28 Mar
2018
28 Mar
'18
2:45 a.m.
"Living Tradition"
Preserving tradition and being appropriate to our day and age are not
mutually exclusive.
I actually love rich traditions that we keep alive. We talk about "living"
traditions, so what do we mean by this phrase?
For something to be alive, it changes. It adapts. What it doesn't do is
stay stagnant and unchanging. The whole reason contra dancing is still
alive today is because it's alive and changing.
By insisting on holding onto traditions verbatim, we are actually doing
more to kill them than save them. Sure, we'll preserve them this way - as
one does a taxidermied animal: perfectly preserved, sitting on a shelf,
dead.
I'd prefer my traditions alive. I'd like to keep sharing them with younger
generations. That means that people like Rich are asking the right
questions. That means we need to consider that language changes and that we
need to speak in a language that reaches an audience not merely just our
own.
Hey, isn't that the whole point of being a dance caller? Being heard by
your audience?
In dance, again,
Ron Blechner
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018, 1:33 AM Ron Blechner <contraron(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I want to echo the words of Alex D-L and Dave
Casserly.
I'm also appalled at the casual use of the n-word on this thread without
anyone whatsoever calling it out. This is really giving me pause. :(
Contra's attendance is dwindling - I hear it from every organizer I talk
to, with a couple exceptions. I also hear about the desire to "get the
young people to dance". Hmmm.
Ron Blechner
On Tue, Mar 27, 2018, 11:39 AM Dave Casserly via Callers <
callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
Rich,
I don't think your situation here is exactly what Colin describes--
you're not worried about any of the particular words, as many of us are
regarding the word "gypsy," for instance. The question here is whether the
phrase has an offensive *meaning* of "women are things," and if so, is
that a good reason not to use it. Personally, I'd probably alter it or do
a different singing square. I don't subscribe to the extreme position that
you should never sing lyrics to a folk song unless you agree with those
lyrics; that would make singing folk songs very difficult to do at all.
That said, there are some times where the meanings of lyrics are offensive
enough, without any redeeming qualities, that I leave a verse out or alter
a few words in the singing sessions that I lead. There is nothing
sacrosanct about a particular set of lyrics to a folk song; people have
been changing them for whatever reason for generations, and will continue
to do so. If future singers don't like my revisions, they can sing a
different version, just like I sometimes prefer to ignore Victorian-era
revisions to bawdier songs.
Here, I'd lean toward not using the lyrics for three reasons: 1) they
imply that women are objects; 2) there's nothing redeeming or valuable
about them, as they're the only things sung, with no context; and 3)
similarly, they don't represent the meaning of the song, and when repeated
on their own, sort of pervert that meaning (at least going by the lyrics
Yoyo posted).
I also think there are good reasons to err on the side of inclusive
language, particularly in our community. Contra dancing is overwhelmingly
white, and for a long time, contra dance calling was dominated by men. The
loudest voices on this forum are those of older white men. Contra dancers
and particularly organizers are disproportionately white baby boomers.
We're seeing the effects of that now; dance attendance has been dwindling
as older dancers stop attending and aren't replaced by younger dancers. If
we want our dance form to continue to thrive, when there's a question on
which there's a generational divide (as you, in my view correctly, note
here), I would err toward using the language less likely to turn off our
younger generations, which are also our most diverse generations. This
isn't an issue where changing the lyrics is going to bother people-- very
few would know the original lyrics well enough to notice-- and certainly
nobody would know if you selected a different singing square instead.
-Dave
--
David Casserly
(cell) 781 258-2761
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
28 Mar
28 Mar
10:16 a.m.
New subject: Politically Correct?
Hello folks
I'd just like to second what Ron said. We keep hearing about how
organisers would like to "get Young People in", but then express disdain
for the things we care about, such as avoiding offensive language.
The idea that we should be allowed to say whatever we want when calling as
long as we don't intend any disrespect seems naive at best. For example, I
might want to say something like "This is so f---ing cool!" when I'm
calling, and intend no disrespect by it. But I still wouldn't say it,
because some people *would* feel disrespected by my using that language
over the microphone, even if that's not my intention, and I care about
them. To say that only your intentions matter is to say that you either
don't recognise, or don't care, that other people may have different
feelings about certain words or turns of phrase than you do. And some
words have a history which cannot be ignored and remains relevant no matter
what your intentions. (unless you are Humpty-Dumpty)
"Political correctness" is what people call it when they have to treat
others with respect, and they don't want to. A good trick is to go through
and mentally replace the words "political correctness" with "treating
people with respect". It helps make it clear what people are really
saying.
I would second Ron's comments about the use of the n-word on this thread.
It's just a word that should never be used by white people, at all, ever,
no matter what the context. Here's a quick explanation of why
<https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/11/9/16627900/ta-nehisi-coates-n-word>.
(https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/11/9/16627900/ta-nehisi-coates-n-word
)
And as to your actual point Colin, I disagree. Our inner thoughts and
feelings towards groups of people matter, like you say. Our outward
behaviour matters. And our choice of language matters. Words absolutely
can cause significant pain. And the fact is that just because a word may
not start off poisoned by racism (or some other form of contempt) doesn't
mean that it can ever become unpoisoned again. Say a glass of water is
fine to start with and then someone defecates in it. You can't just scoop
the turd out and call the water clean again. Sure, changing our choice of
words is treating the symptom not the cause. But if I was suffering from a
painful illness where the cause couldn't be dealt with straightaway, I
would definitely want the symptoms to be treated in the meantime!
I notice that a lot of people express resentment about being asked to
change their choice of words for others. If those people find out that
they can get away without making a change, they are positively gleeful, as
though they have won a victory. Expressing resentment at being asked to
change your choice of words, glee when you can get away without doing so --
there is no surer way to express your contempt for the feelings and
opinions of others. When you are in the position of being an old white
male, with good standing in the community -- and in this community some
callers are positively revered to the point where many act as though they
can do no wrong -- it must be easy to believe that no one but yourself
matters. Consider, though, whether this attitude is really good for a
community long term.
Jen
On 28 March 2018 at 07:45, Ron Blechner via Callers <
callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
"Living Tradition"
Preserving tradition and being appropriate to our day and age are not
mutually exclusive.
I actually love rich traditions that we keep alive. We talk about "living"
traditions, so what do we mean by this phrase?
For something to be alive, it changes. It adapts. What it doesn't do is
stay stagnant and unchanging. The whole reason contra dancing is still
alive today is because it's alive and changing.
By insisting on holding onto traditions verbatim, we are actually doing
more to kill them than save them. Sure, we'll preserve them this way - as
one does a taxidermied animal: perfectly preserved, sitting on a shelf,
dead.
I'd prefer my traditions alive. I'd like to keep sharing them with younger
generations. That means that people like Rich are asking the right
questions. That means we need to consider that language changes and that we
need to speak in a language that reaches an audience not merely just our
own.
Hey, isn't that the whole point of being a dance caller? Being heard by
your audience?
In dance, again,
Ron Blechner
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018, 1:33 AM Ron Blechner <contraron(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I want to echo the words of Alex D-L and Dave
Casserly.
I'm also appalled at the casual use of the n-word on this thread without
anyone whatsoever calling it out. This is really giving me pause. :(
Contra's attendance is dwindling - I hear it from every organizer I talk
to, with a couple exceptions. I also hear about the desire to "get the
young people to dance". Hmmm.
Ron Blechner
On Tue, Mar 27, 2018, 11:39 AM Dave Casserly via Callers <
callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
Rich,
I don't think your situation here is exactly what Colin describes--
you're not worried about any of the particular words, as many of us are
regarding the word "gypsy," for instance. The question here is whether the
phrase has an offensive *meaning* of "women are things," and if so, is
that a good reason not to use it. Personally, I'd probably alter it or do
a different singing square. I don't subscribe to the extreme position that
you should never sing lyrics to a folk song unless you agree with those
lyrics; that would make singing folk songs very difficult to do at all.
That said, there are some times where the meanings of lyrics are offensive
enough, without any redeeming qualities, that I leave a verse out or alter
a few words in the singing sessions that I lead. There is nothing
sacrosanct about a particular set of lyrics to a folk song; people have
been changing them for whatever reason for generations, and will continue
to do so. If future singers don't like my revisions, they can sing a
different version, just like I sometimes prefer to ignore Victorian-era
revisions to bawdier songs.
Here, I'd lean toward not using the lyrics for three reasons: 1) they
imply that women are objects; 2) there's nothing redeeming or valuable
about them, as they're the only things sung, with no context; and 3)
similarly, they don't represent the meaning of the song, and when repeated
on their own, sort of pervert that meaning (at least going by the lyrics
Yoyo posted).
I also think there are good reasons to err on the side of inclusive
language, particularly in our community. Contra dancing is overwhelmingly
white, and for a long time, contra dance calling was dominated by men. The
loudest voices on this forum are those of older white men. Contra dancers
and particularly organizers are disproportionately white baby boomers.
We're seeing the effects of that now; dance attendance has been dwindling
as older dancers stop attending and aren't replaced by younger dancers. If
we want our dance form to continue to thrive, when there's a question on
which there's a generational divide (as you, in my view correctly, note
here), I would err toward using the language less likely to turn off our
younger generations, which are also our most diverse generations. This
isn't an issue where changing the lyrics is going to bother people-- very
few would know the original lyrics well enough to notice-- and certainly
nobody would know if you selected a different singing square instead.
-Dave
--
David Casserly
(cell) 781 258-2761 <(781)%20258-2761>
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
10:58 a.m.
New subject: Politically Correct?
When history shows a number of new terms introduced over the years,
and each, after a while, picks up the taint of being derogatory, you
eventually figure out that
the word itself isn't the real problem.
Using the tainted water analogy, if the person serving your water has
typhoid, asking for a new glass from the same waiter won't help much.
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 10:16 AM, Jen Morgan via Callers
<callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
Hello folks
I'd just like to second what Ron said. We keep hearing about how organisers
would like to "get Young People in", but then express disdain for the things
we care about, such as avoiding offensive language.
