Respect Isn’t Selective: Why Do We Still Push Back on Black Deaf Voices?
As a white DeafBlind person, I see the obvious: when communities ask for respect, we listen. Why is it different when the Black Deaf community asks?
When the intellectually Disabled community asked us to stop using the R-word, we listened.
When Deaf Autistic people asked us to stop using a harmful sign, we listened.
When DeafBlind people asked us to stop using a disrespectful sign for Blind, we listened.
But when the Black Deaf community asked us to stop using the B-hand and the n-word, suddenly the listening stopped.
Why?
The Double Standard
Respect shouldn’t be conditional. We’ve already proven that we can change when asked. We’ve shown that we can adapt our language and signs when communities explain why something is harmful. Yet when Black Deaf people ask, the response shifts from acceptance to argument. That’s not about difficulty — it’s about whose voices we value.
This double standard reveals something uncomfortable: we are willing to respect some communities, but not all. We are willing to change when it costs us little, but when race enters the conversation, suddenly respect becomes negotiable. That’s not equity. That’s racism.
This isn’t new. Black communities have always had to fight harder to be heard, even when asking for basic respect. What we see in Deaf spaces today mirrors the larger pattern in America: when Black people speak, white people debate instead of listening.
If we can accept corrections from one group, we can accept them from another. The refusal to do so exposes the hierarchy we’ve built — one where Black Deaf voices are placed at the bottom, even within spaces that claim to value diversity and inclusion.
Naming the Resistance
The excuses I hear most often are about “access.” Interpreters claim they must provide full access no matter the words, saying things like: “You’re depriving your Deaf client from full understanding if you don’t sign it exactly.”
But that argument doesn’t hold up. There are ways to provide full access without reproducing racist language or harmful signs. You can sign “N-word” instead of spelling it out. You can use the color sign for Black instead of the cultural sign that Black Deaf people have asked us to stop using.
Interpreters adapt constantly. We adjust for register, for context, for cultural nuance. We choose signs that fit the client’s background. We already make judgment calls every day. So why pretend that adapting here is impossible? It’s not. It’s just inconvenient for whiteness.
Access and respect are not opposites — you can have both.
So let’s be honest: these excuses aren’t about access. They’re about protecting whiteness. They’re about refusing to change when Black Deaf people ask for respect.
And that refusal is not neutral. It’s racism, plain and simple.
My Position
I am white and DeafBlind. And if I can obviously see this with my low vision, why aren’t y’all seeing it with full sight? To me, it’s clear: when a community says something is disrespectful, you stop doing it. Period.
The truth is, it’s not about access — it’s about comfort. Too many white interpreters cling to the excuse of “full understanding” instead of admitting they’re perpetuating harm. But comfort is not more important than justice. And “access” that relies on racist language is not access at all — it’s complicity.
Being DeafBlind doesn’t mean I’m exempt from responsibility. It means I have to be even more intentional about what I choose to see and how I choose to act.
If I can recognize racism with limited vision, then those with full sight have no excuse for willful blindness.
The refusal to see what is obvious is not about ability — it’s about choice. And that choice reveals where whiteness places its priorities: protecting itself instead of respecting Black Deaf voices.
A Challenge to the Reader
If you respected the requests of other communities, why not this one? What makes Black Deaf voices less worthy of respect to you? That’s the question we need to face honestly.
Because the issue isn’t difficulty — it’s willingness. And willingness is a choice.
Ask yourself: why do you resist? Is it because you don’t want to admit you were wrong? Is it because you don’t want to give up power? Is it because you’re hiding behind the excuse of “access” when alternatives exist?
Whatever the reason, it’s not good enough.
This isn’t just about interpreters. It’s about every white Deaf person who shrugs off Black Deaf voices. It’s about every ally who stays silent when they hear resistance. If you’re not challenging racism in your own spaces, you’re part of the problem.
Closing Call
Respect is not selective. It doesn’t stop at the boundaries of race. If we can listen when other communities ask, we can listen when Black Deaf people ask.
Respect means choosing signs that honor the people they represent. Respect means refusing to reproduce slurs, even when you’re interpreting. Respect means centering Black Deaf voices in decisions about Black Deaf identity.
