As I reflect on Election Day, I think about my experiences at polling booths. The NAD has a helpful website with explanations about and directions for Deaf voters–but nothing in ASL. And sadly, the promise of DeafVote never materialized, although the info that was originally posted is still there. Do Deaf people experience problems voting at the polls? Have they been stopped at the polls because of communication breakdowns? Are there Deaf people who've had bad experiences and given up on participating in Democracy? What about Deaf-Blind folks? What happens when you're asked for ID? In a country where we can be stopped at the airport and forced to ride in a wheelchair because it's somehow appropriate for Deaf people–are we lucky enough for everyone to participate unilaterally?
Obama has a ton of Deaf support. Here's a POWERFUL video from Abram Powell describing his life and voting experiences (ASL and English):
Does Romney have any Deaf supporter videos? Here's a video from amazing blogger Amy Cohen Efron describing voting experiences from a few years ago and some decisions she had to make:
Finally, since I live in MD, where Question 6 will decide if Gay and Lesbian couples will have equal rights to the rest of America, here's a video from a cool straight guy in Minnesota. In MN, you had to vote NO to stop a ban, here, in MD, you need to vote YES! to let a civil rights law pass:
GET OUT THE DEAF VOTE!
Showing posts with label American Deaf history. Show all posts
Showing posts with label American Deaf history. Show all posts
Tuesday, November 6, 2012
Sunday, June 17, 2012
31: Is American Deafhood different from British Deafhood?
And no, I don't mean the philosophy.
I mean: Is the American Deaf experience or process of coming to understand oneself by virtue of properly assessing one's place in society, and how that place came to be, different from the British Deaf experience of the same?
And the answer, once you put the question that way, has to be: Yes. Of course it is, because we have different societies, different histories, and different myths, even different influences. And because of that divergence our process and our realization and our understanding of self necessarily has to be somewhat different, even though the principle is the same. This is true for every other Deaf culture in the world, just as it's true that globalization is changing the game for all of us yet again.
To really understand our own Deafhood, we have to understand our society, our history and our myths (the harmful and the harmless and the helpful ones. All of them.)
We have to understand that a lot of our dialogue about ourselves is directly influenced by American society and its own history and myths (and probably French too, and Native American, and German, and all the little iconoclastic cultures which made up the beginnings of the American Deaf experience as they make up, to some extent, the etymologies and histories of our own language.)
I love the book "Deaf History Reader;" regardless of your opinions about Van Cleve, the windows it provides into Deaf American history go past Clerc and Gallaudet to far earlier events. It gives me insight, say, into the true beginnings of American Deaf culture, and why Gallaudet happened here, not in Europe where Deaf people had already been going to college and Deaf exceptions (artists, writers) were known.
What that book reminds me of is that, much like the Pilgrims, early America was all about forming unique communities to escape oppression. And this seems like something elementary schoolish when you put it that way–but it is in many ways a profound realization. Martha's Vineyard's Deaf element was founded by a Deaf man who had achieved unusual success in his career. We don't usually give him the same status we give to other American founders of cities in the wilderness, but isn't that a possible interpretation of Jonathan Lambert's whitewashed life?
Today even Wikipedia says he was nothing but a simple farmer and carpenter. Research has shown he was, instead, the captain of his own ship, a slave ship-the brigantine Tyral (although it's not clear to me that these were racial slaves imported from Africa; it seems that these "slaves" were British prisoners, perhaps a mixed group.) He was a military man and served in the British military for several years as part of expeditions. He did all this as a Deaf man, speaking very little and using signs; visiting dignitaries reported being offended he didn't speak to them–until someone whispered the illustrious leader was Deaf and mute! He bought his own land in 1694 and he passed on his Deafness, culture, and hereditary Kentish sign language to his children, who were brought up in Martha's Vineyard, a place where people apparently had no trouble believing Deaf people could vote and hold political office!
