Inner-Community Phonocentrism: We Are Not On Even Ground
in late 2007, i started perusing a blog named Cochlear Implant online, (co?)run by Rachel Chaikof, a CI-user and non-signer probably not that much younger/older than i am. at the time, i was in a relationship with an older white cis het hearing man, was just getting my start in the field of deaf ed, and was starting to -albeit slowly- uncover many years of internalized self-hate about being Deaf. [i mention this to give context about my life back then compared to now, particularly as an intersectional social justice activist.] over the following months, i started to go deeper and deeper into reclaiming that identity after allowing it to be a source of shame and despair. at the time, i didn't have the multifaceted/layered approach that i now have to name what was happening, the observations i was making, the responses i was feeling when i read entries from Cochlear implant Online. but i'd usually close my browsing session feeling furious, helpless, and oftentimes debased as a human being, in spite of still living a life that emphasized phonocentrism rather than liberation as a diverse sensorial being. i felt like utter shit.
{note: i use phonocentrism to refer to the social system and belief of hearing/speaking being inherently superior modes of being and language; and that as a result of phonocentrism, various systems collaborate to push Deaf, DeafBlind, DeafDisabled, and Hard-of-Hearing people towards hearing-centric ways of being and living... meaning: the normative model of hearingness is constantly pushed on us from all angles, rather than recognizing our bodies and experiences as sensorially diverse. recognizing Deaf, DeafBlind, DeafDisabled, and Hard-of-Hearing people as sensorially diverse people removes the forces of normalcy that goad us -oftentimes in violent ways- to be hearing and able-privileged. audism is the system of oppression that upholds the ideology of phonocentrism.}
over the years, ive noticed that i've continued to have really strong reactions to deaf people who assert their experiences of being non-signing CI-users. but i have long felt that my reactions differed from other signing Deaf people (including those who use CIs but do not make their CIs central to identity)- which seemed to be very single-issue, and to only discuss audism as the root and manifestation of non-signing/CI-users' principles. for me, it's always been more than that, far more layered and nuanced.
for instance, though i firmly believe that in this capitalistic, ableist and audist society that technology is not of neutral social value- technology is always weighted with the ideologies of systems of power- i've learned more about the concept of agency, autonomy, when it comes to us selecting technological assistive devices, especially as survival in a society that is intensely ableist and audist. the choice to use assistive devices such as hearing aids and CIs is one usually rooted in just that: survival in navigating through a world that is hostile to Disabled, Deaf, DeafBlind, DeafDisabled, and Hard-of-Hearing people. (i should make it clear at this juncture that i'm focusing on adult non-signing CI users rather than children whose parents/families elected to get them CIs and to not use a signed language with them.) people who elect to get CIs, for instance, oftentimes are really trying to gain accesses - if not freedoms- that are consistently and cruelly denied. this is a form of survival in many senses. but not always so simple.
over time, i think i've acquired the language to best express my feelings and reactions in analytical ways- ways that connect different systems of power and experiences of oppression in complex ways.
so when i read Alanna Kilroy's recent "Hidden in Television: A Marginalized Portrayal of Deafness in Switched at Birth" in response to the #DeafTalent Twitter campaign, those old feelings and thoughts were once again stirred. i tweeted my responses to Alanna, and a brief conversation ensued the next night. however, it was clear that we both have our own principles, approaches, ideas, perspectives about this topic, and i felt that a conversation was not going to emerge into a dialogue where we could go deep into social justice analytical frameworks. instead, i'm gonna write some of my reactions to this experience here- because this is larger than a Twitter conversation that wasn't so positive in the end.
before reading on, i suggest checking out the storified edition of my tweets and Alanna's responses.
first, i should say that i noticed some classic derailing tactics at play here. but i've experienced worse, actually, especially from fellow signing Deaf, DeafBlind,DeafDisabled, and Hard-of-Hearing people on topics of inner-community racism, sexism, cissexism, and so forth. but i still name Alanna's reactions as derailing. i recognize that a number of people went hard on Alanna's blog post, and towards her personally- i definitely think that edged her response to my own tweets about her blog post. i can contextualize that, and i still dont view Alanna as a bad person. however, it still DOES NOT mean that 1) the analysis i brought in "had nothing to do" with her blog post, and that 2) i was attacking her personal character and being.
