11 Mar
2024
11 Mar
'24
10:52 a.m.
John,
<Perhaps, “the roles were originally (completely and utterly) based on
gender”!
Ya think? :)
I had what I assume is a similar response when I read that, John.
Aside to John: In this entire, ongoing discussion, it seems to me that
there is an active conspiracy of pretense (along the lines of 'the
emperor's new clothes') that the elephant sitting squarely in the middle of
the room is actually a blueberry muffin.
Open and honest questions:
Am I the only living person who has a preference for dancing with the
opposite cisgender (realizing that any particular, such opposite,
cisgendered individual may, in fact, have a different preference)?
If the above is a reasonable question, what is wrong with saying "If you
have a preference to dance primarily with women, I recommend dancing the
left role. If you have a preference to dance with men, I'd recommend
dancing the right-side role; if you have no preference, it doesn't matter"?
What is the surveyed percentage of dancers in your community who have such
a preference vs those who don't?
11 Mar
11 Mar
10:58 a.m.
New subject: "Assigning" roles in the beginners' lesson?
You should sign your name at the bottom! :)
In my group, we have so many beginners each month and so many
experienced people who have been dancing with us only since we
introduced the bird roles about 6 years ago, that there is no
discernible correlation any more between a given role and a given gender.
So it would be impossible in our community to recommend one role because
you will get to dance with more ppl of the opposite gender as a result.
Some very-long-time members of our community still ask at the door when
they need to choose a tag, which role is the "gents" or "ladies" role
because they are comfortable swinging on that side/standing on that
side, so we tell them quietly.
Personally, I love the non-gendered dancing. I feel that it has
actually increased my enjoyment of dancing with a same-gendered person
as myself. Prior to that, when there was an unspoken norm, it still
felt a bit "weird" to dance with a same-gendered person.
Now that we have so clearly changed the culture in our dances to "we all
come together to dance in a joyful community, regardless of age, gender,
level of experience or any other factor" it has really changed the
entire vibe. I find it much more comfortable, personally.
Now the big excitement is being paired up with someone who has mastered
the concept of giving weight :)
Kat K
K P via Contra Callers
<mailto:contracallers@lists.sharedweight.net>
Monday, March 11, 2024 11:52 AM
John,
<Perhaps, “the roles were originally (completely and utterly) based on
gender”!
Ya think? :)
I had what I assume is a similar response when I read that, John.
Aside to John: In this entire, ongoing discussion, it seems to me that
there is an active conspiracy of pretense (along the lines of 'the
emperor's new clothes') that the elephant sitting squarely in the
middle of the room is actually a blueberry muffin.
Open and honest questions:
Am I the only living person who has a preference for dancing with the
opposite cisgender (realizing that any particular, such opposite,
cisgendered individual may, in fact, have a different preference)?
If the above is a reasonable question, what is wrong with saying "If
you have a preference to dance primarily with women, I recommend
dancing the left role. If you have a preference to dance with men, I'd
recommend dancing the right-side role; if you have no preference, it
doesn't matter"?
What is the surveyed percentage of dancers in your community who have
such a preference vs those who don't?
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
11:18 a.m.
New subject: "Assigning" roles in the beginners' lesson?
On Mon, Mar 11, 2024, 10:58 Katherine Kitching <kat(a)outdooractive.ca> wrote:
You should sign your name at the bottom! :)
Indeed! I forgot. :)
Thanks for the reply of the experience in your community, Kat.
I am, however, somewhat troubled by one statement you made, below:
So it would be impossible in our community to recommend one role because
you will get to dance with more ppl of the opposite
gender as a result.
Some very-long-time members of our community still ask at the door when
they need to choose a tag, which role is the "gents" or "ladies"
role
because they are comfortable swinging on that side/standing on that side,
SO WE TELL THEM QUIETLY [emphasis mine].
I'm not quite sure what to make of tiis except to see it as form of shaming
that it needs to be mentioned "quietly".
???
Ken Panton
11:30 a.m.
New subject: preference for dancing with opposite gender?
Hi Ken!
Changing the subject line as others suggested.
I would say there is a difference between telling someone "quietly" and telling
someone "furtively" :)
We do the former and not the latter!
In our group - which for sure is not the same for everyone - but in our group we the
organizers/volunteer helpers have expressly committed to a gender-free environment - so it
is important to us not to draw attention to the past association between gender and the
two dancing roles.
Most of our dancers have no clue there used to be an association: I love that.
It has honestly been magical for our group to witness the transformation that ensued in
the "vibe" of our dances, once they went gender free.
It used to feel more intense, socially - there was more pressure to get the appropriate
dance partner, there was more discomfort if you didn't match with the one you had
hoped to, there was discomfort in avoiding some people.
I'm not saying that has disappeared - but it is palpably less. Many ppl have commented
on this.
and in our case, our dance numbers are comparable in the gender-free environment to what
they were previously (45-90 people per dance), so I feel confident that our dancers like
this approach just as much as we the organizers do...
Kat K
Mar 11, 2024 12:18:34 PM K P <kenwp1(a)gmail.com>om>:
On Mon, Mar 11, 2024, 10:58 Katherine Kitching <kat(a)outdooractive.ca> wrote:
You should sign your name at the bottom! :)
Indeed! I forgot. :)
Thanks for the reply of the experience in your community, Kat.
I am, however, somewhat troubled by one statement you made, below:
So it would be impossible in our community to
recommend one role because you will get to dance with more ppl of the opposite gender as a
result. Some very-long-time members of our community still ask at the door when they need
to choose a tag, which role is the "gents" or "ladies" role because
they are comfortable swinging on that side/standing on that side, SO WE TELL THEM QUIETLY
[emphasis mine].
I'm not quite sure what to make of tiis except to see it as form of shaming that it
needs to be mentioned "quietly".
???
Ken Panton
>
11:50 a.m.
New subject: preference for dancing with opposite gender?
Katherine Kitching wrote:
Hi Ken!
Changing the subject line as others suggested.
I would say there is a difference between telling someone "quietly" and
telling
someone "furtively" :)
We do the former and not the latter!
Thanks for the additional information, Kat.
I'll have to gain more experience in non-gendered contra; COVID has hampered that,
significantly.
Ken Panton
12:07 p.m.
New subject: preference for dancing with opposite gender?
Hi Ken and all,
I want to reiterate that the gender free dances I’ve attended and called
aren’t interested in shaming folks for their experience in or preference
for gendered dance roles, but we do want to maintain a space that doesn’t
gender dance roles either explicitly or implicitly.
During the early days of mainstreaming this practice, my dance community
struggled with this. Part of our process of switching to non-gendered bird
terms was to have folks asking “which one’s the man?” and similar
questions. Those in-transition dances often succeeded in having
non-gendered role terms, but the dance roles were still largely
gender-normed and featured a lot of mixed gender couples in the roles
associated with their previously gendered role names.
Now that my communities have made the transition, my experience is a lot
like what Kat K describes — the vibe is different and everyone really can
and does dance with everyone. It’s joyful and fun.
My home dance in Santa Cruz, CA, usually has more people and more young
attendees than it did before the pandemic (when it was still in transition
between gendered and non-gendered practices). And I still dance with plenty
of men as partners and neighbors, but they might be on the right or left.
The openness to wider possibilities is exciting and fun.
Hope that helps.
