Deaf People Are Sex Maniacs
BABEL (2006) Directed by Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu.
I have always thought about this movie since I first watched it a year ago. At first, I was excited to see this movie. I like movies about cultures. This movie is powerful and shows the stereotypes of different groups (Mexican, American tourists, Moroccan desert life, Deaf, Japanese). For the Mexican character, a woman is a maid and works for a rich white American family. The maid's family lives in Mexico and she is struggling with money -typical. Two boys who live in Moroccan desert play with a gun they stole, but the image of them with a gun is typical. The movie unfolds the human side of each characters, and as a viewer, we get to grow sympathy for them and understand them mutually. Also, we realize how quick we are with assuming a culture, like how the synopsis describes, "the mistaken identities, misunderstandings and missed chances for communication that, though often unseen, driven our modern lives." Now, for the Deaf character, the image was a sex maniac and this is the misunderstanding because the reality is she did not have enough love from her father. What does this say to you? Personally, I think it's pretty dumb and lazy. It also shows how much we are misunderstood, and how much we need to be "heard" in the majority.
posted by Sojourner at 3:07 AM
17 Comments:
In reality life, she is hearing but she act as deaf role in movie. btw, its interesting movie.
Would your reaction have been the same if the sex maniac in the movie were portrayed by a hearing person? Are you trying to say that there are no sex maniacs within the deaf community?
Not every portrayal of deaf folks in the movies is intended to perpetuate a stereotype. That sort of hyper-sensitivity does no one any good, least of all the community.
Yes, that movie does stereotype deaf people, more in the sense that the girl is portrayed as a lonely, frustrated person who tries to get attention from men through sex. A very negative stereotype, really. In England, there was a deaf film festival and a reviewer from a mainstream newspaper commented on the portrayal of deaf people in those movies (like the Coming Out film) that was different than those in the mainstream movies. He (or she?) commented that the deaf people portrayed in those mainstream movies could make a person squirm in his seat in discomfort, but that isn't so with the deaf movies. He did mention the deaf character in Babel as an example. I can't really remember the publication or the link to that review, I'd include it here if I had it.
Hey guys, I didn't mean for this blog to be completed. I wrote it quickly last night and meant to edit it today. But I will just leave it alone because I like the comments here.
anon # 1, yes. It is interesting that the director was willing to work with people with different languages. He explained how difficult it was but he did it. And I thought it was strange that he didn't work with a Deaf actress. I guess its just "too much work."
Surduspub, My reaction would not be the same if a hearing person was portrayed as a sex maniac because there are plenty of images taken by a hearing person in plenty of movies, books, etc. Now, for Deaf people, there isn't plenty of good images. We are seen as "needy" people. I thought it was dangerous for us to be portrayed that way in Babel because it is a famous movie. Brad Pitt is in it.
Moebius, wow, I would love to read that review, but thanks for letting me know. I agree completely.
Ali
Sojourner:
I find your response to SurdusPub to be a little naive, but it may be not knowing due to your youth.
Marlee Matlin has played mostly strong deaf characters, certainly not "needy" in most cases.
Deanne Bray I believe, played Sue Thomas, FBI. Certainly a strong character. One is not usually associated with being weak if they work for the FBI (and the real Sue Thomas wrote a good book called "Silent Night", which I recommend).
Lou Ferrigno played the Incredible Hulk on the TV show. I DARE you to call him needy. Haha
In all seriousness, there have been MANY stereotypes perpetuated against people of all ethnicities and so forth, that are negative. As a matter of fact, one of the big arguments regarding the Matt Hamill movie, is will it hurt or help the deaf to simply have more exposure, irregardless of the role? My argument is that it will help, in the land of Hollywood. Face time and a good performance equates to more opportunities, and therefore, some ability to pick and choose at a later time, settling for strong roles versus weaker roles. Only then can we begin to change the negative perception of deaf people as needy.
Deaf people (not all) do not help themselves sometimes, by becoming bogged down in semantic arguments, limiting themselves by choosing to live on SSI while passing up opportunities to go to fulltime (remember I said NOT ALL do this), and so forth. A lot of limitations they impose on themselves sometimes, by falling into the "well I can't win anyway" mindset.
We must rise above those and portray ourselves in a positive manner, as capable and strong, dedicated and UNITED in order to achieve what we want.
Regards,
Eddie (ThumpaFlash)
Hi Eddie,
Darn it! I am naive.... :)
I think it is strange because the majority of Hearing people do not "get it" through those movies/actresses you mentioned. From my experience at a "Hearing" University I recently graduated from, a community college at a different location, talking to Hearing riders on Grey buses, hearing people I've met through my families, etc... have always been surprised with what they learned from me. They never realized how much Deaf people do not want to hear, and how much they feel human and embrace themselves/their culture.
