5 Reasons Why the DEAF Masturbation Video is different than anything before... (page 16)

OUTLAW

The Video is still on youtube..

I can`t find it on JWorg though..

........................ ...OUTLAW

Dismissing servant

No, It's still on Youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1m8AFFGnF9M&feature=player_embedded

Dismissing servant

It's still on jw.org Outlaw! I checked it out one minute ago!

The webmaster(bator)s at WTS seem to have other things to do!

Paulapollos - thanks for your contribution. It's a shame so much time and effort is required in order to comprehensively refute the claims of those who are overly sensitive, or opposed to this negative exposure of the Society's teachings for perhaps some other reason. It's great to have your insight as someone who actually knows what you're talking about.

Cedars

Paulapollos

Cedars,

Thanks. I shouldn't have posted, I normally don't - my language in the post is intemperate, and to be honest, I haven't even bothered to get into the details that KS misuses - it would have taken all night. However, the tone, the attitude, the self-righteousness of it all, just annoyed me. I'm sure that KS is a great person, I bear him/her no ill-will.

For the record, I happen to think that the work that you and other posters have done, and continue to do, to expose the Watchtower Society for what it is, is absolutely invaluable. Whether or not a person always agrees with how each issue is handled, one cannot fault the overall aim - to let people see what the Watchtower Society is really all about. After that, people can make their own decisions.

As far as I am concerned, the WT has been preying on the deaf community for years, deliberately targeting a section of society that for historical reasons that I won't go into here, trusts religious figures. My experience of deaf people and the WT Society is one of outright exploitation, and ruined lives. I don't know who decided to use this clip, but as far as I am concerned, it was a masterstroke. With a little bit of thought, it could be even better. I personally would love to see an expose of the British Sign Language translations - some of the things that deaf people in the UK are taught about what the Bible is supposed to say, are frankly scandalous, and I am convinced that people don't realise simply because no-one has bothered to draw attention to it.

Keep up the good work, Cedars, et al.

PP

rebel8

Oh bother. I can't believe there are 2 lengthy threads even debating this.

No one is mocking sign language. If there was a video of a public talk about masturbation it would be a sensation too. The fact that the translators chose to make ecstatic facial expressions and lewd gestures that would translate to unacceptable words in spoken English (for both female and male masturbation) just makes it all the worse.

The fact that they felt the need to produce this talk just for deaf members is weird.

The ridicule is well deserved. It reminds me of this (nsfw). It's that bad.

mamochan13

Paulapollis - thank you for posting. You shed a lot of light on a topic that many of us, however well-meaning and sincere, have not really understood. Thank you for your perspective.

And I just checked and the video is still on the jw org site.

King Solomon

Thanks for your response. As is expected, not everyone will agree on this issue, hearing or hearing-impaired. I will respond, as you have straw-manned some claims due to perhaps a hasty reading of the forum.

PP said:

King Solomon said: "anyone who giggles and makes fun of the video is likely running the risk of insulting a protected classes language, making fun of hearing impaired."

Rubbish. While facial expressions (actually, they're called Non-manual Features) are part of the language, the nmf's used in the video are not "proper ASL" as you said. A number of expressions could be used by the presenter. The decision has been made by the translation team for the presenter on the video to manifest the facial expression of a weird, dry heaving, and above all, gormless expression. It is a deliberate choice, designed to negatively express masturbation. Why, exactly, should the fact that a person sees that facial expression and laugh, automatically mean that they are "mocking the deaf"? Get over yourself. It's a clear non-sequitur. I watched it. I laughed. My deaf family watched it. And laughed, and said "what the hell are they doing." Other deaf friends of mine watched it and had the same reaction.

As you and others have pointed out, there is a wide expressive umbrella of usage for expressions (NMF) which are part of ASL. Whether they fall under the umbrella of ASL, "correct" or "incorrect" aside, is moot, as you're right: it's not a fair characterization. Why not? We're talking about a 'style' issue, not a 'proper syntax' issue....

