Getting some numbers

[sr171soars]

...
That is implying that there is something wrong with being deaf, which I completely disagree with. Just because the majority of the population is hearing does not mean dhh are diseased or that there is something wrong with us. Among Deaf, including hearing that are willing to learn, not being able to hear as a hearing person would is not at all a disability and it shouldn't be seen as one.
...

You make the classic mistake that trying to defend being deaf from the standpoint of 'normalcy'. Intrinsically, all humans are equal regardless of "missing" aspects that are considered normal. I never stated or implied that the deaf are diseased or that there is something wrong with them. Far be it for me to say so (I'm now totally deaf myself due to CI and have always a hearing loss prior to that). But I refuse to gloss over the fact that the universal experience and expectation is that we should have five functional senses.

Whether you like it or not, to state that a deaf person isn't "missing" sometime that is a fundamental part of the human experience is totally ludricious. If you are deaf, you have to compensate for not having normal hearing. Sure you have ASL and other ways to communicate but there are limits to what you can do in the totally of life. You can't be a police officer on the beat, be a firefighter, be a air traffic controller in the tower and the list goes on and on. It is obvious why the deaf don't do these types of jobs and therefore from that perspective having a hearing loss or being is a disability. Now, does that mean deaf are diseased or that there is something wrong with them...no! It simply means that they have to deal with the fact that there are somethings they can't do in a normal society. I don't have a problem with the fact I can't do somethings that most people can do. It is just the way it is and being in denial about it doesn't help me or anybody else one whit.

Les I be misunderstood, I didn't join this forum to bash the deaf especially when I'm now truly deaf but function as a hearing person. Rather, I joined to learn more about deafness in general and about myself as I have been in the hearing world for so long and will continue to do so...it is all I know. But I will call a spade a spade and not flinch from truth. If that upsets people...sobeit, that wasn't my intent.

 

[sr171soars]

Hey.....I was just saying that a lot NOT ALL "oral sucesses" might be due to lifestyle.... I mean there are kids who are functionally hoh with aids and who don't need intensive training to be oral, as well as kids who feel more hoh, rather then Deaf.....

I hear you and I know what you mean.

 

[Cloggy]

this poll is more for people who had the ci operation when they were younger than 18. There are other people who decided to get a ci when they are older, but has no place to vote. So i assume this poll is for people who got the operation when they were under their parent's authorities

Absolutely. The point of this poll is to see how these children are looking back at their parents decision.

 

[deafdyke]

but function as a hearing person. Rather, I joined to learn more about deafness in general and about myself as I have been in the hearing world for so long and will continue to do so...it is all I know

No, you don't function as a hearing person......you function as a HARD of hearing person.....there's a difference. If there wasn't one, then many of the regular posters here(who are hoh, like Lev, me, Alex and lots of others) wouldn't even be here. The closest a hoh person can come to being hearing is being almost hearing......and there's still quite a lot of difference between a hearing person, and an almost hearing person.

 

[dkf747]

Whether you like it or not, to state that a deaf person isn't "missing" sometime that is a fundamental part of the human experience is totally ludricious.

Now we're less than human? Our lives are not full enough?

You say we can't do certain jobs? I disagree. We can do them but society is trying to prevent us from doing them. They think we are defective when we are not.

 

[Teresh]

sr171soars, your argument errs in that it assumes dhh are inferior. Hearies have developed technology that implicitly requires hearing. Were it deafies who were developing technology, hearing would not be a requirement.

It's not that deafies functionally cannot do those jobs but instead that hearies benefit from technology that is designed for them.

Deafies would be able to do those jobs were the assumption of hearing not made in the course of technical advancement.

 

[sr171soars]

No, you don't function as a hearing person......you function as a HARD of hearing person.....there's a difference. If there wasn't one, then many of the regular posters here(who are hoh, like Lev, me, Alex and lots of others) wouldn't even be here. The closest a hoh person can come to being hearing is being almost hearing......and there's still quite a lot of difference between a hearing person, and an almost hearing person.

Interesting point...and I can agree with it. I wasn't trying to claim I could hear like them but rather function like them. But you are correct it is similar to a HOH person.

 

[sr171soars]

Now we're less than human? Our lives are not full enough?

