One of the problems with same-gender swings in the ballroom position is the awkward moment of who does what role. Especially when this is being done with someone who was not selected as a partner, this can be awkward and make people uncomfortable, irregardless of homophobia or not. Anyone who knows me knows that I am not homophobic but being forced into a same-gender swing annoys me just because you have to negotiate in a split second who will do what how. Janet -----Original Message----- From: callers-bounces(a)sharedweight.net [mailto:callers-bounces@sharedweight.net] On Behalf Of Dave Casserly Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 1:33 PM To: Caller's discussion list Subject: Re: [Callers] Suggestions for particularly flirty contra dances? If men in the UK are so uncomfortable touching another man that they don't want to swing (which is, in its essence, simply placing one hand on the man's back and one on a hand, not exactly an intimate embrace), that is unacceptably homophobic. I know there are some on this list who don't agree that callers have any part in "social engineering" or letting our calling reflect our values as humans, but personally, if I were asked to call a dance where the men were that afraid of touching each other, I would have no problem with challenging their perceptions by asking them to swing with each other (obviously there are some people afraid of touching other people for other reasons, but in that case, their fear isn't gendered). In that situation, a little "stress" is appropriate; I have no problem with causing homophobic people some minor stress when it's their own awful views that lead to their stress. I'm not a big fan of Galway swings. I like to standard, ballroom-position contra swing, which is quite easily learned from either position once you know how to share weight and buzz-step. Galway swings seem to tend towards people trying to swing as fast as possible, rather than form a real connection and dance with their partner. -Dave On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 10:25 AM, John Sweeney <info(a)contrafusion.co.uk>wrote;wrote: -- David Casserly (cell) 781 258-2761 _______________________________________________ Callers mailing list Callers(a)sharedweight.net http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers

Comfort aside, the nice thing about a symmetrical swing like the Galway for same-gender-role swinging is that you don't have to worry about who takes which position. If you spend four counts of an eight-count swing fumbling over whose hand goes where, it rather detracts from the dance. Women seem to handle this better than men, and I've always been curious about how to communicate who takes the "lead" role in a swing between two gents or two ladies. I agree that same-role swings are entirely appropriate, though. It's not that I think pushing boundaries is necessarily required for progress, it's just that there's no sense in discouraging a practice with which there is nothing wrong. On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 1:33 PM, Dave Casserly <david.j.casserly(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:

"What works well is if the more experienced dancer takes the less familiar position. Just position your hands to indicate that you're ok taking the less customary role, and if the other person is faster to do so, go with that instead." Jeff I'd like to look at this issue as a caller, rather than a dancer: When calling such a dance we, as callers, should not assume that for every pairing at least one of the two has danced the other role. "The more experienced of you should take the less customary role" is not useful advice to 2 people who just started today. I dislike the idea of telling the dancers "you figure it out." We should probably teach a symmetric swing so there can be a default amongst those dancers who don't yet have a collection of alternate swings and experience dancing both roles. Dancers with a certain level and type of experience will, of course, make something up regardless of what we tell them.

While you're at it you can make them eat Brussels sprouts and bring a white board so you can give a calculus lesson. Both good things that everyone should be into. On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 1:33 PM, Dave Casserly <david.j.casserly(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:

Brussels sprouts and calculus are good things that everyone should be into that have nothing at all to do with contra dancing. Unlike swinging and other moves and, yes, touching people of the same gender, which is an integral part of the dance. I'm not going to shy away from moves simply because of others' homophobia. As to Janet's point, yes, I agree that it can be awkward when you don't know who wants to do which part of the swing. So I'm not against specifying a default hold for those situations-- I just don't like the Galway hold in particular. I'm ok with some other neutral swings (like, right hand on the other dancer's shoulder blade, left hand grasped together in the middle, above the heads of the two dancers, whatever that's called). On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 1:58 PM, Aaron Redfern <aaron.redfern(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote: -- David Casserly (cell) 781 258-2761

