As the campus (and outside world) watches for something to happen in what seems like a stalemate, hopefully as a result of BoT meetings today, the National Association for the Deaf has just released this open letter:
Open Letter to the Gallaudet University Board of Trustees, Administration, and the Campus and External Community
Editor’s Note: Please use this corrected version of the Fourth NAD Open Letter.
Posted May 11, 2006
To refer others to this page:
http://www.nad.org/GallaudetOpenLetter4; see also http://www.nad.org/GallaudetPresident
The National Association of the Deaf (NAD) is deeply saddened at the turn of events since issuance of its Third Open Letter (see http://www.nad.org/gallaudetpresident), particularly the “deaf card” being perpetuated by the Gallaudet University administration, tacitly supported by the Gallaudet University Board of Trustees.
What exactly does this mean? Similar to the race card we know all too well, the “deaf card” has been played, to the hilt. To illustrate, a CNN.com story posted online on May 8, 2006 states:
[Dr. I. King] Jordan, who backed [Dr. Jane K.] Fernandes’ selection, said the current protest reflects “identity politics” and a refusal to accept change. “We are squabbling about what it means to be deaf,” he said.
The focus on “not deaf enough” and “deaf identity” has effectively detracted the media and all with vested interest in Gallaudet University away from the underlying focus on lack of leadership and trust which is inexorably tied to faculty, staff, student, and alumni protest efforts.
The public relations effort expended to date by the University in playing the “deaf card” has, in effect, set back national and global advocacy strides made by the deaf community for light years to come, causing long-lasting damage.
We condemn these tactics, given great harm to the credibility of the deaf community that these have caused.
The University Board of Trustees and its administrative leadership need to focus on the real issues at hand — exactly why loss of leadership and trust has transpired — by making the commitment to working with its campus and external constituents to begin what will be a protracted and painful healing process. Too much polarization and discord has happened both on and off campus, and it is clear that leadership recovery will be extremely difficult.
Despite our earlier call for “corrective action with courage and wisdom to resolve in a positive manner the growing discord, divisiveness, and disconnect on and off campus,” there has been no improvement. The NAD intends to continue its efforts to facilitate a positive resolution to the current state of affairs.
The NAD therefore calls upon the University Board of Trustees to take serious and decisive action — today — for the good of Gallaudet and its stakeholders as well as the national and global deaf community. The entire campus and external community needs to be part of the University’s healing process, and we at the NAD stand ready to be of assistance.
Sincerely,
Andrew J. Lange
President
National Association of the Deaf
Nancy J. Bloch
Chief Executive Officer
National Association of the Deaf
© 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.
Oooohhh…playing the “deaf card”.
ur an idiot, Mcconnell…. as ridor calls you, MCWEENIE!
As they say, when you point a finger, there’s three fingers pointing back at you…
Thank you, 99er, for posting a comment that contributes absolutely nothing to this discussion and everything to stereotypes that deaf people can’t do anything except call each other names.
Yes, you are absolutely right. They are the reason why the deaf community has not made much progress for the past 18 years. Deaf people themselves chose IKJordan even though they knew he would never stop signing in English with his goddamn voice. And yet Deaf people stood on the sidelines and kept saying “ahh, he has done so much for Gallaudet….oh I mean, the way he’s improved the look of the campus never mind about Deaf students’ poor reading/writing skills and their inability to finish what they started. Even for those who finished their college education end up working in residential schools - a sad cycle of the deaf world and yet nobody talks about it. I don’t think IKJordan and JKFernandes are the problem but the Deaf community itself. It divides, thus creating small groups (elitism,& favoritism) Deaf people oppress their own kind…and use hearing people or deaf people who think and talk like hearing people as scapegoats. Deaf people need to face this issue…the sooner, the better.
He’s an idiot for quoting the letter? Umm, okay. PS: grow up.
