Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.
To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser.
AI
This literature review explores the intersections of disability and deaf studies through a personal narrative lens, extending Martin Luther King Jr.'s legacy to encompass various forms of marginalization. It highlights the impact of oralism on the deaf community and advocates for a collaborative approach in addressing social justice issues, particularly through the framework of Crip Theory. Emphasizing the importance of storytelling and autoethnography, the discussion interrogates how societal structures shape identities, exclusions, and the quest for inclusion among disabled and deaf individuals.
Journal of deaf studies and deaf education, 2008
This article draws on some of the existing literature on the politics of identity and representation as related to minority group formation. It applies this to constructions of Deaf 2 identity from a cultural and linguistic perspective and contrasts this with dominant constructions of Deaf people as disabled. It highlights a number of ways in which Deaf identity differs from disabled identity, demonstrating that the cultural and linguistic construction of Deaf people is a more useful tool for analysis. It raises questions aimed to examine the discourse on deafness and seeks further debate on how best the discourse can be progressed. The article raises issues related to the use of terminology and labeling in the field of deafness. It contends that the continued use of the word deafness is unworkable and should be more widely recognized as a social construct, which has current usage beyond the paradigm in which it was originally intended. The article concludes by recognizing the importance of diversity in identity formation, while simultaneously calling for an appreciation of the need to incorporate this diversity within wider theorizing, focused on commonality and cohesion in identity as a source of collective expression and political mobilization.
Ear & Hearing, 2018
Sign Language Studies, 2013
S eve ral sc h olar s have asked what are the relations between two recently developed concepts, Deaf ethnicity and Deafhood. The emergence of these concepts, along with others such as "audism" (Humphries 1977), "dysconscious audism," "Sign Language Peoples," and "Deaf Gain" reflects important attempts by Deaf communities and their allies to redefine Deaf peoples, their cultures, and their languages. As part of the same process, starting in the 1990s, older concepts such as "People of the Eye," have been presented anew, and externally generated concepts such as postcolonialism have been brought to bear. Similar processes of redefining identity can be found among other minority groups, such as African Americans, women, gays and lesbians and disabled people, all of whom have felt the need to escape the reductionist lens of definitions created by oppressors, developing instead conceptualizations that assist with the liberation of their communities. "Deaf ethnicity" and "Deafhood" are two such conceptualizations. We start by explaining "Deaf ethnicity" and "Deafhood," and then we address their relations.
Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf …, 2010
Joining scholars signaling the need for new directions in Deaf Studies, the authors recommend a more expansive, nuanced, and interdisciplinary approach that encompasses the many ways deaf people live today. Rather than destroy Deaf culture, this approach is the only realistic way to allow it and Deaf Studies to survive. Deaf Studies today continues the focus of founding scholarship on native White American Sign Language users, now head of a powerful hierarchy through which they receive privileged status at the expense of deaf people with different language backgrounds and races or ethnicities. This marginalization is unsustainable and impedes knowledge. A companion article (this issue), “Deaf Studies: A Critique of the Predominant U.S. Theoretical Direction,” analyzes this reactive stance that is oriented by a focus on audism built on the concepts of phonocentrism and colonialism. For Deaf Studies to be fully an academic field upholding intellectual values, scholars must broaden their focus of study to encompass diverse deaf people—diverse in communication, culture, race, and ethnicity. A companion article, “Deaf Studies: A Critique of the Predominant U.S. Theoretical Direction,” looks at the intellectual stance framed by a theory of audism and built on concepts of phonocentrism and colonialism. Together, the two articles reveal the predominant direction in Deaf Studies and in the core White Deaf community as reactive toward changing historical conditions and the variety of deaf lives today. Incorporating other scholars’ signals of the need for new directions in Deaf Studies, the authors recommend that the field take a more expansive, nuanced, and interdisciplinary approach that encompasses the many ways deaf people live today. Some worry that such changes will destroy Deaf culture. In the face of tremendous changes in technology and greater access for deaf people to the hearing mainstream, it is the only realistic way to allow it and Deaf Studies to survive. The predominant direction in Deaf Studies departments and