President Emeritus I. King Jordan’s op-ed in today’s Washington Post has sparked a multitude of comments from all directions.
In the op-ed, Jordan states that he is wary the future of Gallaudet is not so bright anymore. In citing the exit report from the Middle States Association this month, Jordan warns that any more divisive action from the University community may result in Gallaudet losing its accrediation. Nowhere in the op-ed does Jordan mention that the current administrators at Gallaudet, especially Interim Provost Dr. Michael Moore who was chosen by Dr. Jordan last fall, have been working hard on preparing a report that is due to the MSA by March first.
And, nowhere in the op-ed does Dr. Jordan identify by name the current Interim President, Dr. Robert Davila. Instead, Dr. Jordan says “…Gallaudet has had an interim president.” Dr. Jordan does not express confidence in Dr. Davila’s leadership and the fact that he was one of the vice presidents of the Rochester Institute of Technology and an assistant secretary in the Department of Education in the early 1990s.
There have been argumentative comments on DeafDC.com and elsewhere, either in support or in disagreement of the Board’s decision to terminate Dr. Jane Fernandes’ contract. Dr. Jordan again used the “deaf card.” While it is my personal opinion (after post-protest discussion with my friends and colleagues) that the “not deaf enough” argument was a factor in the protest (due to claims by protesters that she did not embrace Deaf culture, did not sign ASL fluently, and in essence, the issue of deaf identity was raised); Dr. Jordan had no right to bring up these statements. Especially this:
Frankly, what is happening at Gallaudet is a struggle between defining the deaf community in narrow, exclusive terms or in broad, inclusive terms. There is a very small but vocal group of deaf people who define the community narrowly. I call this group the “absolutists.” They believe you are either deaf or you are not. You are either a supporter of ASL or you are not deaf. You either refuse to consider cochlear implants or you are not deaf. Many of our students, faculty and alumni who consider themselves deaf (including some born deaf to deaf families) would not be considered deaf by the absolutists.
Gallaudet has always been inclusive. But, yet, Gallaudet has always recognized and supported the traditional elite. This is a dialogue that Gallaudet needs to begin, and perhaps, during the protest, did begin. Maybe that is what Dr. Jordan is referring to. He is still wrong. People who joined the protest came from all walks of life. Over four thousand people marched to the Capitol on one bright Saturday morning last October. That group again consisted of people of different races, genders, communication modes, and levels of deafness.
If these people are absolutists, and what they marched for is a narrow definition of deafness, then their composition would imply that they are lying to themselves and supporting an ideal to which they themselves can never aspire.
After Dr. Jordan’s failed attempt to reconcile the community at Tent City on May 2, 2006, he has become increasingly hostile towards the people who embodied the intent behind the protest: creating an inclusive community at Gallaudet. What really disappointed me was the lame duck period in between the termination of Dr. Fernandes’ contract and the resignation of Dr. Jordan on December 31. Dr. Jordan made no attempt to reconcile the community and engage in coalition-building. The day after Dr. Fernandes’ termination, Dr. Jordan issued this statement:
Now we must all come together for the sake of Gallaudet, particularly for the sake of Gallaudet’s students–those who are our students now and those who will be students in the future.
Instead, by remaining largely silent except for statements of criticism or warning like the one he issued today, Dr. Jordan chose to shoot down the very institution he served for thirty-six years.
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
© 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.
It certainly has! And as always, some bloggers are playing fast and loose with the truth. Thanks DeafDC.com.
Regina:
I hope you don’t mind me posting this link under you since you are on the top and I do not want anyone to overlook this :)
Here’s a letter by Karl Ewan to the Editor at Washington Post in response to Dr. I. King Jordan’s op-ed:
http://blog.deafread.com/mishk.....he-editor/
Not at all. Thanks for the link.
Dr. Jordan explicitly said in the editorial that his policies would survive with Dr. Fernandes, implying that the selection of any other candidate was subversion.
Did he really try to dictate succession? Someone tell him autocracy died when the British monarchy couldn’t keep its rule across the waters of the Atlantic.
How can he actually have been most effective community spokeman like he claimed to be when he called a group of community members ‘absolutists?’
I guess he is showing his true color which he can no longer hid behind the veil of power.
What exactly he was trying to accomplish with his article? Shaming us back into submission? It was interesting to see that he have chosen nationwide media to express his opinion or view instead of telling us in person here at the Kendall Green or using the community based communication medium.
He is not living up his part of pled he made to the community via email ( October 29th and November 2nd ) was stopping the war of words among the community.
