Those who decide not to get a CI

cjg said:
Where have you show that it is wrong .. you posted it yourself ..

and no .. you are wrong .. there is no 50 post minimum .. adjust your settings to allow PM's and ill show you ..
Click to expand...

I get PMs on a daily basis.
 
Bottesini said:
I get PMs on a daily basis.
Click to expand...

this is what I see when I click "send pm" to you .. Yet I am able to send pm;s to others ..

AllDeaf Message
Bottesini has chosen not to receive private messages or may not be allowed to receive private messages. Therefore you may not send your message to him/her.

If you are trying to send this message to multiple recipients, remove Bottesini from the recipient list and send the message again.


Have you perhaps added me to some sort of ignore list ??
 
cjg said:
this is what I see when I click "send pm" to you .. Yet I am able to send pm;s to others ..

AllDeaf Message
Bottesini has chosen not to receive private messages or may not be allowed to receive private messages. Therefore you may not send your message to him/her.

If you are trying to send this message to multiple recipients, remove Bottesini from the recipient list and send the message again.


Have you perhaps added me to some sort of ignore list ??
Click to expand...

50 posts now.

I get PM from friends. :)
 
Bottesini said:
50 posts now.

I get PM from friends. :)
Click to expand...

That is exactly the point .. your setting are set to not permit PM's .. Which is why I was unable to send to you .. Not because of a 50 post minimum count ..

Perhaps that was the case when you first joined .. But it not the case now. That is all I was trying to tell you. I have been able to send and receive pms even before the 50 ..

But anyway ..

Seems as if this has gotton way off track.
 
faire_jour said:
Wirelessly posted



ok, so what word would you use for someone who has a profound hearing loss?
Click to expand...

Just that .. profound hearing loss .. if they want to refer to themselves as deaf .. then that is there choice. As has been posted in other posts , the dictionary has a definition. And that definition is how the word is understood to people. If you choose to refer to someone as deaf , understand that the world will view the person as conforming to that definition.

When speaking about the girl that can hear and understand spoken speech at a 'normal' level while her back is turned "shes deaf , but she can hear" will cause most people to do a double take and wonder what you are talking about. "Oh she is hard of hearing" will likely convey the concept better.

I guess it would be similar to blind , however there is a legal definition for the line between "blind" and "not blind" .. I have been unable to find any real reference to "legally deaf" even tho I have seen the term used. Most recently in leslie nielsen obits.
 
Wirelessly posted

cjg said:
faire_jour said:
Wirelessly posted



ok, so what word would you use for someone who has a profound hearing loss?
Click to expand...

Just that .. profound hearing loss .. if they want to refer to themselves as deaf .. then that is there choice. As has been posted in other posts , the dictionary has a definition. And that definition is how the word is understood to people. If you choose to refer to someone as deaf , understand that the world will view the person as conforming to that definition.

When speaking about the girl that can hear and understand spoken speech at a 'normal' level while her back is turned "shes deaf , but she can hear" will cause most people to do a double take and wonder what you are talking about. "Oh she is hard of hearing" will likely convey the concept better.

I guess it would be similar to blind , however there is a legal definition for the line between "blind" and "not blind" .. I have been unable to find any real reference to "legally deaf" even tho I have seen the term used. Most recently in leslie nielsen obits.
Click to expand...

but she's not hard of hearing, she's profoundly deaf with bilateral cochlear implants that enable her to hear speech in the normal range. You are factually wrong. (i say just what i just typed by the way)
 
Even though I was born with profound hearing loss in both ears, many deaf people refer me as hard of hearing for one reason only...I have the ability to speak. According to my audiogram and the audiograms of my classmates at the deaf school where I had attended, I was THE most deaf"est" kid there...no one had more hearing loss than I did. However, they still called me "hard of hearing" because I function as one.

Hearing people call me deaf, because I do not hear.

For a long time, I was really troubled because I felt I didn't really have a sense of identity. But I grew from my experiences, and one day I simply announced, "I'm deaf. No one can define me but me." And it was a truly liberating experience.
 
deafbajagal said:
Even though I was born with profound hearing loss in both ears, many deaf people refer me as hard of hearing for one reason only...I have the ability to speak. According to my audiogram and the audiograms of my classmates at the deaf school where I had attended, I was THE most deaf"est" kid there...no one had more hearing loss than I did. However, they still called me "hard of hearing" because I function as one.

