What kind of Geographies are Deaf Geographies anyway?

So, here’s the quandary – faced with proposing sessions for the AAG next year, the question currently going around those involved in 2011 is who to approach for sponsorship which, if you don’t know, means persuading the big powerful interest-groups of the AAG to recognise facets of Deaf Geographies as belonging to them, or identified with them in some way, and lend them some support

The decision isn’t completely make or break. The two sessions this year were sponsored by Communication Geography and Qualitative Geography and still featured papers from other geographical sub-disciplines, but being sponsored gets you recognition and a central time and place for the sessions both during the conference, and in the conference documentation.

Plus, it’s interesting to think about which of the big interest groups best provides a home for Deaf geographies.

The list of those proposed is as follows:

  • Cultural geography
  • Qualitative geography
  • Political geography
  • Historical geography
  • Sexuality and space
  • Ethnic geography
  • Population
  • Urban geography
  • Communication geography

I propose to start picking these apart and adding to them what areas of Deaf geographical research I can possibly think of. I’d invite anyone else to chip in… even if only to disagree or to suggest particular projects or challenges in that area.

When we’re done, some kind of synthesis will be posted to the Deafgeographies.com site for reference for those less familiar with Deaf geographies and questions of Deaf/DEAF space.