Why my wife and I want our children to hear and speak a little.

gnulinuxman said:
there are a FEW authoritarian (whose motto is "Do as I say because I said so!") type parents who still do pure-oral.

We were friends with this beautiful deaf woman who was raised "pure oral" in high school. She didn't learn how to sign but she went on to graduate at the top of her class and went to a rather well-known University in the nation.

I never felt it was wrong she didn't know sign language. That is who she is, that is her life.

There isn't anything wrong with deaf people choosing not to use sign language at all just as much as there isn't anything wrong with deaf people choosing to use sign language only.
 
Every time I read Sweetmind's posts, it just reinforces our decision on the signing/oralism method. Thanks, Sweetmind!

Your welcome but I have to say this, A Deaf blind man that I knew when I was a little girl. He always stopped by seeing me until I left to transfer other school. He could speak pretty good without device. He did it without DEVICE. He cannot hear and see so he proved me all along that we do not need Hearing aid or Cochlear Implant devices. He uses his hands to feel it by voices not by his deaf ears. He used ASL and Tactile sign language Thank you so much!!!!!!

Oh I must mention that he was working on electronic things and is very independent guy that he always walk with his cane and get on the bus wherever he goes. He is my Deaf Blind Role Model. ;) I dont know if he is alive today. I would love to meet him again.

Thats why I resisted to believe anything from audism attitude, ASL and Oralism extermists. Thats why it s full of craps for them to make money out on Deaf children.

:whistle: :whistle: :whistle:

Thank you! ;)
Sweetmind
 
Last edited:
Sweetmind said:
Thank you! ;)

Neat testimonal.

You're welcome! ;)

By the way, the Harlan Lane quote in your signature? What do you think of my situation? I changed my Deafist ways for my children :deal:
 
She didn't learn how to sign

I never felt it was wrong she didn't know sign language. That is who she is, that is her life.

There isn't anything wrong with deaf people choosing not to use sign language at all
True, but it should be THEIR choice, not nessarily their parent's choice. It DOES seem like a lot of the people who were raised orally, almost look down on Sign or just dismiss it b/c they don't need it. ie "We're happy being in the oral world....it's Utopia!" I do think that there are folks who would choose to speak over signing (some hoh kids) I really do think that parental choice shouldn't be a thing. The end goal should be bilingalism in both ASL and speech for most dhh kids!
 
He did it without DEVICE. He cannot hear and see so he proved me all along that we do not need Hearing aid or Cochlear Implant devices.

That is great! and I know Evelyn Glennie is one amazing musician despite being totally deaf.
But ekhm how many pple like that do you know exactly? One out of.. ten? twenty? fifty? or, more like one out of... hundred? thousand?

Ever heard of this phrase:
"One swallow does not make spring, nor does one fine day..."


Just because one deaf/blind person is able to speak and one deaf person able to play music does not mean everybody else is.


Fuzzy
 
It DOES seem like a lot of the people who were raised orally, almost look down on Sign or just dismiss it b/c they don't need it. ie "We're happy being in the oral world....it's Utopia!"

I can tell you from my experience - my occasional encounters with deaf pple showed me that most of them didn't understand hearing English, and I found it quite limiting. They didn't understand some written instructions, newspapers, books, CC, etc.
I was reflecting how sad it is not being able to understand these things that anybody else takes for granted.
Since my contact with the deaf world was very very limited I assumed this is how it is for most deaf pple. .
Now put any other HoH person in my shoes, and you won't be suprised why they might not be interested in ASL.
If I was younger and had an opportunity to join deaf world and learn ASL I would do it.
But now it's too late. All my friends, family which I know all my life are hearing. It is hard after 40, 50 years of same to change your lifestyle.
maybe if I wasn't disabled from migraine I would have more energy to have to create two sets of social circle- one with deaf friends one with my present ones but I am too sick and too tired to do anything, let alone do new things.

I do think that there are folks who would choose to speak over signing (some hoh kids)


as above. also maybe they find it easier to communicate this way with more pple.

I really do think that parental choice shouldn't be a thing. The end goal should be bilingalism in both ASL and speech for most dhh kids!