11:19 a.m.
New subject: Politically Correct?
While it's true that language is often not the problem, it's less relevant
to the discussion of what words to use as a caller than you might think.
Scenario A:
If we have to keep finding new ways to describe square dancing because it's
viewed as an activity only danced by weird old white people, then square
dancing is the problem and changing the name isn't going to help.
Scenario B:
If the problem is that an activity like square dancing has borrowed
terminology that has become dated over time, then it can avoid becoming
scenario A by updating its terminology to match the moving target of
society or in some cases it can discard that terminology in favor of
something that is less likely to attract baggage.
As regards the original question for this post, how we refer to people is
going to be a moving target. If you want to avoid offending people, you
should probably find a term that is considered respectful in the current
era in which you are living. If you don't care about offending people,
then the question is moot.
As regards other terminology concerns, if you find that you have a dance
term that refers to specific people or groups (gypsies, contras, etc.) you
can, in fact, avoid the problem (possibly forever) by moving the term to
something less likely to get wrapped up in the identities of groups or
cultures.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-35349619
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 10:58 AM, Donald Perley via Callers <
callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
When history shows a number of new terms introduced
over the years,
and each, after a while, picks up the taint of being derogatory, you
eventually figure out that
the word itself isn't the real problem.
Using the tainted water analogy, if the person serving your water has
typhoid, asking for a new glass from the same waiter won't help much.
11:43 a.m.
New subject: Politically Correct?
He’s right… and she’s right. How can they both be right?
Well… they ARE both right. There is no clear cut answer on this. People who feel strongly
on one side or the other may like to think there is a clear cut answer, but if one thing
seems clear to me by the amount of back and forth on this subject it’s that there are
differing valid opinions.
In the meantime, while we argue endlessly about whether to gypsy, walk-around,
face-to-face, vis-a-vis, spiral, gyre, turn by the eyes, whimsy, kipsy, tipsy, shmipsy -
or just avoid the move altogether, we lose why many came to contra dancing in the first
place. Contradances were a place where people would come to actually get away from all of
the controversies of life. It was a place where people from differing stripes with
differing beliefs (OK, maybe I’m being idealistic here - let’s not kid ourselves, it’s
mostly liberal whites!) can come together and leave the real world issues behind and just
dance and be friendly. And now? These controversies have made their presence known on the
dance floor. And it’s not just gypsies or no gypsies. It’s also questions of role
identification (men/women, ladies/gents, larks/ravens, jets/rubies) and whether people
should boycott dance weekends that gender balance.
Please don’t misunderstand me… I have very little fight in this game. I’m moving to the
point where I couldn’t care less about what we call moves or people. I’m just tired of
the endless discussions that go nowhere except to continue to divide people and make the
dance community cohesive. Maybe I’ve become an old fart who just wishes we could have the
dance community we had decades ago that wasn’t so fraught with divisiveness. Or maybe
there’s something to what I have written here. Maybe the decline in attendance at dances
across the country has less to do with terminology - and more to do with people not
wanting to be a part of yet another community that is becoming polarized. Do I have a
solution? Nope. And neither does anyone else, or else it would have been solved by now.
So maybe we should just cool it for awhile and see if maybe tolerance for personal
preferences might help make the community less contentious. Can we just get back to
dancing for the pure joy of it?
My two cents.
11:49 a.m.
New subject: Politically Correct?
I have a friend who danced for the pure joy of it until he got sick of being asked why a
black man wanted to contra dance. I dance with more, purer joy now that fewer men “offer”
to split me up from my girlfriend when we join a line together.
I’d love everyone to dance for the pure joy of it, but the idea that we can get “back” to
that place, rather than move forward to it, is a myth.
Louise.
www.scissortail.org
On Mar 28, 2018, at 4:43 PM, Jeffrey Spero via Callers
<callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
Can we just get back to dancing for the pure joy of it?
1:12 p.m.
New subject: Politically Correct?
Louise has hit the nail on the head: "I’d love everyone to dance for the pure joy of
it, but the idea that we can get “back” to that place, rather than move forward to it, is
a myth." Me too (yup), and there is no easy path to get there. We must keep talking -
just like in the broader world of politics. Talking does/can get frustrating and circular,
but it also opens minds and keeps people thinking about how to be together better.
Meanwhile, together let's forge a path - maybe of many sortof parallel lanes - to move
forward to dancing in joy.
Dorcas Hand
Houston
-----Original Message-----
From: Callers <callers-bounces(a)lists.sharedweight.net> On Behalf Of Louise Siddons
via Callers
Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2018 10:49 AM
To: callers(a)sharedweight.net
Subject: Re: [Callers] Politically Correct?
I have a friend who danced for the pure joy of it until he got sick of being asked why a
black man wanted to contra dance. I dance with more, purer joy now that fewer men “offer”
to split me up from my girlfriend when we join a line together.
I’d love everyone to dance for the pure joy of it, but the idea that we can get “back” to
that place, rather than move forward to it, is a myth.
Louise.
www.scissortail.org
On Mar 28, 2018, at 4:43 PM, Jeffrey Spero via Callers
<callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
Can we just get back to dancing for the pure joy of it?
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
3:55 p.m.
New subject: Politically Correct?
Folks,
I began this discussion as a simple question with no intention of creating
a debate on gender terms. I simply wanted to know if the lyrics ,in the
context of a traditional song, were going to cause offense to any contra
dancers. I think I had my answer early on.
If we choose to continue this conversation let's do it with respect for
each other, but I believe conversations like this are best held in face to
face round tables. Emails make it hard to feel the emotion of the writer,
and to see that writer as a person, who too, deserves much respect.
Without pontificating, I do want to say, in my few short years in the
contra community, ALL the callers I have met have treated the dancers, and
each other, with great respect. We have a lot more in common than we have
as differences. We must remember traditions within dance communities
vary. Our way is just one way.
Now, as a caller who often calls singing squares, I find that changing the
words of a popular song, changes the way dancers respond to that square
They expect certain words and changing them leaves many feeling cheated or
disappointed. Try changing the song Marianne to say "All day, all night,
my Caroline" and you will know what I mean. IMHO, it is better not to use
a song than to change the tag line significantly. (In MWSD the tag line is
the lyric that is sung during the 16 step promenades, and it is most often
the most common, or repeated lyric in the song.)
Thanks for all your thoughtful responses.
Rich
Stafford, CT
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 1:12 PM, Dorcas Hand via Callers <
callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
Louise has hit the nail on the head: "I’d love
everyone to dance for the
pure joy of it, but the idea that we can get “back” to that place, rather
than move forward to it, is a myth." Me too (yup), and there is no easy
path to get there. We must keep talking - just like in the broader world of
politics. Talking does/can get frustrating and circular, but it also opens
minds and keeps people thinking about how to be together better.
Meanwhile, together let's forge a path - maybe of many sortof parallel
lanes - to move forward to dancing in joy.
Dorcas Hand
Houston
-----Original Message-----
From: Callers <callers-bounces(a)lists.sharedweight.net> On Behalf Of
Louise Siddons via Callers
Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2018 10:49 AM
To: callers(a)sharedweight.net
Subject: Re: [Callers] Politically Correct?
I have a friend who danced for the pure joy of it until he got sick of
being asked why a black man wanted to contra dance. I dance with more,
purer joy now that fewer men “offer” to split me up from my girlfriend when
we join a line together.
I’d love everyone to dance for the pure joy of it, but the idea that we
can get “back” to that place, rather than move forward to it, is a myth.
Louise.
www.scissortail.org
On Mar 28, 2018, at 4:43 PM, Jeffrey Spero via
Callers <
callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
Can we just get back to dancing for the pure joy of it?
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
5:29 p.m.
New subject: freedom
Here was my issue, briefly : I was told to use "walk around" when calling at
glen echo. It also happens that I'm a western square caller and have used "walk
around your corner, see saw your taw" for decades.
It has happened on two occasions when I have mixed up square dance calls from one time
period into another or from one tradition to another and have confused the dancers a tad
and made them think perhaps I'm an idiot.
As far as gypsy is concerned I'd use ANY call as a substitute but not walk around out
of fear of saying the wrong thing by habit. Perhaps it's remote that it would happen
but I'm going to avoid looking liking an idiot at all costs!
Being given that rule by the organizer made my planning for that dance a nightmare. Do I
use dances without gypsies? I mean it really through a wrench into the way I usually plan
because to follow their rule and protect myself I'd have to eliminate far too many
good dances to keep from using gypsy.
And there are more rules that I have to follow or address that I'd rather not, like
leaving a couple out at the top when the music ends.
As far as being sarcastic NO I'm not that kind of person. I simply thought Ron was
being a bully so I wanted to know where he stood. There are a number of us out there that
associate PC with a threat to our freedoms and I'm not a conservative. Sure I can
look up things on the computer and you think I'm being sarcastic because I didn't,
but we're different. I hate computers and only use them when I have to. I value
clear communication and if you carefully read my email you'll see that's what I
was asking for. On several of Ron's emails I see there are a good number of dots that
weren't being connected so I wondered what was going on.
As far as my attitude at Glen Echo is concerned you are reading into it. If you want to
continue this perhaps just between us is the best way. And here we go, Tom is confused
again. Why are you replying for Ron?
Tom
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
6:34 p.m.
New subject: freedom
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 2:29 PM, Tom Hinds via Callers <
callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
Here was my issue, briefly : I was told to use
"walk around" when calling
at glen echo. It also happens that I'm a western square caller and have
used "walk around your corner, see saw your taw" for decades.
Here is an opportunity to say to the organizers, "I understand your intent
is to avoid certain language, but your proposed substitute doesn't work for
me because I use 'walk around' to mean something else. I would prefer to
use [such and such] or another alternative to avoid confusion. Does that
work for your community?" This is a conversation between you and the
organizers, which will ideally result in clearer communication at the dance
itself. But if they don't want to budge, then you've hopefully communicated
that their rigidness is hindering you from presenting a good program. After
all, we're here to serve the dancers.
