New National Pastime: Pick on the Bay Area

The three themes of deaf 2006:
1. We are a divided community.
2. We need to unify through dialogue and reaching out to each other.
3. Let's pick on the Bay Area.

Seriously. I'm seeing these three themes repeated all the time, phrased differently, but these appear often in the deaf blogosphere. The first two are ones I have believed to be true for a long time. I've also done my part in putting the second one into action, and I will continue to do so whenever I can. The third, however, is whack, yo.

I mean, what, has picking on the Bay Area become our national pastime? And how does it relate to the first two? It completely defeats the purpose of unifying us as a people and a community when people unleash splenetic, venomed attacks, such as Chris Leon's latest roar at chrisleon.wordpress.com/2006/12/22/bay-area-getting too-big-for-its-britches/

To give Chris credit, he did not vilify individuals, nor cast aspersions on anyone, but his blog entry was irresponsible in how it maligned an entire community and in how it implied that all of California was somehow involved in this by imagining Dan McClintock drawing a big-headed California.

Let's be fair to Chris, though. His entry generated tons of discussion, so maybe there was genuine concern and honest questioning about the gala for four of the student leaders from the Gallaudet protest. However, fact-checking then discussing what he found would have been the responsible way to go in this, and just about any other, situation.

For example, here is what my fact-checking found:
1. The student leaders were selected simply because they were the public face of the protest. (Leah Katz-Hernandez and Delia Lozano-Martinez were appointed by the FSSA, but they faded quickly due to personal reasons, which I will not air here out of respect for their privacy). Ryan Commerson and LaToya Plummer were appointed by the FSSA, while Chris Corrigan was the mayor of Tent City. Tara Holcomb, in their perception, became the de facto replacement for Katz Hernandez and Lozano-Martinez, though it never became official.
2. The organizers are very, very well aware that many, many people played leadership roles at one time or another or in different ways and it was never, ever their intent to appoint these four to a higher level than the other people who were involved.
3. The gala was so expensive because the hotel was outrageously expensive (but comparable with what hotels charge), and they have not broken even yet. Food was free with admission.
4. The organizers announced the gala at a public event and invited people to sign up for committees. So this was not a hand-picked group of people in charge of the gala.
5. The focus of the gala was on the Bay Area contribution, while honoring as many of the student leaders as they could. They asked anyone who was a student and part of the protest to get up and say a few words to thunderous applause. The PowerPoint they showed thanked over 25 or 30, probably more, student leaders.

With all these facts, some questions may remain, and they may be worthy of discussion. For example, did they consult with the FSSA about who should be invited? If not, why not? (It could have been an honest oversight on their part.) Did they consider hosting something for free and giving up the fancy hotel surroundings? If so, why did they go the way they did? Some suggestions may remain as well, such as inviting all of the student leaders to the gala. This would have resulted in a more responsible item being posted, and it would have served as an outlet for those with concerns.

Another thing that irks me about the blog entry is how the comments section turned into a weapon against some selected individuals in the Bay Area. This is not Chris's fault, of course, and every entry anywere about the Bay Area seems to elicit vile comments casting aspersions on David Eberwein's character. This was no exception, and it seems to have dragged Joey Baer into the fray as well. Based on what I've read as well as on the info I've found while doing my fact-checking, it seems that some people in the Bay Area genuinely like Eberwein, some think he's a total asshole, while others merely tolerate him. Isn't this par for the course for many people we know? It's just that Eberwein is über-visible and he stirs up stronger feelings than most. My suggestion: Lay off the negative comments, and if you don't live where he lives, be grateful. If you do live in the same community and you don't like him, figure out how to tolerate him if you aren't willing to give him feedback. The same is true for all individuals that have been attacked in DeafBlogLand. Personal attacks are DIVISIVE, and they do NOT help us learn how to respect and listen to each other. Attacking people does NOT unify us as a community.

Another thing - why the heck are people attacking the Bay Area left and right? What did they ever do to attract such ire from the community? From what I hear, it is one huge geographic group, and there are many groups within the Bay Area. Ergo, it's unfair to lump them all together in one large deaf group, because that's just not how they function. Also, it looks like one or more group in the Bay Area is full of movers and shakers. They just DO instead of sitting around and talking about stuff. OK. What's so bad about that? I do NOT get why this community is the source of so much acrimony.

If there are genuine concerns about some groups in the Bay Area, then why can't the national/global deaf community act on them in a more positive, productive way? For instance, why can't some concerns be aired via e-mail or videophone discussions directly to people in the area? And if some issues need to be raised on the national stage via blogs, then why can't the entries be less inflammatory and more fact-based? Anything less serves to harm the unity that so many people have worked for this year.

Lay off the bashing, everyone, and resolve your concerns productively, please. Remember: UNITY via open, respectful dialogue should be your, my, and our ultimate goal.