Haiku by Me
You call me names
I call you names right back
Crab claws pince me
Let’s not just throw darts, but knifes on every deaf person you hate…search & destroy…search & destroy…it seems to be the hobby of the deaf community.
typo. every deaf person’s face…
I am sorry, I hope you are not offended with me helping you out with what you are about to say because I want them to understand and realize what you really mean…I am with you, Tom W!
“We condemn these tactics, given great harm to the credibility of the deaf community that these have caused.”
Finally, NAD had to say something to protect the credibility of the Deaf community. IKJ and JKF made us look like the fools. I thought, they were supposed to be our leaders and take the bullets for us. It looked like they are holding us like the babies up in front of them as the shield to protect themselves from the “bullets”.
good analogy :)
What bullets are you referring to Tim? Ak-47? S&W 44 mag? Or the rubber bullets the riot police used to fire at the deaf gally students who started the UMD basketball riot in ‘02?
u idiot, UMD students are notorious for starting riots every time their school win an important game.
You have a new enemy, Big D. From the Wash Post:
Advocates have been making their cases on Capitol Hill. Because more than two-thirds of the school’s budget comes from Congress, lawmakers’ goodwill is crucial.
Rep. Ray LaHood (R-Ill.), one of three congressionally appointed trustees, attended the executive session yesterday morning. He was not involved in interviewing candidates or the vote for Fernandes, he said last night, but board members know his position. “I think she’s very qualified for the job, and I support the decision the board made,” he said.
Now you are up against the United States Congress. Who is the Idiot now. Your little blog comments won’t save you, or your little dog Toto ahahahahahah *wicked laughter*
According to most studies, there are on the order of 600,000 people in the US who are deaf. There are about 6 million people with severe hearing loss. NAD has how many members? That number does not appear on the NAD website but, as an indication, we can do the math… dividing the 40 dollar membership fee into the total income derived from membership comes to a whole 5065 members. (I know there are probably more with discounts and what not, so, let’s be really generous and say that there are 8,000 members. Let’s do that math. 8,000 members is what percentage of the deaf population? That would be 1.3% if we only include the 600,000… But, what if we look at it from NAD’s own perspective from their website, they say they represent 28 Million people. Let’s do that math. That would be 0.00028% (2.8 times 10 to the minus 4) Given those numbers, I have this to say to NAD. You don’t represent deaf and hard of hearing people. With numbers that low, what you say is pretty much irrelevant. Face facts NAD. If you weren’t kept afloat by a grant from the Federal government, you would disappear instantly. 75% of your budget comes from the Federal government. If you are so representative of deaf and hard of hearing people, why is your membership so tiny? There’s really only one reason. You are irrelevant. Your letters to the Board of Trustees should carry no more weight than the random comments and rantings of people on blogs.
First of all, I have no idea where you got those numbers. I’ve never read any studies that indicate that less than a million are deaf.
Secondly, NAD hasn’t really made the numbers of how many members public, and I don’t foresee them doing so.
Thirdly, the United States gov’t has never taken a census of deaf or hard of hearing people.
So until that happens, I’m going to take comments like this with a grain of salt!
Incorrect. From the 2000 Census and the National Center for Health Statistics on Data from the National Health Interview Survey they were able to come up with some statistics regarding the population of people with hearing loss in the United States. Also, there are a few states that do their own deaf and hh survey like Pennsylvania. And then you have the “McGill Study of Deaf Children in Canada” which is a great source of info. Combine all the above and you can be extrapolate and make a very good educated guess on the number of Deaf people in the United States. My study on this two years ago with my written 13 pages of materials on the subject. I was able get an estimate of about 930,000 Deaf people in the United States. I’m quite comfortable with my results.
1) The number that I chose was derived from a number of peer reviewed sources including:
- The National Center for Health Statistics
- Gallaudet Research Institute
- National Institutes of Health.
McConnell’s own study mentioned above supports this range.