Thanks,
Yoyo Zhou
7:04 p.m.
New subject: freedom
Thanks for the suggestion. The rule was sent to me days befor the gig and it took my mind
a good long while to process and work through it. The organizer knows my concerns.
Sent from my iPad
On Mar 28, 2018, at 6:34 PM, Yoyo Zhou
<yozhov(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 2:29 PM, Tom Hinds via
Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
Here was my issue, briefly : I was told to use "walk around" when calling at
glen echo. It also happens that I'm a western square caller and have used "walk
around your corner, see saw your taw" for decades.
Here is an opportunity to say to the organizers, "I understand your intent is to
avoid certain language, but your proposed substitute doesn't work for me because I use
'walk around' to mean something else. I would prefer to use [such and such] or
another alternative to avoid confusion. Does that work for your community?" This is a
conversation between you and the organizers, which will ideally result in clearer
communication at the dance itself. But if they don't want to budge, then you've
hopefully communicated that their rigidness is hindering you from presenting a good
program. After all, we're here to serve the dancers.
Thanks,
Yoyo Zhou
30 Mar
30 Mar
5:47 p.m.
New subject: freedom
These are good points, and they bring up a larger situation. Presumably,
Tom accepted the gig months ahead of the date (like all of us). A few
days before the gig, he receives the new "rule". Does anyone think that
there might be a slight ethical problem here?
When we accept a gig, it's an agreement between two consenting parties.
This is, in fact, a contract. I'm not talking about a long legal
document with pages of small print in a sans serif font. That's not
customary in our dance culture, although in other types of performances
it may be the norm. In any case, in the contra dance world, nearly all
the specifics are not in writing; they are just accepted behaviors and
conventions. The artist (here, the caller) accepted the gig with certain
expectations -- microphone, payment, times, etc. The organizers have
expectations of quality, preparation, being on time, etc. These are all
cultural norms. Every community has its own way of approaching this.
After all, this is a community dance, and things are often pretty loose
with lots of volunteer helpers, not a hard-knuckled bargaining dispute
between unions and coal mine owners.
Here's the issue: Let's assume that the new terminology rule had been
decided up by the organizing committee after Tom's gig date had been
scheduled and finalized. But Tom didn't learn about this change until
just before the gig. I think the organizers have a responsibility here
to convey their decision to the caller in a timely manner and ask if the
caller still wanted to do the gig with this new condition.
Alternatively, the organizers could set a future date when this rule
would become a rigid part of the agreement, and any scheduling for gigs
after that date would include that rule in the initial back-and-forth
communications between the caller and the organizers. That gives both
parties all the information they need to make their decisions.
The awkward period would be the transition period that Tom was caught in
-- where the rule was conveyed close to the gig date and the caller had
to accept it "fait accompli" or cancel. By laying down a rigid rule
unilaterally, the organizers actually broke the agreement. No one wants
this, but IMO that's what they did. But Tom wanted the gig, accepted the
change, and was gracious enough to adjust and call it anyway
In that case, however, I think the organizers could have conveyed
something different -- like Yoyo gently described -- that the organizers
"prefer" that the caller avoid the word "gypsy", use an alternative
word
or phrase, and here is a preferred alternative, but that the caller use
judgement for the ultimate choice. This communication would be during
this awkward transitional period. There would, of course, be some
dancers who may complain, but this would also be an opportunity for the
organizers to convey to those dancers the ethics that they followed and
that it's just a transitional period.
My two cents.
Woody Lane
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 3/28/2018 4:04 PM, Tom Hinds via Callers wrote:
Thanks for the suggestion. The rule was sent to me
days befor the gig
and it took my mind a good long while to process and work through it.
The organizer knows my concerns.
Sent from my iPad
On Mar 28, 2018, at 6:34 PM, Yoyo Zhou <yozhov(a)gmail.com
<mailto:yozhov@gmail.com>> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 2:29 PM, Tom Hinds via Callers
> <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
> <mailto:callers@lists.sharedweight.net>> wrote:
>
> Here was my issue, briefly : I was told to use "walk around"
> when calling at glen echo. It also happens that I'm a western
> square caller and have used "walk around your corner, see saw
> your taw" for decades.
>
>
> Here is an opportunity to say to the organizers, "I understand your
> intent is to avoid certain language, but your proposed substitute
> doesn't work for me because I use 'walk around' to mean something
> else. I would prefer to use [such and such] or another alternative to
> avoid confusion. Does that work for your community?" This is a
> conversation between you and the organizers, which will ideally
> result in clearer communication at the dance itself. But if they
> don't want to budge, then you've hopefully communicated that their
> rigidness is hindering you from presenting a good program. After all,
> we're here to serve the dancers.
>
> Thanks,
> Yoyo Zhou
28 Mar
28 Mar
7:21 p.m.
New subject: freedom
Thanks Dave!
I too have that reaction whenever a caller brings up controversy about terminology.
On the flip side, when an older caller tries to adapt pronouns and such without making a
big deal of it, it’s awesome, even when they make mistakes.
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 28, 2018, at 5:29 PM, Tom Hinds via Callers
<callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
Here was my issue, briefly : I was told to use "walk around" when calling at
glen echo. It also happens that I'm a western square caller and have used "walk
around your corner, see saw your taw" for decades.
It has happened on two occasions when I have mixed up square dance calls from one time
period into another or from one tradition to another and have confused the dancers a tad
and made them think perhaps I'm an idiot.
As far as gypsy is concerned I'd use ANY call as a substitute but not walk around out
of fear of saying the wrong thing by habit. Perhaps it's remote that it would happen
but I'm going to avoid looking liking an idiot at all costs!
Being given that rule by the organizer made my planning for that dance a nightmare. Do I
use dances without gypsies? I mean it really through a wrench into the way I usually plan
because to follow their rule and protect myself I'd have to eliminate far too many
good dances to keep from using gypsy.
And there are more rules that I have to follow or address that I'd rather not, like
leaving a couple out at the top when the music ends.
As far as being sarcastic NO I'm not that kind of person. I simply thought Ron was
being a bully so I wanted to know where he stood. There are a number of us out there that
associate PC with a threat to our freedoms and I'm not a conservative. Sure I can
look up things on the computer and you think I'm being sarcastic because I didn't,
but we're different. I hate computers and only use them when I have to. I value
clear communication and if you carefully read my email you'll see that's what I
was asking for. On several of Ron's emails I see there are a good number of dots that
weren't being connected so I wondered what was going on.
As far as my attitude at Glen Echo is concerned you are reading into it. If you want to
continue this perhaps just between us is the best way. And here we go, Tom is confused
again. Why are you replying for Ron?
Tom
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
29 Mar
29 Mar
3:01 p.m.
New subject: freedom
Really don't appreciate name calling on this list.
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018, 7:22 PM Alexandra Deis-Lauby via Callers <
callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
Thanks Dave!
I too have that reaction whenever a caller brings up controversy about
terminology.
On the flip side, when an older caller tries to adapt pronouns and such
without making a big deal of it, it’s awesome, even when they make
mistakes.
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 28, 2018, at 5:29 PM, Tom Hinds via Callers <
callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
Here was my issue, briefly : I was told to use "walk around" when calling
at glen echo. It also happens that I'm a western square caller and have
used "walk around your corner, see saw your taw" for decades.
It has happened on two occasions when I have mixed up square dance calls
from one time period into another or from one tradition to another and have
confused the dancers a tad and made them think perhaps I'm an idiot.
As far as gypsy is concerned I'd use ANY call as a substitute but not walk
around out of fear of saying the wrong thing by habit. Perhaps it's remote
that it would happen but I'm going to avoid looking liking an idiot at all
costs!
Being given that rule by the organizer made my planning for that dance a
nightmare. Do I use dances without gypsies? I mean it really through a
wrench into the way I usually plan because to follow their rule and protect
myself I'd have to eliminate far too many good dances to keep from using
gypsy.
And there are more rules that I have to follow or address that I'd rather
not, like leaving a couple out at the top when the music ends.
As far as being sarcastic NO I'm not that kind of person. I simply
thought Ron was being a bully so I wanted to know where he stood. There
are a number of us out there that associate PC with a threat to our
freedoms and I'm not a conservative. Sure I can look up things on the
computer and you think I'm being sarcastic because I didn't, but we're
different. I hate computers and only use them when I have to. I value
clear communication and if you carefully read my email you'll see that's
what I was asking for. On several of Ron's emails I see there are a good
number of dots that weren't being connected so I wondered what was going on.
As far as my attitude at Glen Echo is concerned you are reading into it.
If you want to continue this perhaps just between us is the best way. And
here we go, Tom is confused again. Why are you replying for Ron?
Tom
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
5:14 p.m.
New subject: freedom
Ron I apologize for saying that. It was not necessary.
If you'll still speak to me i want you to know that Donna has said exactly what I was
thinking. So I would be interested in seeing what you have to say.
Tom
Sent from my iPad
On Mar 29, 2018, at 3:01 PM, Ron Blechner via Callers
<callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
Really don't appreciate name calling on this list.
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018, 7:22 PM Alexandra
Deis-Lauby via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
Thanks Dave!
I too have that reaction whenever a caller brings up controversy about terminology.
On the flip side, when an older caller tries to adapt pronouns and such without making a
big deal of it, it’s awesome, even when they make mistakes.
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 28, 2018, at 5:29 PM, Tom Hinds via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net>
wrote:
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/ Here was my issue, briefly : I was told to use
"walk around" when calling at glen echo. It also happens that I'm a western
square caller and have used "walk around your corner, see saw your taw" for
decades.
It has happened on two occasions when I have mixed up square dance calls from one time
period into another or from one tradition to another and have confused the dancers a tad
and made them think perhaps I'm an idiot.
As far as gypsy is concerned I'd use ANY call as a substitute but not walk around out
of fear of saying the wrong thing by habit. Perhaps it's remote that it would happen
but I'm going to avoid looking liking an idiot at all costs!
