Hearing (mis)Understandings

I happened upon a twitter conversation today. The only reason I saw it was that I was scanning a search on #deaf and came across a tweet by ZenMonkey. Made me curious, so I opened her page and also the pages of Hermantmetha and Jbrtva (who, as far as I can tell by their bios, are all hearing people).

Here are the tweets, put into time order, from the beginning to the end of the conversation.

http://twitter.com/hemantmehta

I just learned the sign language signs for Chinese, Indian, Mexican, and Jew. I’ve concluded that all deaf people are racist.

8:40 PM Aug 1st from web

http://twitter.com/jbrtva

@hemantmehta did you learn the “new” signs or the “old” ones?

11:50 PM Aug 1st from web in reply to hemantmehta

http://twitter.com/hemantmehta

@jbrtva totally the old ones.

9:32 AM Aug 2nd from Tweetie in reply to jbrtva

http://twitter.com/jbrtva

@hemantmehta deaf people don’t mean to be offensive…just very blunt…

about 21 hours ago from web

http://twitter.com/hemantmehta

@jbrtva Someone explained to me an example of Old sign language vs. New. You’re right: Old is more blunt, even if offensive at times

about 21 hours ago from web in reply to jbrtva

http://twitter.com/ZenMonkey

@hemantmehta But there was still no public retraction of that comment about #deaf people. Coming from you, I am really surprised.

about 18 hours ago from web in reply to hemantmehta

http://twitter.com/hemantmehta

http://twitter.com/hemantmehta

@ZenMonkey I think most people who follow me understand when I’m being sarcastic.. the bit comes from a comedy routine, referring to old ASL

about 18 hours ago from web in reply to ZenMonkey

http://twitter.com/ZenMonkey

@hemantmehta Totally get that about your followers. Unfortunately many of them likely don’t know why it’s a joke, & why it’s not cool.

about 18 hours ago from twhirl in reply to hemantmehta

http://twitter.com/ZenMonkey

@hemantmehta Not a slam on your followers at all; just generally Deaf culture and ASL linguistics aren’t widely known.

about 18 hours ago from twhirl in reply to hemantmehta

http://twitter.com/ZenMonkey

The “it’s just a joke” argument for casually offensive remarks only works if your audience is in on the joke. If not, it’s just offensive.

about 18 hours ago from twhirl

I think this is a great conversation and I’m not offended by it. For me it comes under the category of “oh, that’s how hearies think about us.” It helps that ZenMonkey spoke up in a respectful way, instead of slamming Hermantmehta (thanks for being an advocate!).

First, let me say that I’m deaf, but was raised hard of hearing, isolated in the hearing world. I didn’t start signing until I was 24, so I understand where the hearing people’s attitudes come from, since I made the same mistakes as a newcomer to the deaf community. But I learned, changed, evolved.

Deaf people are VISUAL. This should be an obvious fact, but it’s not. In fact, one old friend of mine even did a Ph.D. dissertation on this topic. Sometimes the simplest things are the hardest ones to get through to people. So I say it again, deaf people are visual.

Because they are visual, deaf people use their faces and their bodies differently from hearing people. For example, hearing folks use their faces for emotion; deaf people use their faces for grammar and emphasis. This is a very deep, and for hearies, a difficult thing to learn. So many hearing people misread deaf expressions as anger, when we’re simply using ASL and being emphatic.

In the context of the twitter conversation above, the fact that deaf people are visual is the basis for labels such as “racist” (even as a joke), “offensive” and “blunt”— no, we’re just visual. The “old” signs are obvious: “Chinese = slanted eyes,” “Indian = painted cheeks” (assuming that’s American Indian, East Asian Indians are dot on the forehead), and so on.

Political correctness hit the deaf world, however, so the new signs generally focus on culture, rather than visual differences, and deaf people try to use the signs that people develop for themselves, rather than give them one from our culture. “Chinese” is now a sweeping sign across the chest and down, following the buttons of traditional Chinese dress. American “Indian” is now a sign signifying “of the land.” The old signs can be hard to give up, though, just because they are so visual and clear to the deaf eye. To be honest, I slip, and sometimes use the old signs. And, I don’t even know the politically correct signs for Mexican and Jewish (I’ve seen a new sign for Mexican, but don’t remember it; and I don’t know any sign for Jewish or Hebrew other than “beard”).*

The point, again, is that deaf people are visual. And it’s difficult for someone who comes from one culture, particularly a dominant one, to avoid imposing the assumptions of their culture onto others. Respectful discussions such as this help us all to understand and appreciate others better.

—Nancy Creighton

@purpleswirl

*I just looked it up in “Signs in Judaism,” 1986 by Adele Kronick Shuart— one of the first books I worked on (I did the typing on a word processor, not a computer). The alternate sign for Jew is “people” plus “Torah” but I’ve never seen anyone use that sign in casual conversation.

PS: Comments on this post welcome. Let’s use hashtag #DfHr (for deaf/hearing) and/or #deaf if commenting on Twitter, okay?

 

Dogs still unwelcome, but cop is savvy

This story comes from my friends, Larry & Carolyn Brick. Residents of Philadelphia, they are currently going west– to ski– and have their two “hearing ear” dogs with them (the current preferred terminology is service animal). I asked Larry to be a guest writer on my blog because his recent email to friends and family not only shows the expected– that people still don’t understand about the rights of people and their service animals; but also that police officers have been trained and are often savvy. Big thanks to all the disability rights organizations who have worked for years to train police forces nationwide about the rights of disabled people!

Larry and Carolyn’s story:

Larry & Carolyn Brick with their dogs, Tiki and Takao

We’re at the Economy Motel in Nebraska City, NE. The woman in charge of registration refused to let us sign in because of the “No Pets” policy. She had a foreign accent and her daughter, approximately 11 or 12 years old, repeated what her mother said because I couldn’t understand her. She said that she couldn’t reach the manager and refused to read the ADA certificate on Takao, and she was willing to be sued. She said she was going to call the police. I replied, “please do that,” because she was breaking the law.

She called the police who arrived shortly. After explaining the situation to the officer he very nicely, and amazingly well, explained that it was a Federal Law and gave several examples of ADA with service animals– including the “No Pets” policy at Wal-Mart that was right behind the motel and how Wal-Mart allowed service animals. He even said that our dogs “…were not pets. They are service animals.” I was floored at how articulate and clear he was. He added that I could sue her and that’s not what she’d want to happen.

The officer suggested that she ask for a damage deposit to be returned if there was no damage. So, here we are, at an inexpensive motel, with an expensive $20 damage deposit that we expect to get back in the morning.

Conclusion: the next morning we got our deposit back, and when she came in the room to clean up while we started up the RV, she quickly came outside, smiling for the first time and waving “good bye,” perhaps because we left a tip on the table.