Thus noted, translators have the ability to use NMF as THEY may choose: that's a highly-personal (even unconscious) decision, much like someone who reads words aloud may stress certain words, change the cadence, pitch, tone, inflection, etc. ALL readings are acceptable, but there's a reason some people get paid the big $$$ to record voice-overs in L.A. for commercials, movies, cartoons, etc. Vocal actors read the SAME exact written lines as anyone who walks down the street, but their delivery is where the art of VO work lies. ALL voice actors are reading scripts (some go to mass-auditions like actors, reading lines), but HOW they inflect is the differentiator.

You haven't made the case that this translator's NMF style was sooooo horribly deviant as to constitute an outrageous crime: all posted opinions I've seen here on JWN (eg Vanderhoven's wife comes to mind, for one) suggested that the translation was/is acceptable, falling within what is understandable and recognizable (which IS the point of communication). I've talked to a family member who's done translating for 40 yrs, and she had no problem with the art of translation she saw, and repeated what I'm saying now: individual variations occur, due to different expressions and personalities of the translator. I already knew that, but double-checked.

So, with that in mind, how can YOU now claim that non-ASL viewers laughing at the video (and not ALL are, BTW) are NOT making fun of THIS dweeb's person's appearance, mannerisms, expressions, as a personal attack on HIM? OR, would you prefer the giggling is making fun of the goofy-looking signs and faces of the deaf? They're laughing: pick your poison. YOU explain to me why YOU think they're laughing...

See, you cannot have your cake and eat it, too: you can't say it's NOT a personal attack ridiculing him, but also claim it's not ridiculing the deaf. People have their individual reasons, and may not even know themselves WHY they are laughing, but here's the kicker: NEITHER YOU or I or anyone else can answer. That will depend on the INDIVIDUAL.

So that's why MOST people would choose to resist the urge to laugh, and simply show a bit of social restraint; some hopefully even take it as an opportunity to LEARN about people who are different from themselves (and wouldn't the World be nicer, if more people DID that?). It's called being considerate, polite, and tactfully aware of the feeling and perspective of others.

BTW, I don't buy that most people who see the video are performing the mental gymnastics required to think it's the WT on display: most people don't know ANYTHING about JWs, or that they made this video, and if you give the average human being that much credit, that's great: you've apparently been hanging around with a smarter, more informed crowd than I have.

Sure, those with a JW-bashing agenda may ASSUME their prior knowledge of the evil WTBTS from reading on JWN is at the top of everyone else's mind, too, but then fact is,it's NOT: they are projecting THEIR World-view on others, and assuming much. And using a GIF of a guy saying "masturbation" over and over is on par with watching fart videos on YT, appealing to the most base, human prurient appeal. That's not addressing the problems of the WT cult.

See, it's one thing to post the VIDEO itself on YT, but some here have felt the need to create GIFs which really don't serve any purpose, but to mock... So be it, but surely you didn't excuse those uses, too?

King Solomon said: "his approach of exploiting a video designed for the hearing-impaired to get a cheap laugh". Again, nonsense. The reaction of deaf non-jw's to this video clip is "who the hell do they think they are, to tell us that".

That, however is the MESSAGE of the video: unlike hearing viewers, ASL viewers don't get all hung up at the sight of seeing a sign that they've never seen before.

if you read earlier, you'd know that I'm an atheist and think ALL religion is off-base... I posted a link that shows that MOST religions take a dim view of masturbation, so again, you could easily find Catholic books that say the same (and remember, this video is based on content found in the Youth book, so it's not like this is done ONLY to tell deaf not to masturbate). Who are Catholics to tell people that it's a sin, as well? If I had it my way, ALL religion would disappear, but that's another issue. So we agree on the conclusion, but not the methods: I'm not one to think "ends justify the means".

