Political Correctness on Deafness

shel90 said:
The problem is that the companies are too smart and can lie their way around it by saying, "We are sorry but we found someone more qualified for the position you applied for. Thank you for your interst." I have gotten that letter/call and so has many of my deaf friends. It makes us wonder if that is really true or just a cover up to cover their asses from getting sued?
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, it is automatically assumed in many cases, that the CI user is more capable of performing the essential functions of the job than the non-CI user. And, yes, it is a way to keep their asses from being sued.
 
shel90 said:
. . . I pay taxes, own a house, have a job, have two wonderful children, and dont break any laws but yet, I need an "attitude" adjustment about my deafness?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I can really tell, shel, that you really DO need an attitude adjustment! Come closer to the screen, I'll adjust your attitude! :whip: :bowlol:
 
shel90 said:
The problem is that the companies are too smart and can lie their way around it by saying, "We are sorry but we found someone more qualified for the position you applied for. Thank you for your interst." I have gotten that letter/call and so has many of my deaf friends. It makes us wonder if that is really true or just a cover up to cover their asses from getting sued?
Click to expand...

You know, I've been thinking . . . if you really wanted that job, find out what day those others were supposed to start and show up, too! Put that employer on the spot, just to see what they'd say! I think I'd show up AND say that I misplaced the letter stating that I was hired and the day and time to show up and where. Play dumb and see if you can force your hand.
 
I find this offensive. First, as a Deafblind person, I'm irked by the fact that the writer constantly needs to compare deafness to blindness to show that deafness is somehow 'less tragic'- being disabled isn't tragic in the first place. I don't get around with any assistance- it's me and me, folks. I take care of myself like a real big girl. I live a, dare I say, fuller life BECAUSE of the experiences I've gained as a Deafblind person.

Second, I know plenty of friends who are blind and jump like excited animals every time some doctor comes up with a new drop or drug or treatment that might give them a little more sight, and I know even more parents who do this to their blind children, and YES, I am the blind friend that tells them not to do it- you can't spend your whole life so convinced you're broken that you're willing to do anything to 'fix' yourself- that's a miserable way to live.

At the end of the day, I view cure seeking, be it from deafness or blindness, as nothing more than an act of self hate. That's a great deal more 'sad' than denying a deaf kid the right to hear birds chirping.
 
Aleser said:
I find this offensive. First, as a Deafblind person, I'm irked by the fact that the writer constantly needs to compare deafness to blindness to show that deafness is somehow 'less tragic'- being disabled isn't tragic in the first place. I live a, dare I say, fuller life BECAUSE of the experiences I've gained as a Deafblind person.

Second, I know plenty of friends who are blind and jump like excited animals every time some doctor comes up with a new drop or drug or treatment that might give them a little more sight, and I know even more parents who do this to their blind children, and YES, I am the blind friend that tells them not to do it- you can't spend your whole life so convinced you're broken that you're willing to do anything to 'fix' yourself- that's a miserable way to live.

At the end of the day, I view cure seeking, be it from deafness or blindness, as nothing more than an act of self hate. That's a great deal more 'sad' than denying a deaf kid the right to hear birds chirping.
Click to expand...

Yea, I lived my life wanting my deafness to be fixed so I developed an unhealthy obsession of hating myself and doing whatever it takes to fit in even it meant doing harm to myself. Pretty sick, huh? So much for assimilation, huh?
 
Here's the problem in a nutshell:

True, I can hear, but I don't feel I am prejudiced when I say that it is not better to be deaf as some of the characters in this film appear to say.
Click to expand...

How can you combat audism when the oppressors don't even know they're being audist -- or even worse, feel they are NOT?
 
dreamchaser said:
One way that a job can get rid of you is to lay you off and not fire you, claiming budget cuts and the elimination of a position. Then they turn around and hire somebody else to do what you do, but they give them a different title so they don't get in trouble. that reall blows!
Click to expand...

Yes, they are doing dirty work by laying off those people, then hire other people ...:rl:
 
shel90 said:
That's is my concern with the public's misinformed views on CIs that deaf people who dont get CIs will be disrespected right on the spot for "choosing" to remain deaf. Just like with my hubby's coworker's comment on why I wont get a CI to improve myself.

I pay taxes, own a house, have a job, have two wonderful children, and dont break any laws but yet, I need an "attitude" adjustment about my deafness?

This is my answer to those people with those kinds of views...:fu:
Click to expand...

I hate the word Disabled, and chose instead the word LIMITED. It would be a lie to say that hearing is not an asset, but it by no means makes a person worthwhile or better.
I wrote a little ditty called YA THINK, very short, but it kind of says what you are saying...
 
Interpretrator said:
Here's the problem in a nutshell:



How can you combat audism when the oppressors don't even know they're being audist -- or even worse, feel they are NOT?
Click to expand...

You've asked an excellent question there. Heh. People like that make me want to smash my head into a wall.
 
jillio said:
Unfortunately, the hearing population quite often
sees "handicapped" as being incapapble.
Click to expand...

Could I say that the hearing population who don't know sign language, are handicapped???? They are incapable of learning sign language in spite of having all five senses. :D
 
Buffalo said:
Could I say that the hearing population who don't know sign language, are handicapped???? They are incapable of learning sign language in spite of having all five senses. :D
Click to expand...

Snort! What silliness! Five senses beats four every time!!! It is more efficient to use spoken language because one's eyes are free to do other things while communicating. For purposes of communication, speech takes much less "bandwidth" for the brain to process without having to bog down the visual component. Why do you think folks with fives senses use speech anyway?

As far as sign language goes, they are most capable of learning sign language if they put their mind to it. But learning any kind of language is always a use it or lose it proposition. Unless they have people to practice with, how do they get any good at it?
 
sr171soars said:
Snort! What silliness! Five senses beats four every time!!! It is more efficient to use spoken language because one's eyes are free to do other things while communicating. For purposes of communication, speech takes much less "bandwidth" for the brain to process without having to bog down the visual component. Why do you think folks with fives senses use speech anyway?

As far as sign language goes, they are most capable of learning sign language if they put their mind to it. But learning any kind of language is always a use it or lose it proposition. Unless they have people to practice with, how do they get any good at it?
Click to expand...

Snort back to you! I agree with Dreamchaser that the hearing people are one step away from deafness. It is far easier for a hearing person to became deaf than a deaf person to become hearing. Haven't you ever heard of this quote "A picture is worth 10,000 words"? All you have to do is to look at the signing and the expression of the signer.... that is far more 'bandwidth' than spoken words! Haven't you read Harlan Lane's "The Mask of Benevolence" - especially the part about the doll house (page 122 - 125)? It is proved there that ASL is superior to oral language when it comes to spatial description. (one volunteer tells the other volunteer the layout of the doll house and where the furniture are supposed to be according to the picture on the box. The deaf volunteers did much better layout than the hearing volunteers!) Here is the quote "Sign languages exploit the unique features of the visual medium. Oral language is linear. Only one sound can be made or received at a time. Sign language, on the other hand, is visual; hence a whole scene can be taken in at once. Information can be loaded into several channels and expressed simultaneously." from Sign language - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia under 'Spatial grammar and simultaneity'. It is clear that ASL is much faster and better 'bandwidth' than oral language.

My own family doesn't know sign language. They have me to practice ASL with but they still don't know sign language. I am sure that there are many many hearing people who have a deaf relative and they themselves don't bother with ASL.

If they think they have the right to look down on the Deaf people, then I suppose we do have the right to look down on them for not be able to sign. I don't make fun of those who do know ASL (more power to those kind of people!). Remember the Golden Rule.
 
Buffalo said:
Snort back to you! I agree with Dreamchaser that the hearing people are one step away from deafness. It is far easier for a hearing person to became deaf than a deaf person to become hearing. Haven't you ever heard of this quote "A picture is worth 10,000 words"? All you have to do is to look at the signing and the expression of the signer.... that is far more 'bandwidth' than spoken words! Haven't you read Harlan Lane's "The Mask of Benevolence" - especially the part about the doll house (page 122 - 125)? It is proved there that ASL is superior to oral language when it comes to spatial description. (one volunteer tells the other volunteer the layout of the doll house and where the furniture are supposed to be according to the picture on the box. The deaf volunteers did much better layout than the hearing volunteers!) Here is the quote "Sign languages exploit the unique features of the visual medium. Oral language is linear. Only one sound can be made or received at a time. Sign language, on the other hand, is visual; hence a whole scene can be taken in at once. Information can be loaded into several channels and expressed simultaneously." from Sign language - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia under 'Spatial grammar and simultaneity'. It is clear that ASL is much faster and better 'bandwidth' than oral language.

My own family doesn't know sign language. They have me to practice ASL with but they still don't know sign language. I am sure that there are many many hearing people who have a deaf relative and they themselves don't bother with ASL.

If they think they have the right to look down on the Deaf people, then I suppose we do have the right to look down on them for not be able to sign. I don't make fun of those who do know ASL (more power to those kind of people!). Remember the Golden Rule.
Click to expand...

Oh yes, I agree. ASL is very far superior to English when it come to spatial relations. English sentences like "he is in front of the house" is imprecise at best compared to ASL spatial relations. You know exactly where he is in ASL.

When describing things around the house, ASL excels at spatial relations when it comes to describings room and stuff. A gifted signer can literally create a 'virtual landscape' in ASL in just seconds. Those of you who know ASL will know what I mean by 'virtual landscaping' in ASL.
 
Buffalo said:
Could I say that the hearing population who don't know sign language, are handicapped???? They are incapable of learning sign language in spite of having all five senses. :D
Click to expand...

Yep, you can say that. They don't have a disability, sao we can't apply that definition.:giggle:
 
deafskeptic said:
Oh yes, I agree. ASL is very far superior to English when it come to spatial relations. English sentences like "he is in front of the house" is imprecise at best compared to ASL spatial relations. You know exactly where he is in ASL.

When describing things around the house, ASL excels at spatial relations when it comes to describings room and stuff. A gifted signer can literally create a 'virtual landscape' in ASL in just seconds. Those of you who know ASL will know what I mean by 'virtual landscaping' in ASL.
Click to expand...

**nodding**

I would also say that ASL users are very adept at conveying emotional tone.
 
jillio said:
**nodding**

I would also say that ASL users are very adept at conveying emotional tone.
Click to expand...

Too bad facial expressions and postures that are an important part of ASL don't translate well into text.
 
Back
Top