2) NAD does not publish the number of members. Correct. I wouldn’t either because it’s an embarrassment. It’s easy to estimate though if you take 5 minutes to read the NAD Annual Report which is available on the NAD website. Look at the budget line item for Income/memberships… then do the math assuming that most members are at the $40 per year level… then add a factor for reduced membership income being part of the mix. Awarding them 8000 is probably generous. Their Fulton III strategic goal for the year 2020 is 25000… that is still a tiny fraction of the population 28 Million that they claim to represent.
3) No grain of salt needed.
4) What I didn’t say was that Andy Lange might have a built in conflict of interest in writing those letters since he also serves as the Gallaudet University Alumni Association President. That makes me view those letters with cartons of salt.
Interesting. I was under the belief that the 2000 census did NOT take a survey of deaf people, and that in 2010, that census would be the first one to do so.
As for the rest, I’ve never seen those studies, but I’ve not done research in that area. So, my bad!
Quite honestly, I can believe that there’s nearly a million deaf, than just over half million deaf. And as for Don’t Speak for Me’s 4) you’re not the only one who’s uncomfortable with Andy Lange’s conflict of interest! And that’s why I’m staying a non-member of NAD!
Deaf Pundit — The Census Bureau have two separate type of surveys that they send out, the “count me!” (short form) type of survey, where very basic information are asked, and the “who am I?” (long form) type of survey where in-depth information is acquired.
The 2000 survey contains a great mix of this, with the vast majority as a “Count me!” (short form) type of survey.
The second survey is actually conducted more frequently but is being replaced by a new survey called the American Community Survey — I was specifically requested to fill out one of that survey a few weeks ago, and yes it does specifically asked about my physical handicaps.
More information:
http://www.census.gov/acs/www/
One additional point… even though I’m sure I’m the only reading this… By way of comparison, The National Federation for the Blind has more than 50,000 members out of a population of 1.3 Million legally blind. NAD has a membership of what?
Extrapolations aren’t the same thing as a census. The last time a full-scale census or count was attempted was in 1973, I believe. People have been using the “28 million” figure for decades since. I really think it’s time that a new census/count was done, not just extrapolations from this government agency and that agency.
Yes, I am laughing. Deaf people are living in this goddamn illusion. They need to realize that we are just a miniscule of the big world.
To premise my argument – it should be known – that I’m an outsider, having only been to Gally once – and would be classified as not being “deaf enough” by some.
I’ve been quite intrigued by the events unfolding at Gallaudet and the protest that has been taken place. Obviously, there is a paradigm shift taking place – and this shift requires the acceptance of change. When people are comfortable with the status quo and then change is forced downward – people often react. This happens quite often with businesses, non-profits and is obviously evident at Gallaudet. In reading the post and the issues the dissenters have with JKF – aside from people having personality issues with JKF as a person (which should be a moot point) and her function as a University Provost. My question is – if she was so bad as a Provost – why didn’t the faculty and students do anything? I would presume that she did her job well – and her qualifications are well suited. Having said this – I can understand the transparency issue during the selection process.
But the main reason for my post today – is the recent letter by NAD – and the claim that the BOT are using and playing the “deaf card”. It should be noted that the NAD has contradicted themselves – when in the third letter they urged the board to find a person –
“able to unite the community behind a common vision and inspire individuals and groups both on and off campus to reach for a noble cause bigger than any single person or issue”
NAD in this statement states that we need a leader to unite the community. And I agree – the very issue in my opinion that divides this community is by how “deaf” a person is.
Instead of the deaf community being open, tolerant and non-judgmental, we’ve come to a point where we criticize people for PERSONAL choices they have made.
No one is playing the “deaf card”. And being an outsider – reading information available to me – the issue is larger than JKF being selected president.
Regards…
The faculty DID try to do something when JK was promoted to Provost and the University circumvented their required participation in the selection process. There was quite a bit of dissent…check your facts and you will see that the faculty have not been complacent, they’ve been IGNORED.
