[Callers] Role term survey responses

[Woody Lane via Callers]

I basically agree with Neal. I would not want to replace gents and 
ladies with other arbitrary terms. For many of the same reasons.

Woody

-- 
Woody Lane
Caller, Percussive Dancer
Roseburg, Oregon
http://www.woodylanecaller.com
home: 541-440-1926 cell: 541-556-0054
------------------------------------------------------------------------

On 2/13/2017 2:51 PM, Neal Schlein via Callers wrote:
> I do not want to replace gent and lady as terms, based on my own 
> experience.
>
> Some context: I've been dancing for between 29 and 37 years, depending 
> on how you count--my parents met at a square dance and I grew up 
> dancing.  I started calling about 18 years ago, and dance/call ECD, 
> Scottish, squares, contra, ballroom, and folk styles at varying levels 
> of proficiency.  Seeing a man dancing the lady's role, or a woman 
> dancing the gent's role, has never, ever phased me. It's fun to swap, 
> requires technical skill, speaks well of a dancer who can do it well 
> stylistically, and sometimes is necessary to fill out a set.  It is 
> also an important skill for any caller, and one callers need to know 
> how to handle when it happens in special situations; the callers I 
> grew up with talked about when they first encountered gay or 
> one-gender crowds in the 60s and how they struggled to adjust on the fly.
>
> That said, I first encountered "gender-free" dancing at a Heather and 
> Rose (?) ECD dance outside of Eugene, Oregon about 15 years ago.  I 
> didn't know what I was walking into, and thought it was a normal ECD 
> event until they lined up and started teaching.
>
> They used several dances I was familiar with; I had been teaching some 
> older ECD dances for a graduate folklore class and recently returned 
> from Berea's Christmas Country Dance School.  Aside from momentary 
> confusion, adapting to the unfamiliar terminology and random line-up 
> was not a problem for me.
>
> What I couldn't adapt to was how being made "gender free" changed the 
> character of the dances I knew.  They became less elegant, less 
> interesting, and were lessened overall. Switching between an A and a B 
> position meant nothing aside from (possibly) a slightly different 
> floor pattern.  Proper and improper had no relevance.  There was no 
> stylistic mastery needed to switch dance sides because any clue as to 
> historically demanded or intended stylistic differences had been 
> stripped out--there weren't even ROLES anymore, merely positions; 
> there was nothing to hold onto even as a guideline for playacting.  
> The dances completely lost their flavor and character.  They became 
> like Caffeine Free Diet Crystal Coke. (I mean, honestly...WHY WAS THAT 
> EVER MADE?  Just drink water!)
>
> Other folks may certainly disagree with me, and I have followed and 
> agree with the many counterpoints, but I personally believe that the 
> terms "gentlemen" and "ladies" (and their derivatives) positively 
> influence how people behave and relate, and definitely how a dance is 
> done.  I don't worry about that at special or family events, of 
> course; I just want everyone to get up and have a good time.  But 
> encouraging folks to learn both roles to become better dancers is only 
> meaningful if there is a meaningful difference between the roles.
>
> I am a happily married man and prefer to dance with women as partners 
> and corners.  I don't mind dancing with men, but that's not what I go 
> to dances for; if I wanted to get close to a bunch of sweaty guys, I'd 
> play football.  If we're honest, we can admit that the vast majority 
> of our general dancers (both new and old) are probably similar.  So 
> why not let the dance reflect that?  That's more likely to win friends 
> than taking a wonderful dance with character and making it into  
> "gender free diet crystal contra."
>
> Just my 2 cents.
> Neal
>
> Neal Schlein
> Youth Services Librarian, Mahomet Public Library
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sharedweight.net/pipermail/callers-sharedweight.net/attachments/20170213/7c241e67/attachment.htm>