We are NOT disabled.

This was a *terrific* article!
Click to expand...
:ty: I just HATE how nondisabled people almost Precious Momentize kids with disablities. We CAN adapt to life without hearing, seeing, walking, talking etc. Sure, a lot of us will never be able to see, hear, walk or talk........but so what? Many of us disabled folks have never done that particualr life activity "normally" ....
 
deafdyke said:
:ty: I just HATE how nondisabled people almost Precious Momentize kids with disablities. We CAN adapt to life without hearing, seeing, walking, talking etc. Sure, a lot of us will never be able to see, hear, walk or talk........but so what? Many of us disabled folks have never done that particualr life activity "normally" ....
Click to expand...

I do too. :( When kids are born with a disability, it's no big deal to them because it's what they're used to -- it's what they've always known. I get similar reactions from people who ask me how I feel about being deafblind or being unable to drive. I always tell them, "You can't miss what you never had."
 
I got my ass jumped in here when I first joined by making the mistake of calling deafness a disability. One analogy that was given to me is that deaf people don't have a disabled plaque on there rear view mirror therefore they are not disabled. I learned a valuable lesson about deaf culture on that day but felt compelled to verify my understanding of what disabled means by looking up the definition.

disabled
Function: adjective
: incapacitated by illness or injury; also : physically or mentally impaired in a way that substantially limits activity especially in relation to employment or education

Decide for yourself. Regardless of what I believe I won't make the mistake of calling deafness a disability ever again.
 
rockdrummer said:
I got my ass jumped in here when I first joined by making the mistake of calling deafness a disability. One analogy that was given to me is that deaf people don't have a disabled plaque on there rear view mirror therefore they are not disabled. I learned a valuable lesson about deaf culture on that day but felt compelled to verify my understanding of what disabled means by looking up the definition.

disabled
Function: adjective
: incapacitated by illness or injury; also : physically or mentally impaired in a way that substantially limits activity especially in relation to employment or education

Decide for yourself. Regardless of what I believe I won't make the mistake of calling deafness a disability ever again.
Click to expand...

Like I said somewhere else, Rockdrummer, it is the politically savvy amongst us as to when to say deafness IS a disability and when to say it IS NOT. :giggle: So don't worry about being so apologetic, man.
 
rockdrummer said:
I got my ass jumped in here when I first joined by making the mistake of calling deafness a disability. One analogy that was given to me is that deaf people don't have a disabled plaque on there rear view mirror therefore they are not disabled. I learned a valuable lesson about deaf culture on that day but felt compelled to verify my understanding of what disabled means by looking up the definition.

disabled
Function: adjective
: incapacitated by illness or injury; also : physically or mentally impaired in a way that substantially limits activity especially in relation to employment or education

Decide for yourself. Regardless of what I believe I won't make the mistake of calling deafness a disability ever again.
Click to expand...

Similarly people assume that autism (and related spectrum things) are disabilities (which I vehemently disagree with). But that isn't to say that there aren't so-called "low functioning" auties for which their autism isn't disabling. Autism can be disabling for some people and I think that also extends to deafness: deafness can be disabling but it certainly isn't the case for everyone in every circumstance.

*dons flamesuit*
 
doh said:
Similarly people assume that autism (and related spectrum things) are disabilities (which I vehemently disagree with). But that isn't to say that there aren't so-called "low functioning" auties for which their autism isn't disabling. Autism can be disabling for some people and I think that also extends to deafness: deafness can be disabling but it certainly isn't the case for everyone in every circumstance.
Click to expand...

I think you mean high functioning. Even there, many have a strong disabled identity. So even when it's viewed as a positive, or at least not a negative, it can still be considered a disability. (That's not limited to autism, either.)
 
but that does not mean I'm less capable than a sighted-hearing person.
Click to expand...


im not attacking you personally, or speaking of you in a negative way here....but you are certainly "less capable" than a sighted-hearing person. thats not to say you can't function. Im "less capable" than a professional basketball player, or an astronaut, or someone with a teaching degree.


an argument over a word, that has a fluid definition is silly at best. In a legal sense, deafness IS a disability...in my mind, the fact that i wear glasses IS a disability, the fact im short is a disability when i play basketball. see my point?


