Mystery Colleague at Gallaudet Univ uses the "N" word in Hate Letter. Yeah. You heard it right. An overly immature if not wholly unprofessional letter was directed at Dr. Angela McCaskill who was recently re-instated as Chief Diversity Officer at Gallaudet University.  The source of the letter was found in Facebook under The Intersection: Deaf/People of Color Forum which is a closed group (private). The letter was procured from that Facebook group in an excellent blog piece called Diversity: Holding the Chief Diversity Officer and office accountable – epilogue written by Kojo Amissah (note: the offending words have been partially redacted in my blog).

Dear Angela, 

 I am a colleague of yours at the University and it was with great dismay that I heard the news that the University has reinstated to you to your position. The University is a chicken-shit organization for re-instating you, Angela. Your signing the petition against gay marriage shows that you are a bigoted, religious freak, out of touch with the majority of citizens in your state and in the country. 

 In fact, your signing the petition shows that you are just a stupid, ignorant nig*** b itch. There, Angela – how do you like being called names? You are a nig*** bitch. I said it again. By signing the petition showing that you are against marriage for a gay person such as myself you show your ignorance and stupidity. I frankly don’t care if it is your religious faith – your religious faith has NO business in politics. 

You are not wanted here at the University, Angela – you should pack your bags and leave – why don’t you get a job working for some right-wing, anti-gay organization – you’d be much, much more comfortable in such a position. You performance here at the University, frankly, wasn’t that great anyway. Stupid nig*** – see, again, how does it feel? It hurts, doesn’t it? I hopes it hurts you as much as your position has hurt me. 

When you see me smiling at you on campus you won’t know it was me who wrote the letter. But I’ll be there, watching you, you hypocrite. 

Signed, 

A former friendly colleague

I don't know the situation behind this letter or how the letter arrived, or whether there's any truth that the letter did in fact come from one of the teachers or professors at Gallaudet University since this "mystery colleague" signed the letter as "A former friendly colleague."  Let's assume this letter did come from one of the staff members at Gallaudet University.

First off.

Whoever wrote this letter is a coward, possibly a racist, possibly against diversity, and certainly a person full of hate against Dr. McCaskill, That much is obvious. This "mystery colleague" is not the sole arbitrator deciding who is not worthy to stay at Gallaudet University. It's the tried and tired "agree with me or else" political correctness attitude just because somebody doesn't fit your own ideological purity test. It's people like "former friendly colleague" who gives Gallaudet University a bad name.  A person who refuses to allow true diversity on campus. A person who twist the words of Dr. McCaskill. A letter that is perhaps just as bad as instigating a witch hunt against her in the name of political correctness. And yet this "former friendly colleague" forgot the fact that even those in the gay community supported Dr. McCaskill.  She has not used hate words against people in that manner like "former friendly college" either directly or indirectly.  There is no justification to write that letter in that manner.

And now you have this "mystery colleague" walking somewhere in the midst of the Gallaudet University campus. Each student will now sit down in class and wonder, "Is this the teacher who wrote that racist letter."  Or perhaps a staff member will be thinking in the back of his or head while speaking to another staff member, "Could this be the letter writer?"  A ghost walking amongst them.

Maybe teachers and professors at Gallaudet University ought to stand up and identify themselves and condemn that hate letter written.

President Hurwitz made it clear on the danger of practicing exclusion in his his February 19, 2013 State of the University address "Open the Gates Wide: Diversity and Inclusion at Gallaudet" speech.

Hurwitz warned against the destruction that exclusion can bring. "The wider the gates of acceptance open, the more room there is for all. Sadly, the community that excludes shrinks and dies," he said. He encouraged members of the audience to expand their circle of friends and colleagues to include those whose background is different from their own, and to embrace them "in the common cause of advancing our community and humanity."

It's the same warning that Deafhood? No Thanks Facebook group have told people for years, even before when the group became established, that it's better to accept people for who they are rather than to exclude them just because they do not pass your ideological purity test or don't believe in open thought or diversity. 

Symbolically, in American Sign Language, the sign for diversity is to reach out, while the sign for inclusion is to draw in. "All of us at Gallaudet ... must reach out and must draw in," he said. As members of a university community-traditionally a haven for open thought and respect for differing opinions-people who live, study, and work at Gallaudet don't need to be convinced of the benefits of diversity and inclusion, said Hurwitz. However, he acknowledged unresolved conflicts between groups on campus.

Those "unresolved conflicts" would be the whole McCaskill/Gallaudet/Hurwtiz/Bienvenu snafu and the seemingly racist hate letter aimed at McCaskill by a "former friendly colleague" at Gallaudet University.

Will Gallaudet University ever become a recognized university known for its inclusion, diversity, and open thought? An institution with the goal of being diverse in its language and communication approaches without resorting to gutter politics and political correctness? Only time will tell.

How impressive. Sarah Churman's book "Powered On" has hit the number one spot on Amazon's best "mover and shaker."

Sarah and I just wanted to shoot out another e-mail saying THANK YOU to all who participated in yesterday's best seller launch on Amazon. By 8pm last night, 'Powered On' earned the best seller title! Sarah's book started out the day ranked #381,773 out of all books on Amazon. She went all the way to spot #361! She got 'best selling biography/memoir' coming in at #64 out of the top 100 best sellers, and eventually earned #1 'mover and shaker' on Amazon books. We are so excited, but more importantly, so grateful for everyone who helped make this happen. We hope everyone who ordered books will enjoy them and return to Amazon to leave a review.

If you want to order Sarah Churman's book, "Powered On", go to Amazon and get one today.

What are the reviews saying in Amazon?

Sarah Churman does an incredible job of taking us into her world of silence along with the challenges of living in a hearing world, bullying, and simple day to day activities that the hearing community takes for granted. She is transparant in sharing her feelings and her journey. It is a beautiful book not just for those effected by deafness but also those facing other serious challenges in life. Thank you Sarah for sharing such a beautiful story.

And that is just one of 29 reviews for a total 5 stars out of 5. Not bad.

You know, after all these years I've seen it happen again and again and again in the cultural deaf community. For some reason or another you get a group of people who would target certain deaf individuals because he or she has gained a bit of recognizance for his or her successful efforts. That negative exercise is called "Crab Theory."

The definition of "Crab Theory" is described in a report called “Review of Deaf Mental Health Services in British Columbia” by Linda D. Hill, Ph.D.and Patricia Nelson, MA.

The tendency of members of an oppressed group to use criticism, pressure, gossip, and in-fighting against group members who appear to be too successful or who appear to be becoming too much like the members of the dominant group.(pg 41).

A better definition seen in Wikipedia is more accurate on what has been happening lately:

The analogy in human behavior is that members of a group will attempt to "pull down" (negate or diminish the importance of) any member who achieves success beyond the others, out of envy,[4] conspiracy or competitive feelings.

The funny thing is that whenever one is accused of "Crab Theory" the person will provide the usual response proclaiming it's really about a person's "character" as a justification to heap scorn, hate, half truths and lies instead of applauding and supporting a deaf person's hard work in his or her rise to success. Often they'll tell stories of year's past as anecdotal evidences without any shred of proof  with the intention of targeting the successful individual to fail in his or her quest. That's the number one motive and that is to get the person to fail.  Other methods would be to use a series of negative comments in quotes that was supposedly said by the so-called "guilty person" as if they're solid proof that he or she actually said those things. Of course, all without offering any links to the actual source of those comments. Their motive is to drag the rising star down at all cost. Sometimes you have people who pretend to be neutral about the whole thing yet continues to heap negative comments. Those are examples of Crab Theory.

Why Crab Theory? Had the person not been successful in his or her efforts while gaining more name recognition in the public, better fund raising efforts or more public support then this whole effort to discredit the successful person would not have happened in the first place. That tells you one thing and that's they are practicing Crab Theory by putting out stories and unfounded and unsupported damaging claims against the successful deaf person without any shred of proof.  No links to sources or videos that would have captured what he or she has said or done.  Just stories. As far as I'm concerned they're fictional stories. Just because somebody shared that story does not make it true. Petty stories make for a petty person.

It's funny how some people in the deaf community behave like that. Here you have an opportunity for the deaf community to help a deaf person become successful by recognizing his or her hard work and successes while climbing the ladder to his or her goal.  People do have the right to not support a person. However, there's a difference between saying that you do not want to support the person versus writing a 4 or 5 page public rant on a website of something that happened 10 or 15 years ago what the person supposedly said or done with an obvious goal to make sure the person would fail. Doing so makes the Crab Theory practitioner look petty and little.

Which ones are living in the past and have grudges or hate vs people looking to the future in the hope that this deaf person will succeed while supporting him or her in such a positive manner that would benefit the deaf community once the person reaches his or her goal?

Crab Theory. That need to stop. People need to stop acting childish by focusing so much on the past of unfounded accusations with no shred of proof. People over time do change into something better. Past is past. No one is perfect. Unless you are perfect in life in everyway then I suppose you would have the right to judge people. But you're not perfect. Might as well step down from that soap box of hate.  Now is the time to focus on the present for a better future.

Not only inspires but this story has gotten bit of a hate rant. More on that later.

This week's story (more here from Marvel) which is a follow up on last year's Marvel comics news on the making of a new superhero out of five-year-old Anthony Smith. Anthony at one time believed that superheroes do not wear hearing aids...that is until he became one when Marvel comics made him into a superhero as The Blue Ear.

Hey gang, I know this blog is a little later than usual but I've had a pretty amazing week! I got to create something special for an amazing little boy! I got to meet Anthony Smith, a real hero! Here's his mom's original letter to editor supreme, Bill Rosemann:

Hi there -  

I am the mom of a super hero mad 4 year old. He lives and breathes super heroes, he also has been diagnosed with a rare genetic disorder - mosaic trisomy 22. The good news is that his physical challenges are workable, he is mentally perfect, and while he will be having a heart surgery this summer - he is on the mend. The challenge that he will face for his entire life are his hearing impairments. He has no ear, and a complete hearing loss on his right side and mild loss on his left. He currently wears 2 hearing aids. 

Today as he was getting dressed I was putting on his "Blue Ear," the aid he wears on his left ear. He did not want to put it on, he told me super heroes do not wear blue ears. To get myself out of a bind I told him that sure they do - in fact Captain America has one under his mask. After repeated questioning he believed me - but I was wondering - maybe you have an intern, or someone who would like a challenge - could you make a little guy's day by drawing him a hearing impaired super hero?  

Thanks for considering this - I am likely to get stuck in your spam filter - but you never know - have a great day - I am attaching a picture of Anthony so you can see one of your dedicated customers.  

Best, Christina

I highlighted in bold blue in the above to point out that Anthony Smith has a mild hearing loss in his left ear although completely deaf in his right ear. Which makes the whole affair completely understandable on why it's important for the young boy to wear his hearing aid. And for Marvel comics to help inspire the boy. But not everybody agrees with this according to one CNN editorial writer written by Tara S. Congdon with a rant article called "Marvel misguided in hearing aid poster campaign."

However, these artists and Marvel have – perhaps unwittingly – stepped into a minefield by working with a hearing aid manufacturer on a marketing campaign that, by extrapolating an individual’s circumstances and applying it indiscriminately, devalues a segment of the deaf and hard of hearing community.

Marvel editor Bill Rosemann and artists Manny Mederos and Nelson Ribeiro have teamed with Phonak to create a poster that features Iron Man and the message "that kids who use hearing aids are just like him because ‘they are using technology to be their best self."

