140 Deaf Epistemologies, Identity, and Learning
look at both sides and points at the uncertainty experienced by all citizens in light
of the major migration movements of today. This includes the paradox of, on the
one hand, more room for individual trajectories that are not bounded by a closed
identity of a particular community, and on the other hand, a greater sense of shared
citizenship in societies. He calls for a movement of self-critique, moving beyond the
divide of majority and minority groups:It is important always to keep in mind the aim of creating a society in which
people are asked now how they see their futures, not one in which they’re
judged according to their pasts. Getting there will be a process of trial and
error, and all citizens will need to look beyond ethnic dividing lines. (Scheffer,
2011, p. 28)Taking into account the limits and critiques on Scheffer’s work (also discussed
in the later section on deaf identity formation) and the imperfections inherent
in drawing parallels, we can nonetheless glean valuable insights into contempo-
rary deaf community dynamics by looking at deaf emancipation from the perspec-
tive of a shared cycle of avoidance, conflict, and acceptance, and considering the
more complex ways in which this cycle manifests in societal practices. It is safe to
conclude that, as a part of a shared notion of citizenship, a broader use of sign lan-
guage in the different realms of life is needed to further the emancipation of deaf
citizens in Flanders (also see Chapter 1; De Clerck & Pinxten, 2012a).
I presented the parallels between the dynamics of emancipation in deaf com-
munities and migrant communities as part of my doctoral research in 2009. I am
expanding this exploration in my current Marie Curie Fellowship on deaf migrants
in the United Kingdom, which also permits an interesting look at the overlap of
these communities. The present focus is the current tensions in deaf emancipation
processes in Flanders that are related to conflicts between politicized notions of
deaf identity and deaf culture (tied to a second-generation movement) and experi-
ences of betweenity that challenge these essentialized notions, possibly resulting in
contested identities. One of the aims of Scheffer’s essay was to break the “culture of
avoidance” (2011, p. 333) around migration and inclusion; 15 years later, he is con-
templating the same questions from the perspective of a society that needs to deal
with a moral dilemma in response to the refugee crisis, and arguing for a sustain-
able ethics (Goossens & Sioen, 2015). Finding itself “between hope and despair”
(Scheffer, 2016), European society will also need to reflect on its boundaries and
borders. The sections below look into emancipation processes of the Flemish deaf
community by exploring border narratives and public storytelling suggestive of
betweenity. Flemish Deaf Parliament was a platform for dialogue on how commu-
nity members are viewing their futures. It illuminates a process of self-examination
within the community that is situated within the uncertainty of today, while it also
deals with societal barriers. Although a wider use of sign language will be a crucial
factor towards further emancipation, other essential elements are the intergenera-
tional understanding of multiple experiences of deaf identity, and reflection within
the community. Perspectives on emancipation in deaf and migrant communities