Unfortunately these choices must be made as soon as the child is diagnosed with hearing loss. Often right ar birth. There is no one else but parents who must make the decision.
Sometimes they make selfish decisions - what's convenient for them, the parents not the child. But I am sure most parents want what is best for their children only, and look for all kind of tools to be used.
I agree both ASL and learning 'hearing" English is best what could be in this situation. I think it is even better to know perfect English than to speak.

Fuzzy

ps. BTW I never considered being oral and in hearing world an Utopia. I just accepted it as it is, and many times it was extremely hard for me in this "Utopia".
 
Fragmenter said:
Exactly.

Our 3 year old daughter who slightly has better hearing than my wife, just cannot shut up. She loves to sing various songs out loud and we are now trying to teach her that it is not polite to interrupt people who are talking. Believe it or not, our kids talks to each other verbally half of the time its scary. Our son would correct her on some signs and our daughter would corect his speech. Already at 3 and 5 years old, they rely on their speech and sign language to express themselves.

Would you be cruel so to take sounds away from them? That is the question.
Taking away any means of communication is wrong in my opinion.
We refused to do that when our daughter got CI. We continued sign and she gradually decided herself when to use sign and when speech.
Your kids are getting familiar with two languages. That's a great thing.
Imagine you would have to "force" it.... your children are doing by themself.

And, there's no problems for children to learn to languages. Mine learned Dutch and Norwegian. The last one started with sign and now uses Dutch and Norwegian... It's natural for them. We would have to think about it..

Cloggy
 
Cloggy said:
Taking away any means of communication is wrong in my opinion.
We refused to do that when our daughter got CI. We continued sign and she gradually decided herself when to use sign and when speech.
Your kids are getting familiar with two languages. That's a great thing.
Imagine you would have to "force" it.... your children are doing by themself.

True. That was a better answer than I originally had :D
 
Sweetmind said:
Are you telling me that Fragment is a failure for being deaf and couldnt communicte with hearing people because he cannot speak or hear ?? Are you telling me his wife has a very strong influence on him while her attitude is audist that changes his own mind. Is he jealousy of his wife or anyone else?? It doenst make any sense


Is a very good excuse for him to show he is a failure deaf?? I THINK NOT!
:laugh2:
Sweetmind said:
Why do we get the impression that we are not welcomed into a hearing community until we follow their rules that it must be hear and orally speaking only? I THINK NOT.. because it s totally unfair to force us for hearing 's sakes before Deaf people 's alternative needs. I was not accepted because I am being deaf and can speak except hear. Thats what it gives me an impression that people think we are a failure for not able to hear. Scoffs!
Summary: Deaf people have needs of their own, and she thinks it's selfish of the hearing world to expect deaf people to act like hearing people or to expect deaf people to be hearing.
Sweetmind said:
We deafies did our best that we can speak with our speech impairment as usual that you cannot expect us to speak perfect that you want us to do.. Why cant you just accept us no matter what? It seems that it s forever that hearing world doesnt accept us for who we are and thinks ASL is not a real language. JEEZ!
Summary: Many hearing people don't accept deaf people's speech and think signing is just a childish game and not a real language.

Sweetmind said:
HA or CI are no difference because we deafies all still cannot hear everything.. Thats the whole answer. SO BE IT!
Summary: Hearing aids and cochlear implants don't give perfect hearing. It's currently impossible for a machine to aid or replace the human sense of hearing.
Sweetmind said:
That s why I stood up and fed up with your audist attitude?
Hopefully, no summary needed.
Sweetmind said:
That is a real ASL extremist and his claim to pretend that he know about us deaf oralist's struggle after all he doesnt know the whole truth while some of you are not being honest with him.
Summary: Fragmenter doesn't know about oralist education because he didn't go through it.
Sweetmind said:
So therefore I would say CI is a failure in many ways.

It s getting old news that we are still dealing with the old audism 's attitude going on and on today. Sighs!
Summary: Oralists have been getting their way for years and continue to do so.
 