While the effort to destigmatize children who rely on hearing aids is laudable, because many of these children suffer relentless teasing from their peers for their differences, the poster’s message is deeply offensive and hurtful to those who gain little to no benefit from hearing aids. It dismisses the reality that Phonak’s technology does not always succeed in restoring hearing or achieving auditory comprehension for its users. And it implies that those who choose to or cannot use hearing aids are failing to be their best selves and are less than whole human beings in their own right.

I am a former Phonak user who derived no benefit from the company’s products. I have profound hearing loss, which means I can’t hear at all. While my parents chose to use Total Communication – an approach that blends hearing aids, speech and auditory therapy, and Signing Exact English – I was never able to differentiate sounds or understand speech.

She's correct that some deaf and hard of hearing kids have been teased for their wearing their hearing aids or even a cochlear implants for that matter. Just as some kids may have been teased for their use of the wheelchair, thick pair of glasses, knee braces, crutches, and so on.  It's really a matter of educating people about these conditions. It was not Marvel Comics intention to push aside those who cannot benefit from the use of hearing aids or with any other today's hearing technology. 

The difference here is that Tara S. Congdon grew up not benefitting much at all with her Phonak hearing aid, and that's understandable why she didn't like what Marvel comics did by creating a super hero with a hearing loss who benefitted from a powerful listening device.  Tara has a profound hearing loss and could not at all benefit from the use of her hearing aid. However, Anthony Smith who was made into a The Blue Ear comics superhero has a mild hearing loss in his left ear.  People with mild hearing loss can certainly and obviously benefit much from the use of a hearing aid. Anthony's hearing loss isn't severe or profound like Tara's but mild hearing loss. Take me as an example.  My right ear has a moderate-severe hearing loss while my left ear has a profound hearing loss. I grew up wearing a much older hearing aid technolgy, Phonak and other brands eventually getting digital hearing aids. I derived a great amount of benefit on using my hearing aid while growing and I was able to discriminate sound and understand speech incredibly well.  Imagine how far Anthony Smith could go with his mild hearing loss and the use of his hearing aid? I believe Anthony's Mom and Marvel comics did the right thing to help inspire and give confidence to a little boy on the benefit of wearing a hearing aid with his mild hearing loss.  Every day I am thankful on what hearing I have left.

In her CNN editorial rant what Tara S. Congdon does not realize is that Marvel comics do incorporate deaf characters with certain powers into their comic books.  In 1999 Marvel comics introduced a new deaf superhero character as Echo.


Echo appeared again as Ronin in the 2005 New Avengers #11 issue. Not only Echo but other deaf or hard of hearing characters with different kinds of superpowers or abilities appeared in other comics as well.

Deaf characters are often marginalised in literature. Echo the deaf superhero is coming to the rescue as the creators of comics strive for realism in their portrayal of deaf characters.  

"With any form of portrayal including the deaf in comics, we tend to see things very much from a hearing person's point of view," said Paul Dakin, a GP trainer from North London who studies deaf characters in literature, at a recent conference on comics and medicine. "Most of the people who write or who are artists are hearing, and as a result, traditionally there have been other reasons to portray deaf people. So, for example, they are plot devices; they are catalysts; they are means of reflecting particular aspects or features of a hearing character; they move the plot along, but they're not developed in their own right."  

In Hergé's Tintin, for example, Professor Calculus is hard of hearing. His disability is used as a comic device to introduce trivial and amusing misunderstandings into the story, rather than explored in its own right. Similarly, Hope Hibbert, a deaf girl who first appeared in The Sensational Spider-Man, issue 18, uses her ability to read lips from security camera footage to give Spider-Man the information he needs to save the day.  

"However, over the last 20 years an increasing number of deaf characters have started to emerge within mainstream comics," said Dakin. "That's given rise to the emergence of Echo. She is a major deaf character in the Marvel canon."  

Echo (aka Maya Lopez) is a superhero like no other. First appearing in Daredevil issue 9 in 1999, she is a rare deaf character with a complex emotional back story. Born deaf to a Cheyenne father and a Hispanic mother, she has the power to perfectly imitate anything she sees, including a rival's fighting style.  

"The character was going to debut as an antagonist in the story, but also as a love interest for Daredevil," Echo's creator and artist David Mack told me by email. "With Daredevil being blind, and constantly piecing his world together via his other senses, I felt he would be able to relate to Maya (aka Echo) who was deaf and grew up visually piecing the information of her world together to make sense of the mysterious audible world that she was not a part of."  

As research for the character, Mack read autobiographies of people who grew up deaf. "That was an incredible insight to me," he said. "I read a book where a boy was told that the rain makes a noise, and that lightning has an audible counterpart in thunder. So then he wondered what sound the sunshine made ... This kind of first person perspective really let me think from a different point of view."  

Echo uses both American Sign Language (ASL) and a Native American system developed for communication between tribes speaking different languages. The sign systems appear throughout the comic, both when Echo is signing and as background art.  

Though Echo provides perhaps the most complete example of sign language in comics, it is not the first. On the front cover of DC's Supergirl, issue 65, characters sign the comic's title. Spider-Man himself uses ASL in Sensational Spider-Man, issue 31 (and every time he shoots webs he signs "I love you"; his hand position blending the signs for I, L and Y in ASL).
 

And then you have Jack Flag who has a hearing loss in his left ear as a result of injury sustained as a costumed crimefighter and his healing powers have not mended the damage done to his ear. And then you have, of course, The Blue Ear, where the characeter Hawkeye teamed up with his fellow hard of hearing superheroThe Blue Ear in a comics rendering to help boost Anthony's confidence and inspire him to continue wear his hearing aid. This was a natural pick because Hawkeye at one time lost some of his hearing in a battle and was forced to wear a hearing aid until his hearing was fully restored.




We know there is a history of deaf people growing up who could not at all benefit from the use of hearing aids and that's an unfortunate thing. Which is why educating people about this history and that not all people with hearing loss can benefit from using a hearing aid. Just as well, it is important to educate people that there is beneficial value on using a hearing aid or any hearing technology such as cochlear implants.  Benefits vary from person to person on using a piece of hearing technology. I think there is plenty room for both for Marvel comics, DC and others to provide deaf and hard of hearing superheros or characters with a variety of super powers or abilities and be able to please both camps in the very diverse deaf and hard of hearing community.

I see nothing wrong with this story on helping inspire Anthony Smith to use his hearing aid. With his mild hearing loss he can certainly benefit greatly from using it. Just as I have benefitted greatly, and continue to do so, on my successful use of my hearing aid since I was two years old even though my hearing loss is much more severe than Anthony's. I thank my mother for helping me with my hearing aid while growing up. Just because you cannot benefit from the use of a hearing aid is not a reason to rain on this little boy's parade when he obviously can benefit from it. There are tons more boys and girls out there who can and do benefit greatly from the use of their hearing aids. Anthony Smith can do great things with his hearing aid and he's proving that everyday. He's an inspiration to hard of hearing kids everywhere. A real superhero.

Rachel Chaikof has a good blog piece about the lack of cochlear implant characters on the Switched at Birth show.  A show with deaf characters who do not know sign language and prefer to listen and speak. Go and check her blog out now and contribute.

Tara Congdon responded to my earlier blog about her recent rant against Marvel Comics and Phonak in a poster campaign with Iron Man.

I agree with Tara's comment that the focus was not on Anthony Smith "The Blue Ear." What I saw was Tara's opinion of Marvel Comics' so called "intention" to push aside or attempt at "devaluing" those who cannot benefit from the use of hearing aids. I found that opinion remarkable which was why I came up with examples of Marvel Comics past characters who are deaf, especially Echo/Ronin, and not wear hearing aids and still be their "best self."

We all use technology to better ourselves with the help of hearing aids, cochlear implants, TTY, cell phone texting, captioning, CART,  real time face to face communication devices, lap top computers, and so on. Anthony Smith is using his own kind of technology to be his "best self” in his own way and that is to wear his blue hearing aid.

I disagree with Tara's contention that Marvel Comics poster campaign tell others that they "are less than whole human beings in their own right" because they are unable to use a hearing aid.  Ironically, if Tara had already been aware, Marvel Comics is known for their characters with varying kinds of "disabilities" such as blindness, mobility impaired, physical disfigurement, dwarfism, one-armed, deafness, and so on.

What is important is the encouragement of kids with hearing loss who can truly benefit from hearing aids to wear them and to not let other kids bully or tease them for wearing their hearing aids. It's an opportunity to educate people about hearing aids. I had to do the very same thing when I was in the 7th grade. I took the initiative to educate my peers about my hearing aids and what it can and cannot do, and my hearing loss.  My hearing aid has actually helped me live better by taking advantage of what hearing loss I have left. I am able to communicate better, listen better, and enjoy better the sound and music.   I agree about the transparency regarding Phonak and audiologists/healthcare professional that Tara spoke of in her article but this isn't about fitting kids who cannot benefit from hearing aids. This is about encouraging those who can and help educate people about hearing aids and hearing loss.

Read Iron Man's message of encouragement to a hard of hearing kid with a hearing aid.

What's the difference between Deaf President Now 2 (Unity for Gallaudet Movement, 2006) protest that began on May 1, 2006 and Deaf President Now 1 that began on March 6, 1988? The difference is that Gallaudet University celebrates and remembers DPN1 every year but hardly even celebrates or remembers DPN2 (Unity for Gallaudet Movement, 2006) anniversary. Why is that? If DPN2 was such a "unity" protest that sought to have a truly, proper Deaf president, the native born kind that many wanted to see ended up getting a "Deaf-centric" president after all but not publicly celebrated each year? A Gallaudet University president who fit the bill as a "strong Deaf center" as Bridgetta Bourne-Firl once said per the screen capture from the Deaf Professional Network website (now defunct) article "Chronicles of Deaf Higher Education: Search for the Next Gallaudet President" written by Alison Aubrecht and Julie Bourne (posted on April 30, 2006 - full copy of the article is available):



The irony is that Bridgetta Bourne-Firl (sister of Julie Bourne who was one of the editors that wrote the article above) was one of the four Deaf President Now (DPN1) protest leaders in 1988 who mentioned in 2006 that it was time to have someone with a "strong deaf center" (i.e. "Deaf enough" or "Deaf-centric").  That was the general mindset on Gallaudet University campus prior to and during the DPN2 protest. The end result was the protesters got what they wanted, a president who is "Deaf-centric."  And that was Dr. Alan Hurwitz.  Although he was not the first "Deaf-centric" president to operate Gallaudet University. That distinction belongs to Dr. Davila who was the ongoing interim president for the next two years until the Board of Trustees could "properly" and officially select their next "Deaf-center" president.

On December 10, 2006, the Board of Trustees announced that Robert Davila would serve as interim president for a period of up to two years.[34] He was formally installed on May 9, 2007, during a ceremony that included a speech by D.C. Congressional Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton, who spoke positively of the 2006 protest.[35] He stepped down on December 31, 2009.  

