Mainstream society is more receptive than you portray to the argument that widespead use of CIs is not necessarily the way to go. Last year in Great Britain on a television interview, it was discussed matter of factly that some Deaf people do not want to be "fixed." The interviewer did not think this was a strange idea, but realized that for some people it might make sense if society stopped trying to "fix" them, especially if they live rich and rewarding lives. The idea of the interview was that not hearing was not a major disability.

Wow, it is great to see an expression (in place of voice) of reason in the wilderness. Your blog post should be a required reading for all leaders and members of Audism Free America. What some or few of them did to Wisconsin only embarrassed the rest of the deaf population.

Joseph Pietro Riolo
josephpietrojeungriolo@gmail.com

Public domain notice: I put all of my expressions in this post in the public domain.

I hate to admit it, you're right. I would LOVE to see the CI trashed in the eyes of the Hearing public. But they will always be audists, meaning believe in Hearing above all. Believe Deaf is nothing without hearing. B.S.! But we have to admit that they won and they want the CI for everybody. All we can do is educate them that Deaf have lived without the CI and done VERY WELL!

I emphatically repeat that it is a MYTH to say that the audists have won. No, they have not.

During the debate about the British law last year, the general public was very accepting of the idea that some Deaf people do not need and do not want to be fixed.

The public discussion has just barely begun and the general public has not yet been fully informed. Deaf people actually WON already when victory was achieved in the 2006 protest. Now we must be patient and wait for the full effects of the protest victory to come to fruition down the road. It's just a matter of time.

Diane,

You nailed it. Personally, I find the notion of attacking/forbidding the CI severely misguided. It doesn't address the root causes. To me, the protesting is all flash, no substance, because it doesn't address the root causes of audism.

Thanks for blogging this.

Right, hearing people are used to the five senses which include hearing, that to not have hearing doesn't make any sense to them. Many hearing people assume that all deaf people want to hear, which is not always the case. This has been since before hearing assistance devices came about and deaf culture in the U.S. existed for well over 200 years.

It's the hearing mindset that needs to understand deafness isn't a medical condition of pity but a state of being that many d/Deaf people are happy with. Bashing CI's and other hearing technology, which are merely things, isn't going to solve a mindset problem that has been there long before the technology.

Most hearing people are unwittingly ignorant, yes, but not necessarily audists. "Pea-brained" audists, who persist in their discriminative behavior even after being educated about Deaf culture's views, will always be out there. But if some d/Deaf people continue to protest "audism" at every hearing slight, we d/Deaf are going to be viewed as "difficult", "crackpots", "nutcases", "retarded", you-name-it, it will only go from bad to worse. Instead of protest, an organization's assertive dialogue will go a much longer way to reinforce a positive impression, instead of a negative one.

Ann_C

As usual, I agree you, Dianrez (yes, sometimes I feel like a pea-brain)! I think the misuse and overuse of the word audism has made it ridiculous. Which is a shame, because there is audism out there, but the application of it to deaf on Deaf disagreements about the CI has made it an unintelligible concept to most everyone outside the Deaf community and many within. And while I love the Deaf community I'm part of in real life, those online who are leading the anti-CI protests rather than building and pushing for ASL access and better deaf education do come off as crackpots and their choice to attack options for young deaf children -- rather than open doors for the "next generation" of deaf -- make their motivations appear to be highly suspect and selfish.

Sure, we've been thrilled with the results of Li-Li's CIs, but I do know one person who sadly hasn't had such a great experience, and it's certainly not a "plug and play"piece of hardware. We look at the CI as a high tech tool, like eyeglasses -- and so although they have very little to do with who my child is as a person, they are ever-present. Like glasses, they just make it possible for her to "see the letters" of spoken language, we still have to teach her to "read." And our choice to go with a CI has in no way negatively affected our decision to continue Li-Li's education at a signing school for the deaf, or to make ASL an important part of her language development, or to make her any less deaf. Or Deaf. or d/Deaf. :)

What does impact our decisions are the role models we see: if the strongest proponents of a given route are angry, bitter, unhappy people who feel oppressed, I certainly don't want my child to go that route. Take a look at the most outspoken blogs across deafread and see which are focused on their own satisfying or challenging experiences and seem empowered. Then look at which seem only to focus on attacking other people's choices. Here's an example: I was so excited to find one Deaf woman's blog a year or 2 ago -- wow! A powerful, exciting young woman doing anything she wants who could be a role model for my daughter. I thought, hmmmm: she sure doesn't seem to be held back by deafness, in fact, she seems all the stronger for it and is more than "a deaf person" or "a hearing person": she's a filmmaker. But if you read her blog this past year: it's not about who she is. It's all about what she's not, and all about attacking what others are. I see yet another example of a person so unhappy with her own situation that she's attacking others. That's what those who have nothing to do with CIs themselves, and yet insist on attacking it as an option look like to me.

I want to make a comment to what Li-Li's Mom wrote:

"What does impact our decisions are the role models we see: if the strongest proponents of a given route are angry, bitter, unhappy people who feel oppressed, I certainly don't want my child to go that route. Take a look at the most outspoken blogs across deafread and see which are focused on their own satisfying or challenging experiences and seem empowered. Then look at which seem only to focus on attacking other people's choices. Here's an example: I was so excited to find one Deaf woman's blog a year or 2 ago -- wow! A powerful, exciting young woman doing anything she wants who could be a role model for my daughter. I thought, hmmmm: she sure doesn't seem to be held back by deafness, in fact, she seems all the stronger for it and is more than "a deaf person" or "a hearing person": she's a filmmaker. But if you read her blog this past year: it's not about who she is. It's all about what she's not, and all about attacking what others are. I see yet another example of a person so unhappy with her own situation that she's attacking others. That's what those who have nothing to do with CIs themselves, and yet insist on attacking it as an option look like to me."

