many different subjects if the word we use to describe a group of people with hearing problems is such an issue that it overrides the dialogue?

LIke if I were to use the dictionary's definition of deaf - it refers to anyone from mild to profound hearing loss and say "deaf people suffer problems relating to the hearing world's inability to comprehend all issues deaf people have to deal with."

Guaranteed someone will come along and say "I'm not deaf, I consider myself HOH and HOH people have problems too" instead of responding to the actual topic of hearing world's inability to comprehend all factors deaf people contend with." and then the conversation starts centering around the issues of using the word "deaf" or insert any other word here.

Anyway, I feel like I'm beating this horse to death so Grummer, sorry if I'm sabotaging your thread!

I just feel almost inhibited from talking about deaf people in general because any word I use to make a general reference is bound to offend someone.
 
As long as you don't call me "hearing impaired," I'm good. :giggle:
 
DeafCaroline said:
That's exactly my point!!

When making a reference to people who have hearing problems it appears there is no word safe from being hotly contested. And that's a problem when you're trying to make a point about something and people start harping on the word you use to make the general reference instead of the subject matter itself. How can we begin to have dialogue and debates about many different subjects if the word we use to describe a group of people with hearing problems is such an issue that it overrides the dialogue?

LIke if I were to use the dictionary's definition of deaf - it refers to anyone from mild to profound hearing loss and say "deaf people suffer problems relating to the hearing world's inability to comprehend all issues deaf people have to deal with."

Guaranteed someone will come along and say "I'm not deaf, I consider myself HOH and HOH people have problems too" instead of responding to the actual topic of hearing world's inability to comprehend all factors deaf people contend with." and then the conversation starts centering around the issues of using the word "deaf" or insert any other word here.

Anyway, I feel like I'm beating this horse to death so Grummer, sorry if I'm sabotaging your thread!

I just feel almost inhibited from talking about deaf people in general because any word I use to make a general reference is bound to offend someone.
Click to expand...

DeafCaroline, Perhaps we should look at where the labels originated? In my own experience, the terms 'hearing impaired' and 'hard of hearing' are terms coined by audists. I was slapped with that label the moment the audiologist found out I could lipread well. She was discussing with my mother about 'special school' (not Deaf school - 'Deaf' was never mentioned). The conversation was geared with mainly terms such as 'degree of hearing loss'. Then when she discovered I could lipread well, the label 'Hard of Hearing' got slapped on me and the suggestion of mainstreaming was immediately implied. There was no further mention of 'special' anything.

(BTW, Kokonut is just loving this - he swears by 'no labels' yet he loves trapping people into debating about labels. You have played right into his hands with this one :run: )

But to be fair on Grummer too, this is one of the challenges we face with the hearing world. With the continuous debate about labels, we can never have a united front for equality in society when there is division in our own. There must be some way we can override this 'labelling' thing.
 
DeafCaroline said:
Good point Sallylou but what if I am make a general reference to all people with hearing loss?
Click to expand...

um, i avoid the term 'hearing loss' because its so demeaning like it makes out that we are somehow got something missing, like hearing (and language) largely this paternalistic attitude is reproduced in society of hearing and speaking(as language). Id rather say people with less hearing or no hearing, not hearing loss. Hearing loss is also has a medical connotion which suggests it is something to fix (hence why HA, CI, and speech therapy - to make those cant hear themselve speaking to speak 'right' for the majority...)

just my 2 cents...
 
Good point. Hearing loss is only appropriate when someone is actually going through the process of losing their hearing.
 
it also suggests that we are somehow less, with a loss...

do you feel you're less than hearing? or hearing people?
 
sallylou said:
Good point. Hearing loss is only appropriate when someone is actually going through the process of losing their hearing.
Click to expand...

from a status that they once were hearing or "hearing" , oh they dont think of it in terms of "hearing" , thats for Deaf people when talking about hearing people, much like Blacks talking about nigga then whites as in inside/outside identification of people as groups. Hearing people tend to use word 'normal' to gone deaf, or lose some hearing , so they term is as 'hearing loss'...
its not for d/Deaf children - we already ARE d/Deaf, it is our character not our status.
 
Well, from now on, I am just going to make a general reference to all people with hearing problems deaf. I am not going to write "deaf/Deaf/HOH/hearing impaired/Cis/late-defeaned/deafpeopleindenialabouttheirdeafness/auditorally challenged/blablabla"

with the exception of when I am referring to one individual.
 
BecLak said:
But to be fair on Grummer too, this is one of the challenges we face with the hearing world. With the continuous debate about labels, we can never have a united front for equality in society when there is division in our own. There must be some way we can override this 'labelling' thing.
Click to expand...

That's why i started this thread.
To unite.
 
DeafCaroline said:
Well, from now on, I am just going to make a general reference to all people with hearing problems deaf. I am not going to write "deaf/Deaf/HOH/hearing impaired/Cis/late-defeaned/deafpeopleindenialabouttheirdeafness/auditorally challenged/blablabla"

with the exception of when I am referring to one individual.
Click to expand...

but late deafened is quite subjective, on other hand it is easy to suss, you'd know if they behave as a hearing person before, or if they suffered as an isolated one (deaf) or that they decided to find a way to be Deaf, with experience you will KNOW...
i mean you will know when to say they are late deafened to go with Hearing. and/or been mainstreamed-not happy-want-a-place , then they are deaf will be Deaf if given a chance to know this, and made feel welcome.
I been hurt alot but self-serving false Deaf or Deafs-gone-with-hearing-ideology for power, its revolting. but I've moved on, I no longer feel outside or inferior, I am now a firm member of the Deaf community, those who made me feel unwelcomed are at least Not a true Deaf...
 
Perhaps we should step back into history for a bit. What did those who were born deaf in deaf families introduce themselves as, what did they call themselves to differentuate themselves, even before big D came into the picture? Does anyone know?
 
Back
Top