Deaf don't like deafness being called a disability because it makes them feel like they are less than a hearing person. And therein lies the problem. Its no different than napeoleon syndrome(not sure if its a real medical syndrome) where short people overcompensate for the fact they are short and try and be tough bully's.

its all about self-confidence and knowing that you are no less than anyone else, and no better for that matter, just different. The way other people see you is moot, the way you see yourself is everything. Stop looking to hearing people for reassurance.
 
I got my ass jumped in here when I first joined by making the mistake of calling deafness a disability. One analogy that was given to me is that deaf people don't have a disabled plaque on there rear view mirror therefore they are not disabled.
Click to expand...


every Deaf person who said that better not be accepting SSI, or throw an ADA law at anyone thier entire life. You can't have it both ways, pick a side.
 
Ariakkas said:
im not attacking you personally, or speaking of you in a negative way here....but you are certainly "less capable" than a sighted-hearing person. thats not to say you can't function. Im "less capable" than a professional basketball player, or an astronaut, or someone with a teaching degree.


an argument over a word, that has a fluid definition is silly at best. In a legal sense, deafness IS a disability...in my mind, the fact that i wear glasses IS a disability, the fact im short is a disability when i play basketball. see my point?


Deaf don't like deafness being called a disability because it makes them feel like they are less than a hearing person. And therein lies the problem. Its no different than napeoleon syndrome(not sure if its a real medical syndrome) where short people overcompensate for the fact they are short and try and be tough bully's.

its all about self-confidence and knowing that you are no less than anyone else, and no better for that matter, just different. The way other people see you is moot, the way you see yourself is everything. Stop looking to hearing people for reassurance.
Click to expand...

A disability is only "disabling" if you allow it to be. For the record, I am no less capable than a sighted-hearing person nor do I seek approval from sighted-hearing people. I could care less what they think of me. If I allowed the general public to determine my self-worth, I would have thrown in the towel a long time ago.

Your description of napoleon syndrome (if that's a real syndrome) sounds alot like people who are described as being "super Deaf" or "super blinks." (super blind)
 
What Ariakkas is referring to is people who have an Inferiority complex. That includes napoleon syndrom. There are many and it can be dibilitating. My sisters husband has social anxiety. He is fine one on one but you put him in a social setting and he shuts down, can't speak, keeps his head down. That isn't good with my extroverted, gregarious family. With his family he is fine. Around me he is fine. My best friend, who is deaf is an amazing dancer, very funny and out going. He is also very artistic. With out being patronizing if you look at everything humans can do and run them like a list not every person can do everything. I dance extremely well, but my best friend dances better than me. I grew up singing, some people cannot carry a tune in a bucket. My entire family cooks, and quite well. Not being able to cook would be an aberration, the ability is in our genes, aunts uncles cousins everyone. one of my brothers married a woman that could burn water. In this sense she is disabled compared to us. (and in my family not being able to cook is considered one, we get excited over a new supermarket opening, yeah we are a little crazy) If you look at Savants they are amazing, GENIUSES in one sense, and severly disabled in another, (some cannot dress themselves or take themselves to the bathroom) and the man who most over america considers a genius, Ray Charles, he was blind. His talents though in other areas far out shown his blindness and no one considered him disabled, same with Stevie Wonder. Really it is how you carry yourself and what you do with what you have.
 
ismi said:
I think you mean high functioning. Even there, many have a strong disabled identity. So even when it's viewed as a positive, or at least not a negative, it can still be considered a disability. (That's not limited to autism, either.)
Click to expand...


I actually meant to write:

But that isn't to say that there aren't so-called "low functioning" auties for which their autism is disabling.
Click to expand...