I know who Li-Li's Mom is referring to, and I am in a full agreement to what she said. It is very disappointing to see these people on DeafRead and DeafVideo.TV who are so focused on attacking other people, just because their ideas, opinions and beliefs are different. Especially from this so-called filmmaker who happened to be Deaf. This person really blew it big friggin' time.

Supposely Li-Li's Mom are looking for role models, and if these people who are angry, bitter and unhappy who feels oppressed attacking others... you lose your own reputation as a role model. There are so few of us in the community and I am very, very disgusted at them.

I am not interested to be associated with these people anymore. No matter how empowered and enlightened they are, I consider them as crockpots, period.

Brian, that was interesting that the British hearing society is accepting of the Deaf side especially in view of their recent controversy about destroying embryos carrying the deaf gene. It could be interesting to see a positive trend in Hearing society in accepting those with no hearing. It previously happened in Martha's Vineyard, in Mexico and in Arab culture, why not again here in the USA?

Thanks, Joseph and Mira, even though you have opposite viewpoints, you both agree that hearing society needs to see a more positive picture of Deaf people and protesting the CI isn't it.

Pundit, good to see you again, and yes, we are missing the root causes of audism by jumping on a symbol, the CI.

Ann, how we hope that education will work on all hearing people! Somehow I feel it will, but there could be a stubborn few who have to be hit with a strong word like "audism" before they finally understand.

Li-Li's mom, I hear you. Role models are needed for our d/Deaf children and their parents, and the blogsphere misses those who are actively helpful but invisible to the public. That could be worth a blog in itself.

To I agree; we will still have those who are embittered, but remember they also carry a useful message for us. The past was not all enlightening nor was it all positive, so the unhappy experiences of some can be educational for us.

Dianrez, you are right in pointing out that we do need to hear from those who are embittered -- I didn't mean to discount that critical aspect of the forum. No one should be silenced. In fact, some of the most moving accounts I've come across online were by you and Deaf Pundit, relating the challenges you've encountered -- and overcome. Real stories, not sweeping statements of vague anti-AGBell hatred, is such a great way to get across the history of discrimination that is not always apparent to a new parent of a deaf child. But I don't count those as embittered accounts -- I saw you as empowered by your experiences, not beaten down at all.

Still, I do wish there were more of a balance -- online (which obviously doesn't represent real life) there's a dearth of examples of happy, fulfilled ASL-using teenagers and young adults (close enough in age to represent the current educational environment) who can reassure new parents of deaf children that their children can go that route and be whole, happy, healthy, and limited by nothing and no one. I see plenty of accounts of AVT families with CI kids and teenagers across the spectrum: a few discouraged, but many more leaning towards the ecstatic. The older kids among my little niche (ASL-using deaf kids w/CIs) is small, but mostly positive. But what are the young ASL Deaf without aids up to? Are they happy? What is their family life like? Where are they seeing limitations? What gets their goat (what should I be fighting so my daughter doesn't encounter the same)?

I wish there was more of a Deaf voice addressing and yes, even fighting for their own choices and opportunities, and less of a Deaf voice trying to limit my daughter's choices and opportunities.

Li-Li's Mom, that entry made me want to stand on my chair and cheer for you!(On the other hand, my chair is a tippy desk type, so better not.) If the blogsphere accomplishes anything for Deaf people, it should showcase the multitudes who are happy, well-adjusted, enjoying life and telling their experiences.

Bloggers and vloggers, encourage the young Deaf people you know to come online and share themselves! The CI industry has already done that in an organized, professionally designed website and it is undeniably effective. What do we have to balance that? There is no excuse--our young peoples' stories truly exist!

DianRez,

Li-Li's Mom's comments warrants a blog/vlog itself. It should be a community's call for happy, well-adjusted young Deaf children (with CIs or without CIs using ASL) to balance that.

We can only ask ASDC, Hands and Voices, and NAD to host the blog. Or perhaps ASL Think Tank?

Of course, we need some kind of paperwork to allow parents to sign consent for their child to be displayed, and making sure that their identity are protected too.

Thanks, Li-Li's Mom. DianRez, I don't mean to belittle these crockpots, sorry I had to say this demeaning word, they are CROCKPOTS, period! I know they have a right to voice their experiences that should never been repeated. It is how they portray themselves over and over again which astounded me that I never wanted to associate with them. Our deaf blogosphere does not represent real life, and that is the first thing many parents of newly diagnosed deaf infants will go to seek for role models. Here are these people on DeafVideo.TV mocking or acting like monkeys, acting with exaggerated mouth movements, and in-your-face distorted grimaces and facial expressions, and worst of all, MOONING their butts online, will definitely leave a very lasting first impression to these parents. Parents would say, "I don't want my own child to be like THEM!"

It is a delicate balance between their right to express their feelings, and a very small number of Deaf role models on the cyberspace, where and how would parents will go and watch?

Li-Li's Mom made a very powerful statement. Simply said.

You can write a book, speak in front of college classes, get college degrees,.. and raise a hearing son,..who is in a college honor's program,..but you'll still be called a dummy if you refuse to conform to the idea that.."hearing aides" and CI's cure deafness.  (Trying NOT to sound BITTER)