Over the years ever since the days of Gallaudet University I am continually not surprised on seeing how a few select group of Deaf people who have the ability to run the gamut from political correctness campaigns in Deaf culture to the constant playing as victims of oppression to the pulpit grandstanding “book thumping” sermons on how to achieve this so-called “Deaf Nirvana.” I swear. It’s like watching one slow train wreck after another with a few cabooses managing to survive intact. But then again who would report about surviving cabooses but the whole train wreck instead? Though rarely have I seen anything positive in the Deaf community with enough traction to move forward that can be *shared by all* whether Deaf, deaf, hh or hearing. But to teach “Deaf Nirvana” with a plastic smile like some Cheshire cat bent on selling a particular concept/product can only raise red flags and suspicions. Naturally more so for those who have never heard of or experienced Deaf culture. And when they see an organization get attacked or witnessed a rally that, to them, looks more like a protest than not or the pimping of “Deafhood” concept that comes with a smile by those who are trying to invite hearing parents to come over to their “Deaf” side will not win much hearts. Simply put, there are too many mixed messages and not enough credibility.
Let’s review Ben Vess’
recent vlog on calling out Ella Mae Lentz which was recently pulled. According to Ben the scathing video supposedly helped increase the internal ruckus among some of those in the Deaf community. Or so they say. But I am seeing two messages from all this.
One message is that Deaf leaders are not allowed to be attacked with negative critiques, no matter how shallow it may seem. I suppose it would depend on how critical the message is to meet their definition of something that’s more “acceptable” than not. Some people have tolerances so thin that they’ll gasp and say, “How dare YOU attack our leaders like that!” even if it’s a constructive one. And then we see the circling of the wagons to protect those leaders, yet hear nothing from the leaders. And because of that we hear from other bloggers regarding a litmus test on whether you, as a blogger or vlogger, would attack your own mother in the same way as you have done to others is a bit off kilter (silly in some ways) but perhaps valid in certain circumstances. Still, we’re not dealing with mothers anyway. Or even close friends or associates. It’s the clearing of the air is what I see it as. I see this ongoing “ethics” finger wagging as more navel gazing in the attempt to define what’s “appropriate” when it comes to vlogging or blogging. I understand there is a time a place to have a bit of decorum but it’s not always possible when sensitive issues abound. The internet is a place to air out and sort out our feelings whether it’s done appropriately or not. Let’s not fall into the political correctness trap.
Ben’s message that day, before he removed it, had some critical points that needed to be raised at the time but few/many took it personally thinking he had gone too far. I don’t see it that way but a natural progression that it was time to call out certain leaders. Ben was seeing Ella for what it was at the time. Insight or grain of truth, whatever it was, he saw something that needed to get out even to the point that the truth may hurt. Sometimes there comes a time when you simply have to be blunt to get your message across in full force. Was Ben’s vlog to Ella inappropriate? That probably depends on you and the thickness of your skin. These things will happen again and again when it comes to directing emotions toward leaders or anybody else. Calling a person a coward isn’t necessarily name-calling but it’s certainly mild compared to those who wished a deaf person’s baby certain death.
A second message I am seeing lately is that censuring must be done in order to “help aid the community” by ensuring that things do not get “out of line” or that inappropriate comments and actions be somehow curtailed or prevented. The question I have is, which community are we talking about helping? Does that mean we should censure those who attack AGBell, too? Or gang up on those who get out of line frequently by attacking certain deaf/hh organizations? Is this about attacking certain leader(s) of an organization? Or is this about how, as a group, can help control through peer pressure on what vloggers or bloggers should or should not say or do and get them “blacklisted” somehow? Is there such a thing as having an open mind and simply agree to disagree?
I see vlogging and blogging as creative outlets rather than something that must come encumbered as "politically correct" vlogs or blogs just to make sure people feelings do not get hurt. Whatever. So, does the act of censuring (not censorship) help promote an atmosphere where people come to the point of being unsure on which posts will be seen as appropriate or not? Why create these doubts in the first place? But when bloggers/vloggers do post in the strongest terms they get accused of causing division when the fault are really those who do most of the hand wringing that caused their own internal strife. Maybe it’s time to bring out that caliper once again and measure just how thick that person’s skin really is?
