Some time ago I happened to discover an article on the history of the infamous “deaf crab theory” that supposedly runs rampant in the deaf community. I found this article, written by librarian Tom Harrington, no where other than the Gallaudet library’s website.
In essence, the crab theory refers to the idea that you never need to put a top on a barrel of crabs to prevent escape, because they’re all too busy pulling at each other’s legs and climbing on each other’s backs to think of working together and pushing each other out.
It’s not a pretty theory to have applied to an entire community, but it persists. I first heard about this deaf crab theory as a camper at YLC (Youth Leadership Camp for you non-initiates), and was pretty quick to apply it to social situations involving deaf people as I got older.
According to Gallaudet’s library site, the earliest (so far) known record of crab theory applied to the deaf community occurs in The Silent Worker in January of 1949, thanks to a certain Fred Murphy.
Imagine my surprise, during my studies this morning, when I found mention of it in a 1923 Marcus Garvey essay. Garvey, for those who don’t know their black history, is best known for organizing a movement of black nationalists whose ultimate goal was to leave the U.S. and form their own nation. Garvey actually quotes the crab barrel story from a Booker T. Washington (aka the founder of the Tuskegee Institute and the writer of the momentous Atlanta Compromise address) lecture. I wasn’t able to find the lecture (although I see some references to such a phenomenon in “Up from Slavery”), but Washington died in 1915, which predates Harrington’s find of recorded deaf crab theory in 1949.
A quick search unearthed a November 1995 Judy Rosenthal article in the academic journal, Cultural Anthropology, entitled “The Signifying Crab.” Admittedly, I’m not sure there’s a connection, but I’ll take a risk and posit it anyway: A precursor of crab theory dates back hundreds of years to Ghana (FYI: the link only works if you have access to the JSTOR database). A Ewe proverb says that “the slave understands language, but s/he does not understand ‘the wild crab.’”
Rosenthal’s discussion, while fascinating, is a complex academic read meant for a scholarly audience, but the gist of it is that one day, a wife tells her husband while a slave listens that she managed to catch four crabs but a fifth escaped. It was a wild crab. The slave wants to know what the difference between a wild crab and a domestic one is, so s/he goes out behind the house to look at the fifth crab, now scrambling away to freedom. The slave exclaims that s/he can’t tell the difference. The wife, hearing this, laughs derisively, and says that the “slave understands language, but s/he does not understand ‘the wild crab.’”
Okay, so on first glance, this story doesn’t seem to have much to do with the deaf crab theory, but it does when you take into consideration the cultural context of the Ewe people: Both owner and slave were Ewe. Many present-day Ewes (in southeastern Ghana and parts of Togo) say they can trace at least one ancestors into “the bought people.” So, in essence, you have a community of people owning each other and denigrating each other. Thus, a centuries-old version of our crab theory, thanks to ancient African folklore.
It’s interesting to note that when I enter “crab theory” alone into Google, I get 3,070 results. But take out every site that references the word “deaf” in it, and I end up with a mere 548 results.
Apparently, crab theory also runs rampant amongst Indians (of the South Asian pedigree, that is), African Americans, Latino/as (although the theory is also known as the Cangrejo, and some sites say it isn’t all Latino/as, just the Mexicans), Louisianans, and even (I had to laugh at this one) Appalachian entrepreneurs.
At the end of the day, though, I think it’s important to understand the crab barrel and its impact. Lerone Bennett, Jr. agrees, saying black Americans (and I say deaf people) should remember that the purpose of the crab barrel is “to check the natural tendency of oppressed people to band together against their oppressors.” (By the way, his piece, “The 10 Biggest Myths about Black History” is a fascinating read, and much can apply to other marginalized groups.) Hmm.
It’s scary too, to read an essay hosted by the Jim Lehrer Newshour site and Clarence Page in which prominent black Americans (like, y’know, Barack Obama and Bill Cosby) converse about this crab barrel. Scary because so many of their comments are similar to those we find in the deaf community.
I’m not sure I should be reassured by the fact that we’re not alone in being plagued by the crab imagery. And of course there are those of us who live in more than one barrel. In any case, it’s clear that the crab barrel, in part, is to blame for the lack of forward movement.
