Introduction to Deafhood: What is Deafhood?
In this continuation of my Introduction to Deafhood series, I explain what Deafhood is in terms of what it is not as well as what it is.
In this continuation of my Introduction to Deafhood series, I explain what Deafhood is in terms of what it is not as well as what it is.
Deb Ann said,
August 26, 2008 @ 6:13 am
Love you, Don G
Thumbs up for giving the best picture of Deafhood!
Platonic's Eye said,
August 26, 2008 @ 7:57 am
You have your own definition of what Deafhood means to you. I understand but Deafhood requires to be understood by studing through metaphysics, epistemology, politic, and ethics that are element of Deafhood first. I do not think most of Deaf do understand what Deafhood and must take a journey without having any goal of being Deaf. Since Deafhood does not have any principle first!!1 perception and oncepts are great!
FloridaGirl said,
August 26, 2008 @ 8:14 am
For example, there are some strong Deaf people, some middle Deaf and some weak Deaf that have differentiated their ways of belief and rational thinking ideas like the degrees of Deafhood.
Matt Hamill wanted to choose a hearing actor to represent a role of a Deaf character in the movie as soon as some people themselves felt insulted or mocked by the role being played by a hearing actor. That is because he can’t see Deaf by himself.
How about Gallaudet students who were protectors and wild fire to both Jane Fernandes and I King Jordan who are deaf?
————————————————————————————
343: what is Deafhood? The original definition
“I found myself coining a new label of ‘Deafhood.’ Deafhood is not, however, a ’static’ medical condition like ‘deafness.’ Instead, it represents a process - the struggle by each Deaf child, Deaf family and Deaf adult to explain to themselves and each other their own existence in the world. In sharing their lives with each other as a community, and enacting those explanations rather than writing books about them, Deaf people are engaged in a daily praxis, a continuing internal and external dialogue. (p.3, “Understanding Deaf Culture” by Ladd)”
“Now, some people might argue that the reason many people are concerned about CI is that, like the children of oralism or even mainstreaming, many people who are isolated from the community do not reach the point where they can constructively analyze their own deafhood because they are continually “trying to be” instead of “being” - and because, like Ladd states, it is important to have dialogue to achieve praxis (praxis is the academic word for understanding/enlightenment, without the frills.)”
http://surdus.blogspot.com/2006/09/343-what-is-deafhood-original.html
——————————————————————————————
Facts on Hearing Loss
“When hearing loss is detected beyond the first few months of life, the most critical time for stimulating the auditory pathways to hearing centers of the brain may be lost, significantly delaying speech and language development.”
“Children with mild hearing loss miss 25-50% of speech in the classroom and may be inappropriately labeled as having a behavior problem”
http://www.hearingloss.org/learn/factsheets.asp
DrDonG said,
August 26, 2008 @ 8:46 am
Platonic,
You keep saying this, and to some extent you are correct, but if we break it down enough to show and explain the metaphysics, politics, ethics, etc, most people will start to understand what it is all about. I have been and am trying to do that with this website and this particular series.
DrDonG said,
August 26, 2008 @ 8:55 am
Fla. Girl –
Thanks for the links, especially to the Surdus post explaining Deafhood. Liked the comments in there that were made about Paddy’s talks too.
FloridaGirl said,
August 26, 2008 @ 9:32 am
Felix Reich wrote that “instruction scarcely differs from that of other institutions, at most in that no definitive rejection of sign language was ever made that the development of the mind and spirit, and not simply the acquisition of language, was considered the greatest goal.”
“to train the spirits and hands of children so that they could succeed in life, and in addition to give them religious feeling and qualities of character so that they became happy individuals”
The book is titled Crying Hands
I have already fallen in love with the quotes from the above statement while I got the whole picture of Deafhood that applies to Deaf people. I spell magic into words that are put in the statement.
[give them Deaf feeling and qualities of character]
PS. I respect Native Americans are familiar to the Hocoka about The sacred alter of all life is inside the sacred circle, the Hocoka.