Best wishes,
Tanya H. Merchant
On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 08:51 Ken Panton via Contra Callers <
contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
Katherine Kitching wrote:
Hi Ken!
Changing the subject line as others suggested.
I would say there is a difference between telling someone "quietly" and
telling
someone "furtively" :)
We do the former and not the latter!
Thanks for the additional information, Kat.
I'll have to gain more experience in non-gendered contra; COVID has
hampered that, significantly.
Ken Panton
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
11:55 a.m.
New subject: preference for dancing with opposite gender?
When people ask me which of Larks and Robins is "the man", I answer
as follows: "Lark" is the role which is traditionally called "man".
You're welcome to dance whichever role you like, and many people have
a role preference.
I think it's important to say that the role is traditionally *called*
"man", not to say "is traditionally danced by a man". People have
always
danced on both sides, for a variety of obvious reasons. I'm not going
to belabour this point when talking to someone like the above, but I do
choose my words carefully.
I don't think it's appropriate for someone to insist that they dance a
particular role because of their gender (etc), but I do think it's fine
for someone to have a role preference, and such a role preference is often
borne of experience, and many people's experience includes being pushed
into a particular role because of their gender or apparent gender, and
that's their dance identity now, and if they want to keep it I think
that's fine, I just think that it should not have a gendered name.
So I'm quite happy to help them to translate.
Most of our dancers have no clue there used to be an
association: I love
that.
I do too, and I like to think that any such person overhearing an exchange
like the above would think "wow, that's weird that someone thinks that
whether you're dancing Robin or Lark depends on your gender, how silly."
And doesn't afterwards remember which role had which alleged gender
association.
regards,
ajr, dancing in and near Toronto, Canada
1:58 p.m.
New subject: preference for dancing with opposite gender?
FWIW, in my calling and dancing experience, the ratio of people actually
dancing to those on the sidelines is better at the "gender free" events
than the "traditional" ones.
Of course this makes sense if you consider the situation in terms of
possible dance slots to be filled.
At the series I help run (Concord MA Scout House, Monday Contras), we used
to get complaints (mainly from men but not always) about an "imbalance" in
the hall and folks sitting out as they "couldn't find a partner". We
shifted to Larks/Robins several years ago and that "balance" issue has
never been raised since. Many folks do line up in a "traditional" couple -
however, as 50+% of the dance pattern is done with neighbors and you're on
average swinging your chosen partner for only 15% of the time...
-Don
12 Mar
12 Mar
6:18 a.m.
New subject: preference for dancing with opposite gender?
Hi all,
I once called Chris Page’s dance where the dancers scatter individually and
find someone with whom to do a Gypsy Meltdown (Gypsy & Swing). Many of the ladies got
together leaving two men alone in the middle of the dance-floor. There was absolutely no
way that those two men were going to Swing each other in a Ballroom Hold.
There was an article in the EFDSS magazine not so long ago about this very
challenge. The author was concerned that by going gender-free they would lose many good
male dancers who weren’t comfortable with the situation.
Someone in these threads said that, if you prefer dancing with ladies, then
there is nothing preventing you from only asking ladies for a dance. But what happens
when you get in the set and find that every Neighbour that you meet is a man!
I and my wife dance many styles, West Coast Swing, Blues, Ceroc, Modern Jive, Tango,
Salsa, etc. 99% of the time it is one man with one lady (OK, I specialise in dancing with
two ladies at once, but that is another matter!). Occasionally there will be same-sex
pairings, and nobody thinks anything of it. But it is not being forced on them in the way
that contra dancing is forcing same-sex pairings as you meet and interact with all your
Neighbours.
The whole point of moving away from Proper to First Couples Improper or Becket was that
you then had people of the opposite gender on both sides of you in your minor set, so that
all Neighbour and Partner interactions were with the opposite gender!
I think part of the challenge is the very close Ballroom-Hold Swing which many men find
too intimate with another man. Of course there are lots of symmetrical holds that don’t
have the same challenge – you are further apart. They don’t have the “Pointy Hand” to
help you remember which side to finish on. I often use these myself in contra dances when
I have a good partner, doing a different Swing each time through the dance, but I know
which side to finish the Swing on. I suspect the Ballroom-Hold Swing is too embedded in
Contra Dance culture to change now, though, of course, it was not always so.
The communities that I call for all want men dancing with ladies. I use geographic and
positional calling where it helps. I start most sessions by saying, “Find a partner,
traditionally one man and one lady, but anyone can dance with anyone.” 99% of the time
they will dance with the opposite gender.
Personally I have a real problem with Larks & Robins since I use Men & Ladies in
my calling. For me the L in Lark makes me think of Ladies, not Left. It really hurts my
brain!
I am all for anyone dancing with anyone. I dance the Lady’s role and will Swing anyone.
I love Chaos Lines! (And please don’t assume that you know anything about my sexuality!)
I feel that it is very sad that the traditional and historic concepts are being lost. Our
culture has always been very inclusive, with everyone welcome and anyone dancing with
anyone they want. I am not at all convinced that any benefits outweigh the losses.
Happy dancing,
John
John Sweeney, Dancer, England john(a)modernjive.com 01233 625 362 & 07802 940 574
http://www.contrafusion.co.uk for Dancing in Kent
8:54 a.m.
New subject: preference for dancing with opposite gender?
On the topic of a comfortable swing that maintains the ballroom hold, i'll repeat the
suggestion I offered a few months back.
As part of our transition to promoting a culture of "we encourage everyone to dance
with everyone else, regardless of gender, age, level of experience or any other
factor" - and also as a reaction to covid, we've started designating the standard
neighbour swing (and default partner swing, if you don't know your partner and
don't want to experiment), as a "modified ballroom hold" - which we call the
"elbow hold".
This swing gives a little more space between the couple, without in any way compromising
the effectiveness of the swing in my opinion. (Though I am sure there will be some other
opinions out there ;). )
Ballroom hands same as always.
Other hand cupped around the back of the upper arm of your partner, just above the elbow.
Taller person's arm goes above the shorter persons arm.
The more I practice this hold, the more I like it.
I find it makes me more comfortable with everyone (and in fact, as a cisgender woman I
find it makes the most difference to me when dancing with men, I have found I like having
a bit of extra space between me and any man who is not my spouse :) )
I offer this in the spirit of "something my group finds effective".
KK
Mar 12, 2024 7:18:46 AM John Sweeney via Contra Callers
<contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net>et>:
Hi all,
I once called Chris Page’s dance where the dancers scatter individually and
find someone with whom to do a Gypsy Meltdown (Gypsy & Swing). Many of the ladies got
together leaving two men alone in the middle of the dance-floor. There was absolutely no
way that those two men were going to Swing each other in a Ballroom Hold.
There was an article in the EFDSS magazine not so long ago about this very
challenge. The author was concerned that by going gender-free they would lose many good
male dancers who weren’t comfortable with the situation.
Someone in these threads said that, if you prefer dancing with ladies, then
there is nothing preventing you from only asking ladies for a dance. But what happens
when you get in the set and find that every Neighbour that you meet is a man!
I and my wife dance many styles, West Coast Swing, Blues, Ceroc, Modern Jive, Tango,
Salsa, etc. 99% of the time it is one man with one lady (OK, I specialise in dancing with
two ladies at once, but that is another matter!). Occasionally there will be same-sex
pairings, and nobody thinks anything of it. But it is not being forced on them in the way
that contra dancing is forcing same-sex pairings as you meet and interact with all your
Neighbours.
