Comments on: Scenes behind Deafhood concept…

By: mcconnell

mcconnell — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 13:42:49 +0000

I certainly have every right to invent a new terminology “deafhoodism” just to show the ridiculousness of it all.

By: Sue

Sue — Sat, 11 Nov 2006 00:55:08 +0000

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?

By: Malita

Malita — Sat, 09 Sep 2006 14:39:09 +0000

Hi! My name is Malita and after visiting this website, all I can say is I thankfully have selective hearing.

By: Deafhood supporter

Deafhood supporter — Sat, 19 Aug 2006 00:51:10 +0000

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.

By: Hmm

Hmm — Fri, 18 Aug 2006 02:58:46 +0000

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.

By: Biffsma

Biffsma — Thu, 17 Aug 2006 21:24:54 +0000

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?

By: ProudDeaf

ProudDeaf — Thu, 17 Aug 2006 11:59:57 +0000

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.

By: Biffsma

Biffsma — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 18:40:48 +0000

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.

By: Hmm

Hmm — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 18:22:08 +0000

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.