He became just another grumpy old man… ;)
He became just another grumpy old man. ;))
He became just another grumpy old man.
Sorry for the multiple entries. It was an error in transmission. Could the moderator, please, clean up the unnecessary repetitions? I would thank it very much!
*sigh* Let Dr. Davila take care of Jordan.
1 million deaf and hard of hearing people nationwide? 4 thousand absolutists? Sounds about right.
Actually, there are over 30 million deaf, hard-of-hearing people in the United States.
and a mincule of them are PAH ME DEAF WHOO HOO DEAF MY WAY YOU NOT MY WAY? HIGHWAY YOU GO
Actually that’s not techically true about 30 million deaf in this country. We had the same discussion in the other blog. Only approx. 2 million practice ASL in the the deaf community the rest are oral, HOH that can pass as hearing, and senior citizens who suffers from hearing loss, they have no involvement in the deaf community but they are welcome to it. Remember not all deaf people were part of the census! There could be more deaf people than we think, many people that are HOH are in denial that they are deaf and say i’m hearing when they are really HOH.
*** Anyway seems like JORDAN thinks GALLY cannot survive without him! That he is the only president that can run Gally!
Gallaudet survived all those years before IKJ and it surely will, sans IKJ! I no longer have sympathy for him after that op-ed. It was the final straw.
None of these former Gallaudet Presidents have agenda and passion to destroy an university they were employed by. And yes, all of these former Presidents at Gallaudet except for IKJ are hearing!
Oops! It should be “except for IKJ WERE hearing.”
Brian,
Please add your last name or initial or do something so that people know that you and I are two different people.
Thanks,
BR
Let’s see: The endowment increased from $5 million to more than $175 million. The university added new buildings and programs, while staying in the red and balancing the budget. Gee, you’re right, Chris. A more miserable failure for a university president has never lived.
Some very visible and vocal protest supporters have gone on record saying: ASL only. No sim-com allowed. If they don’t want to learn, and can’t pass the ASLPI test, they can go elsewhere. And so can everybody else who doesn’t use ASL. Are you oral, hard of hearing, late deafened, a cuer, a cochlear implantee, member of AGB? Do you voice and sign, voice alone, talk on the phone? Gallaudet isn’t for you. Way to make a deaf person feel welcome. By the way, Dr. Davila uses and advocates Signed English – has anyone noticed yet? Never mind. He’s popular. “Gallaudet has always been inclusive”??? Good one, Chris. Tell me another.
Which reminds me – why did I ever go to Gallaudet anyway? Wait, wait. I’m thinking. It’s a long word that starts with an E. … exercise? exorcism? I got it! Education, that’s what. But hey, I don’t see why Gallaudet can’t become a deaf club too. Why not be all things and for all people who never got a chance to go? Let’s have classes in the Rathskeller, the Abbey, or whatever they’re calling that den of iniquity right now. Chug some brews on national television. Rock Festivals every weekend, sell tickets, make some money. Chris Corrigan for President, why not? He’s popular. Turn the whole place over to the students and their puppetmasters. They’re a smart bunch and know better than anyone how to run Gallaudet.
Makes perfect sense.
Hi, Curious Eyes!
I’m curious - why was Gallaudet already shaking BEFORE the protest - actually the same year IKJ was announcing his retirement, where an F was given for the PART 2000-2005, by the White House? That’s pretty bad.
I think what people are trying to say is ASL usage, but still include all walks of life like oral, hoh, CI users, late-deafened, etc… that’s why people came to Gallaudet, because it is a signing campus?
I have had friends who were oralist and SEE users who went to Gallaudet and they loved it.
I didn’t see it as students trying to run Gallaudet, but rather saving it from a person whose leadership was proven to be ineffective for the last 11 years. Also, it wasn’t as if they just started the protest out of blue - they did try to contact BoT and IKJ-JFK Admin, to no avail.
Yes, Dr. Davila is not an ASL user and that just proves that we didn’t support the protest because of her “not deaf enuff”. Some say she even signs better than Davila - but he displayed a very good leadership and a very important relationship with the community - of all diversity.
I thought that made perfect sense. :)
“Some very visible and vocal protest supporters have gone on record saying: ASL only. No sim-com allowed. If they don’t want to learn, and can’t pass the ASLPI test, they can go elsewhere. And so can everybody else who doesn’t use ASL. Are you oral, hard of hearing, late deafened, a cuer, a cochlear implantee, member of AGB? Do you voice and sign, voice alone, talk on the phone? Gallaudet isn’t for you. Way to make a deaf person feel welcome.”