The whole point of moving away from Proper to First Couples Improper or Becket was that
you then had people of the opposite gender on both sides of you in your minor set, so that
all Neighbour and Partner interactions were with the opposite gender!
I think part of the challenge is the very close Ballroom-Hold Swing which many men find
too intimate with another man. Of course there are lots of symmetrical holds that don’t
have the same challenge – you are further apart. They don’t have the “Pointy Hand” to
help you remember which side to finish on. I often use these myself in contra dances when
I have a good partner, doing a different Swing each time through the dance, but I know
which side to finish the Swing on. I suspect the Ballroom-Hold Swing is too embedded in
Contra Dance culture to change now, though, of course, it was not always so.
The communities that I call for all want men dancing with ladies. I use geographic and
positional calling where it helps. I start most sessions by saying, “Find a partner,
traditionally one man and one lady, but anyone can dance with anyone.” 99% of the time
they will dance with the opposite gender.
Personally I have a real problem with Larks & Robins since I use Men & Ladies in
my calling. For me the L in Lark makes me think of Ladies, not Left. It really hurts my
brain!
I am all for anyone dancing with anyone. I dance the Lady’s role and will Swing anyone.
I love Chaos Lines! (And please don’t assume that you know anything about my sexuality!)
I feel that it is very sad that the traditional and historic concepts are being lost.
Our culture has always been very inclusive, with everyone welcome and anyone dancing with
anyone they want. I am not at all convinced that any benefits outweigh the losses.
Happy dancing,
John
John Sweeney, Dancer, England john(a)modernjive.com 01233 625 362 & 07802 940 574
http://www.contrafusion.co.uk for Dancing in
Kent
9 a.m.
New subject: preference for dancing with opposite gender?
"The whole point of moving away from Proper to First Couples Improper
or Becket was that you then had people of the opposite gender on both
sides of you in your minor set, so that all Neighbour and Partner
interactions were with the opposite gender"
That's one advantage for some people, but another advantage of
Improper and Becket is that they make it much easier to have
equal-turn dances, where everyone is 'active' simultaneously. No more
waiting fifteen times through for a chance to be a "one" and then only
getting to dance it twice before the music stops.
Jeff
On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 8:54 AM Katherine Kitching via Contra Callers
<contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
On the topic of a comfortable swing that maintains the ballroom hold, i'll repeat the
suggestion I offered a few months back.
As part of our transition to promoting a culture of "we encourage everyone to dance
with everyone else, regardless of gender, age, level of experience or any other
factor" - and also as a reaction to covid, we've started designating the standard
neighbour swing (and default partner swing, if you don't know your partner and
don't want to experiment), as a "modified ballroom hold" - which we call the
"elbow hold".
This swing gives a little more space between the couple, without in any way compromising
the effectiveness of the swing in my opinion. (Though I am sure there will be some other
opinions out there ;). )
Ballroom hands same as always.
Other hand cupped around the back of the upper arm of your partner, just above the
elbow.
Taller person's arm goes above the shorter persons arm.
The more I practice this hold, the more I like it.
I find it makes me more comfortable with everyone (and in fact, as a cisgender woman I
find it makes the most difference to me when dancing with men, I have found I like having
a bit of extra space between me and any man who is not my spouse :) )
I offer this in the spirit of "something my group finds effective".
KK
Mar 12, 2024 7:18:46 AM John Sweeney via Contra Callers
<contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net>et>:
Hi all,
I once called Chris Page’s dance where the dancers scatter individually and
find someone with whom to do a Gypsy Meltdown (Gypsy & Swing). Many of the ladies got
together leaving two men alone in the middle of the dance-floor. There was absolutely no
way that those two men were going to Swing each other in a Ballroom Hold.
There was an article in the EFDSS magazine not so long ago about this very
challenge. The author was concerned that by going gender-free they would lose many good
male dancers who weren’t comfortable with the situation.
Someone in these threads said that, if you prefer dancing with ladies, then
there is nothing preventing you from only asking ladies for a dance. But what happens
when you get in the set and find that every Neighbour that you meet is a man!
I and my wife dance many styles, West Coast Swing, Blues, Ceroc, Modern Jive, Tango,
Salsa, etc. 99% of the time it is one man with one lady (OK, I specialise in dancing with
two ladies at once, but that is another matter!). Occasionally there will be same-sex
pairings, and nobody thinks anything of it. But it is not being forced on them in the way
that contra dancing is forcing same-sex pairings as you meet and interact with all your
Neighbours.
The whole point of moving away from Proper to First Couples Improper or Becket was that
you then had people of the opposite gender on both sides of you in your minor set, so that
all Neighbour and Partner interactions were with the opposite gender!
I think part of the challenge is the very close Ballroom-Hold Swing which many men find
too intimate with another man. Of course there are lots of symmetrical holds that don’t
have the same challenge – you are further apart. They don’t have the “Pointy Hand” to
help you remember which side to finish on. I often use these myself in contra dances when
I have a good partner, doing a different Swing each time through the dance, but I know
which side to finish the Swing on. I suspect the Ballroom-Hold Swing is too embedded in
Contra Dance culture to change now, though, of course, it was not always so.
The communities that I call for all want men dancing with ladies. I use geographic and
positional calling where it helps. I start most sessions by saying, “Find a partner,
traditionally one man and one lady, but anyone can dance with anyone.” 99% of the time
they will dance with the opposite gender.
Personally I have a real problem with Larks & Robins since I use Men & Ladies in
my calling. For me the L in Lark makes me think of Ladies, not Left. It really hurts my
brain!
I am all for anyone dancing with anyone. I dance the Lady’s role and will Swing anyone.
I love Chaos Lines! (And please don’t assume that you know anything about my sexuality!)
I feel that it is very sad that the traditional and historic concepts are being lost.
Our culture has always been very inclusive, with everyone welcome and anyone dancing with
anyone they want. I am not at all convinced that any benefits outweigh the losses.
Happy dancing,
John
John Sweeney, Dancer, England john(a)modernjive.com 01233 625 362 & 07802 940 574
http://www.contrafusion.co.uk for Dancing in Kent
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
12:23 p.m.
New subject: preference for dancing with opposite gender?
I’m bumping this for folks who want to talk about gender preference in
dance partners.
And while I understand the valid social and historical context that would
make inactive roles a good thing for the social part of social dancing,
like Jeff, I’m also really glad we don’t do that much anymore.
Tanya H. Merchant
On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 06:01 Jeff Kaufman via Contra Callers <
contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
"The whole point of moving away from Proper to
First Couples Improper
or Becket was that you then had people of the opposite gender on both
sides of you in your minor set, so that all Neighbour and Partner
interactions were with the opposite gender"
That's one advantage for some people, but another advantage of
Improper and Becket is that they make it much easier to have
equal-turn dances, where everyone is 'active' simultaneously. No more
waiting fifteen times through for a chance to be a "one" and then only
getting to dance it twice before the music stops.
Jeff
On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 8:54 AM Katherine Kitching via Contra Callers
<contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
On the topic of a comfortable swing that maintains the ballroom hold,
i'll
repeat the suggestion I offered a few months back.
As part of our transition to promoting a culture of "we encourage
everyone to
dance with everyone else, regardless of gender, age, level of
experience or any other factor" - and also as a reaction to covid, we've
started designating the standard neighbour swing (and default partner
swing, if you don't know your partner and don't want to experiment), as a
"modified ballroom hold" - which we call the "elbow hold".