Nobody’s disputed the P.S. in Dr. Meyers’ letter. Ironic it was the ASL and Deaf Studies Dept. who got JK tenured… when now Ben Bahan, from that dept is one of the ringleaders of the protest!
She wrote: P.S. While I am here, I would like to state for the record these facts to counter false accusations of scandal surrounding her tenure: The ASL and Deaf Studies Department initiated tenure for Jane Fernandes and requested documentation from her of her academic achievements to support their request for tenure for her. The Promotion and Tenure (P and T) Committee saw the documentation, certified that she met the requirements for tenure and supported the department’s recommendation. Jane had nothing to do with the processing of paperwork and was not involved except to provide documentation of her academic achievements to the Department of ASL and Deaf Studies at their request.
I read many comments during the interview process and many of them focused on Jane’s lack of ASL skills or her sign skills. There were also several comments about the “not deaf enough” form students and probably some faculty and staff before someone coached them to put the issue on Jane and IKJ.
Jane set up open meetings and forums with purpose to start a discussion to resolve issues. I was not there but what I read about the forum is faculty were more interested in attacking her and correcting her sign for tent city.
Sorry, but I dont believe it is only the administration playing any “deaf card”.
Yes, I think the student protest gave them the perfect opportunity to play the deaf card.
Now, either Dr. Fernandes’ reputation is being sabotaged by a small group spreading rumors and fanning small fires of resentment there and here…
Or there is a deep seated issue of leadership that for some reason not one in the 93 Phds that voted no-confidence can manage to express articulately in a single damning argument and get heard.
You know, I’d almost rather believe in the backstabbing gossip rather than in the idea that so many faculty were incompetent and powerless to pitch their case to external sources long before this occured. What about the alumni association? That’s the perfect third party to leak serious issues of leadership to and build the facts of case to be delivered by an unfireable third party.
Instead we have… well, the last 10 days basically, and a sense of shame and deep discord in this community.
I think you bring up really good points that haven’t really been brought up until now. I do wonder why all of this is boiling up now when there were plenty of avenues, as you say (alumni association, etc) for fac, staff, and students to speak up.
The sense of shame and discord, as you put it, really is suffocating the community to the point where I’m completely turned off by the repetitive rhetoric of many of its leaders. Break some new ground, people, and start spreading FACTS.
Hmm! I second what Bobby Cox said.
After reading your comments, it makes me wonder whether that’s why the faculty’s protesting all of the sudden. By many people’s accounts, it was thought that Ron Stern would get the position, not JK.
So maybe when JK *did* get the position, the faculty decided to decredit JK before JK could go after the incompetents? Like you said, it’s pretty damning that 93 Ph.Ds can’t write a compelling argument against JK. It’s an interesting theory. This is purely speculation of course, but it does make me wonder, and would certainly explain many things.
What would be interesting is to hear the other 75 who didn’t or couldn’t show up for the vote. Does the missing 75 university faculty imply that they are in support of JKF? Noting the fact that among the staff votes came out nearly the same on the for (40%) and against (45%) BoT selection of JKF. And the majority of the staff said “Move on!” Yet, this isn’t even talked about as much as it did with the faculty votes.
Interesting. Their silence on that is, uh, deafening.
Its sad that you have jumped already… The staff votes used blackboard which can be tracked on who votes yes or not. Many MANY, MANY MANY staff are afraid to do that in fear of losing their job. They do not have the same “protection” as facs.
You are really obessed with the missing votes.. there was a good email explaining the missing 40 votes…
I said it many times, and am going to say it again, you are an idiot.
The missing number is 75. 220 (or 223) - 145 = 75.
And I’ll say it again, ad homenim attacks serve no useful purpose in a debate.
I think of those “missing” 75 faculty it would be a mix. If forced to “vote” likely some would say they don’t support JKF. I would guess that for some their absence implies the belief that the BoT and PSC have the authority to select the president. In other words, their absence may say little about their thoughts on JKF and more about their thoughts on the process and the authority of the BoT and the PSC.