Sweetmind said:
Your welcome but I have to say this, A Deaf blind man that I knew when I was a little girl. He always stopped by seeing me until I left to transfer other school. He could speak pretty good without device. He did it without DEVICE. He cannot hear and see so he proved me all along that we do not need Hearing aid or Cochlear Implant devices. He uses his hands to feel it by voices not by his deaf ears. He used ASL and Tactile sign language Thank you so much!!!!!!

Oh I must mention that he was working on electronic things and is very independent guy that he always walk with his cane and get on the bus wherever he goes. He is my Deaf Blind Role Model. ;) I dont know if he is alive today. I would love to meet him again.

Thats why I resisted to believe anything from audism attitude, ASL and Oralism extermists. Thats why it s full of craps for them to make money out on Deaf children.

:whistle: :whistle: :whistle:

Thank you! ;)
Sweetmind
Nice testimonial there. Yeah, I think it is BS for the companies to say people need devices to "fix" hearing to live too.
 
Fragmenter said:
Exactly.

Our 3 year old daughter who slightly has better hearing than my wife, just cannot shut up. She loves to sing various songs out loud and we are now trying to teach her that it is not polite to interrupt people who are talking. Believe it or not, our kids talks to each other verbally half of the time its scary. Our son would correct her on some signs and our daughter would corect his speech. Already at 3 and 5 years old, they rely on their speech and sign language to express themselves.

Would you be cruel so to take sounds away from them? That is the question.
Sign languages are verbal too because they are expressed in words (signs being the words).

Do you mean "oral" or "vocal"?
 
Hmm I can see the evidence of crab theory happening right here in this thread exhibted by two members who refused to let fragementer be...

There's no use convincing fragmenter that oral approaches is useless...

http://www.youthnoise.com/page.php?page_id=1844
Clearly both SL and Oralism have their advantages. So above all, a deaf child should not be forced by his/her parents to be only Oral or to only sign. Why should Oralism and SL be at war with each other? In fact, by knowing both SL and Oralism it is clear that a deaf child would be able to exist in the deaf world without losing links to the hearing world.

Such children would become bridges between two worlds, bridges which are more important than ever in the world of today that is becoming separated and polarized and divided…and alienated.

fragmenter is not trying to impose oral only on his kids.. he wants to add oral approaches into theirs kids. It seems that two members in this threads is trying to prevent that from happening..

well why?


Anyway...
see this thread at DN: Oralism
See what I and LadyDuke debated...
 
gnulinuxman,

Imagine the next evolution would be like this: (I wrote this at DN to SM)
http://www.deafnotes.com/bb/ubb/Forum9/HTML/000384-4.html
Sweetmind,

You don't know me very well.

If you don't have any ears then you will be considered a "evolved species" probably known as Homo Novis (next step in evolution from Homo Sapiens) Homo Novis is considered "Homo Superior" a new species that have a telepathic capability. If that happens then no one will be called deaf or considered disability because of no ears. All will be equals only thing that they will be called disability is that unable to do telepathically then they will be forced to use sign language unless there is a telepathic implant to take place of missing power.

So in a fact, you have a ears, they are designed for human to hear. Your ears seems to be not sending any signals to your brain after converting the sound waves that hit the eardrums to cochlea to auditory nerves then your cochlea hairs are somewhat shortened to make it work. That's why there is a hearing aid to make amplification to make sound louder so the eardrum work harder to make fluid move rapidly so the hairs can move to be able to send signals to your brian. that's why it sounds muddy.

You see I know how deafness works. I know about my deafness. I understand my deafness. I loves musics. I like be able to talk. it is not them pressuring me to talk. it was from the get-go at first time when I was little kid. I sat at the table, the speech teacher made a b sounds I was amazed that I heard the b sound while she hold up a feather in front of her mouth I can see it moves. I understood the b sound and she asked me to say it too. When I said the b sound. I was overjoyed that I can say the b sound.

I do have all the papers that show the progress of my life at schools for example at the pre-schools, in the reports, it said I was very actively cooperating with hearing peers! that goes to show that I have made plenty of hearing friends as well as deaf friends.

You see, you don't know very well about me and I don't know very well about you. Let's leave at it! What I am saying that is that you don't know every deaf people's life and feelings.