This swing gives a little more space between the couple, without in any
way
compromising the effectiveness of the swing in my opinion. (Though I am
sure there will be some other opinions out there ;). )
Ballroom hands same as always.
Other hand cupped around the back of the upper arm of your partner, just
above the
elbow.
Taller person's arm goes above the shorter persons arm.
The more I practice this hold, the more I like it.
I find it makes me more comfortable with everyone (and in fact, as a
cisgender
woman I find it makes the most difference to me when dancing with
men, I have found I like having a bit of extra space between me and any man
who is not my spouse :) )
I offer this in the spirit of "something my group finds effective".
KK
Mar 12, 2024 7:18:46 AM John Sweeney via Contra Callers <
contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net>gt;:
Hi all,
I once called Chris Page’s dance where the dancers scatter
individually and find someone with whom to do a Gypsy Meltdown (Gypsy &
Swing). Many of the ladies got together leaving two men alone in the
middle of the dance-floor. There was absolutely no way that those two men
were going to Swing each other in a Ballroom Hold.
There was an article in the EFDSS magazine not so long ago
about
this very challenge. The author was concerned that by going
gender-free they would lose many good male dancers who weren’t comfortable
with the situation.
Someone in these threads said that, if you prefer dancing
with
ladies, then there is nothing preventing you from only asking ladies
for a dance. But what happens when you get in the set and find that every
Neighbour that you meet is a man!
I and my wife dance many styles, West Coast Swing, Blues, Ceroc, Modern
Jive,
Tango, Salsa, etc. 99% of the time it is one man with one lady (OK,
I specialise in dancing with two ladies at once, but that is another
matter!). Occasionally there will be same-sex pairings, and nobody thinks
anything of it. But it is not being forced on them in the way that contra
dancing is forcing same-sex pairings as you meet and interact with all your
Neighbours.
The whole point of moving away from Proper to First Couples Improper or
Becket was
that you then had people of the opposite gender on both sides of
you in your minor set, so that all Neighbour and Partner interactions were
with the opposite gender!
I think part of the challenge is the very close Ballroom-Hold Swing
which many men
find too intimate with another man. Of course there are
lots of symmetrical holds that don’t have the same challenge – you are
further apart. They don’t have the “Pointy Hand” to help you remember
which side to finish on. I often use these myself in contra dances when I
have a good partner, doing a different Swing each time through the dance,
but I know which side to finish the Swing on. I suspect the Ballroom-Hold
Swing is too embedded in Contra Dance culture to change now, though, of
course, it was not always so.
The communities that I call for all want men dancing with ladies. I use
geographic and positional calling where it helps. I start most sessions by
saying, “Find a partner, traditionally one man and one lady, but anyone can
dance with anyone.” 99% of the time they will dance with the opposite
gender.
Personally I have a real problem with Larks & Robins since I use Men &
Ladies in my calling. For me the L in Lark makes me think of Ladies, not
Left. It really hurts my brain!
I am all for anyone dancing with anyone. I dance the Lady’s role and
will Swing
anyone. I love Chaos Lines! (And please don’t assume that you
know anything about my sexuality!)
I feel that it is very sad that the traditional and historic concepts
are being
lost. Our culture has always been very inclusive, with everyone
welcome and anyone dancing with anyone they want. I am not at all convinced
that any benefits outweigh the losses.
Happy dancing,
John
John Sweeney, Dancer, England john(a)modernjive.com 01233 625 362 &
07802 940
574
http://www.contrafusion.co.uk for Dancing in Kent
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to
contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
1:10 p.m.
New subject: preference for dancing with opposite gender?
I am super glad that in our (Seattle) dance community the vast majority of
people sitting out dances are doing so because they want to rest, or to
chat with someone who's resting. There is still a small handful of folks
who insist on never partnering with those they think are the same sex as
they.
This means that more people are having fun dancing, and fewer are sitting
out because they can't find a partner. People are dancing with _people_. No
one is forcing anyone to dance with anyone else. This is a huge win in my
book.
I'm one of the organizers of Emerald City Contra Dance. About 18 months ago
a dancer told me of a guy who was trying to split up a couple of
female-presenting dancers because he didn't want to do dance moves with
"the wrong person." He physically put his hands on them to try to move them
to the "correct" positions, and force them to dance with male-presenting
dancers. When told about this I immediately approached him, told him his
behavior was unacceptable, and that he should never try to do that again.
He hasn't been back to our dance since. I don't know about the couple he
was accosting. I apologized to them on behalf of ECCD.
The attitude in our community is mostly one of acceptance. Anyone can dance
with anyone who wants to dance with them. Anyone can turn down an offer to
dance for no reason at all. I'm constantly told our community is the most
welcoming they've ever experienced. (Can't vouch for the vastness of said
experience.) I am proud of our community. There's a lot of love in it.
I find the topic of tradition being brought into the conversation baffling.
The folk tradition has always been one of changes, evolving, moving
forward. I encourage everyone to give it a whirl.
-Amy
On Tue, Mar 12, 2024, 9:23 AM Tanya Merchant via Contra Callers <
contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
I’m bumping this for folks who want to talk about
gender preference in
dance partners.
And while I understand the valid social and historical context that would
make inactive roles a good thing for the social part of social dancing,
like Jeff, I’m also really glad we don’t do that much anymore.
Tanya H. Merchant
On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 06:01 Jeff Kaufman via Contra Callers <
contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
"The whole point of moving away from Proper
to First Couples Improper
or Becket was that you then had people of the opposite gender on both
sides of you in your minor set, so that all Neighbour and Partner
interactions were with the opposite gender"
That's one advantage for some people, but another advantage of
Improper and Becket is that they make it much easier to have
equal-turn dances, where everyone is 'active' simultaneously. No more
waiting fifteen times through for a chance to be a "one" and then only
getting to dance it twice before the music stops.
Jeff
On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 8:54 AM Katherine Kitching via Contra Callers
<contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
On the topic of a comfortable swing that maintains the ballroom hold,
i'll
repeat the suggestion I offered a few months back.
As part of our transition to promoting a culture of "we encourage
everyone to
dance with everyone else, regardless of gender, age, level of
experience or any other factor" - and also as a reaction to covid, we've
started designating the standard neighbour swing (and default partner
swing, if you don't know your partner and don't want to experiment), as a
"modified ballroom hold" - which we call the "elbow hold".
This swing gives a little more space between the couple, without in any
way
compromising the effectiveness of the swing in my opinion. (Though I am
sure there will be some other opinions out there ;). )
Ballroom hands same as always.
Other hand cupped around the back of the upper arm of your partner,
just above the
elbow.
Taller person's arm goes above the shorter persons arm.
The more I practice this hold, the more I like it.
I find it makes me more comfortable with everyone (and in fact, as a
cisgender
woman I find it makes the most difference to me when dancing with
men, I have found I like having a bit of extra space between me and any man
who is not my spouse :) )
I offer this in the spirit of "something my group finds effective".
KK
Mar 12, 2024 7:18:46 AM John Sweeney via Contra Callers <
contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net>gt;:
Hi all,
I once called Chris Page’s dance where the dancers
scatter
individually and find someone with whom to do a Gypsy Meltdown
(Gypsy & Swing). Many of the ladies got together leaving two men alone in
the middle of the dance-floor. There was absolutely no way that those two
men were going to Swing each other in a Ballroom Hold.