Um. Like who? Or is this just another strawman? Oh that’s right, I just thought of one or two people I know who might and probably have said those things.
I didn’t vote for them to represent Gallaudet. Did you? Did anybody? I didn’t see anybody lining up at the voting booth and saying, “those people represent the opinion of the majority of Gallaudetians”. Is there a vote?
Oh look, what’s that over there? Fred Phelps. He’s at http://www.godhatesfags.com and protests at solider’s funerals because he believes that our godless country caused the Iraq War. He’s just one guy, but hey, following your reasoning, he represents all evangelical baptists. He’s even a Democrat. Yep, you can betcha that him and Barack Obama is in the same boat. Those two *chuckles*. They’re just like that! I hear they regularly lunch with Hillary Clinton, too.
I feel for you, what you have experienced. I was there, too as a simcom user. I got burned, too. But I’m not going around blaming a whole group of people because of bad experiences I had with a small group. I remember my first semester at MSSD, arguing with one ASLer who did NOT understand that I used simcom because I was raised in a hearing environment and that I had every desire to learn ASL, in time. In the first day of school, she said to me, “You sign stupid. Why do you sign stupid? You look stupid.” and then tried to convince the teacher that I wasn’t smart enough to be in the class, all based on my signing ability. But I didn’t give up on MSSD or Gallaudet because of her.
It’s time we burned the strawman arguement and laid it to rest!!!!
Oh, and do you know what I would do if I saw her today? I’d give her a hug, ask her how her kids are. She was/still is a cool chick. She was just immature and didn’t know better at the time.
De facto, Congress founded Gallaudet specifically for deaf students because the communication of deaf students differs from that of hearing professors and hearing students. Faculty members received sign language training from Clerc and Clerc’s former deaf students to teach to deaf students. Oralists and CIers and cuers must learn ASL so Gallaudet would not have to hire oral interpreters and Cued interpreters for them in the classroom. All students in the classroom and teachers use ASL. Period. When in Rome, do what Romans do. The same can be said about
Gallaudet.
Jean Boutcher
Curious Eyes:
I never questioned Dr. Jordan’s ability to raise the endownment of Gallaudet to what it is today. I’m not going to deny that Dr. Jordan has the contacts in the metropolitan D.C. area. A lot of the people he recruited for the Gallaudet Board of Associates are prominent business leaders. I can name two that I feel are well-known: the late Katharine Graham, the publisher of the Washington Post, and Abe Pollin, the owner of Verizon Center and the Washington Wizards NBA team. Dr. Jordan had the ability to “connect” with these people.
But, that does not disregard the fact that this op-ed column alienates people, and makes a tough situation even more worse, when instead, Dr. Jordan should be acting in his role as president emeritus, helping guide Dr. Davila in a transitional period (according to what I have heard, Dr. Jordan refused to work with Dr. Davila in December after the announcement of the interim president).
You argue my statement that Gallaudet is and has always been inclusive. I ask you to counterpoint that. I was a undergrad and graduate student at Gallaudet. I sign ASL, I have a cochlear implant, I come from a hearing family. I was the SBG president at Gallaudet and while I know the situation was not Utopia, I saw faculty, staff, and administrators work hard to make the place inclusive for everyone. I met students in the cafeteria who said they were happy at Gallaudet. Why? Because they had equal access to everything they could not get elsewhere.
You also blast the education at Gallaudet. I made a promise to myself that within the first one to two years at Gallaudet, I’d leave for a “better” university. I never did that because I was happy with my education, and I pride my education at Gallaudet.
I just wish you could experience the “Gallaudet experience.”
Hello Chris Kaftan: forgive the late response, I found your comment just now. For the record, I graduated from Gallaudet too, and I’ve said on DeafDC.com that they were the best years of my life. Is that what you meant by “the Gallaudet experience”? I’m not aware that I blasted a Gallaudet education. I’m only questioning whether students go to Gallaudet for the education, or for the social life. Since Gallaudet’s “education” is supposedly so awful and has been for years, according to the protestors — the infamous F on the PART report, and so on and so forth — I can only conclude it’s for the social life. Wrong me?
I didn’t find Dr. Jordan’s op-ed alienating at all. I thought it was sad, but true. What’s sad is that he DID do a great job of President for 18 years. He DID have a plan for the transition of the presidency. He groomed Jane Fernandes for years as Provost hoping she would be able to step into his big shoes. JKF has her fans, as well as opponents. It’s the way of the world. And it was all for nothing. Instead of a permanent president, Gallaudet has an interim president, and things are pretty uncertain, with a lot of hard feelings on both sides. The healing has begun but it’s going to be a long process.