————————————————————————————————
Suffix
-ness
Appended to adjectives to form nouns meaning “the STATE of (the adjective)”, “the QUALITY of (the adjective)”, or “the MEASURE of (the adjective)”.
calmness ? calm
darkness ? dark
Appended to words of other parts of speech to form nouns (often nonce words or terms in philosophy) meaning the STATE/QUALITY/MEASURE of the idea represented by these words.
thatness ? that
treeness ? tree
Suffix
-hood
a condition or state of the word it is suffixed to.
child - childhood
neighbor - neighborhood
a group sharing a specified condition or state
brother - brotherhood
MM said,
August 26, 2008 @ 11:54 am
The problem is there are too many ‘communities’ too many ideas of what is deaf. each deaf person seems increasingly unable to relate to the other, except perhaps via sign language, culture is not a unifying force because most deaf don’t evolve from that concept. Deafhood=culture=ideology, just where does everyone else fit in ?
Since 9 out of 10 with hearing loss, and 6 out of 10 deaf people are not ’sign specific’ then the trend is for some act as a collective, and divide again. CI users are forming their own ‘culture’ and areas too, A common communication form tends to unite more than anything else, and the fragmentary nature of hearing loss allows for too many variations of that. We simply are not on even terms to talk to each other.
It is debatable if ‘Deafhood’ can act as a catalyst, or if it should, without addressing the differences, because always the tendency is to revert to the status quo of a deaf person, e.g. the cultural and signing one, or the acquired or deafened or inplanted stages….
Deafhood seems simply unrelated to how many see themselves, Paddy Ladd’s own image, is as a cultural signing person, so his image doesn’t relate to us either. We are dragged down in these debates EVERY Time by the culture versus everything else deaf. Culture is overrated deaf-wise most of us go deaf later in life, and most do not sign at all. Whatever culture may mean to them is simply as a hearing person who now can’t…. perception difference is massive.
I cannot hate a hearing person, I was one myself at one time, my family all are, why would I wage war on them ? I think there IS a knee-jerk when I might see some deaf person having a go at nasty hearing people, and they are pretty vague about who, then I might feel defensive and hit back on their behalf, and immediately get an audist label, ‘Deaf’ have so many hang ups, and baggage they need to get rid of, before we can all actively engage properly.
Culture and sign can be used offensively, , that is their knee-jerk. Can you form deafhood at any point where there is so much suspicion around regarding different mode approaches and choices, in many respects signing deaf have declared CI’s unacceptable, oralism a crime, and hearing aids even child cruelty. It is the people who project that deaf image we need to defeat. If you don’t understand yourself, you won’t understand anyone else either. Whether this constitutes deafhood….
sir william said,
August 28, 2008 @ 1:13 am
it is mostly of all . . .”hood’ it sucks! gang hood type, etc. go and find a better and more pleasant word! wording/ ask the truly Deaf people, not the egoistical ones. ask Bernard Bragg . .i am so sure that he will find and suggest a great word, wording, whatever you’d call it as a proper way. Deaf alone is much better as a word than deafhood! can you imagine that? deafhood is a negative word already. too bold. i am proud of being sixth deaf generation, but not as a bully deafhood.
hopefully there shall be a truly Deaf person that just would write a book with clear and simple facts of the Deaf culture. i doubt very much that more than 20 percent of you Deaf folks could follow what Paddy from another country dictate of how or what we Deaf euolve. i ain’t speak for those deaf teachers, but just like myself a grassroot and common Deaf person with pretty good high reading ability. i have had a difficult time to follow what paddy is trying to say in his book. i just say to hell with it. too complicated and i do not wish to sweat to understand his research findings.
DrDonG said,
August 28, 2008 @ 7:51 am
Sir William,
There is also Brotherhood, Sisterhood, Nationhood — are those negative and unpleasant?
I totally understand that Paddy’s book is hard to read. That’s why I’m doing this series, so I can hopefully make the points more accessible for most of the Deaf community.
If you aren’t interested, nobody’s forcing you to watch.
MM said,
August 28, 2008 @ 1:12 pm
Sir William I may just be your man !
we have a society in the UK dedicated to plain and simple English, most would have rejected Understanding deafhood at page 2. Why the hell it was written in a manner by which deaf don’t themselves communicate and then filling it with words and terms unfamiliar to them, seemed stupid to me too.
It’s a book dedicated to HEARING people to tell them all about us, (or more accurately about people such as Don). It is NOT about a deaf ‘journey’.
Had it been IN sign language, I would have been a lot more impressed by it, but I think it an own goal to do it the way he did and suggest it was for the deaf. It’s a con act basically, if we say it is over deaf people’s heads, deaf will defend the fact it suggests they aren’t clever, and rally to him. He tries to be clever by baffling us all the science of it, but it just doesn’t add up to real scrutiny, and where, are the deaf prepared to wade though it, to do that ?
