Why are we the only ones who are called “militant”?
I recently read All The Young Dudes’ post (http://alltheyoungdudes.radio666fm.com/2008/06/06/deafread-community-censorship-and-freedom-of-expression-p2/) and one point hit me: it seems only those of us who support natural sign languages, Deaf Culture, Deaf Pride, Deafhood, etc. are called “Militant”. It never seems to go the other way. I question why this is here in this Vlog.
Benno said,
June 7, 2008 @ 12:08 am
No way should we accept it as status quo. They just try to fear us and try us to accept that we are militants. Like you signed in one vlog that the mainstream called black people militants. Militants are people who try to change the status quo that is not accepted by the mainstream.
Just ignore them. Let’s progress our work, and reach our goal. Don’t let them fear us.
Candy said,
June 7, 2008 @ 1:09 am
AS usual people assume things. Take me for example, I support natural sign languages, Deaf Culture but I do not support Deafhood. Some of us are capable of making decisions on our own rather than following the crowd. Militant in deaf world isn’t limited to the definition you listed above, it is all about the attitude and how one goes about it.
Simple as that.
Jenny said,
June 7, 2008 @ 3:05 am
Bravo, Don! I’m only going by the summary here, but that’s bothered me ever since people started hurling that insult at our heads. The partisans on the other side are just as “militant” as we are, perhaps even more. Thanks, Don! THis needs to be part of our discourse.
Shelley said,
June 7, 2008 @ 4:07 am
Hmmmm. This is the process of examining … If we have not examined the question why we do not call the other side militant, I would have to say it is because we have been colonized, and suffer dysconscious audism.
However, when we examine this question, and make a conscious decision whether or not to call the other group militants, then I would say no, we are not colonized. This is because we CHOOSE to do so, or not to do so. It is better to take the high road and CHOOSE to not label them with the very same term slapped on us.
The process of examination, therefore, mitigates the barb of the label and transforms our own perspective. We can act accordingly.
I could go on and on, but then it would become a blog posting all by itself.
You and Tony have most definitely given us food for thought.
Shelley
Ali said,
June 7, 2008 @ 12:28 am
I agree with Benno. It is all about putting fear on us.
Personally, I think there is nothing wrong with being called
a militant. It is about time they understand we are serious with
our beliefs and actions.
Ali-
MM said,
June 7, 2008 @ 9:22 am
I agree with Candy. It isn’t ‘Deaf Culture against the world’ as its made out, just two different perspectives on being deaf. I still think the ‘Deaf’ community has been unable to adapt to diversity, they think it’s all right so long as this diversity doesn’t reach as far as deaf culture, or encroaches on it, but in reality, they lost the ‘ID’ battle some time ago, the ‘d’ and ‘D’ thing, and not deaf enough for Gallaudet all backfired on them. Given the decimation of many established ‘Deaf’ insitutions and the fragmented nature of the ‘community’ it makes more sense to ally with the other deaf and CI users, not take the stance you can ‘beat ‘em off’, because unity is via strength, you don’t want to cut off the numerical superiority of the ‘deaf’ do you ? I think it is a case of, the hearing society will not challenge the cultural concept, indeed will applaud and patronise it, but other deaf can, and have opposed, because they have been left out, so that’s the issue. We’re ALL deaf now…. it’s time this was general acceptance.
MM said,
June 7, 2008 @ 9:24 am
We are the new pioneers of the deafhood concept, we have re-written it already.
DrDonG said,
June 7, 2008 @ 10:00 am
MM:
Re: Comment #7: This is unclear — Who is “we” and in what ways have you re-written Deafhood?
DT said,
June 7, 2008 @ 10:23 am
I just read a comment from Melissa, Rachel’s Mother and it is obvious to me that they are here to present one side but they do so in a manner that is smarmy to be polite and have absolutely no intention to be open to diversity, to listening to other viewpoints. That said, how is their being here conducive to attaining diversity?
I know that Rachel’s blog was taken down for another reason; I am just presenting the view that they have no intention of embracing/respecting diversity. So now I ask, why do we need this, this “island” in our midst? Btw, just to show you that I am fair-minded, I’d say the same for any other viewpoint that is not inclusive and diverse.
So, why are the likes of them here? There are other places for them.
DE said,
June 7, 2008 @ 1:57 pm
DonG- thanks for the vlog… a good way to begin my Saturday afternoon. I think it’s much easier for the vocal few to hurl accusations of militancy, whatever it is, from their keyboards. If we all came together in a room and engaged in a meaningful discussion, I know the cordiality quotient would go off the charts.
I do welcome any and all discussions… we all are human, but we do need to keep our Dysconscious Audism in check- it bars healthy discourse in many ways.
Onwards and upwards we go!
SDA said,
June 7, 2008 @ 3:25 pm
Don G. ~ THANKS for doing this vlog! Well, it is unfortunate that ‘militancy’ has become a dirty word. We are simply social activists. We seek to change the society’s consciousness. It is simple as that.
It is indeed mind-boggling to see how the whole idea of Deafhood has been grossly misinterpreted.
Candy ~ You missed the point of the whole Deafhood concept. It is just a process of finding your center as a Deaf person. You said you support natural sign languages, Deaf culture, etc. but rejecting the idea of Deafhood. It does not make any sense, unfortunately. Be sure to try and remain as intellectual as you can and I hope that one day soon you will finally have an “aha!” moment and understand what Deafhood is really all about. You deserve it!
Candy said,
June 8, 2008 @ 12:28 am
SDA,
I didn’t miss the point of the whole Deafhood concept. For starters, I read the book. And I am culturally deaf with deaf genes in my family that goes back generations. My point being, I don’t necessarily agree with deafhood. It is just my view. That is all. Even my very culturally deaf family sees the same too. Even many deaf friends feels the same thing too (most are from line of deaf family as well.) I was born into deaf culture and deaf identity was never an issue with me. I am what I am.
I reached my decision by reading the book and reading the core DH member’s blogs.
I will respect those that rever DH, I’m not going to put them down. However, one has to wonder how does one come up with this rave on DH when in fact, 1) DH is a thesis. Since when does a workshop is a result of a thesis? 2) The British deaf are laughing at the American deaf.
One thing good about that DH thesis that Paddy wrote is the two chapters that covers UK’s deaf people’s stories of their life.
That’s my take. I hope this clears things up as to why I view it this way.
MM said,
June 8, 2008 @ 7:56 am
Is it NOT possible, to reach this ‘Deafhood’ nirvana unless you aspire to deaf culture or sign surely not ? 90% of people with hearing loss, do their own thing and have done for a long time. They attain their ‘ID’ too, with no affiliations whatever to either sign language, or the cultural concept, and the history of deaf issues is unrelated to them, it si unrelated to many deaf NOW !
They are STILL, deaf so ? In that respect, once they attain confidence in what THEY are, then this is NOT d/Deafhood, it is their view of things, it is in effect re-written to be relevant to THEM, the majority.
Milan is meaningless to me, something that happened 200 years ago to someone else, certainly not to members of my family or anything. Where is the relevance ? Other deaf people I meet about my daily life, they oralise, they sign, some even have CI’s ! others with hearing aids, or lip-read… they are my ‘community’ even if they aren’t the ‘Deaf’ people’s idea of it.
The cultural ‘community’ has to get with it, sorry. Who knows we may even get on…? Paddy Ladd is just a writer of books, he isn’t the second coming…. If British can ignore him, or keep a sense of perspective, then why can’t Americans ?