Mocking Hearing Inpaired

[ShockMe]

To be quite shocked that after a member of the public had posted that they had found a hearing aid and hoped to re-unite it with it's owner.. Our local school's SEN teacher commented 'Pardon?'

So is the BSL user going to learn deafblind manual to communicate with me?

Yes! They bloody should. And often they don't/won't. And it's shit when they don't do that. It reeks of hypocrisy.

Although to be fair, the literacy levels of many BSL users is still such that deciphering their fingerspelling can be a task.

However, in relation to non deafblind, deaf people, all other things being equal, if they want to integrate in to the Deaf BSL community, they do need to make some effort to learn BSL.

How do you suggest deaf BSL users communicate with non signing deaf?
In the same way as they communicate with non-signing hearing. We are all communicating effectively on this thread, despite an array of disabilities. I've no idea who is a BSL user.

I think that the divisions within deaf people are about the worst that I have seen within any disability and is in some cases, utterly disgraceful and downright nasty. I supported a parent who was ripped to shreds by what she thought was a deaf support group because she was investigating cochlear implants for her child.

I completely reject the whole notion that you can self-identify as any kind of disabled unless you are actually disabled.

Deaf doesn't even mean deaf - it just means BSL user.

Deaf doesn't even mean deaf - it just means BSL user

Exactly. I completely understand that CI technology is perceived to threaten the very existence of the Deaf community. But so does refusing to interact with deaf and CI users.

Bitchy, I am aware that literacy can be an issue for deaf BSL users.
As such if I communicate with a deaf BSL user I take that into account.
There are indeed terrible stories of deaf children going to deaf schools and being forbidden to use BSL which affective my lead them to be very vulnerable.
However in my town you have a situation. Whereby there is a charity for blind people and a charity for deaf people on the same street.
The blind society is open to all, regardless to level of vision.
The deaf society is only for BSL users.
So as a deafblind person I am welcome at one but not the other.

I think there needs to be far more awareness.

The number of times I am asked "oh, do you sign?" When I tell people I am deaf - well it's a lot.

Most deaf people DON'T sign.

Now if course if you are a BSL user that is vey frustrating I am sure. But the deaf BSL user and deaf non BSL user are still facing the same issues. It's s shame they are so exclusive.

Anyway, technology today is making many things more accessible. I even read an article the other day about gloves that you wear when you sign and it interprets it to text to anae BSL/non BSL communication.

But as need says - it's not possible to identify as deaf if you are not deaf. That's mightily insulting.
And being a hearing BSL user does not make anyone an expert on deafness.
Being deaf makes you an expert on deafness :)

In the same way as they communicate with non-signing hearing.

But non signing hearing are not trying to be members of the Deaf community.

Deaf = BSL user, someone who sees themself as a member of a linguistic minority. They reject the notion of D/deafness as a disability. Generally - though not always - they reject things like cochlear implants (esp for children).

If you don't ascribe to those views, and don't want to/can't learn BSL, why would you want to be part of the capital D Deaf, BSL using community?

deaf society is only for BSL users.

Who runs it? Is it the council? If so, I'd kick up hell.

Is it a Deaf organisation like BDA? If it's a capital D Deaf led organisation/charity, they're surely entitled to set up a society aimed at BSL users.

If it's a charity claiming to represent the interests of all D/deaf people, and then excluding deaf non signers, they should be called to book.

The number of times I am asked "oh, do you sign?" When I tell people I am deaf - well it's a lot

Yep. Along with you don't look/sound deaf

n the same way as they communicate with non-signing hearing. We are all communicating effectively on this thread, despite an array of disabilities. I've no idea who is a BSL user.

Many Deaf BSL users wouldn't be able to communicate on this thread, because of their level of English (their 2nd language)!

Mumsnet, by dint of the fact it's a community predicates on the written word, is off limits to many BSL users.

Hey NeedAnotherGlass the difference in definitions I gave is because EXDSIL was profoundly deaf from birth, went to a school for the deaf and even with hearing aids was severely limited in her speech. Even with the implants she is still recognisably deaf and as such found it difficult to stay employed in the past etc. She has always received disability benefits, though I don't know whether the implants have affected that, although she doesn't consider herself really disabled as she is physically fit and active. She has been heavily involved with several Deaf charities over the years so I think she is still part of the Deaf community to an extent.

OTOH, my Dad has only recently gone deaf due to age, but fairly severely for his age. I lost a significant portion of hearing due to meningitis as a small child, but after I learned to speak. I lost further hearing in my 20s, and am losing more now I'm mid thirties. Both of us can speak clearly, I only have very basic BSL skills and with hearing aids we have functional hearing. I would never try to be part of the Deaf community tbh. I feel it would be appropriation of an identity that isn't mine. I am disabled, but for other reasons and deafness is only a very small part of a genetic condition that effects my sight, hearing, mobility and other systems of the body. However I keep getting rejected for DLA/PIP and I work full time to ensure I can pay my bills. TBH being physically disabled I can see why Deaf people reject the idea of being disabled, as does my ASD DS.

Sorry to weigh in on this thread, I'm a lurker and this probably goes against MN etiquette but looking for your views on this regarding sign, if it had happened to you. I'm HoH and worry that I might lose my hearing (as other family members have) as I age. I've finished L1 BSL and about to start L2.

