Political Correctness, Stunting Growth?

[Nate]

Now that I have that song stuck in my head, I feel pretty good...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rmHAqgAFt6E

[Wallachia]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rmHAqgAFt6E

That's pretty awesome.

As far as something fitting goes, this is a close second.
Can't beat the notion of My Little Pony coupled with that song, though.

[minakichan]

Also, as far as I'm aware, the deaf community is still referred to as "the deaf community," and even "hearing-impaired" is still pretty common, unless I'm missing something. XD

http://www.deaflinx.com/DeafCommunity/identity.html
"This term is considered highly offensive. Just as "deaf-mute" and "deaf and dumb" are inappropriate labels, "hearing impaired" is an outdated way to collectively label people with any level of hearing loss. It does not account for cultural identity."

"deaf" is still fairly common, but "hearing-impaired" is a no-no.

The only reason I know this is because I was called uneducated by a deaf person on the Internet for using "hearing-impaired," although at the time I was actually trying to be politically correct...

[Atria35]

Wow. My mom is pretty out-of-date, then. She is hard of hearing (is half-deaf), and will often refer to herself as hearing-impaired. And since that's what she's done for my life, that's what I say.

[MasterDias]

Wikipedia uses "hearing impaired" all over the article about it. Shouldn't this be changed if it is actually that offensive?

[Wallachia]

The TV-stations out here still say, "Closed Captioning for the hearing-impaired."

[Nate]

Wikipedia uses "hearing impaired" all over the article about it. Shouldn't this be changed if it is actually that offensive?

However, Wikipedia has this sentence at the end of the very top paragraph: "When applied to humans, the term hearing impaired is rejected by the Deaf Culture movement, where the terms deaf and hard-of-hearing are preferred."

The reason hearing-impaired is not preferred is because, as mina posted, many deaf/hard-of-hearing people do not think of it as a disability or impairment.

[Rusty Claymore]

I prefer "Acoustically crippled" over hearing impared.

many deaf/hard-of-hearing people do not think of it as a disability or impairment.

That can be some dangerous thinking. I understand where they are coming from, but it's crucial to know, understand, and accept our weaknesses and disabilities for what they are.

[ShiroiHikari]

"Hearing-impaired" is offensive and "deaf" isn't? Coulda fooled me. That's good to know, I guess. Though I suppose it makes sense-- if you are totally deaf, technically you're not "hearing-impaired", you just can't hear. "Hearing-impaired" implies that you can at least hear a little bit.

[Nate]

I understand where they are coming from, but it's crucial to know, understand, and accept our weaknesses and disabilities for what they are.

But their point is it's not necessarily a disability. There are closed-captions for many TV programs, and many inventions that make things such as driving a car perfectly safe (such as programs to alert them to sirens and things).

The only big problem I can see is that most people on the street don't know ASL. I really think schools should offer ASL classes as a "foreign" language, to increase the number of people who are familiar with it.

[Rusty Claymore]

@Nate: Mhmm, I didn't mention the methods for dealing with disabilities because I figured that was a given. However, if such methods fail the disability remains. My only comment was that they shouldn't develop the mentality of being disability free, when they are still dependent on mechanisms that can fail, and mediciens that can run out.

[Nate]

Yes, but people with the flu are dependent on mechanisms that can fail and medicines that can run out too, but we don't consider people who have the flu to be disabled.

[Rusty Claymore]

That's as unrelated to disabilities as this discussion is from this thread's topic. l_-

[Nate]

No, your statement was, quote:

they are still dependent on mechanisms that can fail, and mediciens that can run out.

The same can be said of someone suffering from the flu, or depression, or diarrhea. Are those people now disabled? If they are not, then depending on mechanisms or medicines has nothing to do with whether something qualifies as a disability or not, and thus your evidence for why deaf/hard-of-hearing people are disabled is faulty.

[Atria35]

The same can be said of someone suffering from the flu, or depression, or diarrhea.

My guess on this is because being deaf is pretty much permanent in most cases, and things like fluw or diarrhea aren't (though I will concede on depression).

[Sheenar]

For many Deaf persons (my ASL professor included), being deaf is seen as more of a communication barrier vs. being a true disability. Even though the average person on the street or working in businesses does not know ASL, communication is still possible through writing notes --it's just not a fluid as being able to speak to one another (or sign if both know it.)

As far as terminology, a culturally Deaf person (whether hearing or deaf) is capitalized (Deaf). The "accepted" terminology is deaf and/or hard of hearing (I am hard of hearing.)

The book For Hearing People Only is an excellent resource for information about Deaf culture and interacting with the Deaf community. It was written by a couple of Deaf persons for hearing friends to help answer many common questions regarding deafness and what the Deaf culture is like.