Protests at Gally: Do We Know What They Were All About?

By Cindy Shapiro

Editor: We've published lots of articles with various perspectives on the situation at Gallaudet. The protests may be over (at least for now), but people continue to contemplate what happened and search for explanations.

One person searching for answers is Cindy Shapiro, who attended Gallaudet in the early '90s and earned an MA in Deafness Education in 1992. Here are her thoughts on the Gally protests.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

REASONS for opposition to Jane Fernandes:

ASSUMED MAIN REASON: Too "think-hearing", grew up oral, not grounded in American Sign Language in terms of culture and language

OTHER STATED REASONS: Abrasive leadership style, the search for a Gallaudet president did not include serious examination of diverse applicants, in particular, a qualified applicant who is African-American was not taken seriously.

~~~~~

When someone assesses the Gallaudet campus protests, the importance of history cannot be overstated. People with a background in the civil rights movement-- in addition to awareness about the varying needs of deaf, hard of hearing and "big-D Deaf--- may have an advantage over others in gaining insight to the actions of the students, faculty and their supporters. As usual, there has been a pattern in the press of demonizing and romanticizing the true character of this social movement, which consists of people with the usual strengths and foibles that are the trademark of human beings.

According to the mass media, nearly everyone insists the real issue with Jane Fernandes was DeafCulture-ness. By "nearly everyone" I mean: people quoted who do and do not identify with "big-D" Deaf culture i.e. all along the continuum of Deaf/deaf/hard of hearing. Nevertheless, faculty (Lynn Jacobowitz quoted in an article in the Washington Post newspaper and student leader LaToya Plummer interviewed on TV/radio "DemocracyNow!") have gone on record about OTHER reasons for discontent with Dr. Fernandes's appointment.

On the other hand, most people (along that continuum of identities) have assumed that the "other reasons" were window-dressing, cosmetics, and not the face or soul of the protests. Is it possible that the part about Deaf identity and culture relates also to the anger and humiliation of having one's collective point of view ignored by the Board of Trustees, and the initial opposition was not essentially and singularly about the big D-deaf issues?

I have found it impossible to measure the extent to which the other issues were genuinely a part of the protests: namely: diversity in the job search and style of leadership, and listening to issues dear to the students and faculty. Dr. Fernandes was to some unknown extent handpicked by Dr. Jordan --it appears. Dr. Fernandes, an already familiar and known player on the Gallaudet scene was viewed with skepticism for many reasons, not just one. Dr. Fernandes is reported to not be considered a "people person"-- a strength credited to Dr. Jordan when I was a graduate student at Gallaudet. During the years that I attended Gallaudet as a graduate student in the early 1990s, Dr. Jordan's people skills went a long way towards moderating (sometimes!) but not resolving discontent--acrid and active as well as smoldering discontent, on- and off-campus related to the centrality of American Sign Language and Deaf Culture at Gallaudet University.

Dr. Jordan played the historical role of being the first deaf president leaving many contentious issues on the back burner. Ever-shrinking funds of Gallaudet programs, the increase in cochlear implantation of children, the wider integration of students who are deaf or hard of hearing on other campuses have all added new ingredients to the ever-simmering pot of questions and assertions about the role of American Sign Language and deaf culture in hiring, admission, curriculum and research decisions at Gallaudet University.

The extent to which the students and faculty felt ignored and left out of the process this autumn and last school year may be something which aggravated and magnified the Deaf Culture issues but as an outsider now, it is impossible to know. It bothers me that the public outcries against the letting go of Dr. Fernandes has reduced the student protests to animalistic stubbornness undermining the genuine complicated assortment of issues that need to be scrutinized, making invisible the other factors and aggravating issues.

There needs to be a scientific and non-politicized analysis. The fact that the "deaf card" has been played by all sides in the past (and I have personally seen this occur at Gallaudet and in the pre-college education system) does not provide a clear explanation of the events related to Dr. Fernandes' appointment and its unraveling. If we listen to what the leaders say, there are discrepancies, and so perhaps different people had different reasons for opposing Dr. Fernandes.

It is important that we pay attention to the authentic and actual driving reasons for the protest and for the trustees' ultimate decisions rather than view all events with the lens of our expectations and opinions and prior experiences and biases related to Gallaudet University and Deaf Culture. We as people in the community "deaf and hard of hearing" need to understand ourselves and one another so we can be united on advocacy issues of communication justice for children and adults alike especially as we seek improvements from Congress, the Federal Communications Commission and public and private institutions.

~~~~~

- Interview with Gallaudet student protest leader LaToya Plummer (Nov. 1, 2006) http://preview.tinyurl.com/uqzfv