I can see why you take so negative view of Alex Bell and his cohorts plus CI industry plus the people who made Oral method possible. That's because you grew up with walls UP in front of you. I don't. I grew up taking all in because I was motivated to learn and motivated to be educated because I do not want to be one of those who have 4th grade reading literacy. Once I overcame what I can capable of, that is signing, speaking, listening, writing and playing. I am able to use it to fullest potential as much I can.

Now, have a nice time for the rest of your life if you can without hearing aid and ASL only. Of course written communication too! So Good Luck!

Boult

And on my forum(DOL) which I am not able to post the link to because AD censor my domain name so I'll post the same thing here;
In regard to this quote I made:
In other thread over at DN, the thread was about evolution. I mentioned that maybe in next evolution, we might have telepathic abilities so that would means those without telepathy will become minorities among deaf/hoh and those with telepathy will be superior to us and will rule the world till the inferior human race die out.. then thus no need for sign language! why try to preserve?
(FYI: I realized it was not about evolution but about manufacturing deaf baby but anyway I did post a reply to SM about evolution and telepathic somewhere on this page: http://www.deafnotes.com/bb/ubb/Forum9/HTML/000384-4.html )

read below! I just came across this today! eh...


Evolving Towards Telepathy
From: Sophists.org,?TX
http://www.sophists.org/article287.html

Demand for increasingly powerful communications technology points to our future as a "techlepathic" species

By George Dvorsky, Betterhumans Staff

I recently read with great interest of researcher Chuck Jorgensen's work at NASA's Ames Research Center. It was the kind of news item that made the rounds among the cognoscenti that day, only to be forgotten the next. But it stuck with me for days afterwards.

Jorgensen and his team developed a system that captures and converts nerve signals in the vocal chords into computerized speech. It is hoped that the technology will help those who have lost the ability to speak, as well as improve interface communications for people working in spacesuits and noisy environments.

The work is similar in principle to how cochlear implants work. These implants capture acoustic information for the hearing impaired. In Jorgensen's experiment the neural signals that tell the vocal chords how to move are intercepted and rerouted. Cochlear implants do it the other way round, by converting acoustic information into neural signals that the brain can process. Both methods capitalize on the fact that neural signals provide a link to the analog environment in which we live.

As I thought further about this similarity it occurred to me that the technology required to create a technologically endowed form of telepathy is all but upon us. By combining Jorgensen's device and a cochlear implant with a radio transmitter and a fancy neural data conversion device, we could create a form of communication that bypasses the acoustic realm altogether.

I decided to contact Jorgensen and other researchers about the prospect of such "techlepathy." While I have always entertained the idea that we'll eventually develop telepathy-enabling technologies, the optimistic responses I received from these researchers startled me nonetheless. And as I suspected, the technologies and scientific insight required for such an achievement are rapidly coming into focusóan exciting prospect to be sure.

The dream of mind-to-mind communication and the desire to transcend one's own consciousness is as old as language itself. You could make a strong case that there's a near pathological craving for it, a tendency that manifests through the widespread belief in paranormal telepathy.

ESP aside, it seems that this craving will soon be satisfied. Several advances in communications technology and neuroscience are giving pause about the possibility of endowing us with techlepathy. As we continue to ride the wave of the communications revolution, and as the public demand for more sophisticated communications tools continues, it seems a veritable certainty that we are destined to become a species capable of mind-to-mind communication.

This prospect is as profound as it is exciting. Such a change to the species would signify a prominent development in the evolution of humanityóa change that would irrevocably alter the nature of virtually all human relations and interactions.

The shrinking planet

Our civilization's current postindustrial phase has often been referred to, quite rightly, as the Information Age. Moreover, the speed at which information is processed and exchanged is only getting faster. There's no question that humanity's collective clock-speed is steadily increasing. Indeed, as is Moore's Law, the communications revolution is still in effect and showing no signs of abating.

Thanks to the rapid-fire nature provided by such things as email correspondence and instant messaging, conversations that used to take weeks or days now only take hours or minutes.

In fact, as I recently read an archived exchange between Charles Darwin and his rival Louis Agassiz from the 19th Century, I realized that the entire exchange must have taken months if not years since their letters had to cross the Atlantic by boat. (Darwin lived in England while Agassiz was in the US.) Today when scientists converse, they debate, critique and collaborate at breakneck speed.