In the meantime, Dr. Jordan has received harsh criticism and scorn for his supposed complicity in promoting audism and abuses at Gallaudet. No wonder he isn’t interested in coming back to “help.” He will only get dumped on and trashed some more. Give the man a break, for Pete’s sake. When is anyone going to say something nice about him, and talk about all the good things he did for 18 years? Dr. Jordan is a hero to many deaf Americans, and gave us so much hope and optimism that we really can do anything except hear.
It’s disturbing to repeatedly read inflated, overwrought phrases like “massive opposition from the community” and “overwhelming majority of faculty voted no confidence” and similar hyperbole bandied around as absolute truths. It’s disturbing to read things like “IKJ and JKF damaged the university,” after they devoted their professional lives to teaching and administering at the university. It’s disturbing that members of the Gallaudet community can be so hypocritical, their smiling faces but a mask for the simmering rage, fear, and resentment that lies underneath.
Sure, Gallaudet is inclusive, but only if you are willing to learn and use ASL. For years, there has been discussion about how far Gallaudet should go to accommodate different languages (ASL or spoken English) and communication modes (SEE, PSE, sim-com, etc.), whether students can continue to be oral, get the auditory input they want and need. Lots of talk about how sim-com “mangles” ASL. Oral deaf people are criticized for talking on the phone or talking to each other with voice only in front of people who only use ASL. There’s opinions that ASL is the ONLY language of instruction appropriate for ALL deaf children. That is, bi-bi and nothing else. A good many people seem to feel that ASL and only ASL should be used at all times as the academic language at Gallaudet, and anyone who wants to use continue to be oral should go elsewhere. I believe those are the people Dr. Jordan was referring to when he spoke of absolutists.
Wildstarryskies, you have a good point that there are absolutists in any group and they don’t necessarily represent the views of the majority. But because our community is so small, and some of the extremists are so persuasive and influential, the potential for harm is much greater. That was Dr. Jordan’s point as I understood it.
When Jane Fernandes threatened the Board of Trustees that there would be years of chaos, turmoil and uncertainty unless she becomes the 9th president, she exactly knew what she was talking about. Jordan’s retirement was forced by overseers because of academic failures. Back already in 2005, there was an impending sense of disaster coming on the Gallaudet campus. Jordan had to go.
Now the chaos, turmoil and uncertainty hit the school just like Fernandes predicted. Not because of the protest, but because the overseers were excessively unsatisfied with the academic performance of Jordan. (While on other areas as scuba diving and running marathon Jordan did pretty well.) So we have to face now the accreditation struggle, as a legacy of the Jordan-Fernandes years.
Jordan is up to whitewashing his image, but the fact of the matter is that his reputation is mortally wounded. He tries everything to push the blame aside from his poor record as Gallaudet president, and he tries to blame everything on the protest and the protestors. But the Board of Trustees declared last October that the BEST INTEREST of Gallaudet was the termination of the Jordanite designate and they found a better person who would be able to face the challenges.
The MSA report made it clear, that the Jordanite governance system at Gallaudet is unacceptable in any decent higher education institute. In fact, King Jordan was an absolutist ruler on Kendall green, with all the miserable characteristics of the Middle Age absolutist rulers whom we know well from history book. An absolutist ruler would encroach into all decision making bodies, usurp and hijack their authority for his own benefit. That is exactly what Jordan did for 18 years.
It is high time that the absolutist ways of the Jordanite rule would be demolished so that Kendall Green could breath freely again.
Excellent write-up, CE. Exactly the same sentiments I feel. It’s hyperbole all around.
CE:
Thanks for your response. I recall now you did mention in an earlier blog you graduated from Gallaudet. I just didn’t connect it at the time.
No, not wrong you. Right you. When I referred to the Gallaudet experience, I was talking about everything Gallaudet has to offer — from extracurricular activities to academic life. If it wasn’t for Gallaudet, I wouldn’t have been the EIC of the Buff and Blue, the SBG president, a fraternity member, and most importantly, created lifelong friendships and met my future wife. Like I said in a previous comment, I value my education seriously and if I felt that my education was not fulfilling, I would seek out alternate avenues. I did not feel that way during my time at Gallaudet. So, you are right…there are students at Gallaudet who go for the social experience only. Even students I’ve taught at MSSD go one to Gallaudet and they tell me that they’re just there for the parties. But I want to make this clear, this isn’t only isolated to Gallaudet. This happens with hearing students at hearing colleges as well.