That’s not optional. That’s equity.
The question isn’t whether it’s hard. The question is whether you’re willing to stop resisting and start respecting.
Change is possible. We’ve already proven it. Interpreters have adapted countless times when asked by other communities.
Further Reading
To deepen the understanding of Black culture, race, and history, here are some recommended books available on Amazon:
Final Thought
Change is never easy, but it is always possible. We’ve already shown that our communities can adapt when asked — and that same willingness can extend to honoring Black Deaf voices. Respect is not a burden; it’s a gift we give each other to build stronger, more inclusive spaces.
If we choose to listen, to act, and to keep learning, we can create a future where equity is not debated but lived. That future is within reach — and it starts with each of us deciding to respect, without exception.
“If you are not deliberately fighting racism, you are passively upholding it.” — Robin DiAngelo
About the Creator
Tracy Stine
Freelance Writer. ASL Teacher. Disability Advocate. Deafblind. Snarky.
Keep reading
More stories from Tracy Stine and writers in The Swamp and other communities.
Beyond Captions: Why the White House Lawsuit Affirms ASL Interpreters as Essential Public Access
The current federal court order, which mandates the Trump Administration to immediately reinstate live American Sign Language (ASL) interpreters for its press briefings, has ignited a critical, high-stakes conversation. This legal victory for the Deaf community is a direct challenge to the administration's decision to discontinue the service implemented by the previous White House.
By Tracy Stine2 months ago in The Swamp
America, Russia And Other Warships Head To India: What’s Coming Next?
In a rare demonstration of naval activity, fleets from the United States, Russia, and other key powers are reportedly heading toward India in what analysts describe as a “strategic maritime convergence.” This development has caught the attention of global security experts, as it signals potential shifts in geopolitical alignments and raises questions about the future of regional stability in the Indo-Pacific. The Arrival of Global Fleets Reports indicate that multiple naval vessels, including advanced warships from the US and Russia, are en route to Indian waters. While military exercises are routine, the presence of these fleets together in a region that has witnessed rising tensions over territorial disputes and trade routes has raised eyebrows. Analysts note that India’s strategic location, bridging the Indian Ocean and the Pacific, makes it a focal point for naval power projection. The United States has maintained a robust naval presence in the Indo-Pacific for decades, primarily to safeguard trade routes, deter Chinese expansion, and maintain alliances with regional partners. Russia, meanwhile, has been strengthening military cooperation with India, supplying advanced weaponry and conducting joint exercises. The convergence of both nations’ naval assets highlights the increasing strategic importance of India in global military planning. Potential Motivations Behind the Movement Several factors could explain this unprecedented maritime maneuver. First, India is emerging as a pivotal player in global defense and security. Its modernizing navy, coupled with strategic ports such as Visakhapatnam and Mumbai, provides a critical launchpad for joint operations or rapid deployment. Second, regional tensions are escalating. The South China Sea and the Indian Ocean have become hotspots for naval confrontations, with territorial disputes and trade security concerns at the forefront. A coordinated presence by multiple powers signals an intent to assert influence and project strength in the region. Third, these movements may reflect preparations for joint military exercises, which India frequently hosts with global partners. Such exercises allow navies to test interoperability, showcase capabilities, and strengthen diplomatic ties. However, the inclusion of both American and Russian forces—nations with historically divergent global objectives—adds a layer of complexity. Implications for Regional Security The presence of powerful fleets in India’s vicinity has multiple security implications. Regional players such as China, Pakistan, and smaller Indian Ocean nations are likely monitoring these developments closely. While some may view it as a stabilizing deterrent against unilateral aggression, others may see it as a provocative escalation. For India, this convergence is both an opportunity and a challenge. On one hand, hosting or coordinating with multiple powers underscores India’s rising strategic clout. On the other, managing the competing interests of major military players requires careful diplomacy to avoid unintended tensions. Additionally, maritime security experts warn that the dense concentration of warships can increase the risk of miscalculations or accidents at sea. Navigating crowded waters while conducting exercises demands precise communication and strict adherence to protocols. Any lapse could escalate tensions unexpectedly. The Geopolitical Angle Beyond the immediate region, this naval movement has broader geopolitical implications. The United States appears to reaffirm its commitment to balancing China’s growing influence in Asia. Russia, meanwhile, seems keen on maintaining strategic ties with India while signaling its continued global relevance amid Western sanctions and pressures. Other nations, possibly including European partners and Australia, may also observe or participate in related naval activities. Their involvement would further indicate the interconnectedness of global security concerns and the increasingly multipolar nature of maritime strategy. What Comes Next? While official statements remain cautious, experts anticipate a combination of joint exercises, port visits, and strategic consultations over the coming weeks. Analysts suggest that India may leverage this opportunity to strengthen defense agreements, secure technology transfers, and position itself as a central player in Indo-Pacific security. Diplomatic channels will be equally important. India must balance cooperation with major powers while maintaining an independent foreign policy, ensuring that these naval movements do not inadvertently heighten regional tensions.A Turning Point at Sea The arrival of American, Russian, and allied warships in India is more than a headline—it is a reflection of shifting global power dynamics. The Indian Ocean is no longer a quiet backdrop to world affairs; it is a central stage where the future of global security is being negotiated. As these fleets dock, train, and depart, the world will be watching closely. What happens next may well shape the balance of power across oceans for years to come.
