The following letter was rejected for publication by the Straits Times’ Forum Page. The letter was accompanied by 15 signatures.

Dear editor,

We winced, we cringed and we threw up our hands in exasperation when we read your news report “Four deaf-mutes jailed over stolen m-cycles” on page C6 of today’s print-edition Straits Times. This also appears on ST’s online site titled “Four jailed over motorbike offences.”

There are two issues here. First, why is it necessary to mention, in the headline of the report in the print edition, the fact that the thieves are deaf? Their physical disability may be a newsworthy element by itself, but phrasing it in such a way in the headline is definitely offensive to deaf people. Why can’t it be phrased as in the online version?

Secondly, please note that the term “deaf-mute” is inaccurate and historically derogatory, and should not be used to describe the deaf. Almost all deaf people have normal, functional vocal cords; they can and do speak, even if their speech is not as clear as hearing people’s. Cases of people who are truly both deaf and mute are extremely rare.

As deaf persons ourselves, we do not want such a term to be used to describe us. It leads to misunderstandings and only reinforce the common misconception that deaf people are necessarily mute as well. Just call us “deaf” (which is acceptable to deaf people who use sign language), or, to describe in general those with hearing loss, “hearing-impaired”.

This is not a new issue, but something we have brought up repeatedly, through the years, to various local media whenever they use the term “deaf-mute”, “deaf and mute” or “deaf and dumb”, and which have been acknowledged by them to be in error. Here, we would like to appeal for the Straits Times to state, ensure and enforce the non-usage of “deaf-mute” in its editorial house style.

Thank you very much.

Alvan Yap

 

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

WP’s Yaw wins convincing victory in Hougang

Mr Yaw Shin Leong of the Workers’ Party beat his opponent from…

Iswaran assures Indian Minister that SG will stay open to talent and commit to relationship with India

At a high-level India-Singapore CEOs’ Forum attended by Indian Minister Shri Piyush…

Company under investigation by CAD continues to send out invoices to businesses

Company under investigation by Commercial Affairs Department (CAD) continues to send out…

北京、上海落实“封闭式管理”

中国北京政府本月9日发布“疫情防控通告严格居住小区封闭式管理”,而上海市虽然没有发出正式通告,但是该市表示目前市内的1万3000个居民社区已经落实“封闭式管理”。 随着和北京都进入封闭式管理,中国四大直辖市-北京、天津、上海和重庆都实施了封闭式管理措施,中国大陆的新型冠状病毒的严峻疫情亦引来各界关注。 北京官方对出十项措施,包括进入封闭式管理的市区,外来车辆和人员不得入城,社区输入口数量遭到严格控制,而甫抵达境内的人员也必须登记个人资讯和报告健康状况,如测试体温等。若发现有体温异常的人士,将依据既定的“全链条处置机制”,即刻将他移送并上卫健委报告。 通告指出,抵达北京前14天内,凡是曾抵达疫区或与疫区人员接触的人们,都必须根据规定接受检查或居家检查,主动报告健康状况,并且配合相关管理进行家中隔离。任何违规或拒绝接受医学、居家观察者,都将受到严厉处罚。 北京社区内的各机关单位及企业严加监控人员提问,而非生活所需公共场所一律关闭,房屋中介和房东则必须向当地负责单位报告租客和承租人的个资,已进行人数监管及防疫工作。 上海:防输入、社区防扩散、筛查 上海方面则采取了筑牢“三道防护圈”的防控策略,即道口防输入、社区防扩散、以及集中力量抓筛查和救治。 上海市防控工作领导小组办公室主任顾洪辉表示,当局强调必须严防死守这个超大型城市和国际枢纽,并通过三个管道掌握资讯,即大资料推送的名单、各交通道口推送的咨询,以及来自各区、街镇的自拍自查。 截止10日下午2时30分(当地时间),上海市官方声称已经发现299起新冠确诊病例、1起死亡病例、48人治愈出院,以及1062起可疑病例。