Being given that rule by the organizer made my planning for that dance a nightmare. Do I
use dances without gypsies? I mean it really through a wrench into the way I usually plan
because to follow their rule and protect myself I'd have to eliminate far too many
good dances to keep from using gypsy.
And there are more rules that I have to follow or address that I'd rather not, like
leaving a couple out at the top when the music ends.
As far as being sarcastic NO I'm not that kind of person. I simply thought Ron was
being a bully so I wanted to know where he stood. There are a number of us out there that
associate PC with a threat to our freedoms and I'm not a conservative. Sure I can
look up things on the computer and you think I'm being sarcastic because I didn't,
but we're different. I hate computers and only use them when I have to. I value
clear communication and if you carefully read my email you'll see that's what I
was asking for. On several of Ron's emails I see there are a good number of dots that
weren't being connected so I wondered what was going on.
As far as my attitude at Glen Echo is concerned you are reading into it. If you want to
continue this perhaps just between us is the best way. And here we go, Tom is confused
again. Why are you replying for Ron?
Tom
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/ > >
> _______________________________________________
> List Name: Callers mailing list
> List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
> Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
> _______________________________________________
> List Name: Callers mailing list
> List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
> Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
6:36 p.m.
New subject: freedom
Thanks.
I'm really not the person ultimately who should be listened to.
Marginalized dancers are the people we all should be listening to. Folks
who are LGBTQ, people of color, people with disabilities, Romany, etc. I've
done my homework, and I've made my choices about what to support.
Ron
On Thu, Mar 29, 2018, 5:14 PM Tom Hinds <twhinds(a)earthlink.net> wrote:
Ron I apologize for saying that. It was not
necessary.
If you'll still speak to me i want you to know that Donna has said exactly
what I was thinking. So I would be interested in seeing what you have to
say.
Tom
Sent from my iPad
On Mar 29, 2018, at 3:01 PM, Ron Blechner via Callers <
callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
Really don't appreciate name calling on this list.
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018, 7:22 PM Alexandra Deis-Lauby via Callers <
callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
Thanks Dave!
I too have that reaction whenever a caller brings up controversy about
terminology.
On the flip side, when an older caller tries to adapt pronouns and such
without making a big deal of it, it’s awesome, even when they make
mistakes.
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 28, 2018, at 5:29 PM, Tom Hinds via Callers <
callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
Here was my issue, briefly : I was told to use "walk around" when
calling at glen echo. It also happens that I'm a western square caller and
have used "walk around your corner, see saw your taw" for decades.
It has happened on two occasions when I have mixed up square dance calls
from one time period into another or from one tradition to another and have
confused the dancers a tad and made them think perhaps I'm an idiot.
As far as gypsy is concerned I'd use ANY call as a substitute but not
walk around out of fear of saying the wrong thing by habit. Perhaps it's
remote that it would happen but I'm going to avoid looking liking an idiot
at all costs!
Being given that rule by the organizer made my planning for that dance a
nightmare. Do I use dances without gypsies? I mean it really through a
wrench into the way I usually plan because to follow their rule and protect
myself I'd have to eliminate far too many good dances to keep from using
gypsy.
And there are more rules that I have to follow or address that I'd rather
not, like leaving a couple out at the top when the music ends.
As far as being sarcastic NO I'm not that kind of person. I simply
thought Ron was being a bully so I wanted to know where he stood. There
are a number of us out there that associate PC with a threat to our
freedoms and I'm not a conservative. Sure I can look up things on the
computer and you think I'm being sarcastic because I didn't, but we're
different. I hate computers and only use them when I have to. I value
clear communication and if you carefully read my email you'll see that's
what I was asking for. On several of Ron's emails I see there are a good
number of dots that weren't being connected so I wondered what was going on.
As far as my attitude at Glen Echo is concerned you are reading into it.
If you want to continue this perhaps just between us is the best way. And
here we go, Tom is confused again. Why are you replying for Ron?
Tom
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
7:42 p.m.
New subject: freedom
I'm certainly well aware of issues that confront those people you listed and others.
I'm hoping you'll share your homework with us off line as you suggested.
Sent from my iPad
On Mar 29, 2018, at 6:36 PM, Ron Blechner
<contraron(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Thanks.
I'm really not the person ultimately who should be listened to. Marginalized dancers
are the people we all should be listening to. Folks who are LGBTQ, people of color, people
with disabilities, Romany, etc. I've done my homework, and I've made my choices
about what to support.
Ron
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2018, 5:14 PM Tom Hinds <twhinds(a)earthlink.net> wrote:
> Ron I apologize for saying that. It was not necessary.
>
> If you'll still speak to me i want you to know that Donna has said exactly what I
was thinking. So I would be interested in seeing what you have to say.
>
> Tom
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
>> On Mar 29, 2018, at 3:01 PM, Ron Blechner via Callers
<callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>>
>> Really don't appreciate name calling on this list.
>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 28, 2018, 7:22 PM Alexandra Deis-Lauby via Callers
<callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>>> Thanks Dave!
>>> I too have that reaction whenever a caller brings up controversy about
terminology.
>>>
>>> On the flip side, when an older caller tries to adapt pronouns and such
without making a big deal of it, it’s awesome, even when they make mistakes.
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> On Mar 28, 2018, at 5:29 PM, Tom Hinds via Callers
<callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Here was my issue, briefly : I was told to use "walk around"
when calling at glen echo. It also happens that I'm a western square caller and have
used "walk around your corner, see saw your taw" for decades.
>>>>
>>>> It has happened on two occasions when I have mixed up square dance calls
from one time period into another or from one tradition to another and have confused the
dancers a tad and made them think perhaps I'm an idiot.
>>>>
>>>> As far as gypsy is concerned I'd use ANY call as a substitute but not
walk around out of fear of saying the wrong thing by habit. Perhaps it's remote that
it would happen but I'm going to avoid looking liking an idiot at all costs!
>>>>
>>>> Being given that rule by the organizer made my planning for that dance a
nightmare. Do I use dances without gypsies? I mean it really through a wrench into the
way I usually plan because to follow their rule and protect myself I'd have to
eliminate far too many good dances to keep from using gypsy.
>>>>
>>>> And there are more rules that I have to follow or address that I'd
rather not, like leaving a couple out at the top when the music ends.
>>>>
>>>> As far as being sarcastic NO I'm not that kind of person. I simply
thought Ron was being a bully so I wanted to know where he stood. There are a number of
us out there that associate PC with a threat to our freedoms and I'm not a
conservative. Sure I can look up things on the computer and you think I'm being
sarcastic because I didn't, but we're different. I hate computers and only use
them when I have to. I value clear communication and if you carefully read my email
you'll see that's what I was asking for. On several of Ron's emails I see
there are a good number of dots that weren't being connected so I wondered what was
going on.
>>>>
>>>> As far as my attitude at Glen Echo is concerned you are reading into it.
If you want to continue this perhaps just between us is the best way. And here we go, Tom
is confused again. Why are you replying for Ron?
>>>>
>>>> Tom
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> List Name: Callers mailing list
>>>>>> List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
>>>>>> Archives:
https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> List Name: Callers mailing list
>>>>>> List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
>>>>>> Archives:
https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> List Name: Callers mailing list
>>>>> List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
>>>>> Archives:
https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> List Name: Callers mailing list
>>>> List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
>>>> Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> List Name: Callers mailing list
>>> List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
>>> Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
>> _______________________________________________
>> List Name: Callers mailing list
>> List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
>> Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
28 Mar
28 Mar
11:56 a.m.
New subject: Politically Correct?
While Jeffrey makes a compelling point, I want to chime in with another
thought: *that not having these discussions is just as divisive (if not
more so) than having them*, just in ways that are harder for some sides of
the community to see. While people make (very valid) claims that long
discussions about terminology, altering words to singing squares, etc. are
alienating some more established members of the community, to *not* have
these discussions is to alienate many other folks, particularly people our
dance scene has done less well by in the past -- young people, people of
color, queer people, trans people... the list goes on.
And if it doesn't look to you like these people are being alienated, that
might be because the alienation started so early that they just never came
back to another contra dance, after they heard the caller using language
that made them deeply uncomfortable, or were "offered" a dance to split
them from their partner, or looked out on the crowd and didn't see anyone
who looked like them.
So yes, having these discussions may make some folks uncomfortable, and I
want to strive to minimize this discomfort; at the same time, many are made
deeply uncomfortable by the status quo, often it ways it's hard to see
(because often the response to this kind of discomfort is to leave the
community and not come back--so we have a pronounced sample bias). To
dismiss these conversations because they're divisive or uncomfortable is to
prioritize the unity and comfort of one group (the established contra
scene) over another (all those who might have been contradancers, were the
community more welcoming to them), and that doesn't sit right with me.
Cheers,
Maia
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 11:43 AM, Jeffrey Spero via Callers <
callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
He’s right… and she’s right. How can they both be right?
Well… they ARE both right. There is no clear cut answer on this. People
who feel strongly on one side or the other may like to think there is a
clear cut answer, but if one thing seems clear to me by the amount of back
and forth on this subject it’s that there are differing valid opinions.
In the meantime, while we argue endlessly about whether to gypsy,
walk-around, face-to-face, vis-a-vis, spiral, gyre, turn by the eyes,
whimsy, kipsy, tipsy, shmipsy - or just avoid the move altogether, we lose
why many came to contra dancing in the first place. Contradances were a
place where people would come to actually get away from all of the
controversies of life. It was a place where people from differing stripes
with differing beliefs (OK, maybe I’m being idealistic here - let’s not kid
ourselves, it’s mostly liberal whites!) can come together and leave the
real world issues behind and just dance and be friendly. And now? These
controversies have made their presence known on the dance floor. And it’s
not just gypsies or no gypsies. It’s also questions of role identification
(men/women, ladies/gents, larks/ravens, jets/rubies) and whether people
should boycott dance weekends that gender balance.
