114 Deaf Epistemologies, Identity, and Learning
guishing mem bers of the deaf community from “chickens”; that is, deaf people who
have grown up in rural areas, have not attended deaf schools, and/or have not been
in contact with other deaf adults. (This label is applied because these people’s ges-
tural form of communica tion is said to resemble the flapping of a chicken’s wings.)
The transition from gestural communication to formal signing in deaf schools or
in the adult deaf community is perceived as a turning point in deaf people’s lives.
Deaf people’s description of this transition also illustrates the ideologies of
Western education, sign language, and religion imported into the country. For ex-
ample, common iconic gestures in Cameroon to refer to father and mother, indicat-
ing a man’s beard and a woman’s breasts, respectively, have had to be replaced by
formal ASL signs (see Figure 5.2). Gradually, the narrative goes, as deaf Cameroo-
nians’ signing “improves” (and the gestures are replaced), they become “suc cessful.”
Having an education, “signing beautifully,” and knowing how to read and write are
also perceived as signs of being “smart.” This ideology is also reflected in the cur-
rent organization of deaf leadership in the CANAD and in the Cameroonian deaf
community, which is largely represented by deafened people who have more educa-
tional background and knowledge of the written and spoken dominant languages.
There is a sense of collective identification among deaf adults in terms of the
African notion of an extended family; for example, deaf peers are called “brothers
and sisters” in deaf community meetings, and older male leaders are called “papa.”
For those who have attended deaf schools, this sense of care and responsibility starts
with deaf teachers or older deaf students taking care of younger students, but it is
broader than that. Local deaf leaders are concerned about the well-being of com-
munity members and often visit deaf people to see how they are doing or to act as
negotiators in case of family problems.
The context of a wider distribution of gestural communication and the lack of
access to rehabilitative technology results in the border marking between members
of the deaf community and “chickens” that is different from the symbolic marker
distinguishing oral and signing deaf people in Western so cieties. “Chickens” are
also considered part of the extended deaf family and are welcomed to learn sign
language and join the group. Deaf leaders will also tend to take responsibility for
“chickens” in case of problems with the larger society.
However, this sense of family is an ambiguous one. In its lack of confidence and
collaboration among deaf adults, it differs from the sense of collectivity in Western
deaf communities (see, e.g., Ladd, 2003; Mindess, 1999; Padden & Humphries,
1988) and in deaf communities in the Extreme North region of Cameroon and
in Chad (see footnote 5). The broader moral crisis and collapse of the community
safety net is probably also a factor, as well as the absence of deaf elders (and their
epistemic authority) who can serve as examples of successful deaf people. Most deaf
adults respond that they do not have any friends and need to solve problems on their
own. Those who attended a deaf school often recall a feeling of belonging; however,
this feeling seems to be overshadowed by the hard realities of adult life. The lack of
secondary education and of room for continu ous bonding at an age when maturity
and independence are being developed is another explanatory factor.
A reason for the lack of trust among deaf community members may also be found
in reported systematic sexual abuse of deaf children and women in deaf schools and