What's interesting isn't just the types of communication tools that now exist. It's also the way in which people use themóways that hint at a desire for more intimate and open forms of communication.

Sitting at a red light the other day, I noticed a herd of pedestrians crossing the streetóeach and every one of them with a cell phone held tightly against their ear. These days, information transfer between people is nearly instantaneous, regardless of what they're doing and where they are.

Many people are also tapping into the power of instant messaging. Programs such as Messenger, ICQ and GAIM are immensely popular, changing the way in which people interact altogether. Family members converse with each other while in the same house (calling the kids down for dinner will never be the same again). Parents chat with their kids while at work. Coworkers, whether they're in the same building or offsite, can quickly exchange information and work in collaborative ways.

Social networking programs, such as Friendster, Tribe and Orkut, are also contributing to novel forms of communication. These programs are undoubtedly making the world a smaller place by steadily decreasing the number of so-called degrees of separation that exist between people. I'm continually stunned at the efficiency of how this works. I have only 19 immediate friends in my Friendster network, but it explodes out from there to 1,010 second-degree friends and 50,611 third-degree friends. I'm pretty much convinced that if you're on the Internet there's no less than four degrees of separation between you and anyone else on the Web, which is two complete degrees below the conventional six degrees of separation that is thought to exist for all people.

One of the most exciting and innovative ways to use the Web is found in the blogging ("Web logging") phenomenon. While bloggers chronicle the news, they also chronicle their own lives. Some bloggers use their sites to post personal journals and diaries. The difference with blogs, of course, is their public nature. What's fascinating is how many people want to make the most personal and private details of their life public. The largest segment of the population currently engaging in this are adolescents who use it to communicate with their friends, as an outlet to express their frustrations, anxieties and experiences and to provide each other with support. I'm both awestruck by and jealous of today's teens.

Bridging minds and machines

Needless to say, the communications revolution and the driving tendencies therein are not going to stop at cell phones, instant messaging and blogs. The work of research labs and universities around the world reveals that some of the most profound developments are still yet to come. It appears that the public's demand for ever more sophisticated communications devices will soon be met by supply.

We live in a day where neural interfacing technologies are enabling monkeys to move cursors across a computer screen with sheer thought alone and where paraplegics are able to type letters on a computer screen just by thinking about it. Recently, the FDA granted approval to Cyberkinetics in the US to implant chips in the brains of disabled peopleóchips that will map neural activity when they think about moving a limb. These signals will then be translated into computer code that could one day be fed into robotic limbs or applied to computer interfacing devices.

These advances in neural interfacing technology are now expanding from motor functioning to communications, an area that NASA's Chuck Jorgensen is actively exploring.

As I mentioned earlier, I contacted Jorgensen and asked him if he'd given any consideration to the issue of techlepathy. His answer was positive, noting that his next goal is to determine whether he can directly correlate auditory speech signals and subvocal signals recorded at the same time by learning nonlinear mapping equations to relate one to the other. Ideally, Jorgensen's team would like to develop a completely noninvasive process, starting initially with understanding highly intertwined surface measured signals. Such efforts would be in contrast to work focusing on embedded neural probes or surgical intrusions such as those used for highly disabled persons.

I also spoke with graduate student researcher Peter Passaro, a scientist pushing the envelope of human communications in the neural engineering lab at Georgia Tech. As is Jorgensen, Passaro and his team are trying to correlate mappings within a system, but in their case it's an in vitro system with no native structures. They are trying to determine general rules for how systems set up in response to sensory input and what the state space of their output will be. Once these rules are determined, says Passaro, it will become much easier to produce such things as cortical implants.

Passaro is fairly certain that all that's required to acquire sufficient neural information is an array of listening electrodes rather than interfacing with numerous single neurons. That being said, he believes incoming neural information is going to be a more difficult case because no one is sure how to use extracellular field stimulation to get information into cortical neural networks except in the simplest of cases. "Luckily," says Passaro, "cochlear information is the simplest of cases."