There was an article in the EFDSS magazine not so long
ago about
this very challenge. The author was concerned that by going
gender-free they would lose many good male dancers who weren’t comfortable
with the situation.
Someone in these threads said that, if you prefer dancing
with
ladies, then there is nothing preventing you from only asking ladies
for a dance. But what happens when you get in the set and find that every
Neighbour that you meet is a man!
I and my wife dance many styles, West Coast Swing, Blues, Ceroc, Modern
Jive,
Tango, Salsa, etc. 99% of the time it is one man with one lady (OK,
I specialise in dancing with two ladies at once, but that is another
matter!). Occasionally there will be same-sex pairings, and nobody thinks
anything of it. But it is not being forced on them in the way that contra
dancing is forcing same-sex pairings as you meet and interact with all your
Neighbours.
The whole point of moving away from Proper to First Couples Improper or
Becket was
that you then had people of the opposite gender on both sides of
you in your minor set, so that all Neighbour and Partner interactions were
with the opposite gender!
I think part of the challenge is the very close Ballroom-Hold Swing
which many men
find too intimate with another man. Of course there are
lots of symmetrical holds that don’t have the same challenge – you are
further apart. They don’t have the “Pointy Hand” to help you remember
which side to finish on. I often use these myself in contra dances when I
have a good partner, doing a different Swing each time through the dance,
but I know which side to finish the Swing on. I suspect the Ballroom-Hold
Swing is too embedded in Contra Dance culture to change now, though, of
course, it was not always so.
The communities that I call for all want men dancing with ladies. I
use
geographic and positional calling where it helps. I start most
sessions by saying, “Find a partner, traditionally one man and one lady,
but anyone can dance with anyone.” 99% of the time they will dance with
the opposite gender.
Personally I have a real problem with Larks & Robins since I use Men &
Ladies in my calling. For me the L in Lark makes me think of Ladies, not
Left. It really hurts my brain!
I am all for anyone dancing with anyone. I dance the Lady’s role and
will Swing
anyone. I love Chaos Lines! (And please don’t assume that you
know anything about my sexuality!)
I feel that it is very sad that the traditional and historic concepts
are being
lost. Our culture has always been very inclusive, with everyone
welcome and anyone dancing with anyone they want. I am not at all convinced
that any benefits outweigh the losses.
Happy dancing,
John
John Sweeney, Dancer, England john(a)modernjive.com 01233 625 362 &
07802 940
574
http://www.contrafusion.co.uk for Dancing in Kent
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to
contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to
contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
1:44 p.m.
New subject: preference for dancing with opposite gender?
I was not going to go here but...
as a female presenting person - of weight. Yeah we should talk about that
elephant in the room too. It used to be difficult to find partners until
they saw me dance and/or crossed me in the line and realized that yes, we
can dance, yes we can move and yes we can be responsible for our own
bodies.
Now saying that - while I can and am willing to dance whatever role there
is, when asked which I prefer (L/R) I always assess who I am dancing with,
and who is in the line that I am in. Sad to say there are dancers that
hurt. I have two bad shoulders, that while do not need particular special
treatment or an ouch tag, do get tired and achy when people hang on that
arm in a swing. So - I avoid dancing with those as best I can by choosing
the role that will have me encounter the lesser of the evils (so to speak)
and in some cases change the swing hold to something less painful. This is
not something I normally talk about but I wonder if others have a similar
defense mechanism. Sometimes I offer to switch part way through the line
or at the end just so we each get equal turns at each role.
Since we are talking role choice I thought this might be an appropriate
place to bring this up. maybe not.
"And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who
couldn't hear the music." - Nietzsche
“Life is not about waiting for the storms to pass ... it's about learning
to dance in the rain!” ~ unknown
On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 1:11 PM Amy Wimmer via Contra Callers <
contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
I am super glad that in our (Seattle) dance community
the vast majority of
people sitting out dances are doing so because they want to rest, or to
chat with someone who's resting. There is still a small handful of folks
who insist on never partnering with those they think are the same sex as
they.
This means that more people are having fun dancing, and fewer are sitting
out because they can't find a partner. People are dancing with _people_. No
one is forcing anyone to dance with anyone else. This is a huge win in my
book.
I'm one of the organizers of Emerald City Contra Dance. About 18 months
ago a dancer told me of a guy who was trying to split up a couple of
female-presenting dancers because he didn't want to do dance moves with
"the wrong person." He physically put his hands on them to try to move them
to the "correct" positions, and force them to dance with male-presenting
dancers. When told about this I immediately approached him, told him his
behavior was unacceptable, and that he should never try to do that again.
He hasn't been back to our dance since. I don't know about the couple he
was accosting. I apologized to them on behalf of ECCD.
The attitude in our community is mostly one of acceptance. Anyone can
dance with anyone who wants to dance with them. Anyone can turn down an
offer to dance for no reason at all. I'm constantly told our community is
the most welcoming they've ever experienced. (Can't vouch for the vastness
of said experience.) I am proud of our community. There's a lot of love in
it.
I find the topic of tradition being brought into the conversation
baffling. The folk tradition has always been one of changes, evolving,
moving forward. I encourage everyone to give it a whirl.
-Amy
On Tue, Mar 12, 2024, 9:23 AM Tanya Merchant via Contra Callers <
contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
I’m bumping this for folks who want to talk about
gender preference in
dance partners.
And while I understand the valid social and historical context that would
make inactive roles a good thing for the social part of social dancing,
like Jeff, I’m also really glad we don’t do that much anymore.
Tanya H. Merchant
On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 06:01 Jeff Kaufman via Contra Callers <
contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
"The whole point of moving away from Proper
to First Couples Improper
or Becket was that you then had people of the opposite gender on both
sides of you in your minor set, so that all Neighbour and Partner
interactions were with the opposite gender"
That's one advantage for some people, but another advantage of
Improper and Becket is that they make it much easier to have
equal-turn dances, where everyone is 'active' simultaneously. No more
waiting fifteen times through for a chance to be a "one" and then only
getting to dance it twice before the music stops.
Jeff
On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 8:54 AM Katherine Kitching via Contra Callers
<contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to
contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
On the topic of a comfortable swing that maintains the ballroom hold,
i'll
repeat the suggestion I offered a few months back.
As part of our transition to promoting a culture of "we encourage
everyone to
dance with everyone else, regardless of gender, age, level of
experience or any other factor" - and also as a reaction to covid, we've
started designating the standard neighbour swing (and default partner
swing, if you don't know your partner and don't want to experiment), as a
"modified ballroom hold" - which we call the "elbow hold".
This swing gives a little more space between the couple, without in
any way
compromising the effectiveness of the swing in my opinion. (Though
I am sure there will be some other opinions out there ;). )
Ballroom hands same as always.
Other hand cupped around the back of the upper arm of your partner,
just above the
elbow.
Taller person's arm goes above the shorter persons arm.
The more I practice this hold, the more I like it.
I find it makes me more comfortable with everyone (and in fact, as a
cisgender
woman I find it makes the most difference to me when dancing with
men, I have found I like having a bit of extra space between me and any man
who is not my spouse :) )
I offer this in the spirit of "something my group finds effective".