I blame double negatives. they're hard. I don't know of any auties that consider theirselves disabled. Autism: Getting the Truth Out is a good example of them vs. us. How auties are portrayed and what is reality!
 
I find the whole topic of what a disability is and what it is not very interesting.. I also understand that generalizing all deafies or all folks with Autism as being disabled would not be accurate. There are always overachievers and other exceptions to the rule. But to say that no deafie is disabled (by definition) would also be inaccurate. That is if you agree with the commonly accepted definition of disabled. Same applies to autism, blindness and other conditions. Again, only if you agree with the definition.
 
Tousi said:
Like I said somewhere else, Rockdrummer, it is the politically savvy amongst us as to when to say deafness IS a disability and when to say it IS NOT. :giggle: So don't worry about being so apologetic, man.
Click to expand...
Thanks Tousi. You and others here have taught me that not all in the deaf community have the same ideals. Perhaps I feel the need to walk on eggshels so as not to offend. I understand and respect both sides. If I had a condition that would classify myself as disabled but busted my ass to overcome it, I would get pissed if someone called me disabled just because I had the condition. So I can understand why I got jumped on. Not knowing the individual situations of everyone here I no longer make assumptions. For me, it's all part of the learning process.
 
deafdyke said:
:ty: I just HATE how nondisabled people almost Precious Momentize kids with disablities. We CAN adapt to life without hearing, seeing, walking, talking etc. Sure, a lot of us will never be able to see, hear, walk or talk........but so what? Many of us disabled folks have never done that particualr life activity "normally" ....
Click to expand...

I so agree! I used to absolutely hate it when people when see me signing with my son when he was little, and say, "OH, isn't that cute!" Why is that cuter than a mom and son talking with voice?
 
When people hear I am disabled, they automatically assume I can't do most things. Like driving or having a college diploma.

We can be triggered by words, and that can't always be such a nice feeling. It's also not so nice to call somebody disabled when you don't know what they are truly capable of.

I conclude that disability is a trigger word that should be avoided because of the psychological and negative associations. On the other hand, if I could be more confident that the word doesn't make people assume I can't drive or anything, I wouldn't mind the term "disability" or "handicap" as much.

For the record, I can drive and do have a college diploma. I accomplished these without any iota of hearing.
 
That's what this book i'm reading at the moment is partialy about...the sterotypes of the medical outlook on deafness..it's very intriquing and it's the first time i've read a book that I was actually glad to have read the forward..being deaf is not a disability and should not be considered one...the book is For Hearing People Only(you probably read it in your ASL class, not sure because it is recomended, but for mine it was mandatory) but I love the title because they called it this because a hearing person would not refer to themselves as a hearing person, but simply a person, just like a deaf person isn't a deaf person, their just a person also...idk, I love the title..I guess it has an impact :)
 
People can be so ignorant about the deaf... I've had at least three people say something about the deaf reading BRAILLE because they think that deaf people need it... It can really get you angry if you don't keep yourself in check... lol... I asked this one guy if he knew any deaf people and he was like "no, but there's a guy in a wheelchair on my street..." what in the world?! People def. need to be educated when it comes to the deaf.
 
It so happens that I like to play MUDs and once a hearing person when she found out I can't hear had a hard time understanding how I could SEE and play on a MUD. I remember several people trying to explain to her that I'm just deaf and not deafblind.

When people think about deaf people, they keep thinking of Helen Keller.

This hearing person wasn't too bright and she didn't know that England and Britain are the same country. I'm not making this up.
 
deafskeptic said:
This hearing person wasn't too bright and she didn't know that England and Britain are the same country. I'm not making this up.
Click to expand...

They're not.

Great Britain consists of England, Wales, Scotland.
The United Kingdom consists of the above plus Northern Ireland.
England is its own country as is Wales and Scotland and Northern Ireland.
 
Back
Top