You say we can't do certain jobs? I disagree. We can do them but society is trying to prevent us from doing them. They think we are defective when we are not.

Paranoid aren't we? There is an incredible amount of defensiveness going on with this particular idea that is astounding. Society is not trying to prevent you from doing them. You just can't do them technology not withstanding. You have no idea how sight and hearing can go together when doing various activities. To be honest I envy them sometimes on that score but since I received my CI is has been less of an issue for me. There is an efficiency factor that both senses bring with doing the activity and communicating at the same time. Even using your argument about technology, you have overloaded your sight to compensate the two senses combined. A hearing person can say be driving a car and hear a conversation while not look at the person talking in the back seat. It is much more difficult to do that while deaf and half to either turn around from time to time or use the mirror all while driving the vehicle. I know all about that when I used HAs. It wasn't easy and even with my CI, once in a while, it can be a problem.

I never said that the deaf are defective and neither do I imply it...you did which is why I question your argument. All I said there things that the deaf cannot either do or not do very well and all if it is in the context of communication verbially to go along with vision.

 

[sr171soars]

sr171soars, your argument errs in that it assumes dhh are inferior. Hearies have developed technology that implicitly requires hearing. Were it deafies who were developing technology, hearing would not be a requirement.

It's not that deafies functionally cannot do those jobs but instead that hearies benefit from technology that is designed for them.

Deafies would be able to do those jobs were the assumption of hearing not made in the course of technical advancement.

See my reply to dkf747 right before this response about any assumptions that you all make that I don't make. You all say that and I don't say that and I don't imply it either. Some of you have an Ax to grind about your limitations. I don't and I'm limited myself like you and always will be but I don't blame on the hearing society.

Why wouldn't hearing society use hearing as part of their activities? Ignoring this fact is the most asinine aspect of this thread. They are using the two primary senses in the most effective manner. Since they do have hearing, it is obviously suitable for communication and it is a more efficient way to communicate period. A person can say so much more via speech in a shorter time span than via ASL or whatever. There is not just the words but the tone and tenor to it that is there. There is an amazing amount of information in a voice that is picked up by hearing people. They don't need to see the other at all and still get the information. If a hearing person needs to talk to somebody on the opposite side of the country, all they need is a simple phone or cell phone and that is it! Languages didn't just pop up because "Oh BTW, those deaf people can't do that..." If you believe that, I got a bridge to sell you.

The deaf communicate by sight and when it is dark and there is no light...what do you do? Not that happens often but Katrina down in NO brings out this problem when electricity doesn't work and you don't have candles. The hearing don't have this problem and they can still communicate. This doesn't make them superior as espoused by some but rather indicates what they can do with what they have.

The hearing don't understand the deaf and probably for the most part never will except for some. They don't have an agenda to make the deaf miserable...they just do what works for them since they are in the majority and always will be... They have done some wonderful things with technology to assist the deaf and that is great!

Why do you have ears if you don't need them? This last point makes my point about this whole thing...I call spade a spade.

 

[dkf747]

Why wouldn't hearing society use hearing as part of their activities?

That is not a problem. Why do you assume that Deaf people can not do so much? Is it because you can't? Deaf people can do nearly every job you have listed so far, but are not allowed to. Those that can't be done currently, could be done with technology. So what exactly is that Deaf people absolutely can NOT do? I'm not talking about what they are not allowed to do (truck driving, baggage handling for an airline, etc...), but what is impossible for them to do.

Why do you have ears if you don't need them?

To hold your glasses on?

 

[sr171soars]

That is not a problem. Why do you assume that Deaf people can not do so much? Is it because you can't? Deaf people can do nearly every job you have listed so far, but are not allowed to. Those that can't be done currently, could be done with technology. So what exactly is that Deaf people absolutely can NOT do? I'm not talking about what they are not allowed to do (truck driving, baggage handling for an airline, etc...), but what is impossible for them to do.

To hold your glasses on?

To the last remark, I had to laugh anyway but ears aren't made to be decorative pieces.