But now that I’ve found that the crab barrel is not a deaf creation, but a child of colonialism, I have to wonder: Where do I find the act of decolonization that will bind those dang pincers?
© Copyrighted material. This article cannot be copied, reproduced or redistributed without the express written consent of the author. As with every blog on this website, this blog does not reflect the opinion of DeafDC.com.
41 Comments
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Fascinating read on the etymology of this term!
You might find the act of decolonization here… but maybe not.
http://www.joeybaer.com/?p=11
I had to read it twice (fascinated), but binding the pincers could limit the freedom it seeks?
Okay, not to get too literal with the crab metaphor (or display ignorance about the anatomy of crabs), but crabs don’t really use their pincers to get anywhere, only to attack, right? They use their legs to move. So binding the pincers wouldn’t hold the crab back, only keep it from preventing another crab from getting out.
A visit to the seafood section in your supermarket can answer this question ;-)
I don’t recall them using their pincers to move around.
The pincher kinds are found in bed. LOL
If I could rephrase a little bit, Allison, my understnading of crab theory points not just to the lack of “working together” to escape the barrel. The real key to crab theory is the active and communal interference of the many with the renegade “uppity” crab who tries to escape. If the majority can’t get out, they’ll make damn sure no individual gets out! The “wild crab” is quickly pulled down to the level of all the rest.
This is what’s so transparent when the deafists attack those who can speak well and who dare to “flaunt” it. They’re “showing off.” They think they’re “better than us,” etc. It’s motivated by good old fashioned jealousy and inferiority, and they literally want language police on campus to enforce “voices off.” They assume that others look down on them if they don’t have intelligible speech and if they “act” deaf. Maybe that’s true sometimes, but the greater danger these days seems to be the crabs keeping each other down. Some will call it internalized audism. I see it as deafist political correctness. The “wild crab” isn’t acting authentically crablike, so the majority enforces crab culture on it, and crab culture is a dead end of isolation. The ruthless enforcers of crabhood police the barrel far more efficiently than even the most vigilant outsider could accomplish.
1. I hate all the crab theory stuff.
2. I think this essay is awesome because it draws cultural connections.
3. Nathan, I have never been attacked for speaking. Ever. Not once. Have you? Can you describe the situation? I hope it is one outside of elementary school, where students tease people about everything. I am curious about audism and its dynamics.
Joseph,
Regarding your #3 - are you subscribing to the avian theory of sticking your head in the sand? Can you honestly say you’ve “never been attacked” for speaking even in passing or in jest? You have got to be kidding me.
You want specifics? Fine, here’s one specific out of many in my life:
“You haven’t accepted your deafness” is a statement made to me by someone of the deaf community after I described my mainstreamed background, after I added that I appreciated my mainstreaming experience, and after I stated that I could speak. I am Deaf. I am proud to be Deaf. I live my life as a Deaf person and I would never trade that for anything. I am also proud of being mainstreamed. According to this individual, I haven’t “accepted” my deafness just because I don’t hate my parents for making choices for me that they thought was a good fit for me.
Is that enough of a “specific” for you, Joseph? Does that satisfy your curiousity about audism (and let’s not forget about deafism) and its dynamics.
It’s a dangerous parallel to try and draw against those who have the ability and/or preference to speak and tell them that they’ve been “oppressed” by the audist crowd. Who are *THEY* to tell them that they’ve been oppressed? Who are *THEY* to tell me that I’ve been oppressed? It is an individual experience. Until you actually live in that person’s shoe to determine the amount of “oppression”. Heck, I consider it to be very “repressive” by those telling me or other people on what *I* should feel regarding audism and such. Please, let’s not have none of this Jim Jones stuff. It’s an individual experience. Let them tell their own experiences and not the other way around by telling them how they should feel.
I agree 100% with you, mcconnell. We need to start letting people be more individualistic, or I fear our culture will die out. And like someone else, I think Nathan, pointed out, I don’t think it really matters who put us in the barrel. What matters now is that we ALL get out of the barrel. Once we’re out, then we can deal with those who put us in the barrel.
