Eckert and Rowley’s article, “Audism: A Theory and Practice of Audiocentric Privilege”, depicts audism, the assumption and attitudes that the superior “audiocentric” bestow upon those who are deaf and hard-of-hearing, through a historical and sociological perspective. The article defines various types of audism that range from the overt: those who reject or nullify Deafhood, to the culturally embracing but conflicting aversive audist who still nullify other’s deaf experience. But the primary argument of this paper reflects upon how the study of audism and the prejudices faced by this population can be implemented as further evidence of what are established sociological theories. Through the addition of audism in this field, there can be powerful
…show more content…
Humphries, from Eckert and Rowley’s article, writes that individual audism, “appears when deaf and hearing people have no trust in deaf people’s ability to control their own lives and form systems and organizations necessary to take charge of the deaf as a group to seek social and political change” (106). This is an assumingly universal experience that deaf people face, with such stories portrayed in the film Audism Unveiled as many individuals had no regard in informing deaf individuals of what is happening in environments like the dinner table. It is a personalized struggle that happens subjectively to deaf individuals that demonstrates how exclusion and sense of audiocentric superiority undermines a deaf individual’s humanity. Furthermore, deaf individuals experience nullification by the institutions that are created for them, but have been set by people who do not understand the deaf experience, is fittingly named institutional audism. This is generally defined as institutions dealing with deaf people with a practically audiocentric view – teaching them what is right and wrong, governing them, and being the critics of their reality. I was shocked to find that educational institutions for deaf individuals are constructed by hearing people without the input from the deaf community. An example of institutionalized audism faced can be found in the educational environment, where deaf students must translate to interpreters. However, interpreters can not agree with what is being signed to them and shift the wording to their opinion, undermining the expression and humanity of a deaf
Humphries, from Eckert and Rowley’s article, writes that individual audism, “appears when deaf and hearing people have no trust in deaf people’s ability to control their own lives and form systems and organizations necessary to take charge of the deaf as a group to seek social and political change” (106). This is an assumingly universal experience that deaf people face, with such stories portrayed in the film Audism Unveiled as many individuals had no regard in informing deaf individuals of what is happening in environments like the dinner table. It is a personalized struggle that happens subjectively to deaf individuals that demonstrates how exclusion and sense of audiocentric superiority undermines a deaf individual’s humanity. Furthermore, deaf individuals experience nullification by the institutions that are created for them, but have been set by people who do not understand the deaf experience, is fittingly named institutional audism. This is generally defined as institutions dealing with deaf people with a practically audiocentric view – teaching them what is right and wrong, governing them, and being the critics of their reality. I was shocked to find that educational institutions for deaf individuals are constructed by hearing people without the input from the deaf community. An example of institutionalized audism faced can be found in the educational environment, where deaf students must translate to interpreters. However, interpreters can not agree with what is being signed to them and shift the wording to their opinion, undermining the expression and humanity of a deaf