Passaro asserts that the technology required to create an implantable cell phone already existsóit's just a matter of someone getting around to doing it. He believes that such a device has the potential to be one of the first widely used nonmedical implants, what he dubs the world's first "killer app" implant.

The next progressive step as far as techlepathy goes, says Pasarro, is to tap into the brain's language centers, specifically the part of the motor cortex responsible for output for the region of the throat and mouth. With such a system in place muscular movement wouldn't be required at all to generate a neural signal. Instead, sheer thought alone will produce the desired language output.

Our telepathic future

Cybernetics pioneer Kevin Warwick also believes in the future of techlepathy. In fact, he's actively trying to communicate in such a manner with his wife by creating an implant that connects his nervous system with hers. "If I have to have a long-term goal for my career," says Warwick, "it would be creating thought communication between humans." Of significance, he sees this as a realistic goal within his lifetime.

But Warwick believes that signals other than thoughts or language are transferable as well. Humans will eventually be able to communicate all sorts of signals, he argues, such as "whether you are feeling bad, as well as where you are." He believes that the body produces an array of information that can be picked out and made to use in a variety of ways.

Indeed, humanity appears to be on the cusp of a rather remarkable development: We are, for all intents and purposes, about to become a telepathic species. Such a development will occur this century and it will likely happen in three major phases.

The first generation of telepathic devices will likely be of the subvocal variety in which communication travels one way, much like a normal conversation. The second phase will also involve unidirectional transmission, but consciousness (i.e. language center output) will be output instead of subvocalized speech. And the third phase will likely involve the seamless bidirectional transference of consciousness and emotions to one or more receiving personsóin other words, telepathy in the truest sense. It's highly probable that the medium of exchange for such communication will be the Internet, or its future form, the global mind or Noosophere.

Given such an endowment, human cooperation and performance, particularly in team environments, will be greatly enhancedówhether it be a search and rescue team or a prog rock band. Indeed, artists will undoubtedly exploit such advancements by creating unimaginably powerful expressions that involve the transference of conscious and emotive experiences.

Come together

While some might be perturbed by the ethical and practical ramifications of techlepathy, I am overwhelmingly in favor. Changes in communication and language have largely captured the human story, giving rise to not only technology and civilization, but also to our enhanced moral capacity and our ability to empathize. Undoubtedly, it is through communication that we learn to relate and understand one another.

As Robert Wright points out in Nonzero and Jared Diamond in Guns, Germs and Steel, effective communications have historically been the crucial key for humanity's ongoing survival and progress. In fact, Wright meticulously chronicles how improving communication technologies steadily result in more and more positive sum games and enhanced cooperative social and interpersonal frameworks. This holds true, argues Wright, whether it be a freshly carved path that connects two tribes in the jungle or the Internet.

There's no reason to believe that techlepathy won't have a similar impact on individuals, social groups and society as a whole. Moreover, imagine how it will further strengthen the bonds of interpersonal communication and intimacy. As we all live alone in our own mindsóforced to live near-solipsistic existencesóI cannot think of anything more powerful than the prospect of sharing someone else's thoughts and experiences. It's been said that such unions will signify the next phase of not just human communications and social interactions, but of personal and sexual intimacy as well.

Many people complain about the dehumanizing and depersonalizing effects of technology. Personally, my usage of communications technology has only resulted in increased interactivity with the rest of the world.

Further, this tendency seems to be the driving force in the history of the development of communications technology. On the surface humanity appears to be spreading outward, venturing across continents and into space. Yet in actuality we are journeying towards one another. Our globe has never appeared smaller and our proximity to each other has never been closer.

This trend shows no signs of slowing down, pointing the way to a remarkable interconnected future.

Note: the link I used for source of this article is broken so here's working link; http://archives.betterhumans.com/Columns/Column/tabid/79/Column/267/Default.aspx

:scatter:
 
Boult said:
Hmm I can see the evidence of crab theory happening right here in this thread exhibted by two members who refused to let fragementer be...

There's no use convincing fragmenter that oral approaches is useless...

http://www.youthnoise.com/page.php?page_id=1844


fragmenter is not trying to impose oral only on his kids.. he wants to add oral approaches into theirs kids. It seems that two members in this threads is trying to prevent that from happening..

well why?


