Hi Chuck!

Like your explanation.

When the deaf MP visited a group that I belonged to, she made it clear that
she preferred lip reading, however guess whose lips gave her trouble? Only
the members of the group that are totally blind. We didn't have mustaches
either, but we were the only ones that she claimed made her struggle. At the
time, I thought the problem was that both of us were male. That was later
proven wrong because she had the same problem when she met my wife, also
totally blind. She wasn't nasty about it. When the interpreter was used, we
got our points across quite easily, and the lady did understand where we
were coming from perfectly. She even apologised for being unable to lip read
us, because to her, seeing it from our lips had greater value to her, but,
there it is. Both meetings were considered successful to all attending.

73,
Dave

-----Original Message-----
From: For blind ham radio operators [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Chuck Lester
Sent: Thursday, 7 May 2015 8:06 a.m.
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: absolutely nothing to do with ham radio but Dayton made me
think about it.

Harvey, I think the latter.  Unless the community of the deaf has changed
dramatically.  When I was an hr specialist with the Postal Service, one of
the programs I was in charge of was communications between a fairly large
contingency of deaf letter sorting machine operators and postal management
with regard to operational and hr related subjects.  Our interpreter always
used sign language.  She told me that lip reading is prone to much
misunderstanding, especially with words which are similar in shape but have
completely different meanings.  An example;  The Seinfeld episode where lip
reading causes nothing but misunderstandings all round.  There is a big
difference between six, and sex. The shape of the lips and tongue are the
same.  Get it wrong by lip reading and...

Chuck wa8vmo
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Harvey Heagy" <harvey.heagy@COX
NET>
Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2015 2:43 PM
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: absolutely nothing to do with ham radio but Dayton made me
think about it.

> That's something I've always wondered; if the opponents of sign 
> language are primarily of the hearing impaired community, or outside 
> that community who work in it claiming to know what's best for them.
> Harvey
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: For blind ham radio operators 
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> On Behalf Of Chuck Lester
> Sent: Wednesday, May 6, 2015 11:13 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: absolutely nothing to do with ham radio but Dayton made 
> me think about it.
>
> Harvey,
>
> Just like those who can hear and see to tell both those who can''t 
> hear or see the best way.  I mean after all, they have all five 
> senses, who could argue with that.  Of course, this completely 
> discounts the human brain and the other guy/gal's need to cope with 
> the real environment. To take away a usable tool, just because, you don't
think I need it, is absolutely silly.
> It sounds so political. Besides, I don't want to teach sign language. 
> And,
> I don't want to teach Braille.  That mentality runs congress.
>
> Chuck wa8vmo