Still, would it not be interesting to know for sure?
blah blah, it would be interesting to know if 100% of americans voted for USA president… Would Kerry have won? maybe?! would have Gore won, maybe…..
point is, more fac came to vote than before..
jeez.
I repeated before. Dragging in the voting process at the National level is quite different at the very local level involving only 220 (or 223) faculty members. Let me know if the faculty members also vote using the Electoral College process.
Listen to yourselves talk. We have some deaf people who are completely and totally unprofessional who practice favoritism and elitism. Please don’t say that Jane’s a lousy provost- maybe she is- but then again, so is every other administrator who has been running the deaf education system. Not only that, there are many professors/teachers on Kendall campus who are not at all qualified to teach, and there are some who are audists. Jane started her Gallaudet career trying to fix the damage MSSD/KDES have imposed upon themselves. MSSD’s faculty/staff during the 1980s and early 1990s were very unprofessional- they pretty much scarred many deaf kids, and even to this day, they are not exactly over it. Maybe Jane did the good thing…
Yes, yes! I am glad many MSSD staff got fired in the early 1990s. They deserved it!
Did you see the way Lynn Jacobwitz deliver herself? She was irrational and immature. I hope Jane will fire her as soon as possible. The sooner the university gets rid of traitors, the better. Lynn is a professor of Gallaudet University, and should represent 100% of student body, and not 10% (those from deaf families). I am disappointed in her, and don’t think she is qualified to work at Gallaudet University.
I warned Feb 1998 that Jordan was drifting away from the deaf community’s interests in my Deaf Watch Newsletter. Anyone listened? NO Because I wasnt ‘deaf enough’, I didnt make the ‘deafhood’ status, and didnt meet up to their ‘white deaf yardstick’ either. So they had like 8 years to prevent this. I respect the BOT’s decision as it’s really the deaf community’s fault for not listeneing to the deaf leaders back then and theyre paying the big price for it now.
I agree with you. Many deaf people have not done anything for 18 years. They were and still are sleeping…and so it is their fault for breaking the community apart and for contradicting itself.
Never read such article from you in Feb. 1998.
If you look at the http://www.bisontv.com, click on Day 10 Forum and go to the part where the male asl teacher asked Jane Fernandes to clarify to the media that it is not about deafness, gender, or personal, she agreed that it was not about those issues but her leadership skills. It obviously showed that she played the “deaf card”!
In the last open forum with JKF at the HMB recently a Deaf person was able to openly mock and make fun of JKF’s inability to sign “tent city”, then I guess over the past 6 years she was never ridiculed for her signing ability? No?
JK was criticized for MANY things, her signing being just one of them. I’m not surprised if it’s the most common criticism because it’s the most transparent “flaw”. To criticize her leadership skills, one’d really have to know her history. Not many did until the weeks leading up to the selection.
So, tell me again. What was the big deal about the goal post thing? Are students still harboring bitter resentment over that? Wasn’t that the time when “know thy enemy” shirts came out after that? What were they saying? That safety isn’t paramount?
That’s the scary thing. The majority (?) of protesters had no real idea to her history and background and we’re lead like lemmings over a cliff on the day after the JKF announcement??
That is because they are not much of planners but troublemakers.
your assuming there were opportunitites to ridicule her. For the most part she stays in her office and the times when she has been really public were during pretty somber times, 2000,2001, 9/11. I am sure students around campus have mocked her plenty…its been said before JK’s election is what broke the camel’s back. Beating the same information over and over again isn’t going to get us a solution whether the “deaf card” has been played or not. SO far everyone has said what needs to be done or what they want. How about some ideas (constructive ones) toward realizing a solution.
So, it’s the social aspect that’s very important to you (ie the FSSA) that it’s the provost’s duty to come out mingle on a consistent basis? This is what she lacked? Is that what you are saying? Her personality or her social graces that irks you?
