Well--the polygenetic mutation finding is something that I've been predicting for some time. There are well over 100 neurological or genetic conditions that result in deafness. I predict that stuttering is the same; stuttering is not a pathology, but rather then end result (symptom) of any number of conditions. It was just kind of weird getting a call confirming this.
When I interviewed for the job down here, the dean of the graduate school inerupted me at least 3 times to say that stuttering was a nervous condition. And since this predjuce and negative stereotype is accepted as fact by society, one sole voice isn't going to change the world's ignorant opinion. The fundamental attribution error is a powerful thing. But it's findings such as these that can have a significant impact on millions of people. Not so much regarding a "cure", but at least in a sense of peace that illudes so many other people who stutter that I've run across. So it's just interesting to be in the initial 21 that will ultimately result in changing world opinion.
When I interviewed for the job down here, the dean of the graduate school inerupted me at least 3 times to say that stuttering was a nervous condition. And since this predjuce and negative stereotype is accepted as fact by society, one sole voice isn't going to change the world's ignorant opinion. The fundamental attribution error is a powerful thing. But it's findings such as these that can have a significant impact on millions of people. Not so much regarding a "cure", but at least in a sense of peace that illudes so many other people who stutter that I've run across. So it's just interesting to be in the initial 21 that will ultimately result in changing world opinion.

2 Comments:
..."interrupted me at least 3 times to say that stuttering was a nervous condition"....
I'm curious how you respond to that. Do you just role with it and say "yeah, I've been nervous my whole life. It's really amazing I can even sleep at night...."
Or do you just shake your head?
Well--I was in a job interview at the time, so I couldn't go too far. All I did was kept on reiterating that he was citing a prejudicial myth, and that there was no data that supported it...but rather all the data supported a neurophysiological origin.
And true to the prejudice, he didn't believe it.
He was probably amazed that a stutterer could go as far as I did. Probably boggled the guy's mind.
Post a Comment
<< Home