Now, with the status of Babel, it is popular and more viewers are expected for that movie, of course, Brad Pitt... Comparing that with the movies you just mentioned, there is a big difference.
It is just sad that this new "step" could hurt the image of Deaf community.
Thanks for the comment. By the way, can you read my blog about Pimping with SSI and let me know your thoughts.
Ali-
Hi Ali:
First, I hope you didn't take offense at the "naive" comment I made, I probably should have just stuck with "young" :-) Also, I think one reason hearing people don't "get it" is because we often do not do a good job of educating them. They perceive us ALL as "deaf militants" because often, those are the most vocal of the deaf culture.
Secondly, in regards to your post about Pimping with SSI. I'm in disagreement with what you conveyed. To try and equate pimping and drawing SSI is not a good metaphor, for one. Secondly, although some would argue that you were dead on with that statement or post, I would argue that any deaf person with that attitude is EXACTLY what is wrong and why deaf/disabled people are looked down upon by the hearing culture. I probably explained my feelings best in my post "What's In A Work Ethic" on my blog at www.thumpaflash.livejournal.com
Basically, deaf people "creating their own space" by going on SSI is a CROCK OF BULL. Here is an excerpt from my posting on that: "Because they have NO INCENTIVE to, we have become such a government of enablers, that actually NOT working hard is rewarded. They have become hypochondriacs to the medicine of free and easy money, they become hysterical if anyone suggests screwing with that money, and they have become the biggest hypocrites in history by suggesting that they are disabled and drawing off the dole, but bristling when someone calls them that, suggesting instead, the term "differently abled". Talk about having your cake and eating it too..."
I'm not saying there are not legitimate instances in which it is okay for a person to seek the assistance SSI provides, but I wholeheartedly disagree with it often being abused as it is.
Feel free to visit my blog and comment on ANY of my postings.
Thanks,
Eddie (ThumpaFlash)
Eddie, you offended me only a little bit. I think its natural because I sure don't want to seem naive! :) But thanks for what you said though. I really want comments like this to sharpen my thinking, writing, etc.
Interesting comments. I disagree, but understand what you are saying.
I really do not think the majority of hearing people think Deaf people are "deaf militants." Are you really sure about that?
From my experience, most of them feel sad when they find out we can't hear. Poor us...
Also, if Deaf people compromise, we are at loss. With hearing, why do we need ASL? Just like when Native Americans compromised, look at what happened.
As for SSI... am on my way to your blog.
Thanks for your comment,
Ali
Eddie, for some reason, I couldnt open the link you left here. Can you email the link to me? Sojtakhi@aol.com
Really want to read your posts.
:)
Ali
I apologize, Ali. I must have typed it wrong. Here is the correct link:
http://thumpaflash.livejournal.com/
By the way, glad you weren't too offended. :-)
Eddie
By the way, I chose my words and arrangement poorly when I mentioned that hearing people perceive us ALL as deaf militants.
What I meant to say was, when we stand up for ourselves, we are lumped in with deaf militants because those are the ones who are most vocal, and have a negative image associated with them.
As for the compromising, it isn't compromising if you don't want it to be. We are all very in-depth individuals with what appear, on the surface, to be contradicting opinions. I would answer your question regarding "with hearing why would we need ASL?" with a simple answer: because, even with a CI, we would still be part of the deaf culture, and ASL is an integral part of assimilating yourself into that culture. Just because someone wants to hear better doesn't change WHO or WHAT they are. When the CI is taken off, they are deaf. The CI is a TOOL that assists them in many aspects of their social, work, and educational lives. But it should not define them, nor should being deaf define us. It should be a PART of who we are, not the sum.
Eddie
Eddie,
I see what you mean now.
This is really tough. It just seems impossible for CI and Deaf to get together and work together, our principles/philosophies are just too different.
There is a huge difference between sign language and ASL. There are much more signs with ASL (grammar types of stuff) than it is with mere sign language. My English is not perfect because I use ASL more. So it is going to be the same for CI, they will not learn ASL but just sign language. Then the core of Deaf culture is going to disappear.
I will just hope for two groups - Deaf CI and Deaf without CI without one disappearing. Fair enough?
Ali-
I FOUND THE REVIEW!!! Here is the link: it's to the Guardian newspaper in London, published last November 2007:
http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/film/2007/11/can_hearing_directors_make_dea.html
Headline is: Can Hearing directors
make deaf films? Good Question!
Moebius,
Awesome! Thank you sooo much :)
Ali
Moebius, can I use this link in a post for deafread? (I will mention your name since u found it) Or do you plan to use if for yours?
Let me know :)
Confirmed. It was posted on DeafRead November 29, 2007 by Grumpy Old Deafies.
Alright, thanks Moebius. :)
Ali-
Post a Comment
<< Home