No what irks me is that it is claimed she’s responsible for many things and yet a good number of those things are group efforts. When there’s a crisis Gally has a CMT (crisis management team). JK is not the sole person to deal with academics or issues or anything related to Gally. She might be the face the media see but her role is far from being singular.
Can you give me examples? Links? Papers? Etc?
I think we have listed plenty of examples…
Plunkett’s scholarship
audism
etc etc… man, ur blind!
Links please or some definitive proof that it was the case. Anybody can talk about it…that’s the easy part. Especially hearing from anonymous posters.
Mcconnell, Have you been at any performances or campus wide events at Gallaudet University? How do you know that the student body has not openly mocked JK in public in the past 6 years? Quit making assumptions to stir up controversy
I’m not saying that. Anyone can mock or ridicule a person either privately amongst friends or openly. Yesterday was a good example of people coming out of the woodwork and plainly mocked her in the open about her signing ability. I wonder what they were saying privately all those years.
FYI, I’m a gally alum.
Deaf people are so hypocrite. They let IKJordan represent the Gallaudet community for 18 years even though he uses SIM-COM. Educators/researchers have proven that it is not a language and that it will destroy deaf children’s chance to master English fluency if there is no foundation in L1- ASL. Why didn’t professors of the Deaf Education department/Deaf Studies department fight against IKJordan’s viewpoint for the past 18 years? Let me tell you this now…they are promoting the anti-Jane cause for their own interests and have compeltely nothing to do with what is best for deaf children across the country. I am completely disgusted with the way the university has been operating for years and years…and now everybody (faculty in particular) are using the young, inexperienced students and the deaf community to promote the so-called social injustice ****.
Excuse me, I was raised using a style of “sim-com” education, and I am pretty damn successful.
A bit of a biased research, I would think.
A foundation in language is important, and to be successful in America, a dominant hearing world, you need to master English at the bare minimum.
Globaltrotter & Richard Rohem,
Both of you mentioned here that you are (or are likely to be) considered not “Deaf enough.” My question: how fluent are you in ASL?
Why I’m asking: I’m trying to figure out whether it is an issue of language fluency or an issue of understanding Deaf values. I have had interesting encounters with Deaf individuals who have a very low opinion of ASL; some of these ASL users think nothing of attacking ASL proponents *through ASL*!
It will be sad for me to learn if some Deaf radicals don’t think you’re “Deaf enough” even if you value ASL like many other Deaf people do.
To answer your question - value ASL, in fact have Deaf parents. But I’ll be the first to admit - I sign more English than anything else.
Sorry made a mistake :-p. I do value ASL…
I can sign excellent SEE, PSE, ASL. I used to be a deaf culture knight until deaf people started stabbing me in the back because I was on the California Consumer Affairs board and I helped shut down a lot of deaf run pyramid scams. The deaf community sort of disowned me in November 1999. I kept fighting for them and I will fight for them. But in this case with Jane Fernandes, I tell them it’s their fault for letting this happen to them. I feel very vindicated because I done my good deed to deaf culture, deaf hood, and the deaf society and I got rewarded with many knives on my back. So I feel very vindicated for warning the deaf communities on Feb 1998 that Jordan was drifting far away from deaf interests and now you see I WAS RIGHT in the first place. The best thing the deaf community can do now is try pulling the knives off my back.
Can anyone put in a nutshell this “Deafhood”. Do they say “deafhood” or “Deafhood”? I have some understanding of it but this “deafhood” concept came out, what, 6 years ago?
McConnell: Have you watched Genie Gertz on Joey Baer’s vlog? She attempts to summarize Paddy Ladd’s thoughts on the subject. And to clear up some of the misunderstanding generated the last few days.
Yes, I’ve seen it. The question remains, do they call it “d”eafhood or “D”eafhood?
Hmm…the silence is deafening. Again, do they call it “d”eafhood or “D”eafhood?
RR - you THINK you have done wonders for the community. Reason you have those knives in your back, you have created those who really hate your guts. It is about time you listen to others rather than you dictate your views onto others.