I agree with you mostly, about Dr. Jordan’s tenure. I am pleased with what he has done. He listed his accomplishments in the op-ed and he cared about the students. I believe this op-ed is a byproduct of the bitter taste in his mouth of how the Board reacted and how his final year went.
I am, however, questioning his motives in doing this…and as my title suggests, this has a feel of a wildfire. It looks like Jordan is trying to drag Gallaudet down, scold us, punish us. Fair? No.
I don’t disagree with your comment about the use of ASL — it’s true for the most part. Again, this is a discussion the entire community at Gallaudet must take. There is no true bilingual philosophy. Anyone who says so is a flake.
There should be a dual-lingual philosophy at Gallaudet (and residential schools) where English and ASL are used as the languages of instruction.
What happened last spring and fall was necessary for change, and we need to work together to see this happen. CE, as an alumni of Gallaudet, I hope you participate in this.
I know I will.
Chris, of course I will. But this relentless bashing of IKJ and JKF has to stop. In case anyone has forgotten, they are one of us — Deaf people. The positive message of Deafhood applies to them as much as it does to everyone else. Agree or disagree with the BoT’s decisions, with IKJ’s or JKF’s administrative skills and decisions, they deserve our respectful attention. The respect goes both ways — although I disagree with the protest’s methods and tactics, and the truthfulness of the claims, I also agree that there were some problems that were not being addressed. I hereby vow to cease and desist casting aspersions on their intelligence and motives. If anyone catches me doing it from this point forward, please administer 20 lashes with a wet noodle.
Curious Eyes:
I think that you are not aware of the fact that Jordan refuses to consider himself as deaf. He said to the media:
“I am NOT (emphasis mine) deaf. I am late-deafened hearing.” He is one of the largest contributors to the late-deafened association, not to the NAD. How convenient of him to label us “absolutists”. What he has failed to realise is that most oralists have become stauncer supporters of ASL more than those who are native ASLers. I, for one, am a former oralist. I support the studies and findings that ASL is the best for all babies, be they hearing or deaf (NIH, 1990, 1992, 2000).
Jean, I think you are not aware that Deafhood, as I understand it, encompasses all people with hearing loss, whether they call themselves Deaf, deaf, hh, late-deafened, deaf-blind, ex-oralist, or any of the other myriad flavors thereof. Just because a person does not identify with the “classical ‘D’eaf culture ASL user” doesn’t him or her any less a member of the larger deaf community. One need not embrace ASL or be stone-deaf or born deaf to be a self-realized and self-actualized deaf person. There is nothing wrong with contributing to a late-deafened organization instead of NAD. Free country — hello? “ASL best for all babies, hearing or deaf?” Um. Perhaps you’d like to consider that statement.
Thank you, Chris, for bringing this up. If it’s anybody I expect from DeafDC, it would be you. I am sickened by what I. King Jordan shared with the public through the Washington Post.
It speaks volumes the kind of person I. King Jordan is for not acknowledging Dr. Davila. Dr. Davila spoke warmly of him during his first speech and is this what Dr. Davila gets from him? Dr. Davila is a better person for it. As my mother always said to all of us, “Don’t stoop to their level and what goes around comes around.”
I’m of two minds on this op-ed. I’m surprised at what Dr. Jordan wrote… It wasn’t very graceful. And Chris Kaftan made a very good point when he mentioned that Dr. Jordan didn’t name Dr. Davila in the article. A politically savvy person like him writing like that? Ouch. Hopefully those two will sit down eventually and smooth things over.
And I find Dr. Jordan’s comment very interesting about continuing things as they were at Gallaudet. That to me, does lend credence to the protestors’ claims that one reason JKF was chosen was to help continue what Dr. Jordan was doing, and possibly covering up some wrongdoings.
On the other hand, I can see why Dr. Jordan’s bitter. The protests were an extremely bitter, traumatic event. This was not a dignified protest. Personal attacks were made. Death threats were made. And the deaf community for the most part, did not condemn those attacks. Some even celebrated those attacks.
And by removing JKF, it was a slap in his face, because he had installed her as provost then recommended her for president. Basically it told Dr. Jordan, ‘We don’t trust your judgment. We don’t have faith in you.’
So I don’t know. My main reaction is just, ‘Ouch!’
~ Deaf Pundit
Yeah…I get you, but what death threats? I didn’t see any except for one that JKF mentioned about an OLD “joke” made way back in May that she bought up in late fall. I was very involved during the protest - blogwise, that is, and keeping in tight contact with people.