Next I want to discuss the words “Deaf babies” being used rather than “deaf babies” or “deaf/hh babies.” By saying “Deaf babies” it creates a perception of ownership of babies born with hearing loss as if they belong to the Deaf community and not to hearing parents. To hearing parents, babies are either born as deaf, hard of hearing or simply a baby with a hearing loss and not “Deaf babies.” Babies are not born culturally deaf to these hearing parents. Otherwise saying “Deaf babies” does help create suspicions among hearing parents towards the Deaf community. There is a difference on helping hearing parents be made aware of the benefits of signing with deaf/hh children versus telling them what to think in the efforts to make them feel guilty for not using ASL. Instead, efforts should be undertaken to help ensure that these parents get the proper information in the most neutral manner so that they can make an informed decision on their own without using guilt to try and pimp ASL. Whatever hearing parents decide people should throw in their support for them even if they decide not to use ASL. Hearing loss grass roots organizations should not be in the business to constantly try and make parents feel guilty by bringing up the past or use Godwin’s Law by invoking a Hitler comparison just to try and create guilt among hearing parents. This is true going after deaf/hh parents of deaf/hh babies on creating guilt for not using a certain technology or a particular communication method. But anyone who invokes Godwin’s Law loses instant credibility in a thread or argument (i.e. meaning…don’t do that unless you want to look really stupid). A good way to lose hearing parents’ attention is to drive them away with protests disguised as “rallies” on the same day when a hearing loss convention was taking place, go after organizations who are trying to offer support to parents of deaf/hh babies, call deaf/hh babies as “Deaf babies” or put the English language on the bottom totem pole and ASL on the top and so on. The best way to win is to provide support to parents of deaf/hh babies and children even if it means parents may end up not choosing ASL. Some parents may eventually come around. Some won’t because they have already decided based on the circumstances they are in. Some will never come around because of what they have heard about Deaf culture and ASL. That’s a fact of life.
Now, myths stick around a lot longer than the actual facts which is why hearing parents or anybody in the hearing society (we’re talking about 90 to 95% of the population in the U.S) will see Deaf people in some negative light in a lot of cases. It’s a lose-lose proposition if Deaf people continue to attack AGBell; pretend that rallies are “neutral” and are not protests; feign ignorance that setting up a counter-convention next door to a hearing loss convention on the same day doesn’t hurt anyone and is only meant to “inform” and help get in touch with hearing parents of deaf/hh children when in fact hearing parents are likely to see it as a confrontation instead; promote “Deaf Nirvana” through “Deafhood” or other cultural awareness methods; get NAD involved by becoming more “Deaf Centric” rather than to help serve the 30 million people with hearing loss and so on; or have Deaf leaders present conflicting messages or their lack of transparency. It just gets deeper and deeper. So, what else is new?
Currently rumor has it that a third “deaf/Deaf/hh” content aggregator may go up and people are already moaning and groaning at the idea of another content aggregator site. But I say,
bully! This is about competing philosophies which means more places for people to go and see which philosophies fit them. There is no one-size shoe fits all here. Even
DeafRead cannot fulfill that roll. Neither can
Deaf Village. Or another content aggregator site for that matter. People will pick and choose for a reason. Even if Deaf Village offered free video/vlog ASL interpretations as part of their captioning or transcripting services in order to help vloggers comply with DV’s guidelines on video accessibility, most/many won’t take up the offer simply because they are either biased against cochlear implants, AVT, oral and/or aural trainings in the first place or some other far-fetched reasons. That was already apparent anyway when Ben Vess tried to do the same thing by offering a
free ASL translation service. I cannot fathom the idea that a single content aggregator having a monopoly over deafness-related topics via blogs and vlogs. Competition was bound to happen as it did with Deaf, deaf and hard of hearing forums when it began in the late 1990s based on a particular philosophy in what an owner wanted to see in a forum. It may either constrain or promote developments and provide some unity among a particular group of people.
Unity aside, I have already for the longest time accepted the fact that it’s the parents who are in control of their deaf/hh babies and not that of the Deaf community or any other deaf/hh communities out there. They decide. Not me. Not a particular community or organization. Yet, I still see masks being worn by some people pretending to be one thing when really they are not. I am sure hearing parents of deaf/hh children are becoming a lot more wary nowadays of those who put on a plastic smile only because the internet makes it possible to see what’s going on in vlogs, blogs and the media. Showcasing “Deaf Nirvana” may be counter-productive when everything else supporting it would probably scare most hearing parents away anyway. Try and look from hearing parents’ perspective for a change. I sympathize with hearing parents of deaf/hh babies on their leeriness towards Deaf people who try and promote ASL or Deaf culture simply because of the confusing and mixed messages. If anything this pushing of “Deaf Nirvana” will simply have hearing parents of deaf/hh children see them more like a cult-like phenomenon than anything else. They aren't exactly flocking to this particular group's ideology or concept. They have their reasons.
We understand and agree that each of us express things differently when it comes to our blogs or vlogs. The so-called “division” within the Deaf community isn’t caused by my blogging or vlogging efforts or other people v/blogging efforts. Rather I see this as paranoia run amok. I see less confidence in what people have to show for. No matter how hard some people try they try and make this whole thing into a gloom and doom scenario. Accusing bloggers or vloggers for the supposed “downfall” or “division” within a Deaf community simply doesn’t cut it. Instead I see fear for change as their shared template and "justification" for lashing out. Change is always the only constant thing we have. Change is inevitable. Change happens. Technology is becoming a big part of our change. This isn’t simply about the Deaf community anymore but the whole hearing loss community of all stripes who have different needs and philosophies. So, don’t let paranoia get the best of you.
Disclaimer - This blog is of my own personal opinion and nobody else.
Labels: conflict of interest, deafhood, gallaudet, leaders, nirvana, peer pressure