BTW, we do enjoy freedom of religion in this country, which trumps all. It's a shame more don't understand that also means a freedom FROM religion (but that's getting OT).

So some people find the video funny. Okay. And? Do you have proof that the motive behind the OP showing the video is "trying to get a cheap laugh"?

Have you NOT read the many threads? Come on.... People are getting enjoyment out of making masturbation jokes, like they're 10 y.o. Not seen the GIF's? No comment on those?

I agree with you, the focus should be on the intrusion into private lives, but let's get something straight here. "try not to trample the boundaries of the hearing-impaired in the process by making fun of a video that accurately depicts someone communicating in correct ASL." There is no correct ASL, just as there is no "correct English". Laughing at a facial expression that the signer has chosen, does not mean the audience is mocking the deaf.

And as I explained above, it doesn't mean they're NOT. You nor I know exactly WHY people find something humorous, but that's why society encourages a tolerance and respect for others who ARE different. We don't laugh at people in wheelchairs, small people, different ethnicities, the blind who run into things, etc. It's not funny: it's just insensitive.

See, the thing is, this is a BIGGER issue that just the deaf: it's basic human decency to have tolerance for those who are different. What's amazing is that you cannot appreciate that fact, or feel that YOU are entitled to speak on behalf of ALL deaf, when the fact is NO ONE gets to do that: we ALL have to be tolerant of differences, even those we personally experience.

(I'm not a believer in double-standards, like "well, I'm XXXX, so I get to use the XXXX word." Nope, that doesn't fly: you've got to 'walk the walk' if you want to 'talk the talk'.)

You are making assumptions, and dare I say it, you are being offended on the behalf of "the deaf". Now let me say it here: THAT IS PATRONISNG. THAT IS OFFENSIVE. Deaf people don't need you to be the "protector of their dignity". JWFACTS had it bang on. "The purpose is not to insult a language, and anyone taking offense is being overly sensitive."

Sorry, but NO ONE gets to speak for ANYONE or EVERYONE.

I'm offended: there. Discount me, then, bcause it IS offensive to me that people laugh at the video if they're doing out of insensitivity. I'm NOT offended on your or anyone else's behalf, but because I, ME, I have this strange thing for symphathizing with that little kid who's getting bullied, the under-dogs.

Yeah, I'm thinking about that small scrawny 5 y.o. kid I saw in clinic last year who came in covered with bruises and a black eye (he was beaten by a bully who mugged him for his glasses, because the bigger kid was told he needed glasses, although he needed his OWN Rx, not this kid's). Never-mind the smaller kid was highly hyperopic and amblyopic in one eye; never-mind that HE needed those glasses to prevent his amblyopia from worsening, leading to permanent blindness. Oh, the smaller kid? Did I mention that he was deaf, and was unable to see without those glasses? He NEEDED them in order to get by in this World? I ruled out retinal detachment (standard procedure after blunt trauma to the eye), and we were able to find lenses/frames that were close to his Rx so he had at least something to get by in a pinch (until the order came back). He had a smile on his face that said it all.

I'm no hero, but I'm not a jerk, either. See, we live in a pretty-damned cruel World, where people really don't give a crap about others. The way you break that cycle is by trying to make the World just a little better place than before, one small kind act at a time, and NOT waiting around for God to do it....

Now let's get onto the bit where KS decided to say that BluePill2 was:

Sooo, then how do all the hearing-impaired posters on JWN (including LAmallcool, above) read and respond to posts, without being able to read? You've just perpetuated one of those ugly stereotypes about the hearing-impaired that shows a lack of awareness of their plight, the daily challenges they face in a hearing World that is ignorant of their experiences, and you aren't doing this to be an advocate or to help, but simply to exploit the disabled because it serves YOUR purposes. That's ugly...".