KK
Mar 12, 2024 7:18:46 AM John Sweeney via Contra Callers <
contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net>gt;:
Hi all,
I once called Chris Page’s dance where the dancers
scatter
individually and find someone with whom to do a Gypsy Meltdown
(Gypsy & Swing). Many of the ladies got together leaving two men alone in
the middle of the dance-floor. There was absolutely no way that those two
men were going to Swing each other in a Ballroom Hold.
There was an article in the EFDSS magazine not so long
ago about
this very challenge. The author was concerned that by going
gender-free they would lose many good male dancers who weren’t comfortable
with the situation.
Someone in these threads said that, if you prefer
dancing with
ladies, then there is nothing preventing you from only asking
ladies for a dance. But what happens when you get in the set and find that
every Neighbour that you meet is a man!
I and my wife dance many styles, West Coast Swing, Blues, Ceroc,
Modern Jive,
Tango, Salsa, etc. 99% of the time it is one man with one
lady (OK, I specialise in dancing with two ladies at once, but that is
another matter!). Occasionally there will be same-sex pairings, and nobody
thinks anything of it. But it is not being forced on them in the way that
contra dancing is forcing same-sex pairings as you meet and interact with
all your Neighbours.
The whole point of moving away from Proper to First Couples Improper
or Becket was
that you then had people of the opposite gender on both sides
of you in your minor set, so that all Neighbour and Partner interactions
were with the opposite gender!
I think part of the challenge is the very close Ballroom-Hold Swing
which many men
find too intimate with another man. Of course there are
lots of symmetrical holds that don’t have the same challenge – you are
further apart. They don’t have the “Pointy Hand” to help you remember
which side to finish on. I often use these myself in contra dances when I
have a good partner, doing a different Swing each time through the dance,
but I know which side to finish the Swing on. I suspect the Ballroom-Hold
Swing is too embedded in Contra Dance culture to change now, though, of
course, it was not always so.
The communities that I call for all want men dancing with ladies. I
use
geographic and positional calling where it helps. I start most
sessions by saying, “Find a partner, traditionally one man and one lady,
but anyone can dance with anyone.” 99% of the time they will dance with
the opposite gender.
Personally I have a real problem with Larks & Robins since I use Men &
Ladies in my calling. For me the L in Lark makes me think of Ladies, not
Left. It really hurts my brain!
I am all for anyone dancing with anyone. I dance the Lady’s role and
will Swing
anyone. I love Chaos Lines! (And please don’t assume that you
know anything about my sexuality!)
I feel that it is very sad that the traditional and historic concepts
are being
lost. Our culture has always been very inclusive, with everyone
welcome and anyone dancing with anyone they want. I am not at all convinced
that any benefits outweigh the losses.
Happy dancing,
John
John Sweeney, Dancer, England john(a)modernjive.com 01233 625 362 &
07802 940
574
http://www.contrafusion.co.uk for Dancing in Kent
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to
contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to
contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
1:36 p.m.
New subject: preference for dancing with opposite gender?
I'm nodding with a lot of comments from the last couple days. Louise
articulated some base concepts clearly, which a lot of y'all expanded on.
There are some contradictory ideas about gender and sexuality with dance,
and I think we in general tend to shy away from delving too deeply in
public discussion. I've been accused of "shaming" people for asking why a
man may prefer dancing with women. The thing is, I've also said what I
think nearly everyone - including most/all of the strongest advocates for
genderfree contra - has said: its OK to have preferences for partners. I
think it is sometimes hard to presume these discussions are done assuming
the benefit of good intent, given how much gender and sexuality is an
enormous political and civil rights topic in the US and most Western
nations. But, I presume this good intent, and I think nearly everyone here
does, too, so, I'm taking another stab at this topic.
Here's some ideas I've been chewing over in an attempt to dig into this
more deeply:
- dance is often a courtship ritual
- despite this, inter-gender set dancing has a long tradition in Western
dance, and partnering with someone hasn't really ever been a "oh, I am
attracted to them". To use the overused example of Jane Austen novels, even
then it's clear family dance together, friends dance together, and
strangers dance together just to have any partner.
- children are at our dances. So if a person is choosing partners based on
heterosexual tradition, why, um: EW
And thus is where the conversation often stops. But to break it down more:
- So, when someone says they prefer to dance in non-genderfree dances, with
a partner of a different binary-presenting gender person, in trad roles,
there's 2 possible, non-exclusive reasons:
1. That their choice is about courtship, but "make exceptions" for people
you're not attracted to. Which, I guess is fine in and of itself, but I
think people with this preference often may not consider _just how many
exceptions_ there are.
2. Their choice is more about embracing traditional gender roles. I'll get
back to this.
So, in the case of #1, the problem isn't just about "what do we do with the
fact that about 5% of people aren't straight". (And realize the number
being 3 or 4 times as high among surveyed youth, with numbers lower in
areas where anti-lgbtq law and sentiment pervades).
The problem is also about fat phobia. And bias against people who aren't
"conventionally attractive". And ageism. And disability phobia. Then
there's the even worse case of when a person both claims attraction is
their main factor for partner preference ... and also has a preference for
much younger dancers. :|
Pushing back on the idea of "partner preference because of sexual
preference" is about all these issues - fatphobia, ageism, disability
phobia, beauty-bias, etc. Now, maybe these things aren't a priority to
everyone, but, I'm going to assume that the overwhelming majority of people
on Shared Weight are interested in most, if not all of them. And,
inevitably, remember - youth, beauty, and able-bodiedness all will fade for
everyone.
In reality, I think partner and role preference for trad-gender-partnering
actually has to do more with gender norms. So insofar as sexual-attraction
for partner preference, I think pushing back, openly, against this, can
benefit dance communities in many ways. And, ultimately if that's not
actually the main reason, then it isn't really harming anyone if we present
it and deal with it with compassion and patience for those having
difficulty with the change. It's not like people aren't going to flirt and
meet sexual partners anyway; we simply don't need to establish dance as a
courtship-by-default space.
Which leads to look at the other reason, #2: wanting trad gender partnering
because you just like trad gender roles.
In and of itself, that's fine. If you like ways of having your binary
gender reinforced, there's nothing wrong with that. And while I'm not
transgender, my friends who are and have shifted/come out as a different
binary gender identity deserve to have their gender affirmed, too. While
me, personally, I don't need reinforcement about being man (which is its
own privilege), I respect people's desire for their gender to be respected
and celebrated.
So, what does that mean for dancing?
- Ultimately, as long as people are finding partners and having fun and
people are respectful of anyone they meet in line, great!
- As noted, splitting up people because of gender is disrespectful on
several levels.
- That complaining about "ah, so many neighbors are my same gender" is
setting one's own preference above everyone else's. In short: it's selfish.
- If someone refuses to dance with someone of the same gender (or
nonbinary/agender folks who "don't look like the opposite gender") then
that's selfish. It's not _as_ selfish as the last item, and, generally, if
this is what they choose, I don't see the positive outcomes from pushing it.
So, if someone wants to just dance trad gender preference in partners,
that's fine to me.
There is, though, the big Catch 22:
If someone believes gendered roles "are just role names", while
simultaneously have a strong/sole preference trad-gender-partnering, this
is self-contradictory. That person is trying to have it both ways.
And so, I leave with the thought: this last bit I see as a core sticking
point to more equality and inclusion at dances.
How do we address this?
Can we start looking at this more openly in a way that is compassionate buy
also more direct that we have been?
