A Solution!

As I was taking Camilla, my ancient Bug, on her weekly trip around town today, I decided to drive past the local cheap gas station, because she could've used a gallon. (I try to keep Milly as full as possible to prevent moisture getting in the gas tank.)

The price? $3.13 9/10 per gallon of regular unleaded

That's right, ladles and gentlemints. *blink* Other gas stations were showing $3.27 9/10 or $3.24 9/10. Jeez. And Americans are still buying SUVs and refusing to consider public transportation. Our government is still sinking more transit dollars in freeway improvements than in strengthening public transportation. I have not driven to work on a daily basis for years now, partly due to the environment and gas prices. I have limited my long trips and when I have a choice for longer trips, I take Old Faithful, the economical Honda, and not Sable, my gas-guzzling sweetie. I have thrown fits, ranted at length about the idiocy of Americans, and I openly mock SUV drivers. (I know a few of you reading this own SUVs, and I still love ya, just not yer wheels. *grin*) Among the things I discuss when I do that are: peak oil is probably here or almost here, public transit is reasonably priced, it's less stressful, this is a great area for alternative transportation, hybrids are here, SUVs and 4-wheel drive vehicles for city driving are among the most selfish choices on earth, statistics on accidents, our government needs to stop subsidizing oil prices to keep costs down, our current fuel dependency means our way of life is simply unsustainable, and a lot more. But I want to keep some of ya as friends. *grin* So I won't do that right now. I will simply direct your attention to this wonderful Chron article that would solve so much. The government can and should do much more to control the marketplace. Europe is a small car driver's paradise because of its tax structure. If a car's engine is more than a certain number of liters, it is hit much harder in its annual license fees. Gas is more expensive over there because the EU does not subsidize oil there. I could go on and on, but you get the drift. It's accepted behavioral theory that in order to change behavior, one must introduce pain or reward, and this is true for American choices. It's such a shame Smirk, Scowl and everyone else in government won't go for it. Dave Richards of the San Francisco Chronicle, you are my new crush du jour!!!

P.S. I confess to having had pangs of guilt because I have 3 cars. I have looked in the mirror and scolded, "Bad, bad, BAD tree-hugger!" *shrug* In my defense, 'twas never my plan. I just bought Old Faithful from cuzzin Tom because I was convinced Sable was shot to hell and I couldn't stand going into debt for a new car. That was only after 8 months of intermittent and undiagnosable car trouble and frustration, with the last straw happening when she died on me at 65 miles an hour. I bought Old Faithful after a week of being car-less only to find the following week that my trusty shop had finally diagnosed and fixed the problem for $300. Camilla is simply to indulge the desire that I've had since high school for a VW Bug. At least that's 3 cars that are not used very much and that are not on the road spewing toxins and ruining our environment.

Boredom

As I sat in one of my unnecessary classes, trying to stave off boredom by conjugating the verb "to bore," this poem came to me.

Boredom...
Stultifying...
All-encompassing...
Tiring...
Engulfing...
I sit here completely and utterly bored.
I sit here futilely
Attempting to focus...
Cursing arbitrary mandates...
Wishing I were elsewhere...
Railing against unnecessary coursework...
I sit here attempting not to cry from sheer boredom...
Boredom...
Stultifying...
All-encompassing...
Tiring...
Engulfing...
I am so bored!

moi 4.19.06 17h16 PT

The Ultimate Fashion Accessory for Deaf People

This morning at a local museum, in the middle of a tour led by a Deaf docent, I spied what is sure to be a hot trend. (said tongue-in-cheek) And what is this accessory, you ask?

*drumroll*

A silver bejeweled cochlear implant glittering on a woman's head above her "hearing aid."

What will they think of next?

The Topic du Jour in the Deaf-World

All over the United States for the past few weeks, pagers have been vibrating and humming. Blogs have been abuzz with people furiously typing entries and with others commenting on those entries. AIM, videophone, and face-to-face conversations have been consumed with one topic. What topic has the Deaf community in such a tizzy? Why, the impending selection of Gallaudet University’s next president, of course. Last week, the final three candidates were announced and all hell broke loose in the virtual and the real Deaf worlds.

This may be just another drop in the raging sea, but I have been following the events very closely and engaging in a lot of reading and talking. Mr. Sandman’s blog has a fine entry which directs the reader to some commonly used sources of information, so I will not repeat them here. One other source is the GallyNet listserv (click on the link to sign up).

After all this reading, poring, talking, and thinking, one thing is inescapably clear — this is not as simple as people are trying to make it seem. Something is incredibly wrong with this whole process, but people do not agree on the nature of the problem. There is a lot of disagreement on many things, including how to proceed with objections. This whole situation would make a perfect doctoral dissertation in sociology. It has been entertaining, yet saddening watching members of my community run the gamut from thoughtful discourse to “Oh, be quiet. Trust the process.” to heated personal attacks to illogical reasoning in order to support a point to allegations of racism and/or ageism. Check out GallyPresWatch.com for instances of all the above.

I, too, have strong opinions about this whole situation (debacle?), naturally. For one thing, I am amazed at how far we have come in eighteen years. The candidates’ deafness continue to be a topic under discussion. However, none of the candidates are hearing this time and the type of deafness being debated is not pathological; rather, it is cultural deafness. Quite a change.

Another issue this has raised is how we as deaf people treat our Deaf leaders. We as a community are too ready to criticize and tear them down. This has been a recurring issue for me in 2006, what with a local movement and other leadership situations. The Gallaudet presidency, however, has nationwide ramifications and it has invited comment from people all over the country. The websites and listservs where people are allowed to comment shine a bright light on how we can be our own worst enemy. Some of the comments are horribly cruel, as well as downright unnecessary. This is at the root of the problem this community has in finding qualified Deaf leaders to lead our agencies, schools, and organizations. Who wants to subject themselves to this type of intense criticism by people we socialize with, work with, and know on a personal level? Stern’s children have been dragged through the mud. Weiner’s ability to lead is being severely criticized and someone likened him to an affable puppy, which is a huge affront. Fraternity affiliations have become an issue. Fernandes’ appearance has been gleefully described by a few of her detractors. And that’s only the tip of the iceberg. Some people are upset at who made it into the final three and who didn’t, but they are resorting to very personal attacks on these three, which is totally uncalled for. Sadly, this is part of a larger pattern in this community whenever Deaf people apply for leadership positions.

This situation has caused some people to raise the ugly “R” word - racism. There appear to be many Deaf people of color who are convinced that Glenn Anderson’s absence from the short list reeks of racism, even though there is no evidence that bears this out, other than his non-presence. In fact, there is circumstantial evidence to the contrary, though it is, admittedly, quite flimsy. There are snippets floating around that Anderson has health problems, along with heated denials of any such health problems. Thus, the potential for Anderson’s health as a factor in derailing his presidential hopes *may* exist. Another may be his age. There’s a rumor going around that a committee member said he was excluded because he’s too old, but this has not been substantiated in any way. On GallyNet right now, if one doesn’t support Anderson, one is being called racist, no matter how thoughtful and well reasoned one’s response is. People have brought up his signing as an issue and a possible reason why he was not selected as a finalist. Since clear communication skills are crucial for a job of this type, this could be one factor among other unknowns that worked against Anderson. But if anyone dares to say so on this listserv, they are charged with holding signers to a white standard of signing and dismissing people of color. In fact, there is a serious movement at Gallaudet to get Anderson included on the list of finalists, based on the need for diversity. Since I grew up in the wonderfully colorful Bay Area, I’m all for diversity and I look forward to the nation’s first president of color, no matter what minority color it is. As a member of a minority, I’m all for support and promotion of people that are not white Protestant males. As a proud Deaf person, I am in awe of Anderson’s impressive list of contributions to our community and gladly concede that on paper he goes beyond meeting all the requirements for the job. But from where I stand (admittedly not in D.C. at the mo’), there appears to be no reason for this hue and cry. I’m afraid it is going to prove divisive, both on a local level and on a national level.

Since before I was a Gallaudet student, the community, both local and national, has been asking for a strong “D” deaf president when King Jordan retires. While many people were quick to point out that King is/was a good president, they want the next president to be more representative of core Deaf values. This has remained constant for more than fifteen years. Recently more and more people have been using a phrase, which has become a buzzword, to describe their vision for the next president - “Deaf-centered.” I, too, share this vision of a president who will embrace ASL and the Bilingual philosophy, who will fight to keep schools for the Deaf open, and who will value Deaf culture. A v-log can be found here that discusses the reasons for this need. Gallaudet has long been a place where the oral and the mainstreamed come to discover our wonderful Deaf-world and our beautiful language, and it must continue to be a place where everyone is warmly welcomed, no matter what their background is. (if it has stopped being so, that needs to be rectified, clearly) It is vital that our next president embody these values without being exclusionary. Blogs, websites, and e mails have expressed sentiments that oppose this belief, but the core community has been waiting for, nay, anticipating this opportunity for close to two decades now. (More another time about how our community has become fractured, how it hurts us, and how moving to a strong Deaf center can only be good for all of us. If you can’t wait, read Paddy Ladd’s book, Understanding Deaf Culture: In Search of Deafhood.) Anyway, it is undeniable that we have been quite clear about our wishes for a long time now and we expect that the next president will be a role model for us.