Plain English, that’s all I can do.
DrDonG said,
August 28, 2008 @ 2:32 pm
MM –
Paddy wrote in Academic English, because that is what people respect, even though they may decry it. He engaged in extensive research in order to alleviate criticisms of his points, as he knew he would get. This too, is good academic policy.
From my experiences here, however, I strongly suspect that Paddy would have gotten criticism no matter what he did. If he had written it in “plain English”, he would have been criticized for “underestimating our intelligence” and “dumbing down” his work. If he had done it in sign (and do you realize just how much time it would take to watch a whole video of this work? In my Introduction to Deafhood series so far, I have so far spent 50 minutes of video time, and that is not even finishing the first third of the book, and this is just a summary!) he would have been criticized for “not providing access to this information to Hearing and Oral Deaf”. It seems that you and others are determined to find fault with these ideas no matter how they are presented.
MM said,
August 29, 2008 @ 1:09 am
The problem then with respect Don, is we are still ‘not getting it’ from the ‘horses mouth’ but from your impression of it. By far the greatest criticisms of Understanding Deafhood are via the fact the deaf cannot wade through the mountains of obscure textology. There was no attempt by Ladd to make it accessible to the deaf.
Like I stated earlier, the reason for that, is the book is NOT for them, but to ‘educate’ hearing in the ‘Deaf Ways’. I cannot fathom out where, some deaf have the idea Mr Ladd has said they need to embark on a journey to deaf enlightenment, the book title, is ‘Understanding Deaf Culture”, the deaf took this to mean (Or you did), that this meant deaf had to find themselves, unwittingly (Or not, depending where you stand), Paddy tapped into the deaf insecurities…. maybe into his own.
Not an attack regardless Don, as we are discussing the book, it has to stand on its merits, or rather lack of some of them. There is a danger you are revertingto the old ‘Deaf’ ways of heads we win tails you lose, when critics put their 10 cents worth. You must defeat or counter us with logic, not emotion.
tryingtounderstandDeafhood said,
August 29, 2008 @ 3:49 pm
if it is simple, could you include in your text the vlog captions so I can print out. Why not do this for all of your future vlogs…Thanks
DrDonG said,
August 29, 2008 @ 6:32 pm
MM,
My understanding is that the “horse” didn’t want to force people to “digest his regurgitated oats”, so to speak. He wanted us to interpret for ourselves what it means for each of us.
I think he was speaking to both Hearing and Deaf. YOu would have to ask him yourself why he did not make it more accessible. He is in your part of the world… try asking him, I’m sure you can find his email over there at Bristol U.
As for defeating or countering with logic not emotion, you know I’ve been trying very hard to do so. But it is very hard to do so when I make the points and people keep refusing to see what I am saying and coming back with the same arguments again and again.
TTUD –
Sorry, but it isn’t simple for me. It is already a quite lengthy process for me. First I have to film myself — that’s the quickest part. Then I have to edit. Then I have to add the captions. Then I have to save (and that can take quite a bit of time. Then I have to compress the file so it doesn’t take forever and a day to upload and that takes a bit of time. Then I have to upload, and that takes another chunk of time. Plus writing the post itself. So adding a text would mean I would have to go back over and retyle all of the text again, step by step. I’ve made the vlog VERY accessible as it is to everyone (except perhaps Blind people, but let’s not go there….)
MM said,
August 30, 2008 @ 2:37 am
Unfortunately Mr Ladd has remained almost totally unresponsive to critics. I find this personally frustrating and a cop out frankly. You and I get the critics, we have to answer them….. Having started all the argument and discourse he now seems to be distancing himself from it, “It isn’t my fault how others interpret what I write..”, yes it IS, if he doesn’t clarify.
Is it just that the more discourse that happens, the more books he sells ? he wouldn’t be the first to go with that approach, he watches you and others struggle to make sense of what he writes, and doesn’t help does he ? The struggle is yours ? he just says keep on struggling…. in the UK (As you know via responses on other UK blogs), they haven’t even bothered to read it. It didn’t stop them still attacking myself and others for so doing ! there is so much ignorance and pejudice it is beyond belief at times, always it goes down to the personal.
Thje only discussions on deafhood are in the USA. Paddy has no audience here for it. If I go over old ground, it is because it HASN’T yet been covered, or answered, not because I am never going to accept it…. why should we even listen to those that have not even read it ? What axe are they grinding ?