Please don’t misunderstand me… I have very little fight in this game. I’m
moving to the point where I couldn’t care less about what we call moves or
people. I’m just tired of the endless discussions that go nowhere except
to continue to divide people and make the dance community cohesive. Maybe
I’ve become an old fart who just wishes we could have the dance community
we had decades ago that wasn’t so fraught with divisiveness. Or maybe
there’s something to what I have written here. Maybe the decline in
attendance at dances across the country has less to do with terminology -
and more to do with people not wanting to be a part of yet another
community that is becoming polarized. Do I have a solution? Nope. And
neither does anyone else, or else it would have been solved by now. So
maybe we should just cool it for awhile and see if maybe tolerance for
personal preferences might help make the community less contentious. Can we
just get back to dancing for the pure joy of it?
My two cents.
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
12:09 p.m.
New subject: Politically Correct?
(Ah, to clarify, by "offered a dance to split them from their partner" I'm
talking about the phenomenon that Louise mentioned, where a queer couple
(or heck, even same-gender friends!) are offered dances by people to slot
them into opposite-gender couples.)
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 11:56 AM, Maia McCormick <maia.mcc(a)gmail.com> wrote:
While Jeffrey makes a compelling point, I want to
chime in with another
thought: *that not having these discussions is just as divisive (if not
more so) than having them*, just in ways that are harder for some sides
of the community to see. While people make (very valid) claims that long
discussions about terminology, altering words to singing squares, etc. are
alienating some more established members of the community, to *not* have
these discussions is to alienate many other folks, particularly people our
dance scene has done less well by in the past -- young people, people of
color, queer people, trans people... the list goes on.
And if it doesn't look to you like these people are being alienated, that
might be because the alienation started so early that they just never came
back to another contra dance, after they heard the caller using language
that made them deeply uncomfortable, or were "offered" a dance to split
them from their partner, or looked out on the crowd and didn't see anyone
who looked like them.
So yes, having these discussions may make some folks uncomfortable, and I
want to strive to minimize this discomfort; at the same time, many are made
deeply uncomfortable by the status quo, often it ways it's hard to see
(because often the response to this kind of discomfort is to leave the
community and not come back--so we have a pronounced sample bias). To
dismiss these conversations because they're divisive or uncomfortable is to
prioritize the unity and comfort of one group (the established contra
scene) over another (all those who might have been contradancers, were the
community more welcoming to them), and that doesn't sit right with me.
Cheers,
Maia
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 11:43 AM, Jeffrey Spero via Callers <
callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
He’s right… and she’s right. How can they both be right?
Well… they ARE both right. There is no clear cut answer on this. People
who feel strongly on one side or the other may like to think there is a
clear cut answer, but if one thing seems clear to me by the amount of back
and forth on this subject it’s that there are differing valid opinions.
In the meantime, while we argue endlessly about whether to gypsy,
walk-around, face-to-face, vis-a-vis, spiral, gyre, turn by the eyes,
whimsy, kipsy, tipsy, shmipsy - or just avoid the move altogether, we lose
why many came to contra dancing in the first place. Contradances were a
place where people would come to actually get away from all of the
controversies of life. It was a place where people from differing stripes
with differing beliefs (OK, maybe I’m being idealistic here - let’s not kid
ourselves, it’s mostly liberal whites!) can come together and leave the
real world issues behind and just dance and be friendly. And now? These
controversies have made their presence known on the dance floor. And it’s
not just gypsies or no gypsies. It’s also questions of role identification
(men/women, ladies/gents, larks/ravens, jets/rubies) and whether people
should boycott dance weekends that gender balance.
Please don’t misunderstand me… I have very little fight in this game.
I’m moving to the point where I couldn’t care less about what we call moves
or people. I’m just tired of the endless discussions that go nowhere
except to continue to divide people and make the dance community cohesive.
Maybe I’ve become an old fart who just wishes we could have the dance
community we had decades ago that wasn’t so fraught with divisiveness. Or
maybe there’s something to what I have written here. Maybe the decline in
attendance at dances across the country has less to do with terminology -
and more to do with people not wanting to be a part of yet another
community that is becoming polarized. Do I have a solution? Nope. And
neither does anyone else, or else it would have been solved by now. So
maybe we should just cool it for awhile and see if maybe tolerance for
personal preferences might help make the community less contentious. Can we
just get back to dancing for the pure joy of it?
My two cents.
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
12:31 p.m.
New subject: Politically Correct?
On Mar 28, 2018, at 8:56 AM, Maia McCormick
<maia.mcc(a)gmail.com> wrote:
While Jeffrey makes a compelling point, I want to chime in with another thought: that not
having these discussions is just as divisive (if not more so) than having them, just in
ways that are harder for some sides of the community to see. While people make (very
valid) claims that long discussions about terminology, altering words to singing squares,
etc. are alienating some more established members of the community, to not have these
discussions is to alienate many other folks, particularly people our dance scene has done
less well by in the past -- young people, people of color, queer people, trans people...
the list goes on.
I would never suggest that these discussion not take place. But at some point, the
discussion must end with action either being taken - or not. This particular discussion
has been going on for many years, with very little new information, with both sides
feeling more polarized, and there being no to little movement in the community at large.
We’re beating a dead horse. At what point does this become more divisive than cohesive?
How is renewing this discussion by rehashing things that have been said over and over
again on both sides of the issue being helpful more than harmful?
Call it a walk around. Call it a gypsy. Call larks/ravens. Call gents/ladies. Call the
moves as you see fit. But let’s stop the constant arguing about it that has become
tiresome and divisive. Minds really aren’t being changed after years of rehashing the
same points.
And with that, I will no longer rehash MY point!
12:47 p.m.
New subject: Politically Correct?
Hi Jeff,
I think your understanding of there being "no to little movement" is
inaccurate.
In New England, New York, Seattle, and the Bay Area, many callers have been
examining terminology and changing. Several dance series have gone
genderfree without being specifically chartered as LGBTQ dances. Not
coincidentally, these dances are thriving amidst a decline of attendance of
contra in general.
Many dances are also taking up safety policies before and after the #metoo
movement, despite plenty of resistance for years of some people insisting
that contra is a happy place where there's no harassment.
So yes, you're correct that these discussions have been happening for
years, true, but they have also been producing tangible change in many
places.
...
I might also like to disagree with your implication that everyone is
responsible for "arguing about it". We callers who have swapped terms for
g*pay, for example, have long since moved on.
In the case of this original post, Rich was asking for practical advice,
and there *was no* argument until a couple choice people started throwing
shade at those of us who think changing the lyrics from "she was a young
thing" to "she was a young girl" is an easy swap that doesn't diminish
the
tradition, but also reduces the objectification of women.
In dance,
Ron Blechner
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018, 12:32 PM Jeffrey Spero via Callers <
callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
On Mar 28, 2018, at 8:56 AM, Maia McCormick <maia.mcc(a)gmail.com> wrote:
While Jeffrey makes a compelling point, I want to chime in with another
thought: *that not having these discussions is just as divisive (if not
more so) than having them*, just in ways that are harder for some sides
of the community to see. While people make (very valid) claims that long
discussions about terminology, altering words to singing squares, etc. are
alienating some more established members of the community, to *not* have
these discussions is to alienate many other folks, particularly people our
dance scene has done less well by in the past -- young people, people of
color, queer people, trans people... the list goes on.
I would never suggest that these discussion not take place. But at some
point, the discussion must end with action either being taken - or not.
This particular discussion has been going on for many years, with very
little new information, with both sides feeling more polarized, and there
being no to little movement in the community at large. We’re beating a
dead horse. At what point does this become more divisive than cohesive?
How is renewing this discussion by rehashing things that have been said
over and over again on both sides of the issue being helpful more than
harmful?
Call it a walk around. Call it a gypsy. Call larks/ravens. Call
gents/ladies. Call the moves as you see fit. But let’s stop the constant
arguing about it that has become tiresome and divisive. Minds really
aren’t being changed after years of rehashing the same points.
And with that, I will no longer rehash MY point!
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
2:52 p.m.
New subject: Politically Correct?
Not that the world at large was waiting for me to weigh in on this, but:
I completely endorse Jen's point that "political correctness" is usually
used as code for resenting having to treat people with respect.
I completely endorse Louise's point that the past where everyone could
dance for the pure joy of it is mythical and there has to be change to
move forward to that place. [The operative word being "everyone"; the
generally-positive experience that cis-het white guys like me had was
different from "everyone".]
As a caller I've called gents/ladies, bands/bares, larks/ravens, first
diagonals/second diagonals (that's for Heather & Rose style gender-free
English).
I'm still going to nitpick some of Ron's rather-too-broad statements.
On 3/28/18 9:47 AM, Ron Blechner via Callers wrote:
Hi Jeff,
I think your understanding of there being "no to little movement" is
inaccurate.
In New England, New York, Seattle, and the Bay Area, many callers have
been examining terminology and changing. Several dance series have
gone genderfree without being specifically chartered as LGBTQ dances.
Not coincidentally, these dances are thriving amidst a decline of
attendance of contra in general.
Contra dancing in the Bay Area is thriving in general, though some
series struggle. I can think of multiple gents/ladies series that do
okay, and I know at least one larks/ravens series that is struggling. I
don't think it's the determining factor in success.
Many dances are also taking up safety policies before
and after the
#metoo movement, despite plenty of resistance for years of some people
insisting that contra is a happy place where there's no harassment.
I am glad to have missed those arguments, but I have missed them. Were
there really contradance people arguing that it would hurt to have a
safety policy? (BACDS had a code of conduct for many years, and then
went full bore into safety policy, but most of the discussion about that
was about how to keep track of reports from multiple dance series to
identify serial harassers without violating privacy, etc - that is,
logistics. Honestly don't recall anybody objecting to doing it.)
So yes, you're correct that these discussions have
been happening for
years, true, but they have also been producing tangible change in many
places.
...
I might also like to disagree with your implication that everyone is
responsible for "arguing about it". We callers who have swapped terms
for g*pay, for example, have long since moved on.