A very serious concern, however, is the process in which candidates were screened. Fact: Roz Rosen’s credentials are nearly impeccable and pretty darn impressive. Fact: She was fired by King Jordan, and the details regarding that incident are murky. Fact: Rosen applied. Fact: Rosen wasn’t invited to interview. Fact: Glenn Anderson meets all the qualifications on paper. Fact: Anderson was invited to interview. Fact: Anderson did not make the list of finalists. Fact: Bill Marshall was invited to interview and meets the qualifications, but is not an option any longer. Fact: Ron Stern does not have a doctorate, yet is in the final three. Fact: Jane Fernandes is in the final three in spite of a lot of anecdotal evidence showing that she may not possess the preferred qualification of being able to engage in open, honest dialogue. Fact: Out of 21 deaf individuals, these three are the finalists. With all these facts, the stink of suspicion is very difficult to ignore. My theory is that this process is much more political than it should be and two weaker candidates (on paper at least) were selected in order to pave the way for Fernandes to get the position without challenges. It is unconscionable that Rosen was not invited to interview, since she would have made it past the first round anywhere else. Standard procedure holds that only people who do not meet the minimum qualifications are screened out at that point. She meets the minimum qualifications.

With all these facts, is it any wonder the community is in an uproar? The problem, though, is that we are splintered and we are not united in what exactly we object to about this process. We are not even united in whether or not we should object. Some argue that we should let this play out. Others want to re-create DPN right this minute. While I would normally advocate letting events run their course, I fear that if we do that and the choice is the wrong one, the resulting anger and outcry would be more damaging than it is worth for our community. Protests and shutting the campus down are not options I espouse at this point either. But we should not sit silent. This decision is just too damn important.

What the Board of Trustees needs to do is simple. They need to say, “Gee, guys. We heard your concerns about the flaws in this process. We’re scrapping what we’ve done and we’re starting over.”
Steps they need to take once this has been done:
*Dismantle the PSC
*Establish criteria for selection of the new PSC, including mandatory recusal if a conflict of interest is discovered with any applicant
*Select a new PSC with all-new people onboard - ones that do not have biases for or against any applicant whenever possible
*Develop a quasi-transparent procedure with standardized rubrics and checklists, along with safeguards to ensure that confidentiality is not betrayed
I’m probably missing a couple of things, but you get the idea.

>>Plea to the Board: Board of Trustees, it is perfectly all right to back up. If you do not, the validity of your choice will forever be in question. No one I have talked to thinks that this selection process is fair and appropriate. Extrapolate that to what is happening nationwide. You are in huge danger of losing our trust, and you are risking hurting whomever you select, because his or her selection will not be on firm footing with the community. I have already contacted you with my concerns and I urge others to do the same.<<

You Me Deaf, Keychain, and Dietro il Mondo

Last Friday I was treated to a trilingual, bicultural feast in the form of three films. The first two were brief productions from LightKitchen, René Visco's company, and the third was a feature-length Italian Deaf film produced by Daniele Le Rose of DeafMedia. All three films had English subtitles, hence the third language.

The first film was You Me Deaf, which, frankly, is... I can't say much nice about it. It is a song signed by Jennifer Visco. The action consists of Jen in a black fur coat, black top, and shiny red vinyl pants, gyrating in a most unattractive way. It reduced me to a spate of giggles, both mortified and "this is just too ridiculous." I have to say, though, that I loved the message it conveys about how we Deaf people need to come together and work together, regardless of our differences. Sara Stallard of the Tactile Mind gave this piece a rave review. (scroll down after clicking the link to read her review) I agree with her about the need for more Deaf films, but not this. Then again, all genres have their masterpieces, their good works, and their, well, crap. The good news is that it only lasts a few minutes.