~ Deaf Pundit
Carrie,
As I said, I haven’t been attacked for speaking by Deaf people. At most they ask me if I’m hearing or deaf. I do want to share that I was attacked for my sub-par ASL skills and teased quite often. But I tended to ignore that. Obviously I was learning and sucked at the time, but I was lucky to have encouraging teachers and friends. I remember a couple of times when I bit back: aren’t you learning English? They got it, and we moved on.
I asked for other people’s experience and think I asked nicely - not really expecting your tone. If we don’t talk about the problems, we won’t find solutions, right? I do understand you obviously have pain from your past. So do I. I encourage you to share you feelings in forums like this one. They are important. Constructive solutions are also important.
What I wonder, now, is how we can quantify that comment by the deaf person. What does it mean for them to “accept your Deafness?” Why could they not accept you as a person? Did they feel you were threatening to them? Are there little secret signals that you might not have picked up on which that person did? Or maybe they were just being b*t*hy? It sounds a little like the latter. Or perhaps they had problems with their own parents, and were projecting their experiences on you.
But I would really love to hear more about people who’ve experienced audism from the Deaf community. (I use the word both ways, just like racism can be used both ways.) It teaches me a lot about where our insecurities lie, and how we can fight against them. If I had been in your shoes, I would have said, “Fine, I agree with you, why don’t you start an organization to educate parents about Deaf people and make sure your side is represented?” Too often I see Deaf people complaining, and taking no action to resolve the situation. That’s crab theory, too, you know.
My own parents had no idea what to do with me. I’ve written on my website about how doctors told them they would make me retarded, etc. by using sign language. They did the best they could with the info they have. It sounds like the individual you spoke to has a lot of inner conflicts themselves. We all have to remember that all groups undergo trauma thanks to discrimination at points in their lives. The feelings themselves are not important; it is when we refuse to take proactive decisions to change things that we truly fail.
I also have been attacked for speaking, being mainstreamed, going to a hearing college, trying to learn ASL and being told that I’m not “Deaf enough” if I’m not 100% fluent in it.
Noelle,
I second that. It’s one reason why I’m up in arms over Kathy Wood’s vision of the “right” Gallaudet. No matter how hard you try, if you don’t fit the pieces of your identity squarely with the oppressed Deaf/ASL-only model, you are unwanted, ridiculed, branded as a traitor, and generally left sitting on the fence between the two worlds.
I love Deaf culture, I love the unfettered spirits that roam its confines, but I’m not always convinced I, as a late-deafend adult with a late deafened mother, am always welcome within those confines.
Jennifer K
Gallaudet and the perils of culture
http://www.washtimes.com/comme.....-9958r.htm
Yes, I’ve read that. Interesting analysis by someone who I suppose is hearing and not affiliated in any way with deafness.
I don’t know how many people are out there like me, but I’ve got a sinking feeling that the protest will turn out in the end to have a deeper tie to the Deaf/ASL-only sect’s agenda than is being admitted. The way the search and outcome of the person to replace Dr. Fernandes unfolds will be telling.
While I supported change in my beloved Gallaudet, and saw the protests as an amazing way to institute the seeds for change, I worry that something bigger, more exclusive in nature, has been unleashed. I don’t even know how to describe it. It’s just a gut feeling from reading all the various blogs, comments, editorials, open letters, and the like. A gut feeling that there’s an element to the protests and their outcome that no one is willing to admit to.
I see Gallaudet as a UNIVERISTY where I can get a visual education. It is why I chose to attend it, why I, knowing only a wee bit o’ SEE, scrambled to learn ASL (resulting in PSE, I suppose) during my first year submerged in class with strong ASLers and without an interpreter, why I never used my voice on campus without signing at the same time, and why I pushed for higher academic standards in admissions and stronger classwork from professors, despite knowing most deaf struggle with English. I didn’t see Gallaudet as a cultural center alone…just a place I could get the best taste of it while pursuing my education. I actually wish the Deaf clubs would re-emerge across the country, giving Deaf culture a place to flourish while leaving Gallaudet alone to do its job: educating deaf and hard of hearing people! I cringe when hearing people write that Gally is just a big ol’ federally funded Deaf club, but I also fear they may have been predicting what Gallaudet could become if the focus is shifted from education to cultural preservation!
Nathan, I was with you up until the “enforcing crab culture” part. If I’m correct in guessing crab culture = deaf culture, I disagree.
I don’t think there’s anything in deaf culture that demands limitation on accomplishment. Suspicious of anything hearing because there’s a history of colonism and paternalism from hearing people, maybe, but no rule that says deaf people are doomed to stay together in an isolated microcosm.
The limit, though, does come from actions, both perceived and actual, that can pull people down. But a person’s action does not a culture make.
Oh I’m not saying that “deaf culture” inherently limits or punishes individuals who don’t “fit.” I AM saying that “deaf culture” and “deafhood” are being wielded as powerful weapons to keep individuals in line. They’re so powerful because instead of questioning the premises of deafhood and deaf culture, individuals respond by enthusiastically trying to prove that they’re in agreement. Just look at the effect that’s had on the black community. Individuals hide or sabotage their good grades and avoid using standard English so they won’t be accused of “acting white.” Certainly there are black leaders who’ve fought that attitude, but overall it’s something that the black and deaf communities have in common. That’s why the origins of crab theory are shared by both groups, because it rings so true. Yes, the hearing/white world originally “put them in the barrel.” We can all stay in the barrel and congratulate ourselves because “they” are to blame, or we can move past it and stop punishing those ready to explore outside the barrel.
If that’s true, then that’s in direct contradiction of what deafhood presenters are saying: deafhood is actually the process of self-actualization. It is in no way a weapon - there are many different deafhoods, all equally valid. It is also not in any way analogous with what most people perceive as deaf culture.
Ella Mae Lentz says in the joey baer blog Shane and “moi” link to that the solution is to topple over the barrel. I like that reframing. Kind of makes your idea of allowing people to explore outside the barrel moot. What do you think?
Allison,
Who put the crabs in the barrel in the first place?
Nathan, I’d like you to think about this too.
When hearing people refuse to hire and accept Deaf people - when the University closes its own departments - when we have to fight for resources and jobs just to survive - when the majority of the Deaf community is on SSI because people JUST DONT HIRE DEAF PEOPLE and Medicaid pays for the hearing aids when insurance doesn’t and all these people on Welfare are haunted and frustrated because their own community backstabs them -
It took me almost a year to find a job despite more degrees than most hearing people, you know?
The point to Allison’s essay is not “Deaf people fight among themselves.” The point is “this fighting is a sign of oppression suffered by both sides as they struggle in a community dominated by the majority, for the majority. And the majority ain’t Deaf.”
As for how to fight it - and decolonialise - Cherie Moraga has some suggestions, and we need to study more. I suggest you read Joanna Russ’s What Are We Fighting For which addresses a lot of these issues inside feminism…
It’s odd. I was watching A Different World today on tv at the hospital. They were talking about how the feminist community didn’t account for Black women on that show. Just a little string of coincidence…
P.S. I didn’t say, but this is a great article, and one I’m printing out for my boss. And posting in the office.
Joseph Santini,
Better yet, who built the barrel in the first place?
1) I can speak. I have been accused by Deaf people of “not being natural deaf” or “your voice sounds horrible, why are you speaking (how would they know?) or… you get the idea. I could go on and on.
2) It’s not what you know, it’s who you know. If all you know is deaf people, well… whose fault is that?
3) I’ve been on both sides of the fence and I’m here to tell you the grass is not greener. People respect winners, not losers with empty rhetoric. You have to ask yourself at the end of each day “did I do everything I can do to make my dreams come true, or did I spend more than half the day camped out on the couch with a bong”.
Put a sign inside the bucket that says, “Team work will get you out.” Without team work all will be in the bucket forever unless someone pulls you out.
What I was taught about crab theory doesn’t seem to match the description of the theory by the comments to this Blog…
Crab theory occurs when deaf people are more concerned about infighting than striking out on their own with the full support of the community.
Ella Mae Lentz gives an interesting perspective on the Crab Theory. She asks, “who put us in the barrel in the first place?” and describes what would happen if the barrel was toppled over.
http://www.joeybaer.com/?p=11
Smiles - I’ve just watched the video, and may I say, I admire Lentz enormously?!
She does an excellent job of reframing the crab theory. Her emphasis is, once again, not on the crabs and the things they do to each other, but their situation (why are they in a barrel as opposed to being free in the sea?). By posing that question, she allows us to envision freedom of opportunity without obligation to or animosity to other crabs.
Thanks for the link, Shane (and “moi”). I would recommend others watch this video (and I hope there’s an English transcript for non-ASLers).
Sighs - no English transcript. So I wrote one up. It’s on the same page Shane and “moi” link to, as comment #46. Hopefully I did Ella justice.
This article is definitely interesting and perked up my eyes (rather than ears). ;)
My interpretation of the crab theory (which by the way, I despise) is a little different from what I’m reading here. Correct me if I’m wrong but when applying the crab theory to the Deaf community, I have thought of it as when one deaf person succeeds and the other crabs pull that deaf person down with criticism and backstabbing INSTEAD of helping that person get out and succeed. That deaf person is not “allowed” to succeed because it’s not fair to the other crabs. I’ve had my share of being the crab that’s trying to get out. It’s not that I’m leaving the other crabs behind but that I’m doing what I have to do to get where I want to be. The other crabs are not interested in what I’m doing or what I want to do UNTIL they see that I’m getting out. Then they attempt to pull me down. Fortunately, I’m a “wild” crab. ;)
For example, I grew up in Maine where the Deaf community there does not value education (very few Mainers actually graduated from college). My parents, being hearing, did and sent me to MSSD. After MSSD, I wanted to attend a college where I felt that I could succeed in what I wanted to do. That was the University of Vermont. A lot of people in Maine criticized me for doing this. They only noticed and said something when I got out of the “crab pot.”
It is unfortunate that while our deafness unites us, it also divides us. If we can all just be supportive of each other in our ambitions, we ALL will succeed.
I relate to those who grew up in the “mainstream” world and feel like the “wild crab.” The quote in the beginning of the article caught my eye: “the slave understands language but s/he does not understand the wild crab.”
I personally think this relates to those “wild crabs” who choose to integrate themselves into the mainstream working environment and overcoming obstacles. This leaves the rest of the barrell of crabs is dumbfounded as to why the wild crab would leave the barrell, away from protection and community ties for lack of understanding as to why the “wild crab” chose independence.
So far in these comments there seems to be the sentiment that there’s a difference between the wild crab and the domestic crab (and that the wild crab is more independent, more ambitious, or more whatever than the domestic crab).
I question whether this is actually true. And I wonder whether saying, “I was a wild crab” reveals something about our perception of the crab theory and the desire to disassociate.
It also seems to me that one effect of claiming kinship with the wild crab is condescension toward the domestic crabs (remember there is no basic or explicit difference between wild and domestic, except that the wild one gets away).
I also wonder whether we should be paying more attention to the wife’s goading of the slave. They were, after all, both Ewe. Just because they don’t see the crabs the same way, one gets laughed at.
Yes, the wife goading the slave did stand out in context of the essay. They are both Ewe and she laughs because the slave did not initially understand. Does she laugh because it’s blantly obvious the crab left, making that one different? Or does she laugh at the situation and realizes, there really isn’t much of a difference in the anatomy of a crab? Do you think it’s placed in there to bring light and humor to the situation of the crab theory? That if a difference isn’t immediatly visible, it’s best to laugh and move on, instead of pondering and dissecting a situation that isn’t worth doing…. I mean, come on, laugh. Life is funny.
She laughs derisively, meaning she thinks the slave is stupid for not thinking the same way she does. So I read it as she is judging the slave as below her, even though they are both the same. This kind of laughter, sadly, is not funny.
Fascinating read!
I believe that we’ve all been guilty of pulling down other Deafies in one way or another. However, I do believe that not all of the pullings were intentional. (Am I rationalizing?) Instead, we say that we were concerned for their well-being/future/finances/(fill in your choice of word).
I am wary about people, including myself, applying “crab theory” to every situation. Just like I’m seeing some people decrying audism to every situation these days, when it’s actually paternalism, sexism, homophobia or something else. I think that we, as Deaf people, need to re-examine the crab theory. Is this applied to “successful” Deafies? Is backstabbing considered crab theory or just plain immature? And other related questions.
One thing I’ve noticed lately is that when asked or discussing about crab theory, some people are quick to inquire “…but who put the bucket there?”. That does call for examination.
However, I’m more interested why we are crabbing each other. Could it be that we’re not optimistic about the real world? You know, the view that hearing people are audistic and discriminatory against Deaf people. Or that we’re familiar with the view that it is generally difficult for Deaf people to gain steady clients, to open a business (whether geared towards Deaf people or not) or that some people are not willing to deal with additions (interpreters, Relays, etc.). Perhaps, it is because we’ve seen or assume that the successes of many Deaf people are short-lived or limited.
So, is that why we’re crabbing? Are we pessimistic about what’s out there? Are we trying to spare each other the hurt/failure/disppointment? Are we fooling ourselves that we’re being realistic or is really the truth?
Regardless, shouldn’t we all encourage each other to go out there and try? Shouldn’t we want the best for each other? Shouldn’t we want to prove to the world that Deaf people can do these things?
Nathan, Shane, and Keri — you’re right, that the deaf crab theory is taught as an emphasis on, to use Shane’s word, “infighting.”
However, I wrote it the way I did not just because I wanted to take into consideration other cultures’ crab theories, which differ slightly in the telling, but also because I wanted to frame it in terms of the overall effect (you never have to put a top on the barrel) as opposed to what we too often focus on (we fight each other too much, they attack me because I can speak, I was a wild crab and therefore more able to get out, et cetera).
I enjoyed reading Allison’s article and seeing how she took the initiative to do some research on this.
I wonder if a graduate student (whether in ASL Education, Linguistics, Social Work, etc) has done a thesis paper on this particular topic? If so, I would be deeply appreciative if the paper could be shared with everyone. If not - then I think that there would be a great many fertile resources for this topic e.g. interviewing people of different social classes, comparing the statistics regarding education, income, whether that person is married, and so forth.
In the end, I think there is a natural urge for minorities including deaf people to feel fiercely competitive with each other. I think that is because many of us grew up socially isolated where if we did well, praise would be given heaped on us and we would feel very special. Then when we would finally meet other deaf people who are more intellectually accomplished or just plain scary smart, one can imagine how disconcerting it would be.
I still remember going to R.I.T. and feeling stunned at meeting so many deaf people who had the mental aptitude to quickly breeze through doors that I couldn’t even envision.
Even now, for myself, at the age of 30, I sometimes fall into the trap of feeling unsure about myself when I meet a deaf person who is so much smarter than I am. However, my feelings do quickly fade if that person is clearly applying his (or her) intelliegence as a productive member of society. And that’s all it should really be about and that’s why I enjoy visiting deafdc.com since there’s a lot of excellent writers who do just that.
I was told of the crab theory in high school at a leadership retreat. Is the crab theory a part of folklore?
Any deaf individual speak orally in any social settings outside Gallaudet University campus and other visually-oriented environment are apparently guilty of “audism”. Those people surely reinforce outsiders’ persecptive of communication in American Sign Language as some kind of laborious and annoying. In the end, oral communication among deaf people leave the majority of deaf individuals at such a disadvantage for meaningful communication flow.
What about such personal preference for “oral” communication on Gallaudet campus? That would undermine the real meaning of inclusive communication policy for everyone on equal footing. Speaking orally on Gallaudet campus will breed suspicion and mistrust among fellow students.
Robert L. Mason (RLM)
Are you arguing that no deaf person should use oral speech for social communication outside of the said campus?
Or even use speech on campus for social communication, too, I would ask. Heck, I did that all the time. I, also, signed all the time, too. It all depends on who I am with. And I wasn’t alone on that, either.
Allison,
Please kindly correct the systematic flaw for accessing to the enclosed articles via ALADIN system for any non-affilated individuals within higher educational institutions. Thanks.
RLM
Unfortunately, the article is only accessible to those who have access to the JSTOR database. I’m a student at GWU and was able to get in with my student ID. If you have access to it via other means, here’s the citation: Rosenthal, Judy. “The Signifying Crab.” Cultural Anthropology, Vol. 10, No. 4 (Nov., 1995), pp. 581-586. You should also be able to get to it by going to a library that subscribes to this journal.
Many thanks, Allison! I truly appreciate your timely response to the JSTOR/ALADIN library system. Thanks again for being very helpful with the pinpointing of volume number and no# of “Cultural Anthropolgy”. :)
RLM