On June 29, 2007, in the aftermath of the controversy over the university's presidency, Gallaudet was temporarily placed on probation by its accreditation organization, the Commission on Higher Education of the Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools.[36] It was also reported that in 2006, the Office of Management and Budget had found that "Gallaudet failed to meet its goals or showed declining performance in key areas, including the number of students who stay in school, graduate and either pursue graduate degrees or find jobs upon graduation."[37] In January 2007, former president Jordan wrote an editorial on the topic that appeared in the Washington Post.[34] The Middle States Commission later reaffirmed Gallaudet's accreditation on June 27, 2008.[38]  

On October 18, 2009, the Board of Trustees announced that Gallaudet's tenth president will be Dr. T. Alan Hurwitz. He began his tenure on January 1, 2010.

Many considered the 2006 DPN2 protest as an "unity" moment when unity wasn't really the case although many vehemently disagrees. Ok. If that's' the case then why not Gallaudet University help recognize and celebrate annually the "Unity for Gallaudet Movement"? A watershed moment when a deaf person who was "sufficiently Deaf enough" became the next Gallaudet University president?

Another irony or twist to this is that the celebrating and recognizing DPN with their first deaf president, I. King Jordan (a late-deafened person who lost his hearing in his early 20s after a motorcycle accident), wasn't considered to be "sufficiently Deaf-centric" enough by their standards.  Although I.King Jordan during the DPN2 protest was sufficiently demonized and hated by many protesters.

What was shocking in this day and age was that DPN2 was also seen as racist moment when leaders and protesters of DPN2 shifted away from recognizing and supporting Dr. Glenn Anderson as the only African American to be selected as one of the 6 six semifinalists but was not the 3 semifinalists during the week of April 9th through 15th of 2006 for the president position.

Oh, absolutely. I’m guilty of being oppressive and part of that is taking ownership and responsibility. Back in May, when I told a specific group of people that they couldn’t speak in front of the student body [during the initial protests against Fernandes]. It was the black group of students who wanted to speak. …That wasn’t the best decision I’ve ever made, so I’m definitely guilty of that oppression. At the time my thinking was that I didn’t want to have a message that was confusing.  

Many students of color objected to the whole selection process, not just the appointment of Fernandes. Did they get much help from the other protesters?  

The white students didn’t do anything to support students of color and work together. [The black students] wrote a very powerful letter, and the board didn’t respond, and the SBG didn’t support them in this process.

But that's another story for another time just to give you the idea the whole supposedly "unity" of this DPN2 protest.

The big question.

When will Gallaudet University publicly celebrate the victory of DPN2 (Unity for Gallaudet University) on the proper selection of a president that is "sufficiently Deaf centric" on the same level as Deaf President Now (1988)? Isn't rather curious that this is kept at a much lower profile than DPN1 when I. King Jordan wasn't really "sufficiently Deaf centric" enough for many of them but enough to get the ball rolling?  Isn't it curious that Gallaudet University has a dedicated page on DPN1 outlining the protest leaders, history and timeline but not DPN2 (Unity for Gallaudet University)? Why is DPN2 not important enough for Gallaudet University to recognize another watershed supposedly student-led protest moment?

Dr. Angela McCaskill: "I quickly looked back to the protest of 2006 (see video on Unity for Gallaudet with MJ Bienvenu in it). Several radical people pushed the students to the front to debate student's agenda. It was not the student's agenda. It was not student's agenda back then and it is not student's agenda now."

Why does Gallaudet University not recognize "Unity for Gallaudet Movement" as another watershed moment when a "sufficiently Deaf centric" president was officially and "properly" selected?  Why not have a dedicated website for DPN2 like DPN1?  Did you notice that 3 days ago marked the 25th anniversary of the DPN protest movement?

Happy 25th anniversary DPN!

I was there, too. But that's another story, too.

I had a brief discusion with a friend of mine that got around to blogging and how we handle comments. This person believes it's better not to have comments saying it cuts down on crap or hate comments by people bent on abusing the system and forcing them to become known entities in order to participate in a discussion. As for me, I believe there is always a choice for a blogger to have.

That discussion reminded me of what happened last year when a few state bills (see bill one and bill two) were drawn up in the New York state assembly by a few overly zealous and controlling Senators on advocating for the ban of anonymous comments by people in social networks, blog forums, message boards, or any other discussion site. From Tech Dirt:

Last fall, we were absolutely amazed at a paper written by some NY state politicians arguing that we have too much free speech, and that we need a "more refined" interpretation of the First Amendment, that outlaws things like "leaving improper messages on online message boards." Well... as covered by Dave Kravets at Wired, some NY state politicians have introduced the same bill, in both houses of the legislature, that would outlaw anonymous speech online. The actual bill is not particularly subtle.

A rather incredible thing to see on the attempt to regulate the internet and free speech.

Either you have a lot of enemies and don't have the skins for it to put up with anonymous comments, can't handle the truth, cannot debate effectively, orjust plain lazy. Or maybe they just drive themselves nuts on the need to know who is doing the commenting. Then again there are good reasons to not put up with anonymous comments, too, but I just believe in choices here. I believe in the freedom of choice and free speech (there's always a certain limit like you cannot make threats online) on both ends, the moderator/blogger and the people doing the commenting with the choice to comment anonymously or not. I can simply not allow comments to go through. A pretty simple concept there.

I've actually had one former moderator of a formerly popular discussion forum come to my blog and actually abused her posting privledge by violating one of my firmly esstablished rules on posting comments (slightly modificated from an earlier posting rules back in 2007). Ironic if you ask me.

Not all comments left are for discussion. Sometimes I get important anonymous tips through my comments as a way for some of my readers to communicate with me, whoever they are, and that's fine.

I think some bloggers actually pay more attention to the person behind the comment rather than the context of the comment itself.  And instead would want to focus on certain individual's name rather than allow anonymous comments go through. Which is probably why some bloggers want to know who is doing the commenting due to perhaps an insecurity issue of their own. They *must* know who is leaving comments behind. This is true among some bloggers who cannot debate effectively and are usually left with "no recourse" but to do ad hominems instead as a way to retaliate back. A psychological sign of an internet bully. All talk, thin skin, must know who is doing the talking.

Overall, I rarely ever delete anonymous comments. Or for that matter, even rarer, delete known person leaving a comment. I only delete a comment if it violates one of my, again, firmly established rules on posting coments. Whenever one is about to comment by clicking on "post a comment" link, a comment box pops up with a link "*****Rules on commenting click here!*****."   People can read. The rules are simple even a deaf caveman can follow them. 

Only a very few, clueless people actually think I delete comments on a regular basis because I don't like them. Actually, that is not the case. It's a very rare occurance that I delete comments because the idiots didn't follow my rules. Kind of like the same kind of people who don't pay attention to rules on playing Monopoly and that Monopoly money is actually fake money and the money doesn't automatically belong to any particular group by fiat.

Sometimes I let anonymous comments left by cowards go through with the intent to show the world exactly how brain dead some of these folks are with no common sense at all when they are intent on making personal attacks towards me. But these are a very small group of people who cannot effectively debate, discuss or argue on the merits itself. So, what do they do? They call you names in the book, make fun of you, and so on as if doing that they are making cogent arguments. They are not. The moment they do that is a sign they cannot argue effectively to make a case. And they are left with "no recourse" but to lob ad hominems over the fence just so they can make themselves feel better. A sign of immaturity. Weak-mindedness they are. I just hope one day they can learn how to argue correctly instead of throwing temper tantums and have that potty mouth.

My blog has always allowed anonymous comments since the day I started blogging Kokonut Pundit almost 9 years ago. I'm not about to change this approach. As always I reserve my right to moderate comments that come through.  They will go through as long as they do not violate my posting rules.

Enjoy your day. Spring is almost here!

I'm sure there are instances when a cyberbully stops becoming a cyberbully and realizes the error  of her/his ways such as publicly signing a pact on not to ever be involved in cyberbullying such as the Deaf Hope pact with over 200 signatures.

From this day forward I publicly commit myself to end all violence. Additionally I shall strive to contribute to a safe and supportive cyberspace. I shall neither participate in, encourage, nor endorse any form of cyberbullying.  

In the spirit of femtorship and mentorship and in the spirit of comm-unity, I promise to respect, honor and learn from myself as well as others.  

Sign the Pact  

Signed by on September 27, 2008:

It's unfortunate that Deaf Hope took down the "The Pact" link.

Now, in general, once a person becomes a cyberbully over the internet and doesn't stop then it can become a vicious circle. The circle gets bigger. The hole digs deeper.  A cycle that never ends just to ensure the continuing character assasinations of people by personally going after named individuals. But the maxim "once a cyberbully always a cyberbully" is not always true but in general I hope people would get the gist of where I'm going with this.

The word "cyberbully" can and do apply to adults. A child can cyberbully a child. A child can cyberbully an adult. An adult can cyberbully a child. An adult can cyberbully an adult. Everybody knows exactly what it means and what it's all about. No need to get "technical" about it because it can confuse the matter at heart when it's about bullying. Excessive harassment is bullying gone too far. You can have an adult bully. By convention you can have an adult cyberbully which is an adult who take to the internet (or phone) as the preferred method to harass and bully others. In other words, cyberbullies use their computer screen as their shield because a cyberbully would not ordinarily say those harassing words or comments online to the same person in person.

The legal definition of "cyberbullying":

Cyber bullying refers to any harassment that occurs via the internet, cell phones or other devices. Communication technology is used to intentionally harm others through hostile behavior such as sending text messages and posting ugly comments on the internet.  

The National Crime Prevention Council defines cyber-bullying as “the process of using the Internet, cell phones or other devices to send or post text or images intended to hurt or embarrass another person.”  

Cyber-bullying could be limited to posting rumors or gossips about a person in the internet bringing about hatred in other’s minds; or it may go to the extent of personally identifying victims and publishing materials severely defaming and humiliating them.

From the National Science Foundation on recognizing cyberbullying:

Cyberbullying is not only associated with children and adolescents. The Cyberbullying Research Center website run by Justin Patchin, an associate professor of criminal justice at the University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire, and Sameer Hinduja, an associate professor in the School of Criminology and Criminal Justice at Florida Atlantic University, claims to receive more inquiries from adults than teens.  

"We get a lot of emails, phone calls and comments on this blog from adults who are being bullied through technology. They stress to us that cyberbullying is not just an adolescent problem. Believe me, we know," they write on their website.  

"We know that cyberbullying negatively affects adults too. It's just that we spend the majority of our efforts studying how this problem impacts school-aged youth due to their tenuous developmental stage," they write.

A woman explains that cyberbullying occurs among adults just as well and as viciously, too.

"Cyberbullying does not just apply to children. There are adult groups dedicated to harassing and defaming others as well," says an adult woman in an online article titled "The Anonymous Attacks of Adult Cyberbullying Cross the Line and Enter the 'Real World.'"  

"Cyberbullying does not just apply to children. There are adult groups dedicated to harassing and defaming others as well, along with websites created online specifically to make fun of and demean individuals. These people can be found in communities linked to blogs and chat rooms and they use the disguise of “anonymity” to harass their prey. Sometimes, these bullies will take their online squabbles offline and press people online to harass their prey's family and friends. As a bully myself, then a victim of large-scale bullying, let me tell you my story.

In November of 2006, my grandfather had a massive heart attack. My way of dealing with my pain was to go online and take it out on nameless, faceless bloggers, and I posted things to people that would probably result in me being beaten up if it were said to someone in 'real life.' When one of these people I attacked told me my grandfather deserved his death, I upped my ante, lashing out at these words with racial slurs, vulgar names and just about anything else you can imagine."

These people, despite their differences, are part of a group that has one thing in common-all of them have been impacted in some way by cyberbullying.

