There’s several folks bringing up the issue on Deafhood. It wasn’t really popular until the protests on JKF’s presidential selection process. Actually, at first, JKF protest was began with “not Deaf enough” then it became a mistake after the news media exposed the reason behind the protest. So the message against JKF had been changed to different issues such as “not leader enough”, “not efficiency enough in ASL”, etc… Those issues against JKF are still not clarified to the news media and to the public. So they got the impression in the first place that she is not Deaf enough. Thus, it did hurt the image of FSSA and anti-JKF folks. FSSA tried hard enough to clear up the message to the news media and to their public officials in the Capitol. Still not good enough to news media and public officials. They are not listening to FSSA and anti-JKF protestors, because their messages had been changing several times against Fernandes.
Now, that Deafhoodism had been the main focus in this controversy and it became increasingly popular among Deaf people through the blogs and NAD sessions.
When arguing about Deafhoodism, why in the world this protest have anything to do with this?
The goal of Deafhoodism in the Deaf community is to be united with all people who are deaf/Deaf, late-deafened, hard-of-hearing, oralists and cochlear-implantees. So that they can have one goal. What’s the goal? They are desperately trying to get together to over-throw the presidential search process and rollback BoTs’ decision on the selection of the 9th president. So desperate as ever. Simple as that.
In my opinion, “Deafhood” terminology is quite a joke to me. I am proud to be Deaf, and I am proud to use ASL. Deafhoodism is nothing but just political term to elaborate and promote itself.
Just be yourself and be damn proud of it …and no need to add “Deafhood” into our everyday vocabulary, really.
August 16, 2006 at 6:22 pm
Actually, that’s not strictly true. Deafhood has been a hot topic in California for over one year now. There were Deafhood presentations at the CAD convention in June or July 2005.
Deafhood is about much, much more than just being proud of yourself. It is an in-depth look at our history and helping us understand why we are where we are now. Please read the book or attend workshops given by qualified individuals before dismissing it. Thanks.
August 16, 2006 at 6:40 pm
Well, Deafhood is an import from England…and almost all of the research that was done for this book was based on the British experience NOT the American experience.
August 17, 2006 at 11:59 am
Malita, you do make a good point here. I haven’t thought of it and it does make sense!
Deafhood as Hmm mentioned may be popular in California for the short time recently but I believe that Gally protests do spread Deafhoodism more quickly. If Gally protests never existed, then Deafhood may spread very slowly. I agree with Malita that Deafies take advantage of Deafhood idea to use on oralists, etc in order to create a larger group. In that effort related to protests may help to oust the JKF presidency.
That’s how Deafhood became wildly popular aftermath of protests.
August 17, 2006 at 9:24 pm
I have read the book….and honestly how do you judge WHO are qualified people…..no one interprets the book the same
What’s their qualifications? whats the criteria for being a bona fide presentator at deafhood workshops?
August 18, 2006 at 2:58 am
Biffsma, actually, the book talks about America too. I have, directly and in person, talked with Paddy himself and he says yes, he incorporated information from American sources into the book and he believes that Deafhood as he writes it applies to America. Keep in mind that he lived in the U.S. for one year while he held the Powrie Doctor chair position at Gallaudet and he is a frequent visitors to these shores.
To answer your question about qualified people – for now, we can agree that people that Paddy believes are qualified are qualified… for the time being. That can change later on as the concept spreads and more and more guidelines are developed and/or discovered. Paddy has said the Bay Area folks, including Ella Mae Lentz and David Eberwein, understand his vision and what he is trying to convey and are qualified to talk about Deafhood.
ProudDeaf, I agree that some people are riding on it and abusing it. That’s wrong. One thought directed not just to you but to some people in the audience – Deafhoodism is NOT a valid word. McConnell, who hates the idea and refuses to read the book invented that term and he has no authority to do so. It’s DEAFHOOD.
August 19, 2006 at 12:51 am
Hmm, you are so right about Deafhoodism. McConnell had no business inventing that term. People need to stop using it, even if they don’t agree with the concept.
September 9, 2006 at 2:39 pm
Hi! My name is Malita and after visiting this website, all I can say is I thankfully have selective hearing.
November 11, 2006 at 12:55 am
Malita, I laughed out loud when I came to your post. Very well said. It is very interesting to read about everyone’s different perspectives regarding Deafhood. As a hearing person I don’t feel that I am able to comment on the value of the term. However, I am slowly working my way through Paddy Ladd’s book. I am training to become a teacher of the deaf and hard of hearing. Any advice?
August 14, 2008 at 1:42 pm
I certainly have every right to invent a new terminology “deafhoodism” just to show the ridiculousness of it all.