My god. KS, if I didn't think you were sincere, I would actually call you a complete buffoon. Here's a little statistic for you. Up to 70% of deaf high school gradutes in the US, CANNOT READ ABOVE THE LEVEL OF A TEN-YEAR OLD. FACT. You want the proof? Read Marc Marshark, from Gaulladuet University. Or Professor Bencie Woll from UCL. Or Professor Gabriella Vigliocco from the same institution. Or, ANY OF THE LAST 45 YEARS OF RESEARCH, from numerous institutions around the world - pm me, I'll send you the goddamn books myself, I've got hundreds of the bloody things. It's a fact. Where in the hell do you get off, accusing another poster of, essentially, discriminatory statements, without knowing MUCH ABOUT THE FIELD? Seriously?

Don't straw-man my position: you know fully well the stereotype that Bluepill repeated, nimplying that the deaf are ILLITERATE, i.e. unable to read. HE was wrong, and I corrected that old wive's tale.

Nowhere did I say that reading wasn't more of a CHALLENGE for deaf: thanks for the studies, as I'm fully aware that deaf test at a significantly lower reading-levels than their age-matched hearing counterparts. In fact, part of my research at UC Berkeley was working with deaf patients, studying the efficacy of various forms of vision therapy specifically designed to allow for greater sensory integration, testing if it enabled them to read with greater facility. I see you are doing similar eye-tracking stuff, etc, so you're preaching to the choir...

So re-read whatever post of mine you apparently misread, as I guarantee you I never said what you think I did.

Absolute rubbish, every word. Deaf people do not exist in a vaccum. They don't use the sign "masturbate" in general, everyday speech. It is a "taboo" sign, and is normally only used in conversations among friends, or as an insult. The reason that the Society used it is simple - it's because they wanted to be CRYSTAL CLEAR, and they lack the subtelty to approach the translation differently. As I said above, their language skills are LACKING, because they use amateur translators.

It's ironic that you'd claim it's "taboo" and normally "used only in private", when what do we have here? I see it about 10 times on every thread on the JWN?

Despite your opinion, there's a valid reason that words like 'masturbation' exist: they're needed to discuss clinical matters related to reproductive health. It's a medical term. If it bothers you, then consider taking a sex education course.

Now, before you get on your high horse, let me just make something clear. You use LadyLee, JGNat and others. Let me put this as clearly as I can. Lady Lee is WRONG. And she is WELCOME to send me a message and her evidence that proves to me that 45 years of research into the subject is INCORRECT. Deaf people, in general, are UNABLE TO READ ENGLISH TO A LEVEL THAT ENABLES THEM TO FUNCTION WITH THE SAME EFFECTIVENESS AS HEARING PEOPLE. God, is that so hard to understand? I have immense respect for LadyLee, she does a lot of good work. But, to quote, " I am not fluent in ASL and I can't read ASL very well. But I can get by with a lot of patience from them. My second daughter's first expressive language was sign. She could communicate with signs before she could talk.I am not just some person sitting on the sidelines." She is an deeply concerned person. But she is not a professional, nor is she a researcher into these issues.

I think you misunderstood Lady Lee's position, as I remember that she asserted exactly the same point you are making. Deaf live in a World where they NEED to read.

As for JGnat, I don't know if he said that the "translators are deaf". But here's a little thing. After spending years at Bethel, ACTUALLY doing the job, I can assure you that the "translators" are not deaf. They're hearing, for very good reasons. The point is, you're just quoting things, to back up your own sense of unjustified outrage. And frankly, it's stupid.

"He" (JGnat) is a "she" FWIW.

Your account of the translators shown differs from someone else who said they ARE deaf, and knows them personally to be volunteers living in the Patterson, NJ area. I don't know.... Do you know these people personally?

Iamallcool

Paulapollos, there are very few deaf people working at Patterson.

5 Reasons Why the DEAF Masturbation Video is different than anything before...

perfect1

OUTLAW

Dismissing servant

Dismissing servant

cedars

Paulapollos

rebel8

mamochan13

King Solomon

Iamallcool

Share this