Cyberbullying is a huge problem over the internet. Not just among the deaf/hh community but everybody. It's also a problem over cell phones through texting or voice.  There were past public and private discussions on cyberbullying within the deaf/hh community. It continues to be discussed. I have covered the cyberbullying topics several times in my blogs.  Courts have recognized that cyberbullying is not protected speech. People who continue to regularly use the internet to harass, make fun of, defame, attack, spew hate, produce ad hominems and such at private individuals whether the person is an adult or child is a cyberbully in my book. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. Once a bully always a bully. Once a cyberbully always a cyberbully but there is always hope that a bully can change. The only guarantee to not be a bully whether online or in the physical presence is not to behave like one.

For an upcoming web conference on listening to and making music with cochlear implants in September 2013, the Association of Adult Musicians with Hearing Loss are hosting a panel of adult musicians who wear cochlear implants. The purpose of this is to share with our audiences the very personal and individual experiences of what it is like to make music with a cochlear implant. Below are the criteria we will consider in panelist selection.

1. The panelist must have at least one year of experience with their cochlear implant(s).

2. The panelist must be musicians or music students who are active in music study, as evidenced by practicing on their instrument several times a week and/or taking private lessons regularly.

3. The panelist must be available on Saturday, September 7, from 1-3 pm Eastern time to serve on the panel.

A small honorarium will be given to panelists at the conclusion of the conference.

If you are interested in serving on this panel, please send your name, email address and a brief statement to AAMHL expressing your interest. The brief statement should state why you feel you would be a good candidate for the panel. All statements and contact inforrmation should be sent to info@aamhl.org by March 30, 2013.

Believe or not the term cyberbullying is just not for kiddies but even among adults who behave exactly what kids would do online, plus some more. You can have an adult bully or a child bully. Being bully knows no age-limit. And if an adult can be a bully, so can one be an adult cyberbully as well.

Cyberbullying does not just apply to children. There are adult groups dedicated to harassing and defaming others as well, along with websites created online specifically to make fun of and demean individuals. These people can be found in communities linked to blogs and chat rooms and they use the disguise of “anonymity” to harass their prey. 

Definition: "Cyberbullying involves the use of information and communication technologies such as e-mail, cell phone and pager text messages, instant messaging (IM), defamatory personal Web sites, and defamatory online personal polling Web sites, to support deliberate, repeated, and hostile behaviour by an individual or group, that is intended to harm others." – Bill Belsey, Cyberbullying Expert  

Common Variations:  Cyber Bullying; Cyberbullying; Cyber-Bullying; Cyberstalking; and Cybermobbing.
 

There is a new non-profit organization against adult cyberbullyg called Civil Nation whose aim is to take

"....a stand against online hostility and adult cyberbullying. Its focus is on advancing the full capability of individuals to communicate and engage in cyberspace in a responsible and accountable way. A strong supporter of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, CiviliNation believes that free speech is enhanced through civil dialog and a rational exchange of information and ideas. By fostering an online culture in which individuals can fully engage and contribute without fear or threat of being the target of unwarranted abuse, harassment, or lies, the core ideals of democracy are upheld."

In the deaf culture world they, too, also have their share of adult cyberbullies who consistently and constantly go on the prowl to find deaf individuals (not public figures but private) and concoct justifications or excuses to make sustained and continued attacks on a regular or semi-regular basis in the effort to defame, make fun of, make hostile remarks, harass, demean, use online threats of exposing identities, call names and/or participate in online activities with one or more people in the effort to get individuals fired or in trouble at work over a matter of disagreements of opinions.  An example of that actually happened during the AB2072 protest (read the comments) . Sometimes you have certain people who like to lay low and get other cyberbullies to do their bidding by directing them or make suggestion about certain individuals because of their dislike or strong disagreement with their opinions or stances.

Cyberbullies come in all forms and shape, and age, too. "Cyberbullying" is not a word reserved only for kids but for adults, too, who behave just like what kids would do. And that is being a cyberbully.

Adult cyberbullies with their continuing and repetitive nature of bullying online will provide an array of excuses to try and dissuade people that they cannot be a cyberbully. Cyberbullying takes on many forms. Some are insidious in nature racked with compulsions while others behave like children such as a posting a picture of the victim the cyberbully dislike on the web in such a demeaning fashion.

A dissertation written by Warren J. Blumenfeld, Ed. D., on cyberbullying describes it succinctly in his abstract:

Cyberbullying, like face-to-face (f2f) bullying, involves deliberate and repeated aggressive and hostile behaviors by an individual or group of individuals intended to humiliate, harm, and/or control another individual or group of individuals of lesser power or social status. Cyberbullying, however, involves the use of information and communication technologies such as Internet web sites, e-mail, chat rooms, mobile phone and pager text message, and instant messaging. The author discusses the similarities and diference between f2f and cyberbullying, and the psychological dimensions unique to human-computer interactions which tend to increase abusive behaviors, including cyberbullying. In addition, the author proposes the application of social norms theory in research initiatives to address issues of cyberbullying.

Adults and children use the same mechanism and tools when it comes to cyberbullying. They both use the internet web sites, email, chat rooms, Twitter, Facebook, mobile phone and text messaging and instant messaging. There are no descernible differences between adults and children when the intention is to send hurtful, cruel, and intimidating messages to their targeted victims. Those would be "hate mail" types. Both adults and children use their blogs or vlogs to post derogatory comments aimed at their intended victims on a regular basis because "they deserve it" or that "I'm showing people the truth!" They do that with malicious intent and purpose. They also use their websites to post pictures of their intended victims telling readers how ugly they are by comparing them to pictures of ugly creatures, for example. Or conjure up stories, produce cartoons or caricatures, display demeaning pictures, or tell jokes ridiculing or mocking others in such repeated fashion. It's an amalgam of all those things that makes a cyberbully a cyberbully. As we all know technology allows cyberbullies a "shelter" against tangible feedback about consequences of one's actions, which can result in minimized empathy or remorse for the intended target of bullying according to Blumenfeld.

"People who engage in cyberbullying can inflict pain without having to see the effects, which can result in a "deeper level of meaness. People who cyberbully can also communicate their hurtful messages to a wider audience with incredible speed."

And that,

"cyberspace can also inhibit a user's sense of responsibility for actions online."

That alone help increase the level of "meanness" of cyberbullying in an almost discombobulated form of cyberspace interaction.

Blumenfeld provided an example of how a cyberbully would justify his or her actions on why abusive messages were sent online,

"I was only telling the truth. She is ugly, and I felt she had to know it!"

Blumenfeld succinctly put it this way,

"It's about the rationalization-denial of responsibility centers around offering the targets of their abuse needed and useful information."

In short, they "deserved it" and needed to "know it" would be their main excuse or justification for behaving in such a boorish and hateful manner. But in cyberspace it's a world where reality gets distorted.

Blumenfeld explains,

"In a virtual sense, then, cyberspace communication can alter perceptions by becoming a make-believe world, a dream-like experience, even a game in which the rules of real life bullying no longer apply. Cyberbullying can occur any time and any place. Home, there, is no longer a refuge from bullying and harassment."

The Blumenfeld dissertation was a piece on children and teens susceptible to cyberbullying but many instances of cyberbullying children describe exactly the adult cyberbullying situation.

Adult cyberbullying is real. It exists. It has been and continues to be documented. Cyberbullying has happened to other adults just as it happened to other children. Do not be a party to or associate with a known cyberbully because doing so encourages cyberbullying attitudes. Once a cyberbully always a cyberbully. Do not let their excuses or justifications fool or confuse you.

Is "deafhood" dying? Are people losing interest in it? Is it still alive? Or just sleeping? Maybe it's just simply a boring thing to lug around that people are just walking away from it? Maybe the excitement, the glamour, and the buzz have finally worn off since 2006 at the height of the DPN2 protest? Has it helped deaf people? Has it helped you? Did it benefit you? Did you gain anything from it? Are deaf people happier benefitting from "deafhood"? Are there more work to be done? Tayler Mayer asked some questions in his "What's up with deafhood?" video. Some of the questions came from me and not Tayler. Although one of the questions he asked,  "Deafhood Foundation (DHF) still alive? Raising enough money?"





Well, as for DHF on the money issue Tayler Mayer and anybody else can look up their 2010 and 2011 public tax records that I've downloaded for your convenience. The Deafhood Foundation tax records are public records since Deafhood Foundation is a non-profit, 501(c)3 organization. Their tax identification number is 26-2603125.

Tayler Mayer, in answering some of your questions, according to DHF's tax records the amount of money they raised in 2011 has gone down compared to their 2010 amount (see above on link for their tax records). Contribution by each donor on average has gone down in 2011. The amount of money raised through gifts, grants, and/or contributions in 2009 was $6,400; 2010 was $26,991; and 2011 was $22,744 totaling $56,135 after three years. Their 2012 tax record won't be available until later in 2013. But in 2010 there were 108 donors averaging about $250 per person. In 2011 there were 155 donors averaging about $146 per person. In 2012 there were 155 donors but amount donated, contributed, or gifted won't be known until later this year after they have filed their taxes.

As for answering the rest of Tayler Mayer's questions go and visit here and read/watch what others have said. So far there are 43 video comments and growing.

Here's a copy of a cyberbullying email discussion I was in a few years ago. I believe with what has been happening lately warrants the releasing of this group email discussion for public consumption. 

A known deaf person personally invited me and numerous other well known deaf people in the community to contribute in a private email group discussion on cyberbullying.  All names have been changed using initials only. Some initials do not reflect the same first letter of any names (e.g. first name or last name). Some initials do correspond with either a first or last name. Other initials I have purposedly mixed them up. Some style of writings were slightly modified to avoid detection. Signature lines were deleted to avoid identifying who said what. The purpose here is not about the names or who was doing the discussing. The purpose is to show what went on during those email discussions. This email copy represent about 1/3th of the discussions that went on. It's a long piece of email discussion that I cobbled together for your viewing information.

Again, this is not about names.

This is about a discussion on cyberbullying that went on in a group email discussion. I plan to release more of these email discussions at a later time. For what it was worth the discussion eventually broke down with accusations cropping up and misunderstandings. Some opted out early into the discussion.  This is a long email copy with the opportunity to learn what was discussed by various deaf/hh individuals.

Enjoy.


Note: Two double line breaks signifies a new thread. A single double line break separates comments.



===============================
　

On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 7:28 PM, “S”wrote:

Greetings all,

Lately the subject of cyber attacks and bullying has come up on Deafread and Aslrocks. As you know, its a subject I feel real strongly about and one that I have ZERO tolerance.

Was thinking, since many of you likewise feel the same way, the only way to end this cycle is by taking a stand to say "stop". Such bullying tactics have lead to many individuals being verbally attacked or trashed on blogs and vlogs. Employers have been contacted, families have been hurt, and self-esteem has been destroyed. Fear gives in, and paranoia sets, to the point some don't even blog or vlog anymore. Ridiculous to see oppressive actions on our own community. Its one thing to disagree with one another, its an entirely other thing to set out on a witchhunt. We could achieve far more working together in harmony, in unity, in the best interest of our future generations of Deaf babies and children.

Hence, this message is a simple request. Many of you are aware, and participated in an article I wrote about Zero Tolerance on Racism, which included A*dism.

I would like to do something similar, and get a quote from you about zero tolerance for cyber-bullying attacks, witchhunts, etc.