In dance,
Julian Blechner
He/Him
Western Mass
On Tue, Mar 12, 2024, 12:24 PM Tanya Merchant via Contra Callers <
contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
I’m bumping this for folks who want to talk about
gender preference in
dance partners.
And while I understand the valid social and historical context that would
make inactive roles a good thing for the social part of social dancing,
like Jeff, I’m also really glad we don’t do that much anymore.
Tanya H. Merchant
On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 06:01 Jeff Kaufman via Contra Callers <
contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
"The whole point of moving away from Proper
to First Couples Improper
or Becket was that you then had people of the opposite gender on both
sides of you in your minor set, so that all Neighbour and Partner
interactions were with the opposite gender"
That's one advantage for some people, but another advantage of
Improper and Becket is that they make it much easier to have
equal-turn dances, where everyone is 'active' simultaneously. No more
waiting fifteen times through for a chance to be a "one" and then only
getting to dance it twice before the music stops.
Jeff
On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 8:54 AM Katherine Kitching via Contra Callers
<contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
On the topic of a comfortable swing that maintains the ballroom hold,
i'll
repeat the suggestion I offered a few months back.
As part of our transition to promoting a culture of "we encourage
everyone to
dance with everyone else, regardless of gender, age, level of
experience or any other factor" - and also as a reaction to covid, we've
started designating the standard neighbour swing (and default partner
swing, if you don't know your partner and don't want to experiment), as a
"modified ballroom hold" - which we call the "elbow hold".
This swing gives a little more space between the couple, without in any
way
compromising the effectiveness of the swing in my opinion. (Though I am
sure there will be some other opinions out there ;). )
Ballroom hands same as always.
Other hand cupped around the back of the upper arm of your partner,
just above the
elbow.
Taller person's arm goes above the shorter persons arm.
The more I practice this hold, the more I like it.
I find it makes me more comfortable with everyone (and in fact, as a
cisgender
woman I find it makes the most difference to me when dancing with
men, I have found I like having a bit of extra space between me and any man
who is not my spouse :) )
I offer this in the spirit of "something my group finds effective".
KK
Mar 12, 2024 7:18:46 AM John Sweeney via Contra Callers <
contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net>gt;:
Hi all,
I once called Chris Page’s dance where the dancers
scatter
individually and find someone with whom to do a Gypsy Meltdown
(Gypsy & Swing). Many of the ladies got together leaving two men alone in
the middle of the dance-floor. There was absolutely no way that those two
men were going to Swing each other in a Ballroom Hold.
There was an article in the EFDSS magazine not so long
ago about
this very challenge. The author was concerned that by going
gender-free they would lose many good male dancers who weren’t comfortable
with the situation.
Someone in these threads said that, if you prefer dancing
with
ladies, then there is nothing preventing you from only asking ladies
for a dance. But what happens when you get in the set and find that every
Neighbour that you meet is a man!
I and my wife dance many styles, West Coast Swing, Blues, Ceroc, Modern
Jive,
Tango, Salsa, etc. 99% of the time it is one man with one lady (OK,
I specialise in dancing with two ladies at once, but that is another
matter!). Occasionally there will be same-sex pairings, and nobody thinks
anything of it. But it is not being forced on them in the way that contra
dancing is forcing same-sex pairings as you meet and interact with all your
Neighbours.
The whole point of moving away from Proper to First Couples Improper or
Becket was
that you then had people of the opposite gender on both sides of
you in your minor set, so that all Neighbour and Partner interactions were
with the opposite gender!
I think part of the challenge is the very close Ballroom-Hold Swing
which many men
find too intimate with another man. Of course there are
lots of symmetrical holds that don’t have the same challenge – you are
further apart. They don’t have the “Pointy Hand” to help you remember
which side to finish on. I often use these myself in contra dances when I
have a good partner, doing a different Swing each time through the dance,
but I know which side to finish the Swing on. I suspect the Ballroom-Hold
Swing is too embedded in Contra Dance culture to change now, though, of
course, it was not always so.
The communities that I call for all want men dancing with ladies. I
use
geographic and positional calling where it helps. I start most
sessions by saying, “Find a partner, traditionally one man and one lady,
but anyone can dance with anyone.” 99% of the time they will dance with
the opposite gender.
Personally I have a real problem with Larks & Robins since I use Men &
Ladies in my calling. For me the L in Lark makes me think of Ladies, not
Left. It really hurts my brain!
I am all for anyone dancing with anyone. I dance the Lady’s role and
will Swing
anyone. I love Chaos Lines! (And please don’t assume that you
know anything about my sexuality!)
I feel that it is very sad that the traditional and historic concepts
are being
lost. Our culture has always been very inclusive, with everyone
welcome and anyone dancing with anyone they want. I am not at all convinced
that any benefits outweigh the losses.
Happy dancing,
John
John Sweeney, Dancer, England john(a)modernjive.com 01233 625 362 &
07802 940
574
http://www.contrafusion.co.uk for Dancing in Kent
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to
contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to
contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
2:38 p.m.
New subject: preference for dancing with opposite gender?
Since "ageism" has been mentioned, I'd like to share an idea I've often
had. I wonder if anyone thinks it's a good idea, or if it's already done at any
contra dances. What if one dance per evening, perhaps in the first half, were done at a
slightly slower tempo, and featured choreography that allowed for some standing around.
Perhaps a dance like Chorus Jig, where some folks could choose to join at the end. Or a
more recent dance that still features down time, for example one where the 1's and
2's have separate swings. I think that might be helpful to some elderly dancers, if
you have them, and to others who may not have a lot of stamina, or who get dizzy easily,
etc. It might be a way to make contra dancing even more welcoming than it already is.
Richard
in Arlington, MA
On Mar 12, 2024, at 1:36 PM, Julian Blechner via
Contra Callers <contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
I'm nodding with a lot of comments from the last couple days. Louise articulated some
base concepts clearly, which a lot of y'all expanded on.
There are some contradictory ideas about gender and sexuality with dance, and I think we
in general tend to shy away from delving too deeply in public discussion. I've been
accused of "shaming" people for asking why a man may prefer dancing with women.
The thing is, I've also said what I think nearly everyone - including most/all of the
strongest advocates for genderfree contra - has said: its OK to have preferences for
partners. I think it is sometimes hard to presume these discussions are done assuming the
benefit of good intent, given how much gender and sexuality is an enormous political and
civil rights topic in the US and most Western nations. But, I presume this good intent,
and I think nearly everyone here does, too, so, I'm taking another stab at this
topic.
Here's some ideas I've been chewing over in an attempt to dig into this more
deeply:
- dance is often a courtship ritual
- despite this, inter-gender set dancing has a long tradition in Western dance, and
partnering with someone hasn't really ever been a "oh, I am attracted to
them". To use the overused example of Jane Austen novels, even then it's clear
family dance together, friends dance together, and strangers dance together just to have
any partner.
- children are at our dances. So if a person is choosing partners based on heterosexual
tradition, why, um: EW
And thus is where the conversation often stops. But to break it down more:
- So, when someone says they prefer to dance in non-genderfree dances, with a partner of
a different binary-presenting gender person, in trad roles, there's 2 possible,
non-exclusive reasons:
1. That their choice is about courtship, but "make exceptions" for people
you're not attracted to. Which, I guess is fine in and of itself, but I think people
with this preference often may not consider _just how many exceptions_ there are.