On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 10:55 AM, Donald Perley <donperley(a)gmail.com> wrote: "Social Engineering" has gotten a bad rep because of its use as a term describing "malicious and deceptive" practices, mostly having to do with computer hacking. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_engineering_%28political_science%29 Some callers use the term to belittle any of the subtle but effective techniques that make up the toolkit of good callers. Don't assume that "social engineering" is always used to get people to do what they don't want to do...or what they "should" do. As a caller I try to use all of my skills to get people to do what almost all of them already *want *to do...even if they haven't thought it through very carefully. (For example: People don't really *want *to rush to the center sets and jockey to "beat" others to a good position. We all would prefer a dance where the regulars quickly partner with the first-timers and dancing throughout the hall is enjoyable. If I, as a caller, can "engineer" a situation that makes center set syndrome both unnecessary and less rewarding, then all of the dancers benefit from that--even those who say that they "want" to compete on the dance floor.) Anyone engaged in any effort for social change is a social engineer...and that includes those working for acceptance of alternative sexual orientations. As a caller I don't use up too much of my limited capital of influence to promote social change movements. I do think it is essential that all be welcomed and treated with respect. That's very basic to any open, public event. It's also the law. If I want to work against homophobia at dances I would wear a skirt and dance with men more often than I do. I don't see this as a core purpose of my calling , or my dancing. I sometimes dance the lady's part, and it can be an effort to make a point. But I don't often do that at the mike unless it becomes an issue that affects the entire community. Integrating the first-timers into the hall is enough of a challenge. - Greg McKenzie *********************

Hi Colin, I'm not really sure what you're trying to say with your analogy here. Do you mean that people in England are actually more homophobic, and that people in America should accept that because, well, we wouldn't want English people coming here and telling us what's right and what's wrong either, when they don't know our culture and haven't danced here? If so, then you're right, that's a premise I disagree with. Since people don't always (or even usually) come to contra dances with their spouses, at least here, the entire premise of your analogy doesn't really make sense. So let's try a different one. What if, say, a caller from England came to America, and noticed that dancers here only danced with people who had the same color skin. And the callers enforced this, by, say, never calling a mixer. Should that caller from England also not call mixers, because hey, he can't expect Americans to feel the same way he does about race, so why challenge them in that way? I would say, of course not, since racism is not an acceptable reason to avoid mixers. If I've missed your point, and what you mean is that there might be non-homophobic reasons that male dancers don't like to swing with each other in England that don't exist here in America (using the mixer example, say, it's just that Americans don't like mixers or there are some creepy or dangerous dancers in the hall that some people don't want to be forced to dance with), then I'd love to hear those reasons. But if your point is just that, as an American who doesn't dance in England, I should not expect the English to have the same values as me and therefore should be more tolerant of homophobia in cultures other than my own, that's a point where we're going to disagree. -Dave On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 2:15 PM, Colin Hume <colin(a)colinhume.com> wrote: -- David Casserly (cell) 781 258-2761

On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 1:33 PM, Dave Casserly <david.j.casserly(a)gmail.com> wrote: The social implications matter much more than the actions. Consider the difference between a gypsy and a swing. In a swing you hold onto each other, look at each others eyes, and move in a circle. In a gypsy you do mostly the same thing without touching. Yet the gypsy is more charged, more flirty, and a bit more intimate. [1] Or consider going the other way, from a swing to an aleman, where you still have the touching and the eye contact, but the intimacy is much more reduced than you might expect from just the change in hand positions. At a contra dance in DC or Boston, two men dancing together indicates little about their sexual orientations. Sure, men who often dance with men are on average more likely to be attracted to men, but there are enough straight men who dance with other men that it's not a very reliable signal. If you go to a place where men don't usually dance together and everyone thinks of that as something that only gay men do, then men choosing to dance with each other sends a different signal. I think a lot of the resistance men give to swinging or gypsying with each other is that they don't want the caller to make them signal something they're not. Mainstream dance communities where men are ok dancing with each other differ from those where they're not in two main ways: being gay is acceptable and not very important, and men dance together for reasons other than sexual orientation often enough that it doesn't say much about them. These are related: the worse it is for me socially if people start thinking I'm gay, the less willing I will be to dance with my male friends. Jeff [1] Some of this is that the focus of a gypsy is the eye contact in a way that the eye contact is only secondary in a swing. But there's a different interpretation of gypsies.

On 4/18/2013 2:20 PM, Kalia Kliban wrote: Ah, yes, I now see that that point has indeed been made, and made, and made :>) Jeepers I missed a lot of discussion while I was gone... Kalia