If you are real serious about seeing such attacks end, then I hope you are willing to show it by participating. By showing quotes from a diverse wide-variety of folks with different backgrounds, my goal is to show the Community that no matter who we are, no matter what we do, no matter that we may strongly disagree on issues, and/or even actually agree on an issue (here's hoping :) for that matter, our discourses, even heated discussions can be healthy, but cyberbullying is not. I think it behooves us to be responsible to ensure such does not continue to happen and such is why, we need to demonstrate this ourselves -- not separately, but together all on the same "page".

That's the gist of it. I look up to you all as leaders in your own right, the passion you bring to shed more light on various issues to help educate each other. This unified effort is to combat one thing, put an end to cyberbullying.

I hope you agree to send me your thoughts by way of a quote. If you think someone else should be added to join this effort, by all means, include them. The more who do join, the less the divide is amongst us.

I would like to post all of our quotes in one article, perhaps as a guest blogger on one of your sites. Would be neat if someone could also asl the piece once its done. The beauty of doing this is to ensure everyone understands one thing we can all agree on: Zero tolerance for cyber attacks and bullying. Such message can do well to actually strengthen our Deaf Community's ties. Who knows? We don't know until we try.

============================

“L” wrote, 10/06/10

　

There's actually a LOT of history to this effort already. You probably know most of it, but for those who don't, I'd start with: Deaf-Hope The Pact (link).

J, do you have more stories about the already-checkered history of this effort? I remember that X was involved, as was R.

I'm not even sure what ZERO tolerance means, after the fact...

- L.

　

=======================


“P” wrote, 10/06/10:

　

Sounds like a good plan. Article for which reading literature q so I'd know who the audience will be.


==========================================

“B” wrote, 10/06/10:

　

My question is simply this: when does it end? I mean, we've come to a full circle in little more than a year. People will do what they want to do -- no amount of leaders can come together and change that.

It is kind of funny how we are asking them to learn something from this. I think we should ask this of ourselves: what are we learning from this experience??

I think if we keep responding to this, it will only fuel the fire.

As an individual among those who are being attacked (cyberbullied, if you may), I think it is best to let it go.

Someone has to or the cycle will never end.

======================================

J wrote, 10/06/10:

B,

Good food for thought.

Which strategy do we pay the higher price? Which strategy do we risk more?

We know for a fact that in recent weeks, gay youth suicides are on the rise because of cyber-bullying. There is now a call to action within the LGBT community.

Do we remain silent with hopes of not adding fuel to the fire?

Or do we risk seeing Deaf people commit suicide because of hatred/ridicule they experience online?

J.


=================================
=================================

　

S wrote, 10/06/10:

Thank you P! Audience are ppl who read blogs and vlogs. Could be in writing, could be as a video. Whole point is to show a variety of us. L, actually, it started long before the Deafhope pact.


J, and other Deaf womyn and myself posted abt putting an end to cyberbullying on Deaf-CommUNITY blogsite abt 4 or 5yrs ago. Zero tolerance meaning we all take a stand together to state we as individuals do not accept cyber-attacks and bullying. Real simple actually, and in our own words, short n sweet.


S.


===================================

“S” wrote, 10/06/10:

Excellent point J!


===============================
“J” wrote, 7 Oct 2010:



B,

Good food for thought.

Which strategy do we pay the higher price? Which strategy do we risk more?

We know for a fact that in recent weeks, gay youth suicides are on the rise because of cyber-bullying. There is now a call to action within the LGBT community.

Do we remain silent with hopes of not adding fuel to the fire?

Or do we risk seeing Deaf people commit suicide because of hatred/ridicule they experience online?

-J

========================================


“B” wrote, 6 Oct 2010:




P,

My question is simply this: when does it end? I mean, we've come to a full circle in little more than a year. People will do what they want to do -- no amount of leaders can come together and change that.

It is kind of funny how we are asking them to learn something from this. I think we should ask this of ourselves: what are we learning from this experience??

I think if we keep responding to this, it will only fuel the fire.

As an individual among those who are being attacked (cyberbullied, if you may), I think it is best to let it go.

Someone has to or the cycle will never end.
============================================



“P” wrote, Oct 6, 2010:

Sounds like a good plan. Article for which reading literature q so I'd know who the audience will be.


====================================
====================================

　

“L” wrote to “S“, 10/06/10”

Actually, I'm feeling more in line with what B has been saying...

This is structural. It's bigger than us taking a stand. It's a difference between how we each see the force of our own actions against others versus the force of others' actions against us.

It seems related to the whole thing of oppressors not being able to see that they are oppressing, and the oppressed seeing every twitch, with us each having way too much of both oppressor and oppressed inside. Both blinding and blinded...

What I'm seeing out there is, "Yeah? Well, your guy did THIS!" "Oh yeah? Well your other guy did something worse to us!" "Oh yeah?..."

Breaking the cycle means somebody has to be ABLE to say stop and actually HAVE it stop.

At this point, I'm not very hopeful...

- L

==================================
==================================

　

“S” wrote to “L” 10/06/10

In isolation perhaps diff ppl have said stop. But all of us together in one place taking a stand? Nope.


This would be one helluva strong message to our Community. Every effort counts in my opinion. Won't know til we try, eh?
=================================

“L” wrote on 6 Oct 2010 21:12:05 -0700


Actually, I'm feeling more in line with what B has been saying...

This is structural. It's bigger than us taking a stand. It's a difference between how we each see the force of our own actions against others versus the force of others' actions against us.

It seems related to the whole thing of oppressors not being able to see that they are oppressing, and the oppressed seeing every twitch, with us each having way too much of both oppressor and oppressed inside. Both blinding and blinded...

What I'm seeing out there is, "Yeah? Well, your guy did THIS!" "Oh yeah? Well your other guy did something worse to us!" "Oh yeah?..."

Breaking the cycle means somebody has to be ABLE to say stop and actually HAVE it stop.

At this point, I'm not very hopeful...

- L

===================================
===================================

“B” wrote to “S” on 10/06/10”

Then, this is your fight.

All I ask from you is to respect my decision to let this go.

Thank you and good luck.

====================================


“S” wrote on Oct 6, 2010:


In isolation perhaps diff ppl have said stop. But all of us together in one place taking a stand? Nope.


This would be one helluva strong message to our Community. Every effort counts in my opinion. Won't know til we try, eh?

=================================
=================================


“L” wrote to “B” and group, 10/06/10”

“S”

It TAKES all of us to agree, but there IS no "all of us" to agree.

There is a really fundamental dynamic going on here that we're trying to sort of wish away.

B, can you explain it any better?

- L

====================================


“L” wrote on 6 Oct 2010


Actually, I'm feeling more in line with what B has been saying...

This is structural. It's bigger than us taking a stand. It's a difference between how we each see the force of our own actions against others versus the force of others' actions against us.

It seems related to the whole thing of oppressors not being able to see that they are oppressing, and the oppressed seeing every twitch, with us each having way too much of both oppressor and oppressed inside. Both blinding and blinded...

What I'm seeing out there is, "Yeah? Well, your guy did THIS!" "Oh yeah? Well your other guy did something worse to us!" "Oh yeah?..."

Breaking the cycle means somebody has to be ABLE to say stop and actually HAVE it stop.

At this point, I'm not very hopeful...

- L

=======================

“S” wrote on Oct 6, 2010
Excellent point J!

=================

“J” wrote to “B” on im Brune" 7 Oct 2010:


B,

Good food for thought.

Which strategy do we pay the higher price? Which strategy do we risk more?

We know for a fact that in recent weeks, gay youth suicides are on the rise because of cyber-bullying. There is now a call to action within the LGBT community.

Do we remain silent with hopes of not adding fuel to the fire?

Or do we risk seeing Deaf people commit suicide because of hatred/ridicule they experience online?

J


===================================
===================================

“J3” wrote to group on 10/06/10

　

Thanks S for including us. I would like to take some time to read this and all responses. This is not easy one after what we have gone through. Who wants to go through this again? It may be easier just to stay away from cyberworld. But heck no, you are right, we can do better than this.

So which is which... ummm...

===================================
===================================

“P” wrote to group on 10/07/10:

Greetings S et al:

I want to thank you for initiating this collective response. Internet defamation, attacks, harassment via promoting falsehoods and inciting others to attack folks via their workplace, affiliations, and government agencies unjustly is definitely not cool when do you need a quote by?

Also - an ASL and/or international version is very important so if any way i can assist - holler. I understand the temptation to let it drop, to be a turtle. This does not make things go away - it just smolders or emboldens. Too many good voices have gone silent - too many good souls have been hurt. MLK Jr said A man dies when he does not take a stand for that which is just, right and good.

====================================
====================================


“J4” wrote to “J” and “P” 10/07/10:

　

J- I agree with you. S, thank you for starting this important dialogue again


We have nothing to lose by taking a stand together. DeafHope did have a public petition created by a Deaf lawyer to stop Cyberbully together as a community during 2008 at our Tea Party. X was the first to sign it along with Y. Both S and I signed it as well. We did experience backlash for starting the petition but it created a much needed dialogue. It was a proactive statement by us as a community. It was worth it.

Now I think it is time for us to step it up with our personal statements before we lose a Deaf person to suicide. Sure we will experience backlash but we are all in it together to support one another. Prevention instead of reaction goes a long way.

-”J4”

===================================
===================================


“B” wrote to group on 10/07/10:


S and everyone else,

Since my last email asking that my wish to let it go to be respected, I got three emails disagreeing with me, but with serious implications. First, I do not appreciate the emails by J2 and J, I felt they were truly disrespectful to my decision by implying that I may have little or no regard for other Deaf people's lives. It is very insulting.

Consider this perspective: I am respecting the lives of other individuals by not thrusting my opinions of their actions uninvited. It begs the question as to why exactly anyone would want to be travel agents for guilt trips on those who have no desire for these travel packages?

By refusing to respect my decision to let it go rather than to fight it with implications that I contribute to the suicides within our community can and should be construed as an early form of cyberbullying.

As for P, once again I felt disrespected. Rather than agreeing to disagree, my position is now considered "turtle" (which I assume is a thinly veiled analogy to cowardice) and throwing in a quote, by Dr. King no less, saying I'm less of a man than those who wish to fight this? Another example of cyberbullying in its early form.

Sometimes it takes a bigger person to take the brunt of it and let it go than to look for retaliation and being self-righteous.

If you feel it is necessary to bash my decision to let it go, then, please remove my name from this email list.

Once more, thank you and good luck!

-B
===================================================

“S” wrote to group on 10/07/10

　

I would much prefer to see this request done in each site...DR, DVTV, and ASLrocks before final quotes are posted on a blog and done in a video format with ASL and captions. I would feel better knowing that this is an effort to reach out to all and that no one is excluded. Perhaps do request via other deaf forums as well.

Also a message to start fresh, meaning - attempts to rehash is not productive. However, there will be some who might demand apology before being able to start fresh. So we do need to keep that in mind....

I do see why B thinks it might not work, because there will be ppl who feel that they have not reached some sort of closure....

Just sharing my perception...

-S

======================================
======================================

“S” wrote to group on 10/07/10

Also....i am of the opinion that with these request we probably should refrain from using any key words that have cause division.

======================================
======================================

“M” wrote to group on 10/07/10:

　

B,

Your mentioning "implications" of cyberbullying raises the fundamental questions I'm having about this call to action and reflections.