The second film was an improvement and a vast relief to me. Keychain is set in Philadelphia and it is centered around a Deaf man's encounter with an ABC card peddler. This ten-minute-long flick takes us to a bar, (Gooskis, owned by René's brother, by the by), where we encounter a young urban white middle-class Deaf couple. They have a lively, heated discussion about the moral value of SSI/SSDI. The female argues that SSI is terrible, because it encourages dependence and sloth. The male argues that SSI is not bad when it is used to support one through college and it is more subtle than peddling ABC cards. She disagrees, saying that both are equally bad because they shape public perception of Deaf people. This discussion began because a man put a keychain attached to an ABC card on their table. When the peddler comes back to hopefully collect money, the man lights into him, scolding him for peddling. The resulting dialogue reveals that the peddler is Slovakian, and he came to this country illegally. He has a pregnant wife/girlfriend and he has tried and tried to find a job, but without a green card, he just can't find work. The man remains solidly unsympathetic, and the discussion ends with him grudgingly forking over a couple of bucks and the peddler saying, "You me deaf same, you me friends" and leaving. After that, the man becomes tortured by his unyielding rejection of the peddler and wondering what would have been if he had simply let go of his principles. He fantasizes about being friends with the peddler. The film makes use of a novel voice-over technique where a black and white shot of the person voicing over is superimposed on the action and you see the black and white person signing the narrative. This piece, while not wonderfully edited, raises interesting points about peddling, SSI/SSDI, and challenges us to question where the line is, if either is ever okay and to define what situations warrant peddling and what situations don't. (Insider info: the keychain is blurred out in the film because it is a picture of a Disney character, which would have invited a humongous lawsuit from Walt's successors.)

Dietro il Mondo was a joy to watch in comparison. Le Rose's creation takes us to the university in Padua and introduces us to Andrea, a first-year student, and a small group of Deaf students. It chronicles his first few months at the university, his in-class experiences, and his interactions with the other Deaf students and with the Paduan Deaf community. This film appears to be a real family affair, with Stefania Le Rose playing the lead female role of Elena and Luigi Le Rose playing the Italian Sign Language (LIS) interpreter. The ending has a rather odd twist which is easy to miss, but if you get a chance to see it, keep in mind during the whole film - what is Carla's motivation? The ending will make more sense if one keeps that in mind.

One criticism of the film, however, is the temporal discontinuity that manifests itself at times. A demostration in Rome is mentioned and it is to happen the following week, but it does not happen until after a title card showing "a few months later" has appeared and more time has passed. Also, it is clear that several months pass, but it always remains cold and characters are always dressed very warmly. Otherwise, while not in the league of Citizen Kane, this is a cute, interesting, and enjoyable film.

This was a fascinating, enjoyable film to watch. The pacing and set-up are so different from American films. It is very slow, with the emphasis being on character development rather than the plot, which is typically European. There are many cultural messages in this piece as well. For example, there are frequent discussions about problems with interpreters at the university. During one discussion, Andrea proposes getting the deaf association involved by providing classes and training. Elena retorts that while this is a wonderful idea, it is going to take years and she needs interpreters now. Another instance occurs when Andrea is anxiously awaiting his turn for his oral exam. Andrea asks the interpreter if the interpreter can voice the right answers even when Andrea is wrong or when he does not know the answer. The interpreter says in beautiful Italian signs that his job is to facilitate communication. He gives Andrea his voice and he gives the professor his signs in order to help them communicate. That is his role and he can do no more than that. While this does not always happen in real life, this is the ideal and what *should* happen in classrooms everywhere. Different examples of interactions with hearing people are also shown, mostly unvoiced. One thing that illustrates European urban culture is the frequent use of bicycles for travel by the characters and by other people.

There are quite a number of cultural differences between American Deaf culture and Italian Deaf culture that are evident in the film. While in America Blackberrys and Sidekicks are ubiquitous, in Italy, they depend on cell phones with text messaging (SMS). Apparently when the phone is plugged in, it does not vibrate, and people run the risk of missing messages. The university does not provide alert lights nor other communication devices. Andrea brings his own alarm clock, but he has no other devices. Two men, who are roommates, excitedly show off their new signal lights very late in the film. One thing that appalled me was when Andrea goes to his first class, he sees this man sitting in front of the room, so he approaches him. The man indicates that he is the interpreter, then proceeds to tell Andrea where to sit, explaining that this place is what works best. He does add that Andrea could move elsewhere and tell him where to sit, but the tone is very paternalistic. That does not happen here in American colleges (at least in my experience). Another interesting difference is that here in America, first and last names must be fingerspelled, along with a demonstration of the name sign when meeting new people. In the film, it shows university students fingerspelling only their first names then giving name signs and other local Deafies not bothering with fingerspelling at all, simply exchanging name signs.