Well, you (Ron) may have. The callers who frequently lead BACDS English
and Contra dances have been having an email discussion trying to
standardize on a replacement term, since there is dancer pushback
against having to deal with multiple terms for the same figure.
(There's certainly also some dancer pushback against dropping a term
they know, like, and don't perceive as derogatory, but they're going to
have to get over it.) Anyway, we got about 40 group emails in and are
stalled on trying to get a term that everybody can support, so right now
everybody's still using what they individually prefer. I'm a "right
shoulder round" person myself, but kinda like "gyre". I don't think I
can call this "have long since moved on".
-- Alan
2:58 p.m.
New subject: Politically Correct?
Ron,
I keep on reading your writing and see that you often give only partial information. What
you write below is interesting:
In New England, New York, Seattle, and the Bay Area,
many callers have been examining terminology and changing. Several dance series have gone
genderfree without being specifically chartered as LGBTQ dances. Not coincidentally, these
dances are thriving amidst a decline of attendance of contra in general.
My own preference is for you to give more information and not let us fill in the pieces.
For instance in the areas that you list above, was there a decline in attendance while
callers were using calls like gypsy and other words like men and women? If attendance did
in fact dip, did it in fact pick up again when alternative words were used? Might be cause
and effect or a correlation or simply coincidence.
If attendance in these areas have always been strong then perhaps there is something else
at work.
Ive always expected contra dance to die simply because that's the way it works. Come
on! Does anyone need me to spell this out? If you don't believe me, Mr Spock, in
one of the Star Trek movies once said, "all things must end" and I think
he's pretty smart!
Ron, I must also ask you about what you wrote below. It's not perfectly clear and of
course nobody is named but my take is that some of us (or me?)have ruined your party by
not going along with what you and others want? Perhaps I don't understand. Would you
please care to explain?
In the case of this original post, Rich was asking for
practical advice, and there *was no* argument until a couple choice people started
throwing shade at those of us who think changing the lyrics from "she was a young
thing" to "she was a young girl" is an easy swap that doesn't diminish
the tradition, but also reduces the objectification of women.
What does throwing shade mean? Does it mean that the sun was shining on you and that
someone blocked the sun? I'm afraid my college degree is from an applied institution
so I'd appreciate it if you could keep it simple for me in the future.
I've had very good conversations with Rich on and off the discussion group and feel
that he shares many of my values. Would you rather that I and others not participate?
Perhaps that is the primary reason that some of us aren't comfortable with PC. Where
does it end and what freedoms am I going to have to give up? My memory is that this
incredible discussion started with a complaint from ONE person.
Lastly let me suggest this after reading Jeffrey's very good email: It may be that
terms like gypsy (and of course others) are location dependent. Here in Charlottesville
and perhaps DC people don't really care for the gypsy issue. In other areas perhaps
that's not the case. On the English list people are reminded that folks from many
countries are members and that we should keep this in mind.
You want fries with that?
Tom
3:12 p.m.
New subject: Politically Correct?
In NYC there are more dances now then there ever have been in the past. They are all
pretty progressive in Dance roles. Two are gender free and one is not but has a
significant majority of dancers that dance both roles and lots who dance with everyone.
Attendance fluctuates so it’s hard to tell, but right now we seem to be on a slight up
taking into account the higher frequency of dances.
Portland, ME had a thriving gender free dance that as I understand it came about as the
older, more traditional Dance wound down- maybe someone else with more knowledge will jump
in.
The Chicago scene has added two dances in the last year. Their queer dance is growing,
their regular dance that is very encouraging of people Dancing both roles is growing, and
the two new series (one revived) are on college campuses. When I was dancing there
Several years ago, the groups were less into progressive concepts. The groups were
smaller. Correlation? Maybe so.
Thanks Ron, Louise, Maia and Jen for the thoughtful responses.
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 28, 2018, at 2:58 PM, Tom Hinds via Callers
<callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
Ron,
I keep on reading your writing and see that you often give only partial information.
What you write below is interesting:
In New England, New York, Seattle, and the Bay
Area, many callers have been examining terminology and changing. Several dance series have
gone genderfree without being specifically chartered as LGBTQ dances. Not coincidentally,
these dances are thriving amidst a decline of attendance of contra in general.
My own preference is for you to give more information and not let us fill in the pieces.
For instance in the areas that you list above, was there a decline in attendance while
callers were using calls like gypsy and other words like men and women? If attendance did
in fact dip, did it in fact pick up again when alternative words were used? Might be cause
and effect or a correlation or simply coincidence.
If attendance in these areas have always been strong then perhaps there is something else
at work.
Ive always expected contra dance to die simply because that's the way it works. Come
on! Does anyone need me to spell this out? If you don't believe me, Mr Spock, in
one of the Star Trek movies once said, "all things must end" and I think
he's pretty smart!
Ron, I must also ask you about what you wrote below. It's not perfectly clear and of
course nobody is named but my take is that some of us (or me?)have ruined your party by
not going along with what you and others want? Perhaps I don't understand. Would you
please care to explain?
In the case of this original post, Rich was
asking for practical advice, and there *was no* argument until a couple choice people
started throwing shade at those of us who think changing the lyrics from "she was a
young thing" to "she was a young girl" is an easy swap that doesn't
diminish the tradition, but also reduces the objectification of women.
What does throwing shade mean? Does it mean that the sun was shining on you and that
someone blocked the sun? I'm afraid my college degree is from an applied institution
so I'd appreciate it if you could keep it simple for me in the future.
I've had very good conversations with Rich on and off the discussion group and feel
that he shares many of my values. Would you rather that I and others not participate?
Perhaps that is the primary reason that some of us aren't comfortable with PC. Where
does it end and what freedoms am I going to have to give up? My memory is that this
incredible discussion started with a complaint from ONE person.
Lastly let me suggest this after reading Jeffrey's very good email: It may be that
terms like gypsy (and of course others) are location dependent. Here in Charlottesville
and perhaps DC people don't really care for the gypsy issue. In other areas perhaps
that's not the case. On the English list people are reminded that folks from many
countries are members and that we should keep this in mind.
You want fries with that?
Tom
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
3:28 p.m.
New subject: Politically Correct?
Yes in DC I have noticed one or two cross gendered people attending and some, not many gay
folks too. Perhaps these populations are finding contra for the first time or finding out
that it's a safe place to have fun.
I used to remodel houses in the DC area with a cross gendered person. There weren't
many places for him to go to socialize.
Sent from my iPad
On Mar 28, 2018, at 3:12 PM, Alexandra Deis-Lauby
<adeislauby(a)gmail.com> wrote:
In NYC there are more dances now then there ever have been in the past. They are all
pretty progressive in Dance roles. Two are gender free and one is not but has a
significant majority of dancers that dance both roles and lots who dance with everyone.
Attendance fluctuates so it’s hard to tell, but right now we seem to be on a slight up
taking into account the higher frequency of dances.
Portland, ME had a thriving gender free dance that as I understand it came about as the
older, more traditional Dance wound down- maybe someone else with more knowledge will jump
in.
The Chicago scene has added two dances in the last year. Their queer dance is growing,
their regular dance that is very encouraging of people Dancing both roles is growing, and
the two new series (one revived) are on college campuses. When I was dancing there
Several years ago, the groups were less into progressive concepts. The groups were
smaller. Correlation? Maybe so.
Thanks Ron, Louise, Maia and Jen for the thoughtful responses.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Mar 28, 2018, at 2:58 PM, Tom Hinds via Callers
<callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>
> Ron,
>
> I keep on reading your writing and see that you often give only partial information.
What you write below is interesting:
>
>> In New England, New York, Seattle, and the Bay Area, many callers have been
examining terminology and changing. Several dance series have gone genderfree without
being specifically chartered as LGBTQ dances. Not coincidentally, these dances are
thriving amidst a decline of attendance of contra in general.
>
> My own preference is for you to give more information and not let us fill in the
pieces. For instance in the areas that you list above, was there a decline in attendance
while callers were using calls like gypsy and other words like men and women? If
attendance did in fact dip, did it in fact pick up again when alternative words were used?
Might be cause and effect or a correlation or simply coincidence.
>
> If attendance in these areas have always been strong then perhaps there is something
else at work.
>
> Ive always expected contra dance to die simply because that's the way it works.
Come on! Does anyone need me to spell this out? If you don't believe me, Mr Spock,
in one of the Star Trek movies once said, "all things must end" and I think
he's pretty smart!
>
> Ron, I must also ask you about what you wrote below. It's not perfectly clear
and of course nobody is named but my take is that some of us (or me?)have ruined your
party by not going along with what you and others want? Perhaps I don't understand.
Would you please care to explain?
>
>> In the case of this original post, Rich was asking for practical advice, and
there *was no* argument until a couple choice people started throwing shade at those of us
who think changing the lyrics from "she was a young thing" to "she was a
young girl" is an easy swap that doesn't diminish the tradition, but also reduces
the objectification of women.
>
> What does throwing shade mean? Does it mean that the sun was shining on you and
that someone blocked the sun? I'm afraid my college degree is from an applied
institution so I'd appreciate it if you could keep it simple for me in the future.
>
> I've had very good conversations with Rich on and off the discussion group and
feel that he shares many of my values. Would you rather that I and others not
participate? Perhaps that is the primary reason that some of us aren't comfortable
with PC. Where does it end and what freedoms am I going to have to give up? My memory is
that this incredible discussion started with a complaint from ONE person.
>
> Lastly let me suggest this after reading Jeffrey's very good email: It may be
that terms like gypsy (and of course others) are location dependent. Here in
Charlottesville and perhaps DC people don't really care for the gypsy issue. In
other areas perhaps that's not the case. On the English list people are reminded that
folks from many countries are members and that we should keep this in mind.
>
> You want fries with that?
>
> Tom
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> List Name: Callers mailing list
> List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
> Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
3:28 p.m.
New subject: Politically Correct?
Tom,
Ron's point wasn't that changing terminology in some dances has been
beneficial; his point was simply that the terminology has indeed changed in
some dances, and he gave exactly the right amount of data necessary to
support that point. If you want to go do your own study on whether it has
been helpful in attracting new dancers, please feel free; I'd be interested
in knowing.