I believe this call by S although noble is too superficial for what is truly needing in this community both in and out of Deaf v/ blogosphere.

What is needing I personally believe as someone who's deeply entrenched in Deaf Cultural and ASL Studies dealing for so many years with all kinds of people both Deaf and hearing is recognizing and respecting the Deaf-centered definitions, social rules, historical ways, and positively potential ways of dealing with crisis. They exist and do work but have been badly battered in the "open" via DeafRead, and yes other "open" Deaf discussion arenas.

Can we begin to discuss cultural as well as personal interpretations of what consists of an insult? What is considered impolite? What is considered insignificant to some but a great insult to one or few? What is considered respect to us or is the same thing considered
hypocrisy to others?

Is pointing out untruths/lies a necessary "insult" or embarrassement that must be avoided? Does it have to do with confidence that comes with a healthy cultural connections with people around us or does it has to do with belittling others or even another culture/language?

Etc etc.

I need to stop now but I know this could become something good. However just quoting and shouting out "stop cyberbullying" won't work. Cuz we seem to have different ideas and ways to deal with it an we haven't even have a collective agreement to cherish and respect our Deafhood, history, Deaf-centered work and fight against a*dism. Etc etc.

========================================

“B” wrote on Oct 7, 2010:

S and everyone else,

Since my last email asking that my wish to let it go to be respected, I got three emails disagreeing with me, but with serious implications. First, I do not appreciate the emails by J2 and J, I felt they were truly disrespectful to my decision by implying that I may have little or no regard for other Deaf people's lives.


It is very insulting.

Consider this perspective: I am respecting the lives of other individuals by not thrusting my opinions of their actions uninvited. It begs the question as to why exactly anyone would want to be travel agents for guilt trips on those who have no desire for these
travel packages?

By refusing to respect my decision to let it go rather than to fight it with implications that I contribute to the suicides within our community can and should be construed as an early form of cyberbullying.

As for P’s email, once again I felt disrespected. Rather than agreeing to disagree, my position is now considered "turtle" (which I assume is a thinly veiled analogy to cowardice) and throwing in a quote, by Dr. King no less, saying I'm less of a man than those who wish to fight this? Another example of cyberbullying in its early form.

Sometimes it takes a bigger person to take the brunt of it and let it go than to look for retaliation and being self-righteous.

If you feel it is necessary to bash my decision to let it go, then, please remove my name from this email list.

Once more, thank you and good luck!

-B

======================================
======================================

　

M2 wrote to “S” on 10/07/10:

As a reader of mostly bloggers with an occasional trip to vlogging sites that were references in the blogs, I have my thoughts that are really irrevelant to this discussion because I do not have a clue as to what happened in 2008. I was not there.

So, I do not know if what I saw constitute "cyberbulling." I think people do it to themselves. I read cyberbulling blogs and do not respond because it is so off base and borders on ludicrous. I can choose to respond and engage in battling words, or I can choose to ignore and be at peace with my decision not to respond. That's where I can understand B's thoughts.

I think we all have to assume responsibility for responding and for engaging in potentially cyberbulling activities when we choose to.

I also think we all ought to be more ready to explain our points of view that could be confusing to others. If I write words that I eventually realize were hurtful, I would apologize quickly.

I don't think our problem is cyberbulling per se, I think the problem is that bloggers/vloggers are not able to look at themselves and acknowledge whether they have had been cyberbullying or wrote harsh words or were confusing readers or what have you.

That happens on both ends of the spectrum. There's no respect for different points of view, and there's no respect for experiences that are so different from the bloggers or vloggers. Does that constitute cyberbullying? I don't know.

It could be ignorance and a hint of arrogance....they think they know better what we need to do.

I think it is a world that invites both awe and repulsion. What do we do about that? I don't know the answer either..

The bloggers and vloggers seem to have ALL of the answers; honestly, I marvel at their knowing everything in life. I wish I knew as much as they do.

M2
========================================

“S” wrote on Oct 7, 2010:

I would much prefer to see this request done in each site...DR, DVTV, and ASLrocks before final quotes are posted on a blog and done in a video format with ASL and captions. I would feel better knowing that this is an effort to reach out to all and that no one is excluded. Perhaps do request via other deaf forums as well.

Also a message to start fresh, meaning - attempts to rehash is not productive. However, there will be some who might demand apology before being able to start fresh. So we do need to keep that in mind....

I do see why B thinks it might not work, because there will be ppl who feel that they have not reached some sort of closure....

Just sharing my perception...

=======================================
=======================================

　

“L” respond to “S” and group on 10/07/10:

Do you think quotes will stop S2? If S2 continues, what are we supposed to do? It only takes one backsliding cyberbully for the whole online community to be thrust back into the same old dynamic!

Can ANY of you get S2 to stop?

I felt that the most recent exposure of what S2's capable of doing was informative to a couple of those who HAD felt that S2 was the "good guy" here, and now realize that he's a BIG part of the problem and needs no longer to have this behavior supported...

J5 has realized that he had crossed the line by calling people names, and has taken steps so that he does not react publicly to taunting such as that S2 did AGAIN yesterday, but that will not be enough going forward if folks like S2 are given a free pass by their friends.

Part of the problem is, as B noted, that cyberbullying is easier to see done TO you than it is to see when YOU are starting to cross over the line, so there needs to be feedback from trusted friends in the backchannel and the ability to actually take HEED of this feedback whenever one of us has crossed the line.

But that takes the "society" part of the "open society". An "open society" that overemphasizes the "open" at the expense of "society" becomes exactly the sort of "Lord of the Flies" situation we have right now. CAN S2's friends tell him when he's crossed the line, and have S2 reign himself in?

- L

========================================
========================================

“X” wrote to group on 10/07/10

The idealist in me

I have always been against cyberbullying and never have condoned or encouraged it. It pains me greatly to see when others respond in a destructive and mean manner. Yes, I would love to see a world where people always treat each other with respect and do not engage in destructive behavior towards others. It would be great if this coordinated response caused many people to see the light and modify their behavior patterns.

The realist in me

Unfortunately, bad behavior always been seen on Internet since the early days. I'm not trying to make an excuse here: it's a simple fact that it's seen everywhere on the Internet across the entire spectrum of users. There are many reasons for this which I won't go into here. It's sufficient to say that people behave very differently on the Internet than in real life. With Internet easier than ever for anyone to access, there are more people present who are not well versed in how to handle negative messages/events.

Even if everyone here today agrees to go ahead with a coordinated response against cyberbullying and other destructive behavior on the Internet, we'll only see a short term effect before it disintegrates back to the old ways. Even if everyone change their behavior tomorrow, it will be inevitable that more people will drawn in and these new people are not attuned to the agreed upon changes. The cycle will repeat itself. In this case, we aren't trying to manage a small group of people, but dealing with a larger population, who don't always follow the same rules, don't know each other personally, don't always get along, respond in many different ways and have their own prejudices and agendas.

The major problems that I have noticed: Not everyone sees cyberbullying in the same light and many times it's a matter of perspective. I've seen too many cases where people who have proclaimed they are against cyberbullying but selectively scold cyberbullies while ignoring/permitting others on their side who engage in the very same behavior.

I think a better approach would be not to aim to eradicate cyberbullying behavior, but to develop effective techniques to deal with these types of behavior on the Internet. Cyberbullying will always exist on the Internet but there are steps to minimize it.

I've tried to model this myself over the years, when I've been attacked numerous times:

1. Always respond in a polite manner, without resorting to degrading comments.
2. Know how to choose the right battles to fight and which ones to avoid.
3. Know when it's best not to respond (most of time, the aim of cyberbullying is to trigger a reaction and while it's very difficult for the person on the receiving end, sometimes the best thing to do is to ignore and not to respond at all.)

Accept the fact that everyone has had different kind of upbringing, were exposed to different things and learned to handle things in different ways. Some of these things they learned or were exposed to may have been positive or were negative. Human nature varies greatly among people. Lastly, it's virtually impossible to change other people's behavior patterns, if they are not open to it.

If there is one thing that I don't like, it's fighting a losing battle. I would prefer to devote my time and energy towards an approach that acknowledges real world factors and will pay off in the end. I may be a bit too pragmatic for my own good but if I see something that will be effective for the long term, I'm all for it.

========================================

B wrote on 10/07/10

　

Be prepared for an heart attack everyone...

I actually agree with M here.

Well said.

=========================================

M wrote on Oct 7, 2010:


B,

Your mentioning "implications" of cyberbullying raises the fundamental
questions I'm having about this call to action and reflections.

I believe this call by S although noble is too superficial for what
is truly needing in this community both in and out of Deaf v/
blogosphere.

What is needing I personally believe as someone who's deeply
entrenched in Deaf Cultural and ASL Studies dealing for so many years
with all kinds of people both Deaf and hearing is recognizing and
respecting the Deaf-centered definitions, social rules, historical
ways, and positively potential ways of dealing with crisis. They exist
and do work but have been badly battered in the "open" via DeafRead,
and yes other "open" Deaf discussion arenas.

Can we begin to discuss cultural as well as personal interpretations
of what consists of an insult? What is considered impolite? What is
considered insignificant to some but a great insult to one or few?
What is considered respect to us or is the same thing considered
hypocrisy to others?

Is pointing out untruths/lies a necessary "insult" or embarrassement
that must be avoided? Does it have to do with confidence that comes
with a healthy cultural connections with people around us or does it
has to do with belittling others or even another culture/language?

Etc etc.

I need to stop now but I know this could become something good.
However just quoting and shouting out "stop cyberbullying" won't work.
Cuz we seem to have different ideas and ways to deal with it an we
haven't even have a collective agreement to cherish and respect our
Deafhood, history, Deaf-centered work and fight against a*dism. Etc etc.
entrenched in Deaf Cultural and ASL Studies dealing for so many years with all kinds of people both Deaf and hearing is recognizing and respecting the Deaf-centered definitions, social rules, historical ways, and positively potential ways of dealing with crisis. They exist and do work but have been badly battered in the "open" via DeafRead, and yes other "open" Deaf discussion arenas.

　

========================================
========================================

J4 wrote to B on 10/07/10:

Hi B. J and I were throwing in our thoughts. I was just having a dialogue. Can u show what I said that was disrespectful to you? This well help me see what I said (unintentionally) to offend you.


======================================
======================================

　

J6 wrote to group on 10/07/10:

I pledge that I will start being diplomatic and start having reasonable dialogue with everyone including K, S, etc. We all need to stop spinning and work towards appropriated solution to the issues.

But will S2 go along with that? Or is his fixation about M, D, B2, DBC, Deafhood is too deep to change for the better?

B, I apologize for my insensitive attitude that I demonstrated to you on your blog two years ago and hope you will forgive me and whenever we meet anywhere in the country, I would like to shake hands to show my secure desire to be friends with you.

J6


=======================================
=======================================

“S” wrote to J6, B, P, K and to group on 10/07/10:

Thank you all for joining this important dialogue. Everyone’s input is respected, valued and appreciated. B, if by saying you don’t want to participate, then I can certainly remove you from this list. I was hoping that although you wish to let it go, you would want to be a part of the discussion. If not, just let me know, thank you.

