2 Being Deaf. 2.1 Who are Deaf people?

Transcription

1 2 Being Deaf 2.1 Who are Deaf people? Unit 1 introduced the distinction of Deafldeaf as a way of defining those people who are the subject of this course. The principal focus has been on those Deaf people who have a strong sense of their own identity as Deaf people, use sign language and identify with the Deaf Community. This is a powerful distinction: its use creates a continuing assertion that Deaf people are a distinct cultural minority group, and constant consideration of the Deafldeaf distinction refines our notions of Deaf identity. However, areas of concern are emerging. One of these areas of concern has already been suggested in the course, and one has emerged from deaf people themselves. Firstly, using the Deafldeaf distinction is not without its problems. You may have felt on reading the transcript of the conversation between Sheila and Kavita that the distinction between Deaf and deaf was not always clear. The conversation was recorded in sign language, which does not make this distinction, and the capitalization was introduced in the transcription process. While Kavita and Sheila have agreed the transcript as set out, it may have, at times, imposed a distinction they did not intend. This difficulty has already been described in the course. In Unit 5, Education and Deaf People, the distinction was not used for children, because the judgement would have to be made on the basis of context (for example, Deaf family, School for the Deaf), rather than about the children themselves. This could mean that children would move in and out of being Deaf (see Unit 5, pp. 8-9). However, the distinction has also been difficult to make in other circumstances: for example, Black people who wish to be part of the Deaf Community, but feel rejected by it, and people who are deaf and are not part of the hearing world, yet are only on the margins of the Deaf Community. You may have other examples of your own. Secondly, one response to the course when it was first produced was that it was discriminating. In labelling some people as 'Deaf' and then focusing on this group, it seemed, by implication, that other deaf people were inferior or not as worthy of consideration. It could then be an insult to say that a person was 'not really Deaf'. A number of partially hearing and deafened people have studied the course. They have described their own feelings of being excluded from the hearing world, but because the course focuses on Deaf people, they also felt excluded from the Deaf world. There seem to be a number of issues here. We feel the distinction has been important in order to establish the notions of Deaf identity, Deaf community and Deaf culture, as without such recognition the rights of Deaf people are not clear. Yet in establishing a clear identity for one

2 group, those on the outside become excluded and marginalized. While we do not regret the focus on Deaf people in this course, it may be that in the future appropriate and sensitive attention should be directed toward all deaf people and their differences and similarities. Another factor seems to be at play here, though, as the whole notion of Deaf identity seems less robust than before. While deaf people may, at some times in their lives, feel a strong identification with the Deaf Community, at other times it may seem less relevant, and at other times they may feel more in tune with the hearing world and its values. 4 Readmg You should now read Dawd Moorhead's article In the Supplementary Readlngs What does h~s research reveal about the notlon of Deaf identity2 What IS learnt from conslderlng dlfferent people wlth dlfferent experiences of deafness2 4 Moorhead suggests that people do not have a single, fixed identity, but that identities vary with circumstances and time. For many deaf people, the critical feature of their identity may not always necessarily be their deafness. He also suggests that hearing people may have a fixed notion of the implications of being Deaf or becoming deafened, which are then imposed on people with a hearing loss, although they may not reflect their experiences or be appropriate. Our changing understanding of the concept of identity comes, not only from a consideration of deaf people, but also from more widespread discussions of the notion as it relates to other disempowered groups (Black or Asian people, women, gay men and lesbians). This parallel is hinted at in the Moorhead article in the quote which compares being Black and being deafened. A recent edition of the journal Feminism and Psychology took as its theme 'shifting identities, shifting racisms'. In the introduction, the editors note that:... identity is not one thing for any individual; rather each individual is both located in, and opts for, a number of differing, and at times conflictual identities, depending on the social, political, economic and ideological aspects of their situation... This conception of identity thus precludes the notion of a time or a 'real-self'. Rather, it may be a place from which the individual can express multiple and often contradictory aspects of ourselves. (Bhavnani and Phoenix, 1994) Stuart Hall has described the ways in which the notion of Black identity can be created to serve particular ends. In this he recognizes the diversity of the subjective positions that constitute the category Black.

3 What is at issue here is the recognition of the extraordinary diversity of subjective positions, social experience and cultural identities which compose the category 'black', that is, the recognition that 'black' is essentially a politically and culturally constructed category, which cannot be graded on a set of fixed transcultural or transconsential racial categories and which therefore has no guarantee in Nature. This inevitably entails a weakening or fading of the notion that 'race' or some positive notion of race around the term black will either guarantee the effectivity of any cultural practice or determine in any final sense its aesthetic value. (Hall, 1992) Both these quotes, from their different perspectives, suggest that identity is neither given nor fixed, but constructed and shifting. The notion of Deaf identity may also be reconsidered in this way. The Deaf Community In the course so far, a general picture has been painted of a coherent, integrated Deaf community with margmal groups on the peripheryalthough, in fact, the situation is not that simple, and the vlews of the Deaf community in Reader Two (Constructing Deafiess), Section 2, point to some inconsistencies and ambiguities. There are different views on whether hearing people can belong to the Deaf community. Ladd suggests that they can, while Higgins and Lawson suggest some degree of hearing loss is required. All three authors, however, suggest that the sharing of Deaf cultural values is integral to membership of the Deaf community, while Padden distinguishes between a wide deaf community, including hearing members, and a Deaf cultural group whose members share a specific culture and language. However, there seems to be a further question beyond that of the elements that are necessary for membership of the Deaf community. Is there a single Deaf community? Increasingly, it would seem that the edges have become blurred, and that rather than there being a core Deaf community, a number of Deaf communities are emerging. Membership is no longer all or nothing, but individuals move in and out. This issue arose m the conversation between Kavita and Sheila. For many Deaf people, it now seems that association with other Deaf people is part of their social life, but not the totality of it. As the notion of Deaf identity has shifted, so has the notion of Deaf community. While the Deaf club may remain strong in some rural communities, in many large cities numbers are declining. Moreover, for many Deaf people, the Deaf club is less central to their social lives, and other meeting places are evolving.

4

5

6 ITQ What reasons would you suggest for this change in the Deaf Community? A number of possibilities arise, some of which were considered by Kavita and Sheila. Firstly, society itself may be less cohesive, and traditional communities less stable. Secondly, the notion of a strong Deaf identity is less clear. Thirdly, because of changes in educational policies and the rise of Deaf professionals (both issues to be considered later in this unit), more Deaf adults and children spend most of their lives alongside hearing people. Fourthly, the greater availability of interpreters and an increase in the number of Interpreter Units mean that some functions served by the Deaf club may have been lost. Fifthly, the Deaf Club may be less central for Deaf people, as Minicoms make contacts between Deaf people easier, and more entertainment is available through subtitled television programmes and videos. This is not to suggest that the Deaf community is disappearing, but that it is changing. The Deaf community now may be seen as a community of communities. In Unit 4, we discussed the 'Other Deaf Community', and suggested that some deaf people were marginalized from the mainstream Deaf community. There is evidence of a shift with respect to some of these groups as Black Deaf people, Gay Deaf people, Asian Deaf people and Deaf women form their own groups. Such groups have their own identity. Thus some of the groups described as marginalized in Unit 4 may be more appropriately seen as part of a more diverse, less cohesive, Deaf community. In discussing the different groups that have grown up, Kavita and Sheila suggest that these may be the site of political activity for the Deaf community rather than the more traditional Deaf organizations. In Section 4 of this unit we shall consider further aspects of the Deaf community by looking at developments in Deaf culture and the impact of technology. We shall also look in more detail at the political activity of Deaf people. 2.3 British Sign Language A major feature of the Deaf community is its language: British Sign Language. Since this term was first used in 1975, interest in the language has developed dramatically in terms of the number of people learning it, research into the language, and the recording of the language. The increase in the numbers of people learning British Sign Language has been dramatic (see Figure 10.3).

7 Year Figure 10.3 Numbers of people taking examinations in British Sign Language, You should now re-read the art~cle by Stewart S~mpson about the Counc~l for Advancement of Commun~cat~on w~th Deaf People (CACDP), Art~cle 6 6 In Construchng Deafness, ent~tled 'A St~mulus to learn~ng, a measure of ab~l~ty' 4 We can now update the figures given on p. 222 of Constructing Deafness for the number of people taking the CACDP examinations. Stage I Stage I1 Stage I , , , ,279 1, However, the most significant milestone in the history of British Sign Language, as Kavita suggests to Sheila, must be the development of the Dictionary of British Sign Language/English (Brien, 1992). This is a massive work, including descriptions and definitions of some 1,739 signs (it weighs 4 Ibs 11 ozs). By the end of 1994, the BSL dictionary had sold 21,000 copies.

8

9 In addition to the sign/word descriptions, the dictionary includes sections on its use, the visual world of BSL, and an English Guide to Meaning. Stokoe (1993) describes it as a model modern sign language dictionary. The dictionary was developed over a considerable period of time, about 15 years. One of the dilemmas the group faced was constructing a dictionary that gave equal status to sign language and English. Most sign language dictionaries published over the past 25 years, throughout the world, have been based on spoken language, and have contained lists of words from the spoken language of the community with sign language equivalents. Often these lists are arranged in categories, such as 'food', 'animals' and so on. It has not been easy to look up the word equivalent for a sign, and signs for which there is no direct spoken language equivalent have often been ignored. These concerns were taken seriously by the editors of the BSL dictionary. In a section on the history of the dictionary they state that: The re-organisation of the contents was guided by the following objectives: 1 that the signs contained in the dictionary should be BSL signs i.e. signs identified by Deaf informants as signs they themselves, or other Deaf people, used when communicating in BSL; 2 that the entries should be organised on linguistic principles, appropriate to a sign language; 3 that a guide to the meaning(s) of the signs (and thereby a guide to appropriate usage) be provided; 4 that the dictionary should be of use to both Deaf users of BSL and people wishing to learn the language. (Brien, 1992) ITQ In compiling the BSL dictionary, it was necessary to consider how signs could be located by the user. From your own understanding of sign language, how could signs be listed in such as way as to allow them to be easily located? You may need to look again at Unit 3. The BSL signs are listed in the dictionary by handshape. There are 57 handshapes grouped into 22 families. At the top of every page is a description of the handshape for the signs on that page.

10

11

12

13

14 An earlier article in the Sun had criticised the sign for Chinese for being racist. However, Pollitt and Turner (1994) criticised the Sun article, suggesting that such signs are not racist. One example is the sign meaning 'Chinese' that shows the shape of a Chinese person's eyes. When we read the newspaper, it makes us think, is it racist to use that sign, or is it just a visual way of describing a Chinese person? Is it Deaf culture? Deaf people often use sign names for each other that show what a person looks like, 'fat' or 'bald' or 'glasses'. When hearing people learn to sign they are taught that this is not rude, it is Deaf culture. They also ask about who is making these decisions. Are they coming from the Deaf community or are they being imposed on it? Whatever the answer to this particular question, a more general question is raised, one that also emerged in connection with the BSL dictionary: Who makes the decisions about what the language is? The discussion so far has indicated growth and development in BSL. While the language still has not achieved official recognition in this country, interest continues to grow.