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.