The points J, M, and K have made are valid. There will always be a “R” or a “S2”. It’s what we choose to do with such comments or cyber-attacks/bullying that is important. From my view, I see a pattern where this issue surfaces almost annually. The educating never stops. Like racism, it rears its ugly head from time to time. Take for example when Obama was elected President, folks thought racism was finally going to end. We know from media publications, racist remarks by the infamous Tea Party about Obama, that this is not true. However, what we do see growing, is a stronger force of people united taking a stand each time it comes up. That is what this is about. Each time it comes up, we grow in numbers to take a stronger stand against cyber attacks and bullying. This doesn’t just mean what happens on the blogs or vlogs, and no matter what culture you belong to, it’s clear bullying attacks when behind scenes where the bullying happens with people sending email threats, calling employers to “squeal” on a person, many of you have experienced this yourselves. This is not acceptable.

P, I appreciate your offer to help. One idea I was toying with, but I don’t have the means to put it together, was to have this be an “infomercial” of the different folks here either defining what it means, or signing stop, or a written quote flashed on the screen – to make it all under 4 mins of course. Basically to make it so that it is “not cool” to attack or bully, so that it becomes a popular thing way to think. That’s what commercials do, shape the way the public should think about an issue or an item. Hope this makes sense. “Next year” we may have a different idea when it comes up again. Like I said, educating folks is an on-going process, it never ends, nor should we ignore it either. I think what I have seen is different folks speaking up on blogs and vlogs. Which is a good thing and needs to continue. But all of us from different backgrounds, together sharing and supporting one message, no.

Thanks to those of you who are considering working on this collectively. May the dialogue continue.....


======================================
======================================

　

“S3” wrote on 10/07/10:

I like the idea of infomercials. keep things simple....people remember simple messages.


======================================================

　

P wrote on 10/07/10

Hi all

Ah my heart is still ticking B - no heart attack. Just an open heart and marveling at this dialogue. Thank you all. I do want to take a minute to apologize to you B if my quoting MLK made you feel I was targeting you. My intent was very far removed from that. This was my intent and desire:

MLK saying... A man dies when he does not stand for that which is right just and good. "Man" was the dominant language of the time. What he meant was a HUMAN - we as a PEOPLE - when we look the other way we cause more harm than good. It is not a question of manhood - or cowardice as MLK framed it

It is a question of doing right and a plea for our souls so there be no
death of the spirit. Too many good folks have been silent. I fully respect what ever choice you choose B. I am speaking to us as a commUNITY and I understand that folks are at different places and stages and have different needs at this time. I’m sorry you felt I was targeting you.

Feel free to disagree with the position without accusing me of something I did not do. I just stated my values and principles - I do accept that many folks hold different values and truths and opinions.

Please know that if I wanna say something directly to you - I will totally honor your spirit and say it directly. I wont play games - there are no veils coming from these quarters.

re: turtle - I was responding more to J3's comment: " It may be easier
just to stay away from cyberworld." But then he quickly followed it with: "But heck no, you are right, we can do better than this."

My purpose of mentioning the turtle - is because it is a mighty temptation for me too.

M wrote:
“Can we begin to discuss cultural as well as personal interpretations of what consists of an insult? What is considered impolite? What is considered insignificant to some but a great insult to one or few? What is considered respect to us or is the same thing considered hypocrisy to others?

Is pointing out untruths/lies a necessary "insult" or embarrassement that must be avoided? Does it have to do with confidence that comes with a healthy cultural connections with people around us or does it has to do with belittling others or even another culture/language?

These are very important questions and maybe the first step in this dialogue is to have folks within this listing share what they see to be the answers to these questions. This may lay the good groundwork for something much better to come forth.


========================================
========================================

J2 wrote on 10/07/10

At the risk of sounding too brash:

I would like to point out two things:

1) I haven't seen anyone who thinks or has said that cyberbullying is OK or is a cool thing to do. Everyone is against it. The problem is their own perception that what they are doing doesn't count as cyberbullying.

2) This similar approach has been tried before with the Pact. It's obvious by now that it has failed and didn't have the desired effect in the long term. Why repeat something similar? It won't work. Find a different approach.

=======================================
=======================================
　

T wrote to group on 10/07/10:

　
S...thanks for initiating this dialogue. I especially appreciate the diversity of people you included in this email:) I would love to see a stop to the targeting of organizations, members of organizations, and individual naming and name calling. I think we have so much to gain by being respectful of each other. That includes other people's opinions even if they are different from our own. I am sorry that B felt put down for his opinion. I don't think that was the intention of anyone but more that this is a forum to either want to be involved in this project or not. So B...please do stay involved in this discussion.. and I do want to thank you for bringing out the truth on Deafread to the facts of the letter writing to employers. That was very brave of you and honorable.

I would love to see guidelines enforced and some oversight to stop witch hunts and harassment which are all forms of bullying but taken to the extreme of riding the line of slander and libel. Vendettas to destroy people and organizations should be recognized and eliminated on aggregators. There is a difference between freedom of speech and terrorism. Simply not accepting those kinds of vlogs and blogs eliminate the chances an aggregator becoming infested by people that simply have agendas to harm others because they feel they have been slighted or owed apologies.

As a hearing parent, I am sadden at some of the blogs I read that literally make the D/d people and organizations look horrible, that spread untruths, and basically turn hearing parents who need information desperately away from D/d people, Deaf communities, and the Deaf blogosphere. Because of all the wonderful D/d people who have influenced our family's lives, I am grateful and hopeful through today's technology that other hearing families can make connections they need to be supported. Many times this happens through blogs and vlogs. And we all know that when our D/d children feel supported and accepted, the possibilities are endless for them.

I think all of you have made some very good suggestions and through this dialogue, I hope that we can all come to some kind of consensus on how is the best way to start awareness building of cyberbullying and how to improve the aggregator systems so that people feel safe again participating in today's cyberworld.

I am happy to participate in this...

T

=====================================
　

J wrote on 10/07/10

J2:
I'm glad u pointed that out.
What would be an effective approach to take?
I think we should consider various strategies before settling on one.


======================================

J3 wrote on 7 Oct 2010


At the risk of sounding too brash:

I would like to point out two things:

1) I haven't seen anyone who thinks or has said that cyberbullying is OK or is a cool thing to do. Everyone is against it. The problem is their own perception that what they are doing doesn't count as cyberbullying.

2) This similar approach has been tried before with the Pact. It's obvious by now that it has failed and didn't have the desired effect in the long term. Why repeat something similar? It won't work. Find a different approach.

===================================


“S” wrote on Oct 7, 2010:

Thank you all for joining this important dialogue. Everyone’s input is respected, valued and appreciated. B, if by saying you don’t want to participate, then I can certainly remove you from this list. I was hoping that although you wish to let it go, you would want to be a part of the discussion. If not, just let me know, thank you.

The points J3, M, and K have made are valid. There will always be a “R” or a “S3”. It’s what we choose to do with such comments or cyber-attacks/bullying that is important. From my view, I see a pattern where this issue surfaces almost annually. The educating never stops. Like racism, it rears its ugly head from time to time. Take for example when Obama was elected President, folks thought racism was finally going to end. We know from media publications, racist remarks by the infamous Tea Party about Obama, that this is not true. However, what we do see growing, is a stronger force of people united taking a stand each time it comes up. That is what this is about. Each time it comes up, we grow in numbers to take a stronger stand against cyber attacks and bullying. This doesn’t just mean what happens on the blogs or vlogs, and no matter what culture you belong to, it’s clear bullying attacks when behind scenes where the bullying happens with people sending email threats, calling employers to “squeal” on a person, many of you have experienced this yourselves. This is not acceptable.

P, I appreciate your offer to help. One idea I was toying with, but I don’t have the means to put it together, was to have this be an “infomercial” of the different folks here either defining what it means, or signing stop, or a written quote flashed on the screen – to make it all under 4 mins of course. Basically to make it so that it is “not cool” to attack or bully, so that it becomes a popular thing way to think. That’s what commercials do, shape the way the public should think about an issue or an item. Hope this makes sense. “Next year” we may have a different idea when it comes up again. Like I said, educating folks is an on-going process, it never ends, nor should we ignore it either. I think what I have seen is different folks speaking up on blogs and vlogs. Which is a good thing and needs to continue. But all of us from different backgrounds, together sharing and supporting one message, no.

Thanks to those of you who are considering working on this collectively. May the dialogue continue.....


===============================

J5 wrote on 07 Oct 2010

I pledge that I will start being diplomatic and start having reasonable dialogue with everyone including X, Y, etc.

We all need to stop spinning and work towards appropriated solution to the issues.

But will S3 go along with that? Or is his fixation about M, XX, Y, DBC, Deafhood is too deep to change for the better?

B, I apologize for my insensitive attitude that I demonstrated to you on your blog two years ago and hope you will forgive me and whenever we meet anywhere in the country, I would like to shake hands to show my secure desire to be friends with you.
together all on the same "page".


========================================

Below is my response to "Matt," an unknown commenter, in which we had a lively discussion in a previous blog, "Death of Deafhood?" I decided to put my response here since it would be too long to respond in a comment box that already limits a certain number of words allowed.


Matt: 1.) It was never his journey. It was a research conducted by Paddy (he was an oralist, btw.) in both the states and UK.

Mike: It was a thesis of his, I know. He related his own experiences through his own research on "finding deafhood" and to be used as a "guide" for others to use. In fact, in his Acknowledgement page he said and I quote, "My persnal journey in search of self and Deafhood has been assisted or supported by so many people....."; "Every word of this text and my life has been infused by some special sources largely hidden from view...."'; and "And so the 25-year journey arrives at this plateau." Doing research was his own journey of discovery. He also peppers a lot of his personal experiences such as explaining, "Being orally mainstreamed to a secondary school level of English literacy, I am situated outside this experience. English remains my first language. Twenty-six years of BSL use hsa brought me 'inside' to some degree, but mastering every...."; and "My account is focused mainly on the UK..." Again, I am aware it's a research/thesis of his regarding the understanding of deafness and self, and the journey about it. I have already said that "deafhood" is simply a concept. A philosopical musing of his imbedded in his research based on his own observations...others and his.



Matt: 2.) Yes, the term "Deafhood" wasn't around back then, but the feeling definitely was. Take the class to understand more.

Mike: No thanks. Until people actually walk the walk and include everybody with hearing loss, only then would I reconsider.  Their past actions betray them.  Inclusivity was never in their vocabulary because it would undoubtedly betray their agenda.



Matt: 3.) It's really really obvious right now that you have zero idea of what Deafhood is, and their participants are. The statement of yours - the one that says that Deafhood divides the community - couldn't be any further from the truth. Not saying this to throw a jab, but to make it really clear.

Mike: Matt, before I go further, why the anonymity on using your first name, if that is your real name? Secondly, "deafhood" is simply a concept. I have covered this many times over the years in my blogging since 2006 when "deafhood" first surfaced. Maybe what you may not realize is the self-hypocrisy at work within a community?

I never said "deafhood" divides the community. Rather, it's the people who insist on belonging in a closed society as I have explained numerous times in my blogs over the years. It's the people who insist on political correctness. It's the people who tries to move the goal post. It's the people who claimed "deafhood" helped them "understand" yet attack those who have other opinions or disagrees with their assertions or opinions. I have said many times in my blog, it's much easier to simply respect deaf/hh people for who they are and not about what they are. This is much better than politicizing "deafhood" and obsessing so deeply about the inequality of life that each of us has experienced on different levels and scales. I'd say, please, walk the walk first. If you believe it so deeply in the gospel of "deafhood" why the anonymity?