That’s another mess IKJ made - picking Jane without search selection process, which he publicly admitted it was the wrong thing to do.
Yet, he recommended her to become the next President. It makes me wonder if his public admittance of doing the wrong thing was genuine or his way of hoping the public within Gallaudet community will sweep it under the rug and say nothing when JKF went on to become the 9th President, after more qualified candidates were eliminated.
I meant to say he recommended JKF as a candidate and forgot to add “it’s” before “his way of…” I hate it when there’s no editing option, but then I need to control my impulsiveness! LOL
For Deaf Pundit:
I agree about the possibility of covering up some wrongdoings, including $4 million. So Jordan is depicted as very desperate in his article. Now he has to reap what he has sowed,
n’est-ce pas?
Noelle,
Yes, 30 million deaf and hard of hearing people in USA. If I am right 24,000 Gallaudet alumnis. Only 2,000 to 4,000 marchers. Only 6,000 signed in the petition on internet yet the protesters thought they got more anti fernandes than pro fernandes, no wonder they do not earn public’s respect. Good thing there are more smart deaf people than the protesters.
Right, but you are forgetting from supporters who couldn’t make it out to there. :)
Are you implying that I’m a stupid deaf person for supporting those protesters? Be careful how you respond - I am a mother of four hearing children, married to a hearing husband who can’t sign worth sh*t, but I love him with all of my heart! :) I also am a CI user.
Those protesters were intelligent and brave to stand up for what they strongly believed in. Good for them!
I also knew some people who were for the protest, but didn’t sign the petition.
Scooters,
Correction:
There are 14, 000 Gallaudet Alumnus..
Not 24,000..
14,000 Gally alumnus? Are you counting people that went to Gally that did not graduate? Do people who actually went to Gally but never graduated count? Not everyone can attend or complete Gally if they wanted to. Could be due to financial stress or family issues. Some of those who never graduated but attended would feel they are part of Gally as well. If that is true, how many would that be?
Brian is correct. An alumnus/alumna is anyone who attended a university, whether or not he/she graduated. And he is also correct that many alumni feel as closely to their university as one who has graduated. The number should include all who attended Gallaudet, but can’t tell by looking at that number.
Jordan said: “There is a very small but vocal group of deaf people who define the community narrowly. I call this group the ‘absolutists.’ They believe you are either deaf or you are not.”
Chris Kaftan said: “While it is my personal opinion (after post-protest discussion with my friends and colleagues) that the “not deaf enough” argument was a factor in the protest (due to claims by protesters that she did not embrace Deaf culture, did not sign ASL fluently, and in essence, the issue of deaf identity was raised).”
Is it me or the two statements sound nearly identical? Both do talk about the small minority of deaf people, no? It’s about a certain inclusiveness from a certain group of people who are like this, no? And Jordan doesn’t have the right to say his opinion, which is correct, but Chris can? Correct me if I wrong on seeing this.
Also, did the thought ever occur to people that perhaps Jordan wanted to remain silent so as to let Davila work his magic and not overshadow his efforts with his comments?
Another thing, one can be an “absolutist” and be quiet about it while participating in the march/protest and still keep their own personal agenda intact. But just make sure he doesn’t upset the “deafhood” apple cart placed before everyone as a reminder not to be that “absolutist.” Just because one participated in the protest does not mean he or she could not have been an “absolutist”. We saw some of those “absolutists” in various forms whether it’s in the form of vandalism, hateful commentaries, demands of ASL-only-or-yer out, or the ever so oft quoted “then-why-are-you-here-at-gallaudet-for?” and so on. Granted, this would be most likely a very small minority of people who could be this. But, oh, they do exist. No doubt.
As I have said this again and again, I view this fault as everybody’s. A “mea culpa” for all. But do they say it? I do. Somehow I’m at fault in this but how? What about other people? Do they say they’re at fault somehow in this whole mess, too? Then why do I see more blame and finger pointing in this article?
Let Davila do his work and move forward, folks.
yes I notice it is very similar, to be honest i never fully understood what really sparked the protest, there was too many different reasons. Jane not being deaf enough, not ASL enough, or election was not properly conducted to elect the next Deaf President but from what I see from Chris’s opinion is that he believes “NOT DEAF ENOUGH” was a factor, I find that insulting because exactly how deaf do you have to be deaf in order to be in deaf community? If a Deaf person who is considered deaf by decibals but yet can hear with hearing aid and speak well but signs fluently not deaf enough? Really how do you define deaf enough? I do not think “deaf enough” was the real factor. It was how Jane approached the deaf community and how she is not involved with deaf community, not how deaf she is but to criticize her ASL, if it is because she lacked in deaf social community then I understand but I am already hearing complaints about Davila’s ASL ability. I think we shall not judge the book by its cover based on their ASL ability but their heart for the deaf community. Does Jane F. have the heart and compassion for the deaf community? From the complaints of other Gally staff, she does not. So I do understand that reason but not ASL enough is not good enough for me, but if she cannot sign at all, then we definitely have a problem. I am not saying ASL enough, some deaf sign very very well and they are very well understood but not ASL enough, I was like? OK, elaborate for me please.