programs in U.S. institutions of higher education, however, continues the focus and concerns that established the field in the 1970s with the scholarly recognition of American Sign Language (ASL) and Deaf culture. This founding scholarship validates and instills pride in native ASL users and demarcates boundaries of Deaf culture. What remains in the shadows is the fact that the pride of ASL users has evolved into a powerful hierarchy through which native White ASL users and those born into Deaf culture receive privileged status at the expense of other deaf people. Changing historical conditions are eschewed for a frame of audism that casts events as part of a repeating, endless oppression by hearing people in which deaf people participate as a marginalized, embattled Other. Certainly, native users of ASL maintained the language and culture associated with it through times of extreme oppression. Hence, this group will always have historical importance. However, today both activists and some scholars fix cultural borders and stigmatize ways other deaf people live. These issues demonstrate barriers to an inclusive and proactive Deaf Studies. http://jdsde.oxfordjournals.org/content/15/1/17.full#abstract-1
Sign Language Studies, 2017
Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 2005
Born-deaf, sign-language-using people have for the past two centuries been placed within a succession of externally constructed models, notably the traditional ''medical'' or pathological model. This perceives them primarily as biologically deficient beings in need of cures or charity in order to be successfully assimilated into society. This paper proposes that the concept of colonialism is the one that most appropriately describes the ''existential'' reality of deaf communities, and offers instead a deaf-constructed model. Utilizing recent confirmation of the existence of bona-fide feaf cultures, it highlights the extent to which these communities have resisted such models, maintaining their own beliefs concerning their validity and quality of their existence, and what they offer to non-deaf societies. This ''vulnerability as strength'' is manifested through the concept of deafhood, which is presented as the first move towards a formal narrative of decolonizing and liberatory possibilities.
Sociology, 2014
American Annals of the Deaf, 158(5): pp. 428-438 , 2013
The authors argue that Deafhood (a term coined by Dr. Paddy Ladd) is an open-ended concept with an essentialist core. They describe how deaf people who have attended their Deafhood lectures and workshops have perceived different aspects of the Deafhood concept, and compare the basic tenets of Deafhood and criticisms on Deafhood to theories and criticisms on feminist essentialisms. The authors find that the vagueness and wideness of the Deafhood concept is one of its strengths, though they also find that it is in some respects problematic to combine and unite ontology and liberation theory in one concept. They further sug- gest that the ontological aspects of Deafhood need to be foregrounded. The question of essentialism inherent in the Deafhood concept is also briefly discussed with regard to hearing people, the use of spoken lan- guage, and the use of amplification technology and cochlear implants.
Scandinavian journal of public health. Supplement, 2005
Born-deaf, sign-language-using people have for the past two centuries been placed within a succession of externally constructed models, notably the traditional "medical" or pathological model. This perceives them primarily as biologically deficient beings in need of cures or charity in order to be successfully assimilated into society. This paper proposes that the concept of colonialism is the one that most appropriately describes the "existential" reality of deaf communities, and offers instead a deaf-constructed model. Utilizing recent confirmation of the existence of bona-fide feaf cultures, it highlights the extent to which these communities have resisted such models, maintaining their own beliefs concerning their validity and quality of their existence, and what they offer to non-deaf societies. This "vulnerability as strength" is manifested through the concept of deafhood, which is presented as the first move towards a formal narrative of decoloni...
Human Organization, 2015
In our research with d/Deaf people in five families in the North and South Islands of New Zealand, we found that some of the challenges that we as researchers faced in our encounters with participants and within our mixed hearing and d/Deaf research group paralleled broader issues for this community. We use the details of our field research processes to explore the conundrum of d/Deafness, which may or may not be a disability and use this exploration to reflect on approaches to d/Deafness as revealed in our research findings. We argue that d/Deafness creates a predicament, but not only for the d/Deaf. We propose that practical solutions to this predicament may be thought of as services that enable citizenship, participation, communication, and care, rather than disability services, and this rethinking would ease the cognitive and cultural dissonance experienced by perfectly able d/Deaf people who have to access disability services in their everyday life.