I didn't assume they can't do much. Your remarks about truck driving, baggage handling are not what I'm talking about and you know it. In fact, I don't see why the deaf can't do those jobs...they ought to be allowed to. I'm talking about jobs that require both sight and hearing in a coordinated fashion to make the instantaneious decisions that are often required for the job. Such as being a policeman, fireman, and a airline traffic controller. You are only fooling yourself if you think you can do these types of jobs without the benefit of hearing. In fact, you will be putting not only others in danger but also yourself in danger.

Take the police job, your eyes will not be able to, in most cases, make the determination where somebody has taken a shot at you for the first time assuming you are even aware that it is happening (without hearing). The first warning you typically get is when you get hit by the bullet or the sound of it via hearing. Once in a blue moon, you actually see evidence of the shot like a ricochet. With hearing you know the fact right away and you are in action to protect others and yourself. Granted this doesn't happen every day but it does happen as it is part of the job description. You mentioned technology doing this for you...I don't think so. I know there is nothing out there to assist now to deal with stuff like that. You don't have the luxury of time to check your gadget to figure out this out. It is survival pure and simple and the one with both their senses tuned into the situation do much better than one with only one. Again you totally underestimate the coordination of somebody with sight and hearing to react appropriately in any such situations that require both senses.

Now, as for accusing me of not being able to do these jobs...that sounds more like a red herring to get me off track. Let me get you straight on one thing, I believe that the deaf can do many jobs. I just don't include the ones that require both major senses in order to do the job well. These are not the majority of the jobs out there but rather a just some of them. I know many deaf people and myself can do these jobs physically but when you can't rely on your hearing you become a liability. Having a liability in a tough situation can get you or somebody else killed easily. Trying to track down the source of danger or problem just on sight alone is a heck of way to live. Give me both major senses and I will take my odds but just one is asking for a one way ticket out ot this world. Bottomline, it is stupid thing when one's ego gets in the way of reality.

 

[Teresh]

I don't 'have an axe' to grind with hearies. Your points are valid, however they have nothing to do with anything I said. Rather than confronting your insecurity, you are instead audacious enough to say that it is I who am deluded. Being hearing is just another way to exist in the world, just like being deaf is. Neither is inherently superior to the other, and the only people who would believe otherwise are the crazies of both sides.

Hearies have every right to use their hearing, but your implication that it is easier or more efficient to communicate in audio is patently false. SEE may be slower than English, but SEE is not really a sign language so much as a way of rendering an audio language in signs. Legit sign languages are just as fast I'd not faster than English.

Tonality can also be rendered in video and in fact usually is in the form of facial expressions.

I would allege that your argument is fundamentally flawed as you are assuming that deafness is a disability at its core. Were the world largely or entirely deaf, I honestly believe that we would as a species be no better or worse off.

And by the way, there are several species of marine animals that are completely deaf.

 

[Cjanik]

I voted that my parents made the decision and it was a good decision.

I also agree with most of what sr171soars has said. The words from sr171soars could not have come out of my mouth any better.

In my opinion, the discussion ends with one fact:

the ratio of hearing to deaf/HH is something like 1:250

when almost everybody around you rely's on spoken english as communication, then being able to speak and communicate via words/sounds is the obviously best way to go.

the reason isnt to try to say being deaf is wrong/disabled, but rather, its to say that being deaf is inconvenient.

we now live in a world of convenience, weither it be the microwave, a dishwasher, a car, a watch, or deafness.

when the parents make a desicion for their child, its based on what will be most convenient for the child. If you were to say the child needs to make the decision on his/her own, then by age 13 they'd probably not want the CI, being that they spent their whole life deaf and are afraid of what changes can come.
On the other hand, if you were to implant a child at age 4 with a CI, the child would most likely, by age 13, root for the implant, because they have more realistic opportunities.

due to that, there's no real judgement that any of you (including myself) can make when you say "no, your wrong, im right" when it comes to implantation via parents or childs choice.

while its not impossible for a deaf person to get a job working in customer service (such as home depot), its not as realistic. however for someone with a CI, its more realistic (such as me for example).

eh im tired, heading to bed, goodnight.

 

[sr171soars]

I don't 'have an axe' to grind with hearies. Your points are valid, however they have nothing to do with anything I said. Rather than confronting your insecurity, you are instead audacious enough to say that it is I who am deluded. Being hearing is just another way to exist in the world, just like being deaf is. Neither is inherently superior to the other, and the only people who would believe otherwise are the crazies of both sides.