Gotta agree here. There’s clearly a small group of people who have a far more extreme and exclusionary view of what is acceptably “deaf”.
Now, IJK managed to make it sound like the entire protest involved only this “small vocal group” and that is clearly not the case; there were many others also protesting outside of this exclusionary minority.
But that fact does not make the problem presented by these “absolutists” (for lack of a better term) in the deaf community go away. It’s still something we need to address.
“But that fact does not make the problem presented by these “absolutists” (for lack of a better term) in the deaf community go away. It’s still something we need to address.
”
The problem will not go away! EVERY group has their own asolutists/fundamentalists/militants.
What we need to do is to put it in perspective, and be grateful that they do us an useful service by identifying important issues that have been festering underground. Extremists do not spring out of thin air. When there is something that is bothering people, there are always a few who take the ball and run with it.
Eye on the ball, that’s what I say. In this case, the ball is bi-bi philosophy and the use of language in the deaf community. Let’s talk about this, instead of moaning and wringing our hands over some extremists (on both sides) who do not represent the community as a whole.
bingo. couldn’t have said it any better.
Someone needs to write to the editor of The Washington Post that Gallaudet has always been inclusive for more than a century, accepting oralists. Cochlear implantées entered Gallaudet before Jordan became president.
It has been a well-establishede fact that Jordan had never supported DPN. When Dr. Zinser resigned, he veni, vidi, VICI. Alas, like the last chapter of Oscar Wilde’s book, “The Picture of Dorian Gray,” Jordan has now shown his true dark colors as depicted on Black Friday and in the op-ed of The Post. Not having disclosed “Dr. Davila” as the Interim President is one of many disrespectful acts Jordan has committed for 36
years at Gallaudet.
In think you misread the editorial.
He wasnt saying that the campus wasnt or isnt inclusive, but that there is a possibility of it happening when “absolutists” take power.
Methinks you haven’t read all comments he’s made
from May to the present. Read Buff & Blue!!!!!!!
J Boutcher.
Davila really should not apply for this job after putting a stumbling block on JF’s road to presidency by writing a letter asking JF to resign in (public) FSSA link. It is like snatching the job for himself cheaply. I bet you a hundred bucks if Davila were a woman he would never be able to sit in the president’s office.
It was deaf leaders that urged him to apply as Interim President. It is like American boys being drafted in the army by the president. Please note that he was eliminated from one of the six-finalist group in 1988 so the BoT could move Jordan and Corson into the three-finalist group along with Dr. Elizabeth Zinser. Dr. Davila retired from the public life, but he yielded to the demand by deaf leaders and sacrificed courageously to return to the public life despite his 74 years of age. Please memorize forever that he was an unschooled little boy, working on farms for his widowed mother. By manna, he became deafened. Voilà.
We would be pleased if you would kindly change your adverb from “cheaply” to “courageously.”
Best regards.
Cochlear implants widespread before Jordan got into Gally? You got something to back that up? If not, dont worry, I’ll still give you a pat on the head.
A question.
I read the editorial and knew that it would inflame passions even more. It might change people’s opinion against him.
I ask, why did he write it? Did he mean to create more tension on campus or was he trying to save his reputation on campus and to the general society at large?
Is there anything going on that would cause him to do this.
I wonder what will this mean for a future president of your campus bein that his point that the person has to run the university at an academic level and at a PR level to a larger community. It narrows down the number of people significantly and even then they may not be the best qualified.
He is unhappy because he was forced to retire due to his disastrous management of Gallaudet’s academic matters.
He is unhappy because he was forced to retire due to his disastrous management of Gallaudet’s academic matters.
My thoughts exactly. What was he trying to accomplish by writing this editorial?
He has been generally silent on campus. Writing this in a mainstream publication makes me think he’s playing a PR game in which he can put anyone who didn’t support the board’s selection into a “Deaf militant” basket. Like Chris Heuer says below, the polarizing effect is dangerous.