Canadian Journal of Disability Studies
I am one of a handful of signing deaf tenure-track or tenured professors in Canada. To my knowledge, I am also the only one who teaches a stand-alone university course in Deaf Studies that is not part of a sign language interpreter or teacher of the deaf training program. As such, I was delighted to read Innovations in Deaf Studies: The Role of Deaf Scholars edited by Annelies Kusters, Maartje De Meulder, and Dai O’ Brien. In this work I find many of my scholarly experiences and concerns reflected on an international scale.
2019
This paper discusses four issues regarding the potential for research to be misguided when white, hearing persons, who are members of the majority culture, conduct investigations on members of two minority cultures, deaf and Asian-Padfic people. One potential danger is that researchers may draw conclusions that facilitate inappropriate stereotyping of deaf and Asian-PadfLc persons. In addition, there are potential problems regarding credibility when researchers who are members of the majroity culture write about individuals in a minority culture. Misguided work is less likely to occur when researchers who belong to the majority group are involved in the minority culture. However, involvement by such researchers is not enough; it is also important to have more researchers who are themselves members of deaf and Asian-Padfic minority groups. The papers by Akamatsu (1994) and Foster (1994) provide fascinating discussions about researchers who are "outsiders,*' that is white, he...
Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf …, 2010
The focus and concerns establishing Deaf Studies in the 1970s have rigidified into a reactive stance toward changing historical conditions and the variety of deaf lives today. This critique analyzes the theoretical foundation of this stance: a tendency to downplay established research in the field of Deaf Studies and linguistics, the employment of outdated examples of discrimination, an uncritical acceptance of Derrida's phonocentrism, flawed uses of Saussure's linguistic theory, and reliance on the limiting metaphor of colonialism. The purpose of the critique ultimately is to point Deaf Studies in a new direction. Issues with conceptualizing an expanded Deaf Studies are the focus of a companion article (this issue), “Inclusive Deaf Studies: Barriers and Pathways" -- at http://jdsde.oxfordjournals.org/content/15/1/17.full
Handbook on Promoting Social Justice in Education
In this chapter, it will be argued that there are two fundamentally different ways in which deafness can be conceptualized: as a pathological medical condition (deafness) and as a distinctive linguistic, cultural, and social identity (Deafness). The characteristics and attributes of the Deaf cultural community (called the DEAF-WORLD in American Sign Language) will be explored: the role and place of its vernacular language (ASL), the awareness of group identity shared by its members, its distinctive behavioral norms, its endogamous marital patterns, the cultural artifacts that are most closely associated with it, its shared, insider
2019
Names are both personal and political, as they relate to identity. Woodward’s 1975 etic article first mentioned a naming convention for D/deaf and prominent scholars have debated the issue since. To evaluate current preferences, the research team used an online questionnaire to gather emic insights and opinions from the community, as well as a more etic perspective from hearing individuals for work with these issues. Data from these three self-identified groups of participants, Deaf, deaf, and hearing, were analyzed. Results found high variability among responses related to the terms, D/deaf, and whether or not certain terms should remain in the lexicon. Results are discussed and presented both to contribute and to further research in the field. It is recommended that the usage of existing term(s) be adhered to and that an individual’s preferred naming conventions be respected and utilized whenever possible.
Développement humain, handicap et changement social, 2022
Tous droits réservés © Réseau International sur le Processus de Production du Handicap, 2009 Ce document est protégé par la loi sur le droit d'auteur. L'utilisation des services d'Érudit (y compris la reproduction) est assujettie à sa politique d'utilisation que vous pouvez consulter en ligne. https://apropos.erudit.org/fr/usagers/politique-dutilisation/ Cet article est diffusé et préservé par Érudit. Érudit est un consortium interuniversitaire sans but lucratif composé de l'
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.