2. Their choice is more about embracing traditional gender roles. I'll get back to
this.
So, in the case of #1, the problem isn't just about "what do we do with the fact
that about 5% of people aren't straight". (And realize the number being 3 or 4
times as high among surveyed youth, with numbers lower in areas where anti-lgbtq law and
sentiment pervades).
The problem is also about fat phobia. And bias against people who aren't
"conventionally attractive". And ageism. And disability phobia. Then there's
the even worse case of when a person both claims attraction is their main factor for
partner preference ... and also has a preference for much younger dancers. :|
Pushing back on the idea of "partner preference because of sexual preference"
is about all these issues - fatphobia, ageism, disability phobia, beauty-bias, etc. Now,
maybe these things aren't a priority to everyone, but, I'm going to assume that
the overwhelming majority of people on Shared Weight are interested in most, if not all of
them. And, inevitably, remember - youth, beauty, and able-bodiedness all will fade for
everyone.
In reality, I think partner and role preference for trad-gender-partnering actually has
to do more with gender norms. So insofar as sexual-attraction for partner preference, I
think pushing back, openly, against this, can benefit dance communities in many ways. And,
ultimately if that's not actually the main reason, then it isn't really harming
anyone if we present it and deal with it with compassion and patience for those having
difficulty with the change. It's not like people aren't going to flirt and meet
sexual partners anyway; we simply don't need to establish dance as a
courtship-by-default space.
Which leads to look at the other reason, #2: wanting trad gender partnering because you
just like trad gender roles.
In and of itself, that's fine. If you like ways of having your binary gender
reinforced, there's nothing wrong with that. And while I'm not transgender, my
friends who are and have shifted/come out as a different binary gender identity deserve to
have their gender affirmed, too. While me, personally, I don't need reinforcement
about being man (which is its own privilege), I respect people's desire for their
gender to be respected and celebrated.
So, what does that mean for dancing?
- Ultimately, as long as people are finding partners and having fun and people are
respectful of anyone they meet in line, great!
- As noted, splitting up people because of gender is disrespectful on several levels.
- That complaining about "ah, so many neighbors are my same gender" is setting
one's own preference above everyone else's. In short: it's selfish.
- If someone refuses to dance with someone of the same gender (or nonbinary/agender folks
who "don't look like the opposite gender") then that's selfish. It's
not _as_ selfish as the last item, and, generally, if this is what they choose, I
don't see the positive outcomes from pushing it.
So, if someone wants to just dance trad gender preference in partners, that's fine to
me.
There is, though, the big Catch 22:
If someone believes gendered roles "are just role names", while simultaneously
have a strong/sole preference trad-gender-partnering, this is self-contradictory. That
person is trying to have it both ways.
And so, I leave with the thought: this last bit I see as a core sticking point to more
equality and inclusion at dances.
How do we address this?
Can we start looking at this more openly in a way that is compassionate buy also more
direct that we have been?
In dance,
Julian Blechner
He/Him
Western Mass
On Tue, Mar 12, 2024, 12:24 PM Tanya Merchant via Contra Callers
<contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
<mailto:contracallers@lists.sharedweight.net>> wrote:
I’m bumping this for folks who want to talk about gender preference in dance partners.
And while I understand the valid social and historical context that would make inactive
roles a good thing for the social part of social dancing, like Jeff, I’m also really glad
we don’t do that much anymore.
Tanya H. Merchant
On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 06:01 Jeff Kaufman via Contra Callers
<contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
<mailto:contracallers@lists.sharedweight.net>> wrote:
"The whole point of moving away from Proper to First Couples Improper
or Becket was that you then had people of the opposite gender on both
sides of you in your minor set, so that all Neighbour and Partner
interactions were with the opposite gender"
That's one advantage for some people, but another advantage of
Improper and Becket is that they make it much easier to have
equal-turn dances, where everyone is 'active' simultaneously. No more
waiting fifteen times through for a chance to be a "one" and then only
getting to dance it twice before the music stops.
Jeff
On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 8:54 AM Katherine Kitching via Contra Callers
<contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
<mailto:contracallers@lists.sharedweight.net>> wrote:
On the topic of a comfortable swing that maintains the ballroom hold, i'll repeat the
suggestion I offered a few months back.
As part of our transition to promoting a culture of "we encourage everyone to dance
with everyone else, regardless of gender, age, level of experience or any other
factor" - and also as a reaction to covid, we've started designating the standard
neighbour swing (and default partner swing, if you don't know your partner and
don't want to experiment), as a "modified ballroom hold" - which we call the
"elbow hold".
This swing gives a little more space between the couple, without in any way compromising
the effectiveness of the swing in my opinion. (Though I am sure there will be some other
opinions out there ;). )
Ballroom hands same as always.
Other hand cupped around the back of the upper arm of your partner, just above the
elbow.
Taller person's arm goes above the shorter persons arm.
The more I practice this hold, the more I like it.
I find it makes me more comfortable with everyone (and in fact, as a cisgender woman I
find it makes the most difference to me when dancing with men, I have found I like having
a bit of extra space between me and any man who is not my spouse :) )
I offer this in the spirit of "something my group finds effective".
KK
Mar 12, 2024 7:18:46 AM John Sweeney via Contra Callers
<contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
<mailto:contracallers@lists.sharedweight.net>>:
Hi all,
I once called Chris Page’s dance where the dancers scatter individually and
find someone with whom to do a Gypsy Meltdown (Gypsy & Swing). Many of the ladies got
together leaving two men alone in the middle of the dance-floor. There was absolutely no
way that those two men were going to Swing each other in a Ballroom Hold.
There was an article in the EFDSS magazine not so long ago about this very
challenge. The author was concerned that by going gender-free they would lose many good
male dancers who weren’t comfortable with the situation.
Someone in these threads said that, if you prefer dancing with ladies, then
there is nothing preventing you from only asking ladies for a dance. But what happens
when you get in the set and find that every Neighbour that you meet is a man!
I and my wife dance many styles, West Coast Swing, Blues, Ceroc, Modern Jive, Tango,
Salsa, etc. 99% of the time it is one man with one lady (OK, I specialise in dancing with
two ladies at once, but that is another matter!). Occasionally there will be same-sex
pairings, and nobody thinks anything of it. But it is not being forced on them in the way
that contra dancing is forcing same-sex pairings as you meet and interact with all your
Neighbours.
The whole point of moving away from Proper to First Couples Improper or Becket was that
you then had people of the opposite gender on both sides of you in your minor set, so that
all Neighbour and Partner interactions were with the opposite gender!
I think part of the challenge is the very close Ballroom-Hold Swing which many men find
too intimate with another man. Of course there are lots of symmetrical holds that don’t
have the same challenge – you are further apart. They don’t have the “Pointy Hand” to
help you remember which side to finish on. I often use these myself in contra dances when
I have a good partner, doing a different Swing each time through the dance, but I know
which side to finish the Swing on. I suspect the Ballroom-Hold Swing is too embedded in
Contra Dance culture to change now, though, of course, it was not always so.
The communities that I call for all want men dancing with ladies. I use geographic and
positional calling where it helps. I start most sessions by saying, “Find a partner,
traditionally one man and one lady, but anyone can dance with anyone.” 99% of the time
they will dance with the opposite gender.
Personally I have a real problem with Larks & Robins since I use Men & Ladies in
my calling. For me the L in Lark