Since you've asked for data from Ron, it seems like it's important to you
to know the effects of changing terminology. So I do want to correct one
point that you've made, which is that people groaned in DC when you said
you would try to replace the word "gypsy" but might slip up sometimes. I
was there, and I groaned, but I wasn't groaning because I thought it was
ridiculous that a caller would replace the word. Nor was I groaning at the
prospect of you slipping up; everybody makes mistakes, and I've never heard
anybody complain about a caller using the wrong term when they were trying
their best not to. I was groaning at your aggrieved tone. You sounded
like replacing a single one of the hundreds of words you use in contra
dance calls was a huge inconvenience that only unreasonable people would
demand. I'm sure some people in DC agree with you and would prefer that
callers continue to use the word "gypsy," but that's by no means the
consensus in the community. Most people seem not to care much one way or
the other. If you want to know for sure, I'd suggest a poll, set up in
such a way that you're not just asking the people you already know and talk
to.
I'm also not entirely sure what freedoms, exactly, you are giving up when
people get annoyed or offended by the words you say. Everybody who is not
a sociopath takes at least some care to avoid bothering others. That
doesn't mean we're all giving up freedoms; it simply means we choose to be
polite. Nobody has proposed having people who say the word "gypsy"
arrested or fined.
For what it's worth, I also agree with Jeff that we are rehashing arguments
that have already been made on this board over and over again. Ron was
correct, too, that these arguments have made a difference in some
communities. That doesn't mean we should keep making exactly the same
arguments every time somebody asks a narrow question about a particular
lyric or call.
And, it seems like your question about the definition of "throwing shade"
was sarcastic, especially since we all have internet access and can read
Urban Dictionary. But it's tough to tell, so I'll answer. Throwing shade
is when somebody subtly insults somebody else without bothering to mention
them. The people who decide to publicly announce to the list that they are
leaving it after one of these discussions are throwing shade at those of us
participating. I don't think Ron was using the term correctly, really;
actually he was sort of the one throwing shade by saying that others were
doing so without naming names. I'm sure views can differ on the subject,
and you'll find a plethora of treatises on proper use of the term if you
google it.
-Dave
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 2:58 PM, Tom Hinds via Callers <
callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
Ron,
I keep on reading your writing and see that you often give only partial
information. What you write below is interesting:
--
David Casserly
(cell) 781 258-2761
In New England, New York, Seattle, and the Bay
Area, many callers have
been examining terminology and changing. Several dance
series have gone
genderfree without being specifically chartered as LGBTQ dances. Not
coincidentally, these dances are thriving amidst a decline of attendance of
contra in general.
My own preference is for you to give more information and not let us fill
in the pieces. For instance in the areas that you list above, was there a
decline in attendance while callers were using calls like gypsy and other
words like men and women? If attendance did in fact dip, did it in fact
pick up again when alternative words were used? Might be cause and effect
or a correlation or simply coincidence.
If attendance in these areas have always been strong then perhaps there is
something else at work.
Ive always expected contra dance to die simply because that's the way it
works. Come on! Does anyone need me to spell this out? If you don't
believe me, Mr Spock, in one of the Star Trek movies once said, "all things
must end" and I think he's pretty smart!
Ron, I must also ask you about what you wrote below. It's not perfectly
clear and of course nobody is named but my take is that some of us (or
me?)have ruined your party by not going along with what you and others
want? Perhaps I don't understand. Would you please care to explain?
In the case of this original post, Rich was
asking for practical advice,
and there *was no* argument until a couple choice
people started throwing
shade at those of us who think changing the lyrics from "she was a young
thing" to "she was a young girl" is an easy swap that doesn't diminish
the
tradition, but also reduces the objectification of women.
What does throwing shade mean? Does it mean that the sun was shining on
you and that someone blocked the sun? I'm afraid my college degree is from
an applied institution so I'd appreciate it if you could keep it simple for
me in the future.
I've had very good conversations with Rich on and off the discussion group
and feel that he shares many of my values. Would you rather that I and
others not participate? Perhaps that is the primary reason that some of us
aren't comfortable with PC. Where does it end and what freedoms am I going
to have to give up? My memory is that this incredible discussion started
with a complaint from ONE person.
Lastly let me suggest this after reading Jeffrey's very good email: It
may be that terms like gypsy (and of course others) are location
dependent. Here in Charlottesville and perhaps DC people don't really care
for the gypsy issue. In other areas perhaps that's not the case. On the
English list people are reminded that folks from many countries are members
and that we should keep this in mind.
You want fries with that?
Tom
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
30 Mar
30 Mar
2:20 a.m.
New subject: Politically Correct?
Hi Tom,
Earlier this year in Eugene, a caller was struggling with trying to be
extra careful with alternative terms for gypsy. She referred to the
"g-word" and then tried using other terms. She was actually trying to
demonstrate something else on the floor. The crowd said in a friendly
way but very clearly -- we don't care, just use the word "gypsy"! And
then she did, people relaxed, and the evening progressed smoothly.
The intensity and animus of these conversations may have unintended
long-term consequences in the contra dance world. Does anyone really
want to establish the contra equivalent of Callerlab?
Woody
On 3/28/2018 11:58 AM, Tom Hinds via Callers wrote:
I've had very good conversations with Rich on and
off the discussion
group and feel that he shares many of my values. Would you rather that
I and others not participate? Perhaps that is the primary reason that
some of us aren't comfortable with PC. Where does it end and what
freedoms am I going to have to give up? My memory is that this
incredible discussion started with a complaint from ONE person.
Lastly let me suggest this after reading Jeffrey's very good email: It may be that
terms like gypsy (and of course others) are location dependent. Here in Charlottesville
and perhaps DC people don't really care for the gypsy issue. In other areas perhaps
that's not the case. On the English list people are reminded that folks from many
countries are members and that we should keep this in mind.
3:23 p.m.
New subject: Politically Correct?
Woody, I really don't understand your question. Please connect the dots.
Sent from my iPad
On Mar 30, 2018, at 2:20 AM, Woody Lane via Callers
<callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
Hi Tom,
Earlier this year in Eugene, a caller was struggling with trying to be extra careful with
alternative terms for gypsy. She referred to the "g-word" and then tried using
other terms. She was actually trying to demonstrate something else on the floor. The crowd
said in a friendly way but very clearly -- we don't care, just use the word
"gypsy"! And then she did, people relaxed, and the evening progressed smoothly.
The intensity and animus of these conversations may have unintended long-term
consequences in the contra dance world. Does anyone really want to establish the contra
equivalent of Callerlab?
Woody
On 3/28/2018 11:58 AM, Tom Hinds via Callers
wrote:
I've had very good conversations with Rich on and off the discussion group and feel
that he shares many of my values. Would you rather that I and others not participate?
Perhaps that is the primary reason that some of us aren't comfortable with PC. Where
does it end and what freedoms am I going to have to give up? My memory is that this
incredible discussion started with a complaint from ONE person.
Lastly let me suggest this after reading Jeffrey's very good email: It may be that
terms like gypsy (and of course others) are location dependent. Here in Charlottesville
and perhaps DC people don't really care for the gypsy issue. In other areas perhaps
that's not the case. On the English list people are reminded that folks from many
countries are members and that we should keep this in mind.
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
3:33 p.m.
New subject: Politically Correct?
As a member of Callerlab for 25 years, I can answer Woody's question with a
definitive "NO".
Callerlab does offer many benefits, but it has its drawbacks as well.
Standardization was supposed to be a good thing, and perhaps in the MWSD
world that is more good than bad, but it also diminishes the regional
differences of dance, and limits the expression and flexibilities of
callers. There is also an organization called ContraLab, and thankfully
its reach is limited.
Rich Sbardella
Stafford, CT
On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 3:23 PM, Tom Hinds via Callers <
callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
Woody, I really don't understand your question.
Please connect the dots.
Sent from my iPad
On Mar 30, 2018, at 2:20 AM, Woody Lane via
Callers <
callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
Hi Tom,
Earlier this year in Eugene, a caller was struggling with trying to be
extra
careful with alternative terms for gypsy. She referred to the
"g-word" and then tried using other terms. She was actually trying to
demonstrate something else on the floor. The crowd said in a friendly way
but very clearly -- we don't care, just use the word "gypsy"! And then she
did, people relaxed, and the evening progressed smoothly.
The intensity and animus of these conversations may have unintended
long-term
consequences in the contra dance world. Does anyone really want
to establish the contra equivalent of Callerlab?
Woody
> On 3/28/2018 11:58 AM, Tom Hinds via Callers wrote:
> I've had very good conversations with Rich on and off the discussion
group
and feel that he shares many of my values. Would you rather that I
and others not participate? Perhaps that is the primary reason that some of
us aren't comfortable with PC. Where does it end and what freedoms am I
going to have to give up? My memory is that this incredible discussion
started with a complaint from ONE person.
> Lastly let me suggest this after reading
Jeffrey's very good email: It
may be that terms like gypsy (and of course
others) are location
dependent. Here in Charlottesville and perhaps DC people don't really care
for the gypsy issue. In other areas perhaps that's not the case. On the
English list people are reminded that folks from many countries are members
and that we should keep this in mind.
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
6 p.m.
New subject: Politically Correct?contra lab.
Rich,
I'm not clear why Woody's question is directed to me. And I see he's
indicating that's this long involved conversation about terminology is related to
creating a callerlab for contra. I'm not clear on his thinking so I suppose I'll
have to hear from him before honestly responding
This fear of having a contralab (which I believe actually exists or existed for western
contra) has caused some concern for many of us for years. Back in 2011 I wrote a booklet
on contra choreography and included a couple of pages on why that simply couldn't
happen. If I have the time I'll send it to y'all.
Tom HInds
Sent from my iPad
On Mar 30, 2018, at 3:33 PM, Rich Sbardella
<richsbardella(a)gmail.com> wrote:
As a member of Callerlab for 25 years, I can answer Woody's question with a
definitive "NO".