Hearing people call me deaf, because I do not hear.

For a long time, I was really troubled because I felt I didn't really have a sense of identity. But I grew from my experiences, and one day I simply announced, "I'm deaf. No one can define me but me." And it was a truly liberating experience.
Click to expand...

Same experiences here. Also, I am the most deafest out of all of my closest deaf friends at 110-120 dB.
 
faire_jour said:
Wirelessly posted

but she's not hard of hearing, she's profoundly deaf with bilateral cochlear implants that enable her to hear speech in the normal range. You are factually wrong. (i say just what i just typed by the way)
Click to expand...

This goes back to where exactly the line between deaf and not deaf is.

the dictionary says:

1. Partially or completely lacking in the sense of hearing.

The phrase 'hard of hearing' would better fit then simply 'deaf' .. With your longer phrase being the most accurate of any of them. Because the definition of deaf includes "completely lacking" ..

she is NOT completely lacking of the sense of hearing. Her sense of hearing works well enough to be used in that situation ..

Again .. this all comes down to defining the line between deaf and not deaf.

I am arguing semantics , not culture.
 
cjg said:
This goes back to where exactly the line between deaf and not deaf is.

the dictionary says:

1. Partially or completely lacking in the sense of hearing.

The phrase 'hard of hearing' would better fit then simply 'deaf' .. With your longer phrase being the most accurate of any of them. Because the definition of deaf includes "completely lacking" ..

she is NOT completely lacking of the sense of hearing. Her sense of hearing works well enough to be used in that situation ..

Again .. this all comes down to defining the line between deaf and not deaf.

I am arguing semantics , not culture.
Click to expand...

You are also contradicting the dictionary definition that you just posted.
 
Wirelessly posted

uh, it says partially as well. Even with perfect settings, you would admit that she is partially lacking hearing because she is profoundly deaf 50% of the day (when she is sleeping)
 
Bottesini said:
You are also contradicting the dictionary definition that you just posted.
Click to expand...

How do you figure ??

the word is "lacking"

Definition of LACK
intransitive verb
1
: to be deficient or missing <time is lacking for a full explanation>
2
: to be short or have need of something <he will not lack for advisers>
transitive verb
: to stand in need of : suffer from the absence or deficiency of <lack the necessities of life>
 
cjg said:
How do you figure ??

the word is "lacking"

Definition of LACK
intransitive verb
1
: to be deficient or missing <time is lacking for a full explanation>
2
: to be short or have need of something <he will not lack for advisers>
transitive verb
: to stand in need of : suffer from the absence or deficiency of <lack the necessities of life>
Click to expand...

"partially" How can you overlook that word in your own post?
 
faire_jour said:
Wirelessly posted

uh, it says partially as well. Even with perfect settings, you would admit that she is partially lacking hearing because she is profoundly deaf 50% of the day (when she is sleeping)
Click to expand...

Are you saying that a "normal hearing" person is deaf when they are sleeping ??

Or that she does not wear her ci's while sleeping ?

I would concede ( for lack of a better term ) that without the CI's the term deaf would be the most accurate ( if of course she has none or minimal residual hearing )
 
Bottesini said:
"partially" How can you overlook that word in your own post?
Click to expand...

I am not ..

but she is not lacking with the CI's .. her hearing works properly for that situation. Or do you not define "ability to hear/understand spoken words while her back is turned" as working properly ?
 
Wirelessly posted

cjg said:
faire_jour said:
Wirelessly posted

uh, it says partially as well. Even with perfect settings, you would admit that she is partially lacking hearing because she is profoundly deaf 50% of the day (when she is sleeping)
Click to expand...

Are you saying that a "normal hearing" person is deaf when they are sleeping ??

Or that she does not wear her ci's while sleeping ?

I would concede ( for lack of a better term ) that without the CI's the term deaf would be the most accurate ( if of course she has none or minimal residual hearing )
Click to expand...

how do you not know that you can't wear a processor when you are sleeping?
 
Back
Top