I keep looking for some angle I’ve overlooked.
if there’s one, maybe IKJ really believes that gallaudet’s being taken over by ASL extremists and is trying to stir up enough outrage for the public to somehow intervene. or trying to shame the BoT into following his vision of the university.
he calls the protesters “absolutists”. but to see the protest as a spawn of ASL militancy and nothing else is an absolutist way of thinking.
I agree, Ben.
The easiest way to understand Jordan is to realize that almost every insult he makes against other people is actually what he is himself. He is constantly projecting.
BR
What’s happening here is very dangerous. Keep making these kinds of arguments in the Post, whose readership is largely ignorant about deaf-related issues, and sooner or later the only two paradigms through which that readership will be able to understand deaf people and their issues will be the following: the “Not deaf enough” paradigm and the “ASL absolutists” paradigm. And whether you think IKJ is justified in doing/saying this or not, those paradigms hurt all of us.
For example, take any given issue in this community… say Bi-Bi. Imagine that I wanted to support it, solely because I think that early exposure to language–not necessarily ASL but ANY accessible language–is what promotes literacy skills, and since I believe that ASL can do that for deaf kids more than cochlear implants currently can, Bi-Bi is good, and in fact necessary, and can potentially help countless deaf children avoid illiteracy.
That argument has NO premise in Deaf Absolutism or Deaf Extremism or ASL Militancy or any of that. It’s a well-reasoned argument founded on quite a bit of research.
But what’s going to stop my political opponents from shooting me down as a Deaf Absolutist now? Especially with the readily available ammo that articles of this type (IKJ’s piece in the Post) are providing them with? When they start shooting the general public STILL won’t understand the issues any better than it does now, and my detractors will KNOW that. It’s PERFECT for them–it’s manna (sp?) from Heaven. Imagine that their real reason for arguing against me is something unethical… they don’t want any kind of negative impact on the CI industry, for example… they don’t want to see a drop in sales. I’m not arguing that that’s currently what all of them think but it’s possible that’s what’s on the minds of SOME of them.
Okay, so how to solve the problem? Simple. Point at me and call me a Deaf Militant. Hearing parents will have been so conditioned by that time, they’ll already be running for the door before I can put together a counter-argument.
Please for a second look beyond the response of “Well, those protesters brought this down on us, so blame them!” The protesters didn’t write this op-ed. It’s the mere act of making these terms more popular (Deaf Militant, Deaf Absolutist, etc) in mainstream media that’s eventually going to start creating real problems for us if we ever start fighting for changes practically anywhere… including in the field of Deaf Ed.
What you just saw today was the creation of one more paradigm through which hearing people, who knows how many, will eventually come to discriminate against all of us, and to maintain their prejudices against us.
I urge everyone to scroll down that Op-Ed article and post your comment for the public to also read instead of taking everything what I. King Jordan said at a face value.
Your ” I am already a victim” mentality is part of the problem.
You paint yourself into a corner of already being persecuted and any attempt to change that is rebuffed because on some level that persecution gives you a platform for other issues.
Hi Johan:
You’re going to need to explain this a bit more. I’m not sure I understand.
Your last three paragraphs point at yourself and already act as though the general public was attacking you.
As if they were calling you a deaf militant and trying to discriminate against you.
Your last paragraph already assumes that there is a deep anger that will be strengthened and that you will be further pushed into the side.
That assumes a lot and while it provides a great tool for finding a source of anger I am not sure it is based in reality.
Johan, I said “suppose.” Which makes everything hypothetical. Is my position so far-fetched? I can give you several real-life examples. The first being the UFG protest. My own reason for supporting it, rest assured, has NOTHING to do with Deaf Cultural Extremism, as today’s op-ed piece would have the general public believe. Second example: Shane Feldman’s article in here (I believe it was on the abuse of the term audism) which he ended by saying something like “…and if anyone disagrees with the prosters, they aren’t deaf enough.” (No offense to you, Shane, I know what you meant, but I’m trying to point out how that mentality could spread until it becomes the same kind of thing a lot of people in DeafDC accuse Ridor of, for example… he supposedly rejects many of your arguments because you’re not deaf enough, and many of you reject his because he’s too deaf. Where are the rest of us supposed to live between those two huge cannon you’ve got pointing at each other? Third example: Starving For Access. The community of Flint Michigan was ENORMOUSLY resistant to Bi-Bi philosophies, linking it to…? You guessed it… Deaf Militancy. Practically no amount of argumentation could convince many of them otherwise.
Thus what I’ve described above in my original argument could very easily happen.