Hearies have every right to use their hearing, but your implication that it is easier or more efficient to communicate in audio is patently false. SEE may be slower than English, but SEE is not really a sign language so much as a way of rendering an audio language in signs. Legit sign languages are just as fast I'd not faster than English.

Tonality can also be rendered in video and in fact usually is in the form of facial expressions.

I would allege that your argument is fundamentally flawed as you are assuming that deafness is a disability at its core. Were the world largely or entirely deaf, I honestly believe that we would as a species be no better or worse off.

And by the way, there are several species of marine animals that are completely deaf.

I don't have any insecurity with my deafness as it is a plain fact and I just live with it...doesn't bother me a bit. Actually, it has some advantages like when I sleep...I don't have to hear the racket going on out there. Anyway, what I'm gonna to do...whine and complain about it...heck fat lot that would do me. I decided long ago to get on with the program and make peace with myself and function the best I could and you know...it worked in very well for me. Maybe for some it doesn't work so well. Since, I had my CI, it made it easier for me to function in the hearing world since I always have been in that world since I was a child. Because of that decision (to get with the program), I have experienced so many things that I wouldn't have otherwise.

Cjanik said it a little better about deafness is more of an inconvenience than anything else. At it's core, deafness is a disability because you are missing a sense that that you would normally have but for whatever reason you don't have. Now, if you are deaf, then that is what you are and if there is no way to assist you to hear or you don't have the desire to hear then what's the problem? As I mentioned somewhere earlier, nobody pointing a gun to your head to make you hear (if you could). If that suits you, fine nobody's in a snit about it. I certainly don't go around belittling the deaf world...why would I do that? They are who they are and they are comfortable with it...so who am I to say otherwise.

The point about speed of communication is probably not as clear cut as either of us like to make it to be. I can let that go...no big deal.

The last point you made is irrelevant, as it pertains to the whole species. In our case, hearing is the normal attribute.

At this point, I will simply say I disagree with the premise that deafness isn't a disability. We can argue about all day and go around and around. There are two camps of thought...deafness is a disability and the other where it is not. The Beatles said it very well with their song..."Let it be...there will be an answer".

 

[dkf747]

To the last remark, I had to laugh anyway but ears aren't made to be decorative pieces.

You walked into that one, didn't you? Well, it was meant to be silly. Glad you laughed.

I'm talking about jobs that require both sight and hearing in a coordinated fashion to make the instantaneious decisions that are often required for the job. Such as being a policeman, fireman, and a airline traffic controller. You are only fooling yourself if you think you can do these types of jobs without the benefit of hearing. In fact, you will be putting not only others in danger but also yourself in danger.

I'm not disagreeing with your point entirely. However, it is not necessarily impossible to do those kinds of jobs. They are only impossible because these jobs were made to depend on hearing. What if they were made so that hearing was not a factor? Some of these jobs could easily be made that way, others would more challenging. The point is deafness is often only a disability because the majority sees no reason to make jobs so that hearing ability is not a factor. If we were to reverse things, so that deaf were in the majority, would being deaf be disabled? My answer is NO. All of this leads me to conclude that the limiting factor is not necessarily hearing loss, but rather the majority does not care or see a need to make things deaf-friendly. I realize that they don't have to. That was not my point that they should or should not.

Now, as for accusing me of not being able to do these jobs...that sounds more like a red herring to get me off track. Let me get you straight on one thing, I believe that the deaf can do many jobs. I just don't include the ones that require both major senses in order to do the job well. These are not the majority of the jobs out there but rather a just some of them. I know many deaf people and myself can do these jobs physically but when you can't rely on your hearing you become a liability. Having a liability in a tough situation can get you or somebody else killed easily. Trying to track down the source of danger or problem just on sight alone is a heck of way to live. Give me both major senses and I will take my odds but just one is asking for a one way ticket out ot this world. Bottomline, it is stupid thing when one's ego gets in the way of reality.

We'll just have to disagre on that then. In many cases the liability thing is artificially created or could easily be adapted too.

 

[sr171soars]

...
We'll just have to disagre on that then...

I'm cool with that. Nobody agrees on everything...if we did, then one of us is not needed...