if you read the Storify of the conversation, i repeated a number of times that my critique was not about non-signing people who have CIs being terrible people because they do not sign or because they have CIs- my critiques were based on the push towards accountability in understanding and accepting that being a deaf person who does not sign and who uses CIs is to align with the normative expectations in a phonocentric society. And that as a result, those people have very real privileges over many Deaf, DeafBlind, DeafDisabled, and Hard-of-Hearing people. and that in the realm of media, being a speaking deaf person with a CI is to be lauded and humanized. we know this because a non-signing speaking Deaf person with a CI is instantaneously a more desirable candidate for any number of jobs. we know this because a non-signing speaking Deaf person with a CI is what many of our parents and family members imagined as a success story for us. i can bring in many more instances where i explain that no matter how reclaimed we may be, we still have to contend with the shadow of phonocentric expectations trailing behind us.
with all of those social realities in mind, i argued that when a non-signing CI-user is represented in the media, they are prized and humanized before any of us signing Deaf, DeafBlind, DeafDisabled, and Hard-of-Hearing people are, because: phonocentrism and audism. Alanna was insistent on the numerical representations of CIs in Deaf-based media portrayals. i get that there's a not a lot of appearances of CIs on popular TV shows. but hey, guess what? i can go on youtube any time of the day and search for scores of videos about CI activations among babies, children, and adults that celebrate the experience of hearing, and receive accolades for finally "being able to hear" from many hearing people worldwide. this is important to note because this is phonocentrism at play: hearing is celebrated and embraced, and humanized. it prompts people to be emotionally moved. it is inspiration porn. and it is rooted in a default deficit thinking of Deaf, DeafBlind,DeafDisabled, and Hard-of-Hearing people- that we are not complete, we are not fully human, until what is "missing" is filled in, remediated, "fixed." the social approval of being "fixed" is more widespread and intense than it is to be an "exotic" "strange" "unfortunate" "uncomfortable" Deaf, DeafBlind,DeafDisabled, and Hard-of-Hearing person who isn't a speaking, non-signing CI user. so what does this mean on larger social scales? it means a hell of a lot.
Alanna also mentioned that if i was "really for social justice" that i would fight for the representations and inclusion of all deaf people, regardless of them being signers or non-signing CI-users. let me clarify once again: all Deaf, DeafBlind, DeafDisabled, and Hard-of-Hearing people who use various modalities of communications, who may or may not use assistive devices, are all impacted by phonocentrism and audism. however. there are degrees and nuances to this shit. to tell me that i should fight for "all of us" implies a very, very false presumption that "all of us" are on equal footing, that all of our experiences are completely lateral. they are not- they are not lateral across the axis of sensorial experiences- our experiences of being Deaf, DeafBlind,DeafDisabled, and Hard-of-Hearing- and they are not lateral because of multiple axes of race, ethnicity, sex, gender, sexuality, nationality, and so on. to urge me to be inclusive of various experiences of being Deaf, DeafBlind,DeafDisabled, and Hard-of-Hearing is to erase the degrees and nuances of privilege within those experiences. for instance: the capacity to hear and speak, as well as to see and to be mobile, or to be emotionally-abled, and so on, among Deaf, DeafBlind,DeafDisabled, and Hard-of-Hearing is INTENSELY varied. as i mentioned, i am a Deaf person with hearing and speaking capacities. i also have a MA degree. i come from a professional-class background. i pass for a white person and for a heterosexual person. therefore: i have a shitload more privilege than my community members, who may be Deaf too, but do not possess the other privileges that i have. this is my point: non-signing, speaking CI-users have privileges granted to them that are not granted to me and the vast majority of Deaf, DeafBlind,DeafDisabled, and Hard-of-Hearing who are struggling to survive every damn day. this is why i cannot, in good conscience, encourage/fight for even more social representations and acceptance of non-signing, speaking CI-users. i will recognize and affirm your existence and embrace you as a human being and desire to be in community with you, but i cannot, in the context of multiple systems of power, fight for your social overrepresentation.
Alanna stated that her blogpost had nothing to do with phonocentrism and audism. that she had a specific topic in mind, and that i've- and others- have gone completely off track. but it actually had everything to do with phonocentrism and audism. stating that it was not her aim or her intention is moot. because as we know from a social justice framework: the social privileges a person has is inherent and molds who they are by constructing their thoughts, behaviors, and languages. to have privilege is to oftentimes, if not always, not be conscious of it at all. for me, Alanna probably is not yet aware of how she possesses immense privileges as a person of her background, and how these privileges shape who she is and what she writes, what she produces. overall, as of late, she's made it clear that she does not want to perceive herself in the frameworks i am bringing in. and that is her right, and i still honor that choice that she is making, from my own perspective- because i will still recognize her autonomy--- while continuing to contextualize the social impact her beliefs and actions have. (this complexity IS possible.) but you know what: i dont want to focus/fixate on her specifically. i want to bring us to all the other Alannas and Rachels and many more folks who have the principles and perspectives that they have. because i want to talk about the patterns i witness and analyze among many non-signing speaking CI-users.
i have observed that the assertion of the right for CIs/non-signing representation is usually (though, yes, i recognize not always) bound with systems of whiteness, economic/class privilege, and able-privileges.
namely, i observe non-signing people with CIs to espouse very white euro-american-centric/WASP-centric values of "individualistic choice"- which then means that many of them are disinterested in examining the collective impact that their decisions and actions have on other Deaf, DeafBlind,DeafDisabled, and Hard-of-Hearing people. when i observe this, i instantly know that the non-signing, speaking CI-user and i are dwelling in different worldviews, and that there are no bridges between ourselves. because i don't front for white, euro-centric, WASP systems of thought and behavior, or for the entitlement of individual rights and decisions. i believe in communities and fighting for collective liberations. my principles are my principles because of my marginalized identities and because of the long, long, lifelong unpacking processes i am on regarding my privileged identities. if we aren't operating from a shared approach of centralizing power systems and differentials, then we can't really move on from there.
and of course, the assertion of having the right to be non-signing, speaking, and CI-using is still entrenched in ideologies of normalcy- that human bodies need to mold to a specific default shape of being hearing, ambulatory, body-normative, neurotypical, and so on. multiple systems such as science, medicine, technology, and education, have pushed many people towards normative molds of being for generations at an end. to opt to mold to those expectations often happens. and sure, we can talk about agency and autonomy. but we need to also go deep into discussions of larger social meaning and impact.
i also observe attempts to assert non-signing, speaking CI-using experiences as laterally important to the dire marginalizations that Deaf, DeafBlind,DeafDisabled, and Hard-of-Hearing people experience because of phonocentrism and audism. this is where i get tripped up: how do i support your desire to be represented in the media and other public spaces when your lived experiences are so drastically different than the people who do not have your accesses and privileges? do you not realize that you are many rungs above us on the ladder?
to assert the experience of being a non-signing, speaking CI-using person is to endorse phonocentrism. to demand representation and inclusion in media is to come from a phonocentric angle, because it is without consideration for the experiences you do not have in comparison to so many people with your natural sensorial experience worldwide. this is harmful. it's hurtful on personal levels. and it has dire social impact because of your complicity to a system of power and violence.
so while Alanna was talking about Switched at Birth and her desire to see CI representations and "inclusion" in popular television media, i still contend that her blogpost was much larger than that: one thing i am appreciative about is that her blogpost is sparking the need to have more consistent, analytical, and profound discussions about the degrees and nuances of privilege among all of us Deaf, DeafBlind,DeafDisabled, and Hard-of-Hearing people when it comes to our sensorial and politically sensorial experiences. because as long as non-signing, speaking CI-using Deaf people are going to claim that the community is divided and exclusionary because of their choices/decisions, then we need to get serious about unpacking our internalized phonocentrism and audism across the board. unity does not happen without serious unpacking and pinpointed awareness/consciousness about how power dynamics and stratifications exist among all of us. this is the point: we are all Deaf, DeafBlind,DeafDisabled, and Hard-of-Hearing, signers, non-signers, users of technological devices, non-users. yes. but we are not on equal ground. we are not dwelling in the same spaces. we are not experiencing the world in the same ways. and we cannot afford to to presume or assert that we all are- because then we opt out of being accountable for the privileges we hold; and once we opt out of accountability, we perpetuate power and violence. this is not kind, this is not socially responsible, this is not sustainable. the discussions must start and continue here on out.
-Elena Ruiz-Williams, 2015
multiracial/multiethnic Xicanx cis Femme PanQueer Deaf-Signing writer/activist
