[Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

[Angela DeCarlis via Callers]

Yes, Cara, definitely a history! Thank you for inquiring.

Another argument I've heard against Lead/Follow is that if we change the
role known up to now only as "Gents" to "Leads," and likewise "Ladies" to
"Follows," we could unwittingly be reinforcing the cultural notion that
only men can be leaders and that women can only be follows.  This is not
the most common argument used (see Jeff's comments), but it is the one I
most often cite, since I do prefer contra to include the *option *for a
lead-follow dynamic.  Either way, while most partner dances do have this
dynamic absolutely and inherently, contra does not have to include it and
since we're already using gendered terms that have for generations
described gendered roles that we're trying to move away from, switching to
Lead/Follow has proved a less-popular choice.

Hope this helps!

Angela

On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 7:59 PM, Jeff Kaufman via Callers <
callers at lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:

> Hi Cara!
>
> There is definitely a history! Many dancers don't like lead/follow as
> terms because they either don't think contra has a lead/follow dynamic or
> they don't want to encourage lead/follow dancing.
>
> Some dance series, primarily ones with younger dancers, do use those
> terms, but there are enough dancers opposed to them that I don't see them
> as a potential community-wide replacement the way rubies/jets could be.
>
> Jeff
>
> On Jan 18, 2017 7:53 PM, "Cara Sawyer via Callers" <
> callers at lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>
>> Hello all,
>> I am quite new to the list and am only now embarking on learning to call,
>> but I have to ask a question I have had for awhile as a dancer that I now
>> need to understand as a caller: is there something wrong with Lead and
>> Follow?
>>
>> When I first encountered the creative alternatives in contra, I wasn't
>> sure what to think. I came to contra from a swing background and that is
>> what is used in workshops (and sort or in general now), since many people
>> switch in that dance style as well.
>>
>> Besides being an obvious description for the dancer role, it had the same
>> 1/2 syllables rhythm as Gent/Lady. And it seems to me to have the advantage
>> of being intuitively linked to how the dancer is thinking about
>> his/her/their role.
>>
>> Just curious if there is a history, I'm sure I am not the first person to
>> think of this.
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Cara
>>
>> Sent to you using thumbs.
>>
>> On Jan 18, 2017, at 10:40, Angela DeCarlis via Callers <
>> callers at lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>>
>> When I called at PICD (the Portland ME dance), I really enjoyed using
>> Jets and Rubies. One silly thing I enjoyed any the terms during the
>> beginners' lesson was coaching palm direction based on the terms: "Jets'
>> palms face up, towards the sky; Rubies' palms face down, towards the
>> ground."
>>
>> And yes, I realize that *both* are gemstones and that some feel strongly
>> that we should steer away from the "airplane" association, but it did make
>> for easy teaching.
>>
>> Jets and Rubies is also more forgiving for callers new to gender-neutral
>> language, since the terms are so linguistically comparable to Gents and
>> Ladies.
>>
>> That all said, I also like Larks and Ravens fine.
>>
>> Happy calling, everyone!
>>
>> Angela
>>
>> On Jan 18, 2017 11:30 AM, "Aahz via Callers" <
>> callers at lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Not that Portland, the other Portland.  ;-)
>>>
>>> http://bangordailynews.com/2017/01/09/news/portland/contra-d
>>> ancing-takes-a-gender-neutral-spin-in-portland/
>>>
>>> I personally would prefer to settle on "larks" and "ravens" because that
>>> seems to have more traction -- but it doesn't matter as long as we get
>>> away from "bands" and "bares".
>>> --
>>> Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6
>>> http://rule6.info/
>>>                       <*>           <*>           <*>
>>> Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Callers mailing list
>>> Callers at lists.sharedweight.net
>>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Callers mailing list
>> Callers at lists.sharedweight.net
>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Callers mailing list
>> Callers at lists.sharedweight.net
>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Callers mailing list
> Callers at lists.sharedweight.net
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sharedweight.net/pipermail/callers-sharedweight.net/attachments/20170118/ad2bc73c/attachment.htm>