DrDonG said,
August 30, 2008 @ 6:45 am
MM –
I didn’t say critics. I said questions. As for his motives, I’ve only met the guy 2 times, for a total of about 30 mins. both times. I can only say what I’ve heard from others what his reasons are.
Just out of curiosity — did you read the book ALL the way through? I’m not saying just the first chapter, but the WHOLE book?
As for not listening to those who have not read the book, and wondering what axe they are grinding, I agree wholeheartedly. Many of the critics haven’t read it, and they admit it. Nobody should be allowed t criticize without knowing what they’re criticizing, especially a complicated subject like Paddy’s book.
MM said,
August 30, 2008 @ 7:31 am
Obvipously I haven’t read every single word Don, has anyone ? I am struggling as are many to try and read on, while totally sidelining the defintitions he put at the start, because this is labelling we have to accept before we can, he makes it almost impossible for people to do that. If we reject the D,d thing (And I think most are now dissolutioned with it), then reading the book becomes a real struggle, because he is forcing us to accept what we cannot. I don’t think Paddy realised when he penned this book, that the D and d would become obsolete before he went to print…. He must have known even then it was contentious in our world…. I supect this is what you mean when you suggest we repeat ourselves.
If we are going to discuss ‘Understanding Deaf Culture’ can we do it on the basis the definitions are NOT valid ? but a personal view, as they are not universally accepted amongst the deaf or the HoH ? That I may reject the D.d thing does not by definition mean I reject the deaf culture…. they keep suggesting that… Understanding deaf people would be a more worthwhile discourse….. it is a mistake to align this with culture.
cnkatz said,
August 30, 2008 @ 9:13 am
DonG, just let MM be. He, just now with his comments here, insulted my intelligence and dignity as a deaf person. I leave him alone. If you need more exercises in honing your rebuttals, keep on, otherwise let it be.
DonG, keep on with this deafhood series. People who do watch blogs are only a small(?) fraction of the deaf community. More do watch vlogs not in any blog format but youtube and dvtv. Much more rarely use the internet. We need to reach those people. You must have your own reasons for not putting your videos on youtube and dvtv. Schools for the Deaf, most if not all, restrict blogs in their internet usage policies, unless approving websites. Should you type up transcripts below which is paste-able. I could go on and on with “issues” of maintaining a blog because I am in the same blogboat as you.
When deaf and HH people like MM (if he has any hearing loss) criticize Ladd or anyone else, they are already engaging in their deafhood process. As simple as that. Any cognitive (mental, psychological, behavioral, and/or spiritual) exercise on the topic of being deaf (deafhood) is engaging in the deafhood process. Those denying and celebrating about hearing loss engage in deafhood. Again, as simple as that. I found this single term, deafhood, simple to grasp. Not so with all the baggage with deafhood, the worst is our friend, Paddy, who also is on a journey we all share.
DonG, as Seneca said, “to err is human”. When I see any serious errors, I will make pubic comment here. I haven’t seen any so far, other than having thoughts of doing this and that differently, smile.
Forge on -
DrDonG said,
August 30, 2008 @ 11:24 am
MM,
Unfortunately, I can’t agree that Paddy’s definitions are not valid, because I do believe they are. I believe you have interpreted them through your own lens to make them invalid, but through my lens, they DO apply to you too. Even though you reject the ‘D’ I see you are ‘D’. Your recent post about “Hallelujah!” shows me you are ‘D’. You think like us. You have the same cynicism about “cures” that we do. You participate on the Deaf sites. You write about Deaf issues. You are ‘D’, whether you like it or not. In reality, we have been talking about the same things in the long run with Deafhood — those experiences and perceptions of ourselves and the world around us that are colored by our being “deaf”.
Katz –
It’s already a pretty lengthy process for me to save and upload once in this vlog format. To add save as YouTube…. sigh… plus, personally, I don’t want to be reduced to a grainy image…. I like looking and thinking clearly…..
deafchipmunk said,
August 31, 2008 @ 11:27 pm
Hi Don,
Well done and I am impressed with your explanation about Deafhood. You have given a clear concept of Deafhood itself.
cnkatz,
I definitely agree with you about people who have criticized Paddy Ladd are actually part of Deafhood process. It is like people who did not believe in childhood but they already went through their own childhood process.
The only one thing for sure is that we cannot escape our Deafhood process.
Deafchip
DrDonG said,
August 31, 2008 @ 11:57 pm
Hi DeafChip –
That is a funny way of putting it but it totally works! I will definitely have to remember that one!