-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Kaufman via Callers <callers@lists.sharedweight.net>
To: Ron Blechner <contraron@gmail.com>
Cc: callers <callers@lists.sharedweight.net>
Sent: Fri, Jan 27, 2017 2:26 pm
Subject: Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"
On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 1:44 PM, Ron Blechner <
contraron@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> If that's the case, one would assume there are also plenty of traditional
> venue dancers who don't care either way. To that effect, genderfree roles
> are not as scary as some have claimed.
Sure, I think that's probably true. But I think the most likely
possibility is "most people don't care that much" not "several
thousand dancers want it".
>
> Dances using gents/ladies up and down the East coast are dwindling in
> attendance. I'm hearing that from nearly every organizer I speak with.
I'm not disputing this (though I also don't have firsthand evidence of
it) I just don't think gender free terms are *causing* the attendance
change, as opposed to both attendance changes and gender free naming
being caused by an underlying factor.
> I don't understand discounting new dances at all. If there was a demand for
> a genderfree dance, and it was filled, how is that not proof of growth of
> overall genderfree dancing?
The dances that have been gender free for decades and the dances that
have recently one gender free are pretty different. The older dances
have a community, culture, and core that formed several decades ago to
be LGBT/queer spaces, while the newer gender free dances are mostly
mainstream dances in a modern mainstream that is much more queer
friendly.
Jeff
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net