488). Further, I learned that this group of people was impulsive to the signs whose underlying meaning seemed abusive or complicated to them despite the use being a normal one.
I was nervous while communicating to the deaf people because I was unable to inform them that I was capable of hearing and speaking contrary to their expectations since the majority members in the chatroom were deaf. The fact that I was inconsistent in signing to them with the same speed they took to communicate to me spurred anxiety and I could not contemplate the alternative measures to establish in solving the imminent misunderstandings that would emanate from the delays. Despite bearing knowledge on the signs used by the majority population of people in the deaf culture, I was incompetent in elevating the desired skills as there different types of misunderstandings would result from the different perceptions that different chat members bore towards the signings (Davidson 792).
Despite the challenges experienced during the chatroom conversations, the deaf people cooperated and educated me in their experiences while living with the condition as they were growing up. The chatroom experience influenced the understanding that the people were aggressive towards the people who were capable of hearing and speaking holding the belief that such people were ignorant of their inability to hear; hence, the use of verbal communication was deliberate and abusive. Further, I learned that the deaf community perceived that they were normal; hence, they were against any practices expressed by different people whose meaning communicated their inability to participate in verbal communication. Other members with whom I communicated to in the chatroom expressed their dissatisfaction to the practices used by the society in providing special learning centers to the deaf (Hauser