Boult, thank you SO much! :bowdown:

i have been seeing that from the same two members and i'm shaking my head wondering why they are trying SO hard to make fragmenter into the people they are -- shame on them! :whip: (fragmenter had even told them not to rile me!!!!!)

nevertheless, fragmenter and his wife are going to give the world to their children and give them ALL the tools they will need to fit into this world. BRAVO to them! we stand behind them and applaude them! :applause:
 
gnulinuxman said:
Summary: Deaf people have needs of their own, and she thinks it's selfish of the hearing world to expect deaf people to act like hearing people or to expect deaf people to be hearing.

They recognize our deafness as a disability just like any other disability. They try to help everyone and they're only trying to help us but we're so backwards about our disability that they leave us alone in our little shells. It's not their fault.

gnulinuxman said:
Summary: Many hearing people don't accept deaf people's speech and think signing is just a childish game and not a real language.

I have never met a hearing person outside of elementary school that thought sign language was a joke! I don't know who Sweetmind is arguing with; she's shooting in the dark here.

gnulinuxman said:
Summary: Hearing aids and cochlear implants don't give perfect hearing. It's currently impossible for a machine to aid or replace the human sense of hearing.

Hello? EVERYONE has repeated that nothing is as good as natural hearing. Get that straight, kids. And cochlear implants sends sound information almost directly to the brain and it's the closest thing to normal hearing you can get. Lesson for SM and Danny Phantom: educate yourself before you post or you'll look silly.

gnulinuxman said:
Summary: Fragmenter doesn't know about oralist education because he didn't go through it.

I went to an oral school for 2 months before being mainstreamed. I wore hearing aids up to when I was 7 years old. I never benefitted from them -- just like my son. Both of your ignorance is crystal clear here because you guys do not know me. My mom even explained our backgrounds just yesterday and you completely disregarded them... I think I understand why you guys post those ignorant posts; you guys just do not read other people's posts COMPLETELY. You have selective memory, for sure.

I've heard of horror stories in the 50's, 60's and 70's but the world is more aware that the deaf is not necessarily a mute or mentally retarded now.

gnulinuxman said:
Summary: Oralists have been getting their way for years and continue to do so.

This claim is so asinine I won't even touch it with a ten foot pole.

If it helps, should I put up pictures of Spongebob and Dora the Explorer right next to my posts so you'll pay more attention to them?
 
Boult said:
There's no use convincing fragmenter that oral approaches is useless...

fragmenter is not trying to impose oral only on his kids.. he wants to add oral approaches into theirs kids. It seems that two members in this threads is trying to prevent that from happening..

well why?

Boult and the others GETS it -- you two don't.
 
Fragmenter said:
Boult and the others GETS it -- you two don't.

And I find this so terribly sad. Its like you have to beat something into them to get them to understand, repeating oneself is no good - they just bring things up again and again in the face of any evidence otherwise. I think the best we all can do is just ignore them both, and let them argue between each other. If they don't get the reaction they're striving for they'll realize we aren't paying attention.

Unfortunately the downside of this is that their ignorance will persist - but only because THEY choose to let it continue. At least we know we tried.
 
fragmenter is not trying to impose oral only on his kids.. he wants to add oral approaches into theirs kids.
In other words, he wants his dhh kids to have oral skills. Being orally skilled is a pretty nice skill to have. It IS possible to aquire it in a non-audist way. Like I do undy 100% b/c I don't think a lot of oral chaunavists realize the damage they do when oral skills are aquirred with an oral-only methodology.
Audiofuzzy,
I still think that parents really shouldn't be up in arms about speech vs. Sign.
The parents need to expose their kids to a full range of choices. Like speech first is OK, if the child is being carefully monitored in terms of risk for speech failure and if they learn sign relatively early.....
 
neecy said:
And I find this so terribly sad. Its like you have to beat something into them to get them to understand, repeating oneself is no good - they just bring things up again and again in the face of any evidence otherwise.


Refusal to believe until proof is given is a rational position; denial of all outside of our own limited experience is absurd.

ANNIE BESANT
 
Back
Top