Thanks, Globaltrotter and Richard.
I have Deaf parents too. I know that my family and community value ASL (actually, many of them still call it “sign” rather than ASL). I don’t think there has ever been an incident where there was serious disagreement about who’s “Deaf enough” or anyone questioning one’s Deafhood.
Perhaps my travels should be wider (or more frequent) so I’ll have a better chance of meeting these so-called Deaf radicals or the 10 percenters (most of the 10 percenters in my community are good-natured, believe it or not). I wonder whether they might be found at the NAD conference this summer in California.
Anyway, it’s mystifying to me if one isn’t considered “Deaf enough” when that person is fluent in ASL and values the language and the Deaf community.
NAD in California this summer? Be sure to seek out a lovely lady named Roberta Daniels. Read her comment on Elisa A.’s blog under the “BOT visits Tent City” entry. Daniels applies her piercing insights of JKF’s character by using a book about how to deal with manipulative people. Be sure to open the link and read about those categories. Shake Daniels’ hand, and congratulate her for her intelligent psychological insights.
In case you weren’t sure — yes, that was totally tongue in cheek. And for the record, I actually like Daniels — she is a very nice person, and we have a cordial relationship. I’m rather shocked by her extreme comment, and that of others I know firsthand to be genuinely nice people too. This whole situation has brought out the worst in the deaf world.
sorry, wrong blog. here’s the link: http://www.xanga.com/jennycat88
The NAD is doing what is expected of them. They made a good point and it is their mission to protect the image and foster the rights of deaf folks (including Jane Fernandes and McConnell).
It was made clear that this protest is about the distrust we have in Fernandes as the president. Even though King and Jane knew this, yet they decided to perpetuate the false argument on why the protest started. (She doesnt say ‘Hi’, and she didnt sign during her teen years…Gee, ever notice how idiots are more visible than normal or intelligent folks?). We all know too well that this false argument is marring public opinion(s) of deaf folks and that is dangerous. More especially when it is not true. And this is what upsets the NAD.
I find it interesting that King and Jane are using this tactic (lying to the press) because I know no self-respecting deaf person who wants to remain close to the deaf community would ever lie like that, especially when the core reasons have been painted on banners, claimed in some newspaper articles, repeated on blogs, letters, etc… These lies are a sure-fire means of becoming a pariah and destroying bridges.
Adam-
Can you send all of the idiotic remarks from all of the blogs in this site to a “quarantined” comment area? Granted, the comments wouldnt be coherent when you’re mixing them up from different topics BUT thats the beauty of it, these idiotic remarks never made sense from the first place. (Non Sequitir)
I can easily see it from their perspective in terms of being a deaf person never having experienced signing or Deaf culture, not having grown up in a deaf family or having to deal with deafness later on as an adult. And perhaps people of Deaf culture and native ASLers never really accepted them completely because they were never really one of them? How do I know that this might be the case? Well, I’ve been through the very same thing they’ve experienced in so many different ways growing up as an adult stepping into a completely different world at Gallaudet University. And I can see why they may have said those things to the press because, maybe, just maybe, they’ve also felt the same discriminatory practices by the likes of you guys? Just as proudly as Joey Baer put out a video tape to show the differences between IKJ’s signing and Greg Hlibok’s ASL while introducing an old ASL word “double standard” in a veiled but mocking manner?
Try and see it from their perspective just once. Yet you go about calling them liars? Better have some definitive proof to back that big whopper up that’s flapping in the wind.
C’mon now. As I say it again, unity for whom?
Blimey, I have been a member of NAD for the past twenty years. Not once did NAD email me to ask my opinion about the protest, the board simply made their own decision without consulting the true NAD members. I have lost my faith in NAD. Edwin A. Hodgson believed in recruiting all members’ opinion before commiting to a decision. No wonder membership for NAD has gone down the toilet in recent years under the lead