The deaf body in public space

Image result for sig languag eperson

“It’s rude to point,” my friend told me from across the elementary-school cafeteria table. I grasped her words as I read them off her lips. She stared at my index finger, which I held raised in midair, gesturing toward a mutual classmate. “My mom said so.”

I was 6 or 7 years old, but I remember stopping with a jolt. Something inside me froze, too, went suddenly cold.

“I’m signing,” I said out loud. “That’s not rude.” Pointing was a truly fundamental act for me; it was how I expressed what my grown-up scholarly self would call relationality — the idea of being in the world in relation to others.”

When hearing people learn to use sign language, “they must overcome the cultural taboos about excessive movement, pointing and gesture.” As well as gestures, sign language involves what hearing people would see as exaggerated facial expressions. Meanwhile the “listener” maintains a continual gaze (in order to follow the signing) which hearing people can find uncomfortably intense.

“Hearing culture presents us with ideals of speaking with good elocution, restraint and self-control. Now, I admit, I see these ideals as visually impoverished, inaccessible and uninteresting: They produce spaces full of immobile talking heads, disembodied sound and visual inattentiveness.”

There is so much here I’d never thought about before.

For more of this sort of thing, sign up to my weekly newsletter, The Whippet

Molyneux’s Problem: thought experiment from 1688 solved in 2003

Q: If a man born blind can feel the differences between shapes such as spheres and cubes, could he, if his sight was restored, distinguish those objects by sight (without touching them)?

A: No. Huh. “Although after restoration of sight, the subjects could distinguish between objects visually almost as effectively as they would do by touch alone, they were unable to form the connection between an object perceived using the two different senses. The correlation was barely better than if the subjects had guessed. They had no innate ability to transfer their tactile shape knowledge to the visual domain.”

“Ostrovsky, et al studied a woman who gained sight at the age of 12 when she underwent surgery for dense bilateral congenital cataracts. They report that the subject could recognize family members by sight six months after surgery, but took up to a year to recognize most household objects purely by sight.” Wikipedia article

For more of this sort of thing, sign up to my weekly newsletter, The Whippet!

Interviews with female bodyguards


“I’m nearly 50 and I am shocked that I’m still alive. I was shocked at 30 and I was shocked at 40. I keep saying it’s time to wind down, but I miss doing my job too much. I need the adrenaline.”

“It’s the same thing every year: you have to be vetted by a guy from the Saudi embassy saying, ‘Oh, my God, you are a woman!’ At which point you have to throw one of his blokes on the floor and stamp on his windpipe to prove you can do the job.”

“It’s very frustrating working with people who have no understanding of the value of money, who think they can buy anything. There was one 10-year-old Middle Eastern princess I had to take round London. She asked: ‘Can you go and get me a kitten, a puppy, and a baby to play with?’ I said I couldn’t get a baby and all hell broke loose.”

I was also so interested in how they said most of the work was done beforehand, on the computer – researching the situation in a country, where the risks are, safe routes, etc etc.
Full article

For more of this sort of thing, sign up to my weekly newsletter, The Whippet!

Reviews of celebrities on RateMyProfessors


I came across some random article about celebrities who teach at US colleges and realised: that means they would have entries on RateMyProfessors.com. Here’s a few I looked up.

“James seems sleepy and distracted and doesn’t give feedback because he doesn’t read our writing.”
“I also know for a fact that he does not read the papers you hand in, he just gives you an A.”
James Franco
“Defintely the former secretary of State, in the flesh.”
Madeleine Albright

“Where exactly did she attend school; Does she have a degree; Or are we to assume that she is just a natural genius.”
Maya Angelou
“This man does not belong in Academia. Very wierd ideas. Not recommended”
Peter Singer

Tell me you don’t wistfully long to take a vow of silence

The piece below is an (emailed) interview with monks who do the vow of silence thing. I’m constantly drawn to this idea. It feels like it would be more like a vacation than a fast – freedom from words rather than the imposition of silence. I wonder, if you stopped communicating in words, would you stop thinking in words as well? Or would you constantly be mentally composing all the bits of dialogues you couldn’t say?

I went to a silent interactive performance art party/event last year and it was both liberating and deeply discomfiting to be robbed of the ability to explain myself. I could apologise, with facial expressions or gestures, but I couldn’t give context, make clear my intentions or motivations, “here’s what I was thinking when I… here’s what I was aiming for” – which is something I do almost constantly. You just had to let your actions stand for themselves (but also, people were more forgiving, because they knew there was stuff you couldn’t say. Which is good practice for dealing with the rudeness of strangers: there’s so much context they can’t give you that might explain their actions).

The other tough part was seeing some cool thing in one part of the event – a silent drag show, a mime competition, a strawberry tasting – and then not being able to tell your friends what you’d just seen and where you’d been. You could point, and make your eyes shine – it was amazing! – but that was about it. You had to just accept that you were not capable of making yourself fully understood, and that you were not capable of fully understanding anyone else. There is a meaning here, but I cannot access it. (Again, good practice for the rest of life – it’s much easier to assume, when you’ve heard all the words, that you get what there is to be got. But you probably don’t.)

I’m trying to think of ways to make this acceptable – parties is the obvious one – but another might be something like the 40-Hour Famine, Movember or Dry July. Not everyone would do it, but people wouldn’t find it strange that you were, because it would be a Thing. You’d just gesture, and they’d get it.

For more of this sort of thing, sign up to my weekly newsletter, The Whippet

How silence works: Emailed conversations with four Trappist monks

Credit: Daniel Tibi“The silence does make me aware of my inner workings … I can’t pretend that I’m always a nice guy, always patient, always calm and receptive. I have to admit that I can be abrupt, cold to offenders, or would often prefer efficiency to the messiness of other people’s moods. Silence seems to keep me from idealizing myself.

I’ve become very attuned to the sound of bird-song, the wind, water running through the pipes, identifying unseen monks by the sound of their footsteps — just paying attention to my surroundings.” Full article

For more of this sort of thing, sign up to my weekly newsletter, The Whippet

Poor people deserve to taste something other than shame


“And that is what we are saying, when we talk disdainfully about poor people buying lobster and steak, or nice phones, or new clothes. We are saying, you are not sorry and ashamed enough. You do not hate your poor existence enough.

Because when you are poor, you are supposed to take the help that is never enough and stretch it so you have just enough misery to get by. Because when you are poor you are supposed to eat ramen every day and you are supposed to know that every bite of that nutrition-less soup is your punishment for bad life decisions. Your kids are supposed to be mocked at school for their outdated clothes — how else will they know to not end up like you when they grow up?

When I hear these words, I don’t think of lobster or steak, I think of Boston cream pie. ” Keep reading, it’s so good you guys

‘Mrs’ didn’t always mean married

The Mrs/Miss distinction, which is intolerable if compulsory and we’re all glad to be rid of, is pretty new. Both are short for ‘Mistress’ and both, up until the 19th century, could refer to unmarried women. ‘Mrs’ was a mark of social status and that higher status could mean a marriage, but could just as easily mean being head housekeeper, owning a business, or being a respected scholar in a particular field.

‘Miss’ arose in the mid-18th Century as a way for upper class unmarried women to distinguish themselves from women of business – women with, god forbid, a trade.
Full article