While Italian Deaf people appear to be behind America in terms of technology, there are many similarities between the two cultures. Both groups of people are experiencing problems with the limited number of qualified interpreters. Andrea's interpreter is a person with Deaf parents. They talked about the term "CODA," which they borrowed from America. The film makes it clear how the Deaf are collective by showing their need for togetherness and how they share information. Another similarity is the relationship between "grassroots" Deafies and more educated Deafies, with its attendant frisson and their role in translation of the majority language. One elderly gent at the local Deaf club scolds a few university students, telling them going to school is a total waste of time and they should be working. Later in the film, after Paolo has helped him translate a letter and advised him on what to do, the man tells a group of university students that they need to stay in school so they can achieve great things for the community.

The two signed languages are quite different, but there are clear similarities as well. Both have subject-verb agreement implemented in similar fashions, both use space in much the same way, and both use classifiers. There are a small number of cognates. LIS appears more similar to French sign language (LSF) than to ASL, but all three languages have features in common.

I recommend this film for the opportunity to observe another Deaf culture and language, but the story held my attention as well. Part 2 is apparently coming. Hopefully it will bring a resolution to the odd ending in Part 1.

The irony, oh, the irony

I signed up to take a required technology class online. It began Tuesday night. On Wednesday morning I received the following e-mail:

This is to advise that we are having some technical problems with your online course Integ Tech/Educ K-12 Levl 1 DL, Section: 055158. However, our developers are working on the problem and will have the situation resolved at the next system refresh which will be at 11:00 A.M. this morning.
Please accept our apologies for the delay.

While this probably upset other students, I dissolved into giggles. ;)

Somnorexia... it's a bitch.

Picture this. Anytown, USA, 2006. There is a dimly-lit, smoke-filled basement populated with yawning people occupying folding chairs, all facing the front of the room. Sounds of people popping No-Doz fill the air. A podium is in front and a harried middle-aged woman raps the podium, calling for attention. The weekly meeting has begun. A woman walks to the front of the room.
“My name is Sandy Shore. I am a somnorexic.”
The meeting proceeds much like a 12-step meeting. The purpose of this meeting is for those who are somnorexic; that is, people who accumulate a sleep deficit during the week and overcompensate on the weekends.

When given the opportunity to reflect on what I wanted to change about my behavior, the first thing that came to mind was sleep. This has been a source of much frustration for me for several years now, but much more so now that I’m taking 3 graduate-level classes in addition to my usual full plate, which includes: a highly demanding teaching job, extra responsibilities at my job due to my leadership positions, along with being very active in my community in various ways. I had already weeded out what I did not believe to be important and have been continuing to decline opportunities, but it’s still a lot to handle. As a result of all this, I had gotten into the habit of sleeping 4 to 5 hours per night during the week and sleeping 12 hours on the weekend. This had left me groggy, listless, and having more and more trouble functioning as the week progressed. Easy choice for this project!

The above paragraphs are the introduction for a self-monitoring project I wrote for a class this past week. Suffice it to say that my sleeping patterns did not improve much during the month I was gathering data on this behavior change project. For example, last night I went to bed at 9 pm and didn't wake up until 12:30 today.

It's quite frustrating, actually. I sleep between 4 to 6 hours a weeknight, then sleep over 12 hours on weekend nights. It feels quite unproductive and I'm always tired. Last month was really hard because I had 2 papers due a week and there were some big deadlines at work. It was awful. But this month should be much easier, because I have 2 spring breaks and they don't overlap. That'll give me some down time and there are few really major deadlines. I have time to get things done ahead of time. Hopefully I won't be so severely somnorexic much longer.

I concluded the paper with: This was a very interesting experience. I found that I have made a conscious effort to sleep more during this particularly stressful month than I would probably have done otherwise. While I have not yet met the goal, I have made progress. As I end this, I note that it is 10:11 pm on Tuesday, March 28th. While I will not meet the 8 hours’ goal, I may just yet sleep more than seven hours, as long as I end this, put my PowerBook down, put it to sleep, and walk to bed right now. Wish me luck in April!