Compare this to the fleeing Puritans who were prevented from practicing their religion or being involved with legal office. They did what - came to America and made sure they had a place where such an opportunity was possible! America has this story again and again: people coming to America to make places for themselves. (Of psychological interest: it may be that Lambert was part of a long line of Lambert captains and sailors which continued in England after Jonathan Lambert's departure. If so, is there a story here of a man who felt less equal in his family, striking out for a new world and new possibilities?)
From as early as the 1700's, then, we had evidence of Deaf leaders in business and politics who fought to establish places where Deaf people had equality. Superiority, perhaps. Does this help us inform the story of Gallaudet? Was the Gallaudet protest part of a long cycle of fighting for equality that began before most even dreamed?
(Note: We might judge Lambert for his involvement with slave activities. I did, at first. But it's important to remember that he too was a child of his time and place. History is an easy place to judge.)
I mean: Is the American Deaf experience or process of coming to understand oneself by virtue of properly assessing one's place in society, and how that place came to be, different from the British Deaf experience of the same?
And the answer, once you put the question that way, has to be: Yes. Of course it is, because we have different societies, different histories, and different myths, even different influences. And because of that divergence our process and our realization and our understanding of self necessarily has to be somewhat different, even though the principle is the same. This is true for every other Deaf culture in the world, just as it's true that globalization is changing the game for all of us yet again.
To really understand our own Deafhood, we have to understand our society, our history and our myths (the harmful and the harmless and the helpful ones. All of them.)
We have to understand that a lot of our dialogue about ourselves is directly influenced by American society and its own history and myths (and probably French too, and Native American, and German, and all the little iconoclastic cultures which made up the beginnings of the American Deaf experience as they make up, to some extent, the etymologies and histories of our own language.)
I love the book "Deaf History Reader;" regardless of your opinions about Van Cleve, the windows it provides into Deaf American history go past Clerc and Gallaudet to far earlier events. It gives me insight, say, into the true beginnings of American Deaf culture, and why Gallaudet happened here, not in Europe where Deaf people had already been going to college and Deaf exceptions (artists, writers) were known.
What that book reminds me of is that, much like the Pilgrims, early America was all about forming unique communities to escape oppression. And this seems like something elementary schoolish when you put it that way–but it is in many ways a profound realization. Martha's Vineyard's Deaf element was founded by a Deaf man who had achieved unusual success in his career. We don't usually give him the same status we give to other American founders of cities in the wilderness, but isn't that a possible interpretation of Jonathan Lambert's whitewashed life?
Today even Wikipedia says he was nothing but a simple farmer and carpenter. Research has shown he was, instead, the captain of his own ship, a slave ship-the brigantine Tyral (although it's not clear to me that these were racial slaves imported from Africa; it seems that these "slaves" were British prisoners, perhaps a mixed group.) He was a military man and served in the British military for several years as part of expeditions. He did all this as a Deaf man, speaking very little and using signs; visiting dignitaries reported being offended he didn't speak to them–until someone whispered the illustrious leader was Deaf and mute! He bought his own land in 1694 and he passed on his Deafness, culture, and hereditary Kentish sign language to his children, who were brought up in Martha's Vineyard, a place where people apparently had no trouble believing Deaf people could vote and hold political office!
Compare this to the fleeing Puritans who were prevented from practicing their religion or being involved with legal office. They did what - came to America and made sure they had a place where such an opportunity was possible! America has this story again and again: people coming to America to make places for themselves. (Of psychological interest: it may be that Lambert was part of a long line of Lambert captains and sailors which continued in England after Jonathan Lambert's departure. If so, is there a story here of a man who felt less equal in his family, striking out for a new world and new possibilities?)
From as early as the 1700's, then, we had evidence of Deaf leaders in business and politics who fought to establish places where Deaf people had equality. Superiority, perhaps. Does this help us inform the story of Gallaudet? Was the Gallaudet protest part of a long cycle of fighting for equality that began before most even dreamed?
(Note: We might judge Lambert for his involvement with slave activities. I did, at first. But it's important to remember that he too was a child of his time and place. History is an easy place to judge.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)