By Fiaz Ahmed 2 days ago in The Swamp
Comments (1)
I completely understand where you are coming from. Unfortunately, it's not just the black community. It's spread to all minorities. Jewish community especially right now. Our deaf voices are completely being ignored. People have such a huge double Standard when it comes to POC. As a deaf Jewish Indian myself, I couldn't tell you how many times I've experienced oppression from the deaf community. most of the time it was because someone didn't like me personally. There was a very serious situation that happened with a deaf professor at a university who took it upon himself to tell his 70,000 followers on tiktok that I fake my deafness because I didn't have enough signing videos on social media. Not only did I not have enough signing videos but my signing was not up to his standards. So then he made an entire video saying that I fake my deafness. Now before you say or think anything, let me ask you a question. If an interpreter on a call told a deaf person that they were faking their deafness, what would you do? Would you not report that interpreter? Is that not unprofessional? Are we not morally obligated to hold people accountable who are in these types of professions? Especially when it's a deaf ASL teacher at a university. If he had told a student that they were faking their deafness or faking their blindness, would that be tolerated? But for some strange reason, when I held this man accountable for his actions in contacted the university to let them know what he had done, an entire group of deaf people came and attacked me, harassed and doxed me. They threatened my life, they sent messages to my family members into random people who they assumed were my family. They play detective and picked through my entire life. They mocked my mental illness. Made accounts with my home address. And I am still dealing with these people today. This happened almost 3 years ago. Now, I would really like to know what would have happened if my skin had not been so pale, if the same thing would have happened. I have on my social media that I am Jewish and Indian. People have called into question my deafness and my own identity. Now I tell you this story to make a point. We have to realize that just because deaf people are oppressed themselves and in a minority, does not absolve them of being bad people. For some reason some non people of color, within the deaf community, believe that they are better and Superior to others. We see racism, homophobia, transphobia, islamophobia, etc all within our own little community and to be blunt it sickens me to my core. The fact that we as an oppressed minority cannot unite and understand each other baffles me. This situation with "how to sign black when referring to a black person" and the "n word", has already been discussed for years. And as we have noticed it is mostly non-black individuals who are bringing up this discussion yet again. I would understand if someone was new to learning ASL or to the deaf community, whatever, but all they would have to do is research that. They would not have to make a video themselves or post questions in the public eye themselves to get the information that they're seeking. This entire recent discussion, all it did was to fuel in platform racist. The woman who made the video about her niece for example, that video was so unnecessary, and so was the video that the niece made herself. And in making both videos, it allowed racists to be platformed, it allowed a white woman to tell other white people what to do in a situation dealing within the black community. Which again was not her place. Even her apology was lacking integrity and accountability. When the deaf Community defends itself against hearing people, we expect respect. We expect hearing individuals to listen to us because we have lived experience. And for some strange reason when it applies to anyone else, who happens to be a person of color, they throw that logic out the door. I can't understand it either. It is simply people being racist. I appreciate your blog and bringing up this discussion.