Callerlab does offer many benefits, but it has its drawbacks as well. Standardization
was supposed to be a good thing, and perhaps in the MWSD world that is more good than bad,
but it also diminishes the regional differences of dance, and limits the expression and
flexibilities of callers. There is also an organization called ContraLab, and thankfully
its reach is limited.
Rich Sbardella
Stafford, CT
On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 3:23 PM, Tom Hinds via
Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
Woody, I really don't understand your question. Please connect the dots.
Sent from my iPad
On Mar 30, 2018, at 2:20 AM, Woody Lane via
Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
Hi Tom,
Earlier this year in Eugene, a caller was struggling with trying to be extra careful with
alternative terms for gypsy. She referred to the "g-word" and then tried using
other terms. She was actually trying to demonstrate something else on the floor. The crowd
said in a friendly way but very clearly -- we don't care, just use the word
"gypsy"! And then she did, people relaxed, and the evening progressed smoothly.
The intensity and animus of these conversations may have unintended long-term
consequences in the contra dance world. Does anyone really want to establish the contra
equivalent of Callerlab?
Woody
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/ On 3/28/2018 11:58 AM, Tom Hinds via Callers
wrote:
I've had very good conversations with Rich on and off the discussion group and feel
that he shares many of my values. Would you rather that I and others not participate?
Perhaps that is the primary reason that some of us aren't comfortable with PC. Where
does it end and what freedoms am I going to have to give up? My memory is that this
incredible discussion started with a complaint from ONE person.
Lastly let me suggest this after reading Jeffrey's very good email: It may be that
terms like gypsy (and of course others) are location dependent. Here in Charlottesville
and perhaps DC people don't really care for the gypsy issue. In other areas perhaps
that's not the case. On the English list people are reminded that folks from many
countries are members and that we should keep this in mind.
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
5:58 p.m.
New subject: Politically Correct?
Hi Tom,
Sure. The first paragraph describes the current situation regarding the
use of a controversial single word.
The second paragraph steps back and looks at the bigger picture within
our community. My speculation that the animus and hard feelings that
this word has elicited among callers, organizers, and dancers may result
in pressures to "standardize" terms. The logic then is by whom, then the
move to setup an organization with some sort of
standardization/certification/controlling power, etc. Hence the
historical precedent of Callerlab.
Woody
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 3/30/2018 12:23 PM, Tom Hinds wrote:
Woody, I really don't understand your question.
Please connect the dots.
Sent from my iPad
> On Mar 30, 2018, at 2:20 AM, Woody Lane via Callers
<callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>
> Hi Tom,
>
> Earlier this year in Eugene, a caller was struggling with trying to be extra careful
with alternative terms for gypsy. She referred to the "g-word" and then tried
using other terms. She was actually trying to demonstrate something else on the floor. The
crowd said in a friendly way but very clearly -- we don't care, just use the word
"gypsy"! And then she did, people relaxed, and the evening progressed smoothly.
>
> The intensity and animus of these conversations may have unintended long-term
consequences in the contra dance world. Does anyone really want to establish the contra
equivalent of Callerlab?
>
> Woody
>
>> On 3/28/2018 11:58 AM, Tom Hinds via Callers wrote:
>> I've had very good conversations with Rich on and off the discussion group
and feel that he shares many of my values. Would you rather that I and others not
participate? Perhaps that is the primary reason that some of us aren't comfortable
with PC. Where does it end and what freedoms am I going to have to give up? My memory is
that this incredible discussion started with a complaint from ONE person.
>> Lastly let me suggest this after reading Jeffrey's very good email: It may
be that terms like gypsy (and of course others) are location dependent. Here in
Charlottesville and perhaps DC people don't really care for the gypsy issue. In
other areas perhaps that's not the case. On the English list people are reminded that
folks from many countries are members and that we should keep this in mind.
29 Mar
29 Mar
11:07 a.m.
New subject: Politically Correct?
Ron: Would you please be more specific? There's not enough information here for me to
understand what you're claiming, nor to clarify it, and I find it frustrating and
misleading in it's generality.
I'm going to assume that you not only mean callers in these areas but are also
speaking of dances in these specific areas. New England covers several states and has
lots of dances. New York? City or State? How many dances in Seattle and the Bay Area?
How many is "several"? And "these dances are thriving amidst a
decline..."? Without details I cannot support your claims.
In New England, New York, Seattle, and the Bay Area, many callers have been examining
terminology and changing. Several dance series have gone genderfree without being
specifically chartered as LGBTQ dances. Not coincidentally, these dances are thriving
amidst a decline of attendance of contra in general.
Donna Hunt
-----Original Message-----
From: Ron Blechner via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net>
To: Jeffrey Spero <jeff(a)syncopaths.com>
Cc: callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net <Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net>
Sent: Wed, Mar 28, 2018 12:47 pm
Subject: Re: [Callers] Politically Correct?
Hi Jeff,
I think your understanding of there being "no to little movement" is
inaccurate.
In New England, New York, Seattle, and the Bay Area, many callers have been examining
terminology and changing. Several dance series have gone genderfree without being
specifically chartered as LGBTQ dances. Not coincidentally, these dances are thriving
amidst a decline of attendance of contra in general.
Many dances are also taking up safety policies before and after the #metoo movement,
despite plenty of resistance for years of some people insisting that contra is a happy
place where there's no harassment.
So yes, you're correct that these discussions have been happening for years, true, but
they have also been producing tangible change in many places.
...
I might also like to disagree with your implication that everyone is responsible for
"arguing about it". We callers who have swapped terms for g*pay, for example,
have long since moved on.
In the case of this original post, Rich was asking for practical advice, and there *was
no* argument until a couple choice people started throwing shade at those of us who think
changing the lyrics from "she was a young thing" to "she was a young
girl" is an easy swap that doesn't diminish the tradition, but also reduces the
objectification of women.
In dance,
Ron Blechner
2:30 p.m.
New subject: Politically Correct?
I'm going to respect Rich's request to not discuss the broader topic on
this thread anymore.
I'd be happy to continue the discussion in a separate thread or private
email.
Best regards,
Ron Blechner
On Thu, Mar 29, 2018, 11:07 AM Donna Hunt <dhuntdancer(a)aol.com> wrote:
Ron: Would you please be more specific? There's
not enough information
here for me to understand what you're claiming, nor to clarify it, and I
find it frustrating and misleading in it's generality.
I'm going to assume that you not only mean callers in these areas but are
also speaking of dances in these specific areas. New England covers
several states and has lots of dances. New York? City or State? How many
dances in Seattle and the Bay Area? How many is "several"? And "these
dances are thriving amidst a decline..."? Without details I cannot
support your claims.
In New England, New York, Seattle, and the Bay Area, many callers have
been examining terminology and changing. Several dance series have gone
genderfree without being specifically chartered as LGBTQ dances. Not
coincidentally, these dances are thriving amidst a decline of attendance of
contra in general.
Donna Hunt
-----Original Message-----
From: Ron Blechner via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net>
To: Jeffrey Spero <jeff(a)syncopaths.com>
Cc: callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net <Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net>
Sent: Wed, Mar 28, 2018 12:47 pm
Subject: Re: [Callers] Politically Correct?
Hi Jeff,
I think your understanding of there being "no to little movement" is
inaccurate.
In New England, New York, Seattle, and the Bay Area, many callers have
been examining terminology and changing. Several dance series have gone
genderfree without being specifically chartered as LGBTQ dances. Not
coincidentally, these dances are thriving amidst a decline of attendance of
contra in general.
Many dances are also taking up safety policies before and after the #metoo
movement, despite plenty of resistance for years of some people insisting
that contra is a happy place where there's no harassment.
So yes, you're correct that these discussions have been happening for
years, true, but they have also been producing tangible change in many
places.
...
I might also like to disagree with your implication that everyone is
responsible for "arguing about it". We callers who have swapped terms for
g*pay, for example, have long since moved on.
In the case of this original post, Rich was asking for practical advice,
and there *was no* argument until a couple choice people started throwing
shade at those of us who think changing the lyrics from "she was a young
thing" to "she was a young girl" is an easy swap that doesn't diminish
the
tradition, but also reduces the objectification of women.
In dance,
Ron Blechner
28 Mar
28 Mar
11:33 a.m.
New subject: Politically Correct?
I agree wholeheartedly with Jen, and appreciate her thoughtful response.
Donald makes the excellent point that history is the source of an ongoing challenge (it’s
not the present, and the values of any one historical moment are not the same as those of
another) for which language usefully offers a dynamic solution. I enjoy thinking about
this aspect of dance history, and I enjoy sharing it with dancers (at appropriate times
and in the appropriate quantity, of course). I see no reason not to enjoy this aspect of
what we do just as much as we enjoy the vagaries of Sharp vs. Shaw siding, or wagon-wheel
versus hands-across stars (which I assume we do, since I can initiate a lengthy
conversation about these and other things with very little effort, among most dancers and
callers I know!).
Louise.
www.scissortail.org
On Mar 28, 2018, at 3:58 PM, Donald Perley via Callers
<callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
When history shows a number of new terms introduced over the years,
and each, after a while, picks up the taint of being derogatory, you
eventually figure out that
the word itself isn't the real problem.
<Snip>
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 10:16 AM, Jen Morgan via
Callers
<callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
Hello folks
I'd just like to second what Ron said. We keep hearing about how organisers
would like to "get Young People in", but then express disdain for the things
we care about, such as avoiding offensive language.
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
2430
days inactive
2432
days old
contracallers@lists.sharedweight.net
33 comments
16 participants
participants (16)
-
Alan Winston -
Alexandra Deis-Lauby -
Dave Casserly -
Donald Perley -
Donna Hunt -
Dorcas Hand -
Jeffrey Spero -
Jen Morgan -
Louise Siddons -
Maia McCormick -
Rich Sbardella -
Ron Blechner -
Ryan Smith -
Tom Hinds -
Woody Lane -
Yoyo Zhou