Re: [Callers] Leading, consent in embellishments

Thanks, Jack. I think we, as callers, ought to acknowledge there are 2 camps of dancers, believing either: 1. Gents/Larks role is implicitly "led", and ladies/Ravens role is implicitly "follow" (along with all of the good comments about consent, such as Maia's) 2. Contra is implicitly not lead/follow, and any initiating can be done from either role. Either way to dance can be valid. Because both are valid, then we cannot assume either is default. Thus, technically both viewpoints are wrong. Contra is not *implicitly* one or the other. And in fact, I dance both styles, depending on partner. Sometimes, I feel like one style and the very next dance I might feel like the other. Options! Neither viewpoint is universal, nor is either rare. Thus, if we don't acknowledge that these both exist, we are doing a huge disservice by denying dancers to dance the way they want to dance. Thus, as callers, the view we should treat lead/follow are *style* choices. And while some areas may have dominant styles, it's not right to stifle either. Thus I have several practical recommendations: 1. Refer to it as style choice. 2. Get to know what your dance partners' preference is. Don't presume one or the other. 3. Lead/Follow are not appropriate role terms, because they dismiss people whose style is not that. 4. Teach leading tips for both roles. Like, you have a long lines, and then a mad robin or gents/larks allemande left? The ladies/Ravens are leading the move by easing the gents/Larks into those moves. In dance, Ron Blechner