Do you buy it?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
5 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Do you buy it?

joshualane
Administrator
1: Stuttering is not an individual defect but a social and cultural discrimination against certain speech patterns. Do you buy it? Why or why not?
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Do you buy it?

Guest
1- ( important point )

Stuttering is a speech defect.
It is not in the ear of the listener. It is there. I do stutter myself. I know that I am blocking, my lips are bumping each other.

2- ( totally another point )

Stuttering is stigmatized.  However it is not *the only* disability or illness that is stigmatized.


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Do you buy it?

Frank
In reply to this post by joshualane
Is there any culture where stuttering is considered "normal" speech and not stigmatized in some way??
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Communication is variable and changing---that was my point

Zach
When you ask that question, you may be missing the point of our most recent blog post.

Nonverbal communication, accent, semantics---all differ across cultures.

Communication is not centralized.

In implying that the bias against stuttering is cultural, I hoped to demonstrate how a culture could have different thoughts regarding stuttering.

We know that Americans view eye contact as a necessity, but some non-western cultures tend toward fleeting eye contact.

The variance of communication proves that there is not one single standard, but a series of collective expectations, some of which evolve and can be changed.

I believe in disability cultures which could arise and alter how stutters are viewed.

I believe that activists around the world could invent a way of thinking about communication that does not stigmatize stuttering.
Eli
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Do you buy it?

Eli
In reply to this post by joshualane
Yes, I obviously buy that it's a cultural discrimination. So I've been trying to deconstruct what the basis of the discrimination is. (I'm sure this has been done before) but what I kind of instinctually feel are these:
1. The listener is uncomfortable, embarrassed (and sometimes fearful) by hearing sounds they don't understand or seeing secondaries that look odd to them.
2. The listener is impatient. They don't want to wait or put forth the tiny bit more energy required to understand.
3. The listener is amused. Because media has informed us that is okay to laugh at stuttering (Porky Pig).
4. The listener is overly sympathetic or concerned. This might be the least harmful but can get pretty annoying. I think letting the listener know that you have no problems with your stutter might alleviate this.
5. The listener is judgmental. I think this comes from the expectation that if you stutter, you should should try to fix it and if you don't or can't, then you're lazy and/or stubborn.

It seems both 1 and 3 would be helped by more positive representation in popular culture. How does one go about advocating for this?  Numbers 2 and 5 seem harder to fix. We live in such a fast-paced world that loves polished uniformity and shuns nonconformity and otherness. It's these two that make me the most angry. I want to do something radical and reactionary; I just don't know what that is yet.

I probably overlooked something important in this dissection, so please, anyone, feel free to add, edit or comment.