It started around 1880 and it took about twenty years for audism to take effect globally. It is time for us to turn tables and reduce audism at all costs!

More needs to be done!

=)

Yes, there is the problem that Deaf people in England became deeply resentful of hard-of-hearing people or Deaf people who could speak well. These people were generally spoiled by missionaries in the British system who ran charities and Deaf Clubs. In England, however, there was a point before the term “hard of hearing” where Deaf people who could hear some or speak were called “Deaf can speak.”

I am not clear that the same division happened for the same reasons in the United States. In the US, things happened the way DonG said. There was a drive to classify students differently and get as many students who could speak into classrooms. Where I grew up, in public school in NYC, great emphasis was placed on whether you were deaf or hard of hearing. But other divisions exist. One example would be Deaf people who were educated at Gallaudet versus what’s commonly termed “grassroots” Deaf people and the group commonly termed the hard-of-hearing. In New York, for example, many “grassroots” Deaf people are deeply suspicious of people who come from Gallaudet and “tell them how they should sign” (actual quote.)

Our Deaf community is extremely diverse. MM ties Deafhood too strongly to Deaf Culture. Deaf Culture is one path people can take on the road called Deafhood. I think Dr. Ladd believes Deaf Culture is something every Deaf person gets a little of. This might or might not be true. I think it’s vitally important to encourage diversity in the Deaf community. I think there is a drive to find a common bond with all Deaf people and that this bond COULD be ASL. It could also be our common experiences as people who are Deaf in a majority community that is hearing… I don’t think every person in the Deaf community ‘feels they are fine.’ I think they ARE fine – but, for example, Deaf people who became so while part of hearing families are probably still suffering a grieving process etc. etc. Our identities are diverse. That’s what makes them real.

Anyway, Don, thanks for a good post, obviously inspired much discussion – Joseph

There are as you say ‘Many roads to your deafhood’ you will accept many won’t take cultural deaf roads or directions ? and if they do not, are they damned or non-community ? what ? You are just building a wall around yourself. each will take their own path, they won’t take Pady’s… who has amply demontsrated a lack of deaf awarenes.

The point of my post was that the Deaf community is divided along communication and hearing ability lines, but the division was created not by ourselves, but by the audist educational system. The division was created long before the Cochlear Implant, so that is not relevant to what I was saying.

But, even with the implant, Deaf people are not “Hearing”. The implant itself doesn’t even give real sound or sound in the SAME way that you as a Hearing person perceives it.

You say the division has come from the Deaf side, and not the Hearing… well, you are looking at the result of practices conducted by Hearing people for over 100 years which have made Deaf people more suspicious of Hearing people. If you look at the history, before 1880, Deaf people were more willing to interact with and be open with Hearing people.

Yes, the article is written. It has not been published yet so I am not making it widely distributed. I will post a pdf of the article after it has been published. But if you are working on something and need specific references, let me know and I will share with you.

I found you via DV where i am also a blogger however I focus on children w/ multiple disabilities. Feel free to check it out.

Respectfully,
Amy

This comes from a historical perspective — before the current era of hearing aids and Deaf who can use the phone and talk. If you look back on the NEGADM constitution, you’ll see those Deaf who could talk because they had become Deaf later, or some who might now be classified as “hard of hearing”. But back then they didn’t use those terms — everyone was “Deaf” or “Mute” or semi- one or the other. But you’re right, it wasn’t just audiologists who created the division — speech teachers, regular teachers, and the whole Oralist educational system was involved.

I understand what you’re saying but I’m sorry that your argument is a little bit flawed. There were/are still profoundly deaf people who can speak and even can use the phone very well out there. Sometimes deaf people were classifed as HOH, later on, they found out that they weren’t really HOH, it was just that they could speak/hear well.

I think it just depends on a deaf individual if they are destined to be born with the ability to learn how to speak/hear well.

I believe that the division among the deaf community was caused by speech audiologists/teachers who determined who and who couldn’t speak/hear well, not because of their hearing loss degree.