Just today I asked a man who was slowly typing each word he wanted to communicate on to his phone screen to show it to the assistant who was then mouthing exaggeratedly the answers back. I offered to sign, got nervous and my signing looked rubbish because of nerves. I felt like a complete prat, the man told me he was getting on fine using the phone. Was I being patronising and overstepping by offering? Am sitting here annoyed at myself now thinking I've been so rude, especially as I read this thread. He was maybe a non BSL user. Sorry for the slight highjack, it is related as to BSL and am now worrying sick about it.

However I keep getting rejected for DLA/PIP and I work full time to ensure I can pay my bills.

Are you getting ATW, at least?

Was I being patronising and overstepping by offering?

It depends, especially on your manner.

But the thing is, you've sort of assumed that the man was:

1. deaf
2. a BSL user

The vast majority of deaf people are not BSL users.

Was there anything in the interaction you observed to make you think he was a signer?

Tbh, I'd be moderately surprised to see a BSL user using the device described. It makes me think he was probably late deafened.

Did he speak to you or sign?

It makes me think he was probably late deafened.

But then, if he were late deafened, why would he be typing??

Sorry, having a blonde moment.

He just smiled and waved his hand in a universal 'everything's OK' way before pointing to the phone. Sorry, realising I said upthread he 'told' me, looking back I don't think he used any proper BSL signs.

I thought he was a signer as I thought I saw him sign 'thanks' to the assistant but maybe I jumped to conclusions. Thinking now, it's a very well known sign as so maybe he would've used it without being a BSL user?

Got so flustered I think I just signed that I'd level 1 if that was helpful and afterwards ran out embarrassed. Not great at social cues/situations at the best of times. Is it offensive? Wish I could go back and mind my own business.

That's not true Bitchy. Some BSL users wouldn't be able to access this. Not many.

It's not a BDA organisation, it's a local charity which is subsidised by the council.

Who's responsibility is it to kick up hell? Mine? Why? I've got enough on my plate ta very much.

I'm not trying to be a member of the Deaf community. I've no desire to - it's too discriminatory for me,

I'm not trying to be a member of the Deaf community. I've no desire to - it's too discriminatory for me

Which is sad really isn't it?

I've never met anyone my own age with deafness. It would have been lovely growing up with a friend who understood. Now it appears I've saved myself some hassle. From the one group who shouldn't be discriminatory against me

That's not true Bitchy. Some BSL users wouldn't be able to access this. Not many.

I would absolutely disagree. The level of English on this forum is too high for many BSL users (people who have BSL as their 1st or preferred language).

Some 1st language Deaf BSL users have very high levels of written English, but they are unfortunately still far from the majority.

It's a local charity which is subsised by the council,

And who do they claim to represent? If the charity claims to offer services to the full spectrum of deafness, but won't let you access their services on the grounds you're not a BSL user, then they should be reported to their funders.

If, on the other hand, the charity is up front about only representing the interests of BSL users, and the council is willing to fund that, then they're perfectly entitled to restrict those services to BSL users.

Is Hearing Link discriminatory because they only offer services to oral deafened/hoh adults?

Loki my view is offered help is better than no help. You offered, he said he was ok, no harm done.

It's supposed to offer services to all bitchy.

You seem very defensive about BSL users. I'm a profoundly deaf person. I know many deaf people. I've outlined my experiences over the last 42 yes of being a profoundly deaf person.

It's supposed to offer services to all bitchy.

Then they should be reported to their funders. That's not on.

You seem very defensive about BSL users

I'm not sure where you get that from.

I simply maintain that BSL users have the right to set up organisations/charities/groups that cater to their specific needs/identities/values. As do oral deaf people. Both groups have the right to safe space.

What isn't on, as appears to be happening in your town, is for a publicly funded charity to claim to represent the needs of all deaf people, but deny you access to services on the grounds that you're a non signer.

That should be reported to the funders.

Long time hearing impaired here. It's annoying but I always greet it with:

"Well done, you're the 1,000,000th person to have made that joke. You win a biccie."

Why? Why do non BSL deaf people need a safe space away from BSL signers?

Why? Why do non BSL deaf people need a safe space away from BSL signers?

Ask Hearing Link!

Because, quite frankly, BSL users will hog the floor.

But I suspect you already know that.

But that's fine. I'm ok with sharing the floor. As a deaf person I'm totally used to not understanding a word and having to wait for an explanation. I'm patient, tolerant and don't discriminate.

Is it a Deaf organisation like BDA? If it's a capital D Deaf led organisation/charity, they're surely entitled to set up a society aimed at BSL users.
Then calling it the British Deaf Association is incredibly misleading if they only support BSL users. Especially when their website states:
"The BDA stands for Deaf Equality, Access and Freedom of Choice"
It should have a tag line to say "BSL users only"
In fact, having a look at their website, I am very confused about what they actually do.

Many Deaf BSL users wouldn't be able to communicate on this thread, because of their level of English (their 2nd language)!
Then why is the teaching inadequate to enable them to be able to access written material?
Just because BSL is their primary method of communication, it doesn't mean that they are unable to learn to read. People can learn two languages and be competent and fluent in both. It is a huge failing if deaf children are not taught to read and write.

RhodaBorrocks So your ex SIL is hearing impaired or deaf (depending on her level of hearing). She can choose to not consider herself disabled but by the sounds of it, she does meet the definition of disabled. However, I disagree with your views about who is disabled. I consider myself to be disabled despite being physically fit and active.

Loki There's nothing wrong with you offering to sign, but don't assume that just because his method looked difficult to you, that it wasn't perfectly acceptable to him.