Matt: Right now you're judging it by a glimpse of the book cover. I suggest you take the workshop. I guarantee you that there will be a diverse group of people in that room with you. There were a few of oralists in the class I took. After the class was done, we felt closer to one other.

Mike: No. I have researched this. Discussed with those who did take those workshops. Some were culturally deaf from deaf families. The problem is that in America (rather than the UK) certain groups of people took the concept of "deafhood" and politicized it every which way possible in the name of political correctness for their deaf culture. Some believe there's an agenda afoot.  My view is, as I have said many times in my blogs over the years on "deafhood," that a person's journey is deeply personal and private. Each of our own journey is unique from the time we are born to the time we die. There are some overlaps on our experiences, sure, but we do not travel the same journey as with the next person. Our paths simply intersects at various points in time and see things the same way but it doesn't mean both journeys are the same from beginning to end. Simply put.



Matt: Deafhood is basically about the fact every Deaf person shares one thing in common - deafness. You cannot deny that.

Mike: I never denied that. Please show me where I have said that. I challenge you to find somewhere in my 2000+ plus blog entries that I denied that we do not share a common trait and that is hearing loss (as opposed to your "Deaf").  Use my blog's search feature to find what you are claiming. Good luck.

The problem here is when people try and politicize "deafhood" to fit their own agenda. Which is why "Deafhood? No thanks" FB came about. It's better to simply respect people for who they are rather than on what they are (i.e. Deaf/deaf/hard of hearing). The focus should not be about our disabilities (i.e. our deafness) but as a human being who go through our own unique journey. Seriously, Matt, I have covered this many times since 2006. If you like "deafhood" and it makes you feel happy and secure then knock yourself out. As for me, no thanks.



Matt: Deafhood Foundation has made it clear that they're still in their formative stages and is willing to hear suggestions on how to make things better. Your question is valid, the one with why there is no interpreter provided. Butch Zein, the instructor, actually mentioned that in our class and they're working on it - thought you'd like to know that tidbit.

Mike: Certainly, they're in their formative stages. I have provided a challenge in my blogs several times for them and that is to walk the walk regarding inclusivity of anyone who has a hearing loss and whether they know ASL or not, or are AGBell members, HLAA members, strict oralists, SEE users, CUERs, and so forth to discuss this "deafhood journey" of yours. And ensure that they receive the same communication access as the next person who may or may not know sign language. They have not done that nor will they do it whole scale because they have deeply politicized the whole deaf culture thing intermingling with cochlear implant issues, language development, educational settings, oral trainings, audiologists, the medical field and terminologies, and so on. In short, they made themselves completely incompatible with the rest of the 98% of the hearing loss population (36 million people with hearing loss). Or from your viewpoint you could say that the 98% made themselves completely incompatible with the 2% of the people who are culturally deaf. It'd be a farce to fully expect they all will embrace your new goal moving post the new term "Deaf" to mean them, too. It'd be just as horrifying for you if they expect you will accept the word "hearing impaired." Sorry. It simply will not work as long as people continue to politicize the whole concept of deaf culture to fit their own agenda, whatever they may be.



Matt: And re: my usage of Deaf for everyone. You have mentioned in the past that you love the English language. The beauty of languages: they have the ability to evolve over time. Words change meanings. You may be right, Deaf has it's own meanings. I've made my definition clear - and I hope it changes the definition for everyone. I do not want people to feel that they're a lesser Deaf person by putting the d label on them. If they want to label theirselves as deaf, that's fine with me. It's not my job to decide for them.

Mike: Consider that not all of the 98% of the hearing loss population (36 million) will accept the new word "Deaf" to mean them, too. Especially when it's already been defined to mean culturally deaf people only.  It simply won't work expecting the masses will agree to the new term. This is all about serving their own agenda regarding their deaf culture, ASL, deaf education, and language development. We saw that hideous development during the AB2072 debacle. That's "deafhood" for you instead of considering a more open society concept.



Matt: This will be my last response re this topic. I really hope you take the opportunity to take the class one day. I guarantee you will take something with you from the class.

Mike: I have no interest because they have shown not to "walk the walk" and prefers to keep to their own status quo.  Like I said, if you like using the feel good "deafhood" term and feel secure about it, then by no means do not stop on account of me. Go ahead and spread your "gospel."  But remember, Pres. Hurtwitz re-iterated the key point that ICED issued a global call to "accept and respect all languages and all forms of communication" in the education of deaf and hard of hearing people.  "Deafhood" is an ideological concept born of a culturally deaf person specifically and targeted to mostly a limited culturally deaf audience. So, therein lies the conundrum.

Ad homenims do make an argument. In other words calling people names in the effort to belittle and/or denigrate them in an argument/debate do nothing other than to conspicously flag themsselves for others to see that they are unable to make any compelling arguments in their defense. They are unable to simply agree to disagree and would rather make parting shots on the way out in a vain effort to protect their already fragile and questionable ego. During the AB2072 protest period a few years back compelling arguments were made for the support of AB2072 but for some of the detractors they were bent on using ad homenims instead thinking it would shut up supporters of AB2072. So severe it has gotten it has led to some serious cyberbullying responses such as contacting employers of AB2072 supporters the effort to shut them up. That was an extreme form of ad hominem manifested in the form of pure hate with no logical reason for doing so. Those are usually the hallmark signatures of a cyberbully or have the potential of becoming one. This is a problem with people who have the tendency to be emotionally laden to attack without provocation because they are unable to make compelling or persuasive arguements. Because of certain insecurity issues or other internal issues they feel compelled to attack arguments with ad homenims because they have no compelling arguments to give. Best to simply disagree and provide compelling reasons in support of your own arguments just as I have done describing the existence of "adult cyberbullying."

Big mystery question of the day. Why do some people to my blog and leave comments about how great "deafhood" is or something along that line but refuse to leave their real name behind? Are they embarrassed to show their faces about a philosophical concept? The problem with "deafhood" is the people who don't walk the walk and instead become walking hypocrites. A common sight, I'd say. If it makes people feel good to tout it like a trophy, be my guest. I prefer the most simplest way without any baggage or political correctness and that is accept people for who they are...not about what they are. It doesn't matter if they have a hearing loss or not. I have said this many times in my blogs in the past and elsewhere. If people are so doggone crazy about "deafhood" then why the anonymity when commenting in my blog in the effort to advertise on how great it is? Just like anonymous Matt.

That's my "Thought of the Day."

KVP. You know her blog. But, alas, the blog is no longer there.

Blog has been removed.  

Sorry, the blog at karenvonpills.blogspot.com has been removed. This address is not available for new blogs.

Not that the blog was important or anything, it was an odd ranting blog that sort of spiraled out of control in various places in her blog. Not all of them, mind you. KVP's blog appeared as a blip on the internet horizon and then disappeared.  The last blog was on March 25, 2013. Four days ago. The last post showed a picture of a man holding up a business card that says, "When people starts (sic) talking against you....Means you are growing!" And then her blog disappears. How ironic. But you can still read it via Google Reader by subscribing by typing in the internet address to her blogsite. And read what you may have missed. It's all there. Defamation and all. The good, bad and the ugly.

Next.

BTW, I heard about the latest so called "rift," if you call it that or true at all, about what's going on at Gallaudet University.   I believe it had to do with two Deaf-blind candidates who were not chosen as a speaker for an upcoming event but a person of color was chosen instead. If there's any truth to that we'll have to wait. Some believe this may be due to the McCaskill brouhaha last semester and so an "appeasement" was perhaps made towards people of color by picking a different speaker.  Again, I'm hearing this through the grapevine.  Regardless, the deaf/blind have it hard when it comes to communication access even at Gallaudet University. I did several blogs about deaf/blind over the years including this fascinating deaf/blind pianist since I'm a ragtime pianist myself, of course. In one of the blogs I discussed adding captions to signed videos such as "No subtitles for Patty" and "The advantages of subtitles on vlogs. It was surprising how so many deaf vloggers groused at the idea of adding captions/subtitles to their blogs.  One deaf/blind commenter said something profound about being deaf/blind in a community full of sighted people like at Gallaudet University.

Please keep in mind, the Deaf-Blind community is really at the bottom of the totem pole, struggling to be seen, heard and recognized. It does not really help that our peers, the Deaf community, responds in this manner whether they realize it or not.

Bottom of the totem pole is an understatement. They continue to be marginalized in all aspects of life, including at colleges. If you want "Community Accountability" then this should be one of them according to the Tactile Mind blogger who is Deaf/blind herself.

I think it’s time that the Deaf community learned about accountability – towards its very members – grassroots, women, men, the educated, around the world, the blind, the DeafPlus, et cetera – and truly learned how to INTEGRATE that into their livelihoods.  

Because you might as well get used to me butting into your lives with my lovely hands tactiling yours in FORM OF COMMUNICATION using the very COMMON method: SIGN LANGUAGE. Any sign language around thw world. That can be said for others, however, this opinion article is based on my experiences and views being an international lecturer meeting hundreds if not thousands of Deafblind people around the world who say that they grew up Deaf, but now that they’re Deafblind, they don’t feel part of the Deaf community anymore. 

My answer to that?  

It takes two sides to come HALF WAY to communicate. The Deafblind people have to come halfway and educate the others how to communicate with them; The Deaf people have to come halfway to learn how to support them, how to integrate them within the Deaf community, to ensure that rejection is not a verb in anyone’s language.

Indeed.

Community accountability does not mean challenging a deaf person to prove that she's a deaf-blind person. Only the most crudely obnoxious and uncaring people would even do that. Community Accountability means that you take the effort to include them in your "Deaf world" such as providing subtitles to your signing videos.

As a Deaf-Blind person, I truly appreciate subtitling in vlogs because I am legally blind now. It does help a lot to be still involved in the v/blogosphere with the subtitles. If there wasn't any, I wouldn't complain because I visit a lot of blogs.

Patty's not alone on wanting to feel welcomed and involved in these signing vlogs if only they included subtitles so the d/b can understand what's was being said for those with limited vision and are still able to read.

I'm going to respond generally here.   

When a vlog isn't subtitled, I admit I do feel I miss out a lot of what the person is signing. ASL is my language. I do rely on my DH to tactile to me what the vlogger signs.   

A suggestion if I may offer to any vlogger that wishes to help the Deaf-Blind community with subtitling. Yellow fonts with the black background is actually much better to read than the standard white fonts.   

The white fonts is just too strong and some words can be missed out. Yellow is softer and words are easier to read.   

Please keep in mind, the Deaf-Blind community is really at the bottom of the totem pole, struggling to be seen, heard and recognized. It does not really help that our peers, the Deaf community, responds in this manner whether they realize it or not.   

Tactile smile with hugs, Patty

That's the crux of it. Easy to understand and quite a reasonable request for deaf people who like to do their signing vlogs but not include subtitles/captions. Spare me the inane excuses for not doing it. Just admit that you're lazy and don't care for doing it and I'll accept that honest appraisal of yourself for those who are completely capable of doing so versus those who are not as tech-savvy or English-savvy.  The least they can do is own up to their demands of others this "Community Accountability" but yet they become one of the biggest violators of the lot when it comes to their signing vlogs by shoving the deaf/blind out of the loop.  It just drips with hypocrisy. Kind of like signing a public pact to not cyberbully but in the end becomes one of the biggest cyberbullies around. Do yourselves a favor with this "Community Accountability," include the Deaf-blind into your world and stop being an ass for once with stupid excuses to match with your behaviors.