14 Sep
2009
14 Sep
'09
1:18 a.m.
Interesting. I like this way of thinking about it - observing how we do
behave rather than prescribing how we should behave.
But I note that the complaint on the survey was for a swing *and *a two-hand
turn. The gypsy, because it was with a partner of the opposite sex, was not
part of the complaint - the complaint was about breaking off the gypsy with
an opposite sex partner to do a two-hand turn with a same-sex neighbor. But
goodness, if a two-hand turn requires uncomfortably "sexual" eye contact,
then so does an allemande. Pretty soon we have to post a note at the door:
"Warning, you may have to dance with all of the other people in your set,
and they may look at you while they are dancing. It is recommended that you
do not look back if it will make you uncomfortable."
But aside from the absurdity of taking offense at a dance move (as opposed
to a person), this discussion does help explain something I've long wondered
about. What is it that makes a person "creepy"? What you said does seem to
describe it - eye contact that lasts too long between "unacceptable"
partners. Odd that such a simple act could engender such strong negative
emotions. Odder still that the same act, i.e., eye contact, is our way of
showing friendship and acceptance... What a difference a millisecond makes!
How do we ever get it right?
M
E
On Sun, Sep 13, 2009 at 7:03 PM, Jeff Kaufman <jeff(a)alum.swarthmore.edu>wrote;wrote:
Martha Edwards wrote:
--
For the good are always the merry,
Save by an evil chance,
And the merry love the fiddle
And the merry love to dance. ~ William Butler Yeats
Even though he described what he meant (guy swings and a "bait and
switch" gypsy to a two-hand-turn with a neighbor, who, in ECD is
likely to be your same-gender person), I could not see how any dance
move is, well, sexual, unless you yourself make it be. Heck, in the
right hands, a down-the-hall-and-back can give you a thrill. But
even a gypsy is just friendly, or it's funny, or it's a girl-power
moment, or it's sisterly or brotherly, or it's none of these, it's
just a walk around your neighbor facing in. So I didn't "get" the
complaint and have no idea what to do with it other than tuck it
away in the "go figure" box.
In normal american culture, looking someone directly in the eyes for
more than a fraction of a second is very rare. When it does happen,
it's generally between lovers. In a swing or gypsy, you have several
times that much direct eye contact, and it's generally not with a
lover, so it's weird. I would say it is, from a normal american
viewpoint, 'sexual', even without someone choosing to make it so.
As contra daners, we've mostly learned not to think of it that way.
Mostly. But the sexual interpretation and connotations are still
present. Imagine a man gypsing with a young girl. If the man stared
directly into her eyes the whole time, as the figure entails and would
be standard with an older partner, contra dancers would widely
percieve this as somewhat creepy because it would be seen as partly or
possibly sexual.
Also in our culture there's a wide range of variation in who it is
acceptible to be sexual with and how much. Factors include:
- age (more difference in age, less acceptable)
- marital status (married to someone else, less, married to each
other, more)
- gender (Opposite gender more acceptable. If same gender, female is
more acceptable)
- ...
Note that I'm not taking a position here, just trying to describe the
culture. But I get the complaint: the unhappy male dancer did want to
do something generally percieved as somewhat sexual with someone
generally percieved as inappropriate for him to be sexual with.
I don't agree with the complaint; I think that if he paid attention he
would realize that in this group the eye contact did not indicate as
high amount of sexual involvement as he thought it did. The complaint
makes sense, though.
Jeff
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
Callers(a)sharedweight.net
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers