The new deaf generation....speaking and listening

[jillio]

Same as "oh my goodness! You speak SOOOOO well!" in a sugary tone that would be appropriate when talking to a 3 year old, and I get that at 40 now.

I know what you are saying! My son has gotten it all of his life as well. Shame that people don't understand how patronizing they are being with remarks like that. And, when you point it out to them, rather than changing what they are doing, they just argue that it isn't patronizing.:roll: Talk about audism in action.

 

[jillio]

http://www.alldeaf.com/1858948-post69.html

Just a small example in the 3rd paragraph.

Great example.

 

[AlleyCat]

I know what you are saying! My son has gotten it all of his life as well. Shame that people don't understand how patronizing they are being with remarks like that. And, when you point it out to them, rather than changing what they are doing, they just argue that it isn't patronizing.:roll: Talk about audism in action.

Yep, and there goes the "Oh no, I didn't mean anything by it!! But I'll pray for you anyway."



Anyways enough getting off track. I think we made our point.

 

[TheOracle]

I'm afraid civil rights are quite important to us - especially when it comes to communication, jobs and education.

deafskeptic, I mean Black Civil Rights. I don't like it when people who advocate for gay rights try to compare it to MLK or Malcom X's movements and I had the same issue when Jillio made it sound like the de-segregation movement is the same as your cause.

Being treated fairly regardless of hearing IS a civil rights issue, but it completely different than ones of race and I know most in the black community resent the apples to oranges comparison.

All civil rights campaigns need to stand on their own merit. Deaf issues do. I just don't think it is fair to compare a deaf person 'passing' as hearing the same way you compare a 'high yaller' trying to pass for white.

so not the same thing.

 

[Banjo]

And, civil rights issues regarding African Americans are not what they were in the past, either. Doesn't mean that the history does not impact the culture, and that certain forms of oppression are not still evident.

It seems that the use of sarcasm is often a defensive ploy to cover over the fact that knowledge is lacking in an area. Don't have knowledge regarding Deaf history? Make a sarcastic comment to any discussion there of, because you have nothing else to contribute, but have a strong desire to be included.

Right, let's not forget the fact that children's hands were often slapped if they were caught signing. Or worse, smacked with a wooden ruler sideways. People's hands were tied together to discourage signing. The deaf children were even locked into closets as a punishment. The deaf were discriminated on a daily basis when it came to everything.

People like Alexander Graham Bell did the deaf community a big injustice by advocating to sterilize the deaf merely because he believed them to be unfit to reproduce. His actions also affected the African-Americans as well and it continued until the early 70s.

The list goes on and on. Our rights are in fact, civil rights. Period.

 

[DeafCaroline]

Jillio, you like to talk about how qualified you are because of your degree. :roll: Well, now it's my turn. I teach history for a living and I can most certainly tell you that Deaf in America have not been subjected to Jim Crow, slavery, lynch mobs, etc.

People don't look at a Deaf kid and cross to the other side of the street in fear and/or disgust!

I'm a history major and I hold the opposing view. Fear and disgust? Dealt with a lot of that in school. Any time I opened my mouth - I got mocked for my speech and treated as though I was mentally retarded. There would be kids pulling other kids away from me and calling me a loser.

2 experiences I remember very well, no one wanted to sit next to me on the bus and if they had to, they would spray imaginary disinfectant on my seat before sitting next to me as if I had cooties. This is every morning and every afternoon for 6 years.

2nd experience- we were outside on the playground, getting ready to play dodgeball. Teacher asked "who wants Caroline on their team?" The entire class, instead of putting their hands up in the air, bent down and touched the ground.

Maybe I didn't fear for my life but I often wanted to end it.

 

[deafskeptic]

Yep, and there goes the "Oh no, I didn't mean anything by it!! But I'll pray for you anyway."



Anyways enough getting off track. I think we made our point.

I would hope so. It gets tiring using a hammer to drive the point home.

 

[Banjo]

Jillio, you like to talk about how qualified you are because of your degree. :roll: Well, now it's my turn. I teach history for a living and I can most certainly tell you that Deaf in America have not been subjected to Jim Crow, slavery, lynch mobs, etc.

People don't look at a Deaf kid and cross to the other side of the street in fear and/or disgust!

Jim Crow laws? Well, well... a lot of people would have to disagree with you on that one. A lot of people who were considered to be "special needs" were separated from the others. Often in different schools and if they didn't have a choice, they'll just put them way in the back of the school where nobody can see them or come in contact with them.

And yes, deaf people were subjected to slavery. Just not in the way you would think. In fact, I believe CNN covered something about this as a part of their Freedom Project. Here are some examples.

http://www.nytimes.com/1997/10/24/n...re-tortured-with-stun-guns-enforcer-says.html
http://www.nytimes.com/1997/07/27/nyregion/for-deaf-peddlers-both-opportunity-and-exploitation.html
http://articles.latimes.com/1997/jul/25/local/me-16247

 

[deafskeptic]

deafskeptic, I mean Black Civil Rights. I don't like it when people who advocate for gay rights try to compare it to MLK or Malcom X's movements and I had the same issue when Jillio made it sound like the de-segregation movement is the same as your cause.

Being treated fairly regardless of hearing IS a civil rights issue, but it completely different than ones of race and I know most in the black community resent the apples to oranges comparison.

All civil rights campaigns need to stand on their own merit. Deaf issues do. I just don't think it is fair to compare a deaf person 'passing' as hearing the same way you compare a 'high yaller' trying to pass for white.

so not the same thing.

I'm afraid you'll need to learn deaf history.

 

[GrendelQ]

Where did I even imply that Koko had inserted the word "effortlessly" into his definition?

Again, you are flip flopping. First you say that whether someone has to exert greater effort in English usage does not impact fluency, now you are saying it does, then again you say it doesn't.

And I agree with Beclak's assessment. That is why effortlessly does not need to be a criterion for fluency for the deaf, or for any population that has to exert greater effort in the use of English than does the general population.

Wow, you are doing a lot of dancing around this issue. For a moment I feared that you were about to flip the argument and claim that it was me saying that d/Deaf/HOH could never be fluent in spoken language.

1. I have no disagreement with the definitions of fluency I've seen online, many of which have been posted on this thread. No, I don't see the error you see in including the word "effortless" or "effortlessly" in the definitions, as we've seen again and again. I think it make sense to say that if you have difficulty using the language, you are not fluent in it.

2. I disagree with your proposal that the deaf and other populations should have a different definition of fluency that excludes any reference to "effort."

 

[DeafCaroline]

deafskeptic, I mean Black Civil Rights. I don't like it when people who advocate for gay rights try to compare it to MLK or Malcom X's movements and I had the same issue when Jillio made it sound like the de-segregation movement is the same as your cause.

oh boy. in the 1980s and 1990s, gay people were scared to be in their neighbourhood because they were constantly attacked and killed in my town. it was always in the news. have you ever heard of any gay people openly strutting their identity in public before say 1970s? No....they knew they would be attacked.

Oracle - you seem to be missing the forest for all the trees.

 

[deafskeptic]

deafskeptic, I mean Black Civil Rights. I don't like it when people who advocate for gay rights try to compare it to MLK or Malcom X's movements and I had the same issue when Jillio made it sound like the de-segregation movement is the same as your cause.

Being treated fairly regardless of hearing IS a civil rights issue, but it completely different than ones of race and I know most in the black community resent the apples to oranges comparison.

All civil rights campaigns need to stand on their own merit. Deaf issues do. I just don't think it is fair to compare a deaf person 'passing' as hearing the same way you compare a 'high yaller' trying to pass for white.

so not the same thing.

While I certainly have never faced discrimination due to my skin color, I can not begin to count the times I've been discriminated because of my deafness.

When I told Native Americans about my oral background, they could see parrals to their own experience. They or their parents had been taken away from their nations and forced to use English only just as ASL was forbidden to me when I was growing up.

 

[deafskeptic]

Right, let's not forget the fact that children's hands were often slapped if they were caught signing. Or worse, smacked with a wooden ruler sideways. People's hands were tied together to discourage signing. The deaf children were even locked into closets as a punishment. The deaf were discriminated on a daily basis when it came to everything.

People like Alexander Graham Bell did the deaf community a big injustice by advocating to sterilize the deaf merely because he believed them to be unfit to reproduce. His actions also affected the African-Americans as well and it continued until the early 70s.

The list goes on and on. Our rights are in fact, civil rights. Period.

I don't remember being put in a closet but I certainly remember being put in a trash can as a punishment in oral class.

 

[deafskeptic]

I don't remember being put in a closet but I certainly remember being put in a trash can as a punishment in oral class.

Trash can was empty but I had to stand in it as punishment

 

[jillio]

Yep, and there goes the "Oh no, I didn't mean anything by it!! But I'll pray for you anyway."



Anyways enough getting off track. I think we made our point.

Yep, point made. Let's just hope those who need to understand that point, do.

 

[GrendelQ]

Again, you are flip flopping. First you say that whether someone has to exert greater effort in English usage does not impact fluency, now you are saying it does, then again you say it doesn't.

Nope, never made those statements. You must be thinking of someone else. I've provided you with the dictionary definitions. If you have so many issues with what they say, write the editors.

 

[deafskeptic]

Nope, never made those statements. You must be thinking of someone else. I've provided you with the dictionary definitions. If you have so many issues with what they say, write the editors.

So why am I confused on your position?

 

[jillio]

Wow, you are doing a lot of dancing around this issue. For a moment I feared that you were about to flip the argument and claim that it was me saying that d/Deaf/HOH could never be fluent in spoken language.

1. I have no disagreement with the definitions of fluency I've seen online, many of which have been posted on this thread. No, I don't see the error you see in including the word "effortless" or "effortlessly" in the definitions, as we've seen again and again. I think it make sense to say that if you have difficulty using the language, you are not fluent in it.

2. I disagree with your proposal that the deaf and other populations should have a different definition of fluency that excludes any reference to "effort."

I'm not dancing around anything. I have been up front in every statement I have made. Just because you keep trying to twist it and make it say something you can disagree with doesn't mean I am dancing around anything. Obviously, there are many who understand exactly what I am saying judging from their responses.

I didn't say that a different definition was required. I said it needed to be adapted to those specific populations the same way that anything based on hearing standards needs to be adapted.

 

[Banjo]

Trash can was empty but I had to stand in it as punishment

Regardless, it's wrong to humiliate a deaf child and punish them in such a manner. Just wrong!

 

[jillio]

Nope, never made those statements. You must be thinking of someone else. I've provided you with the dictionary definitions. If you have so many issues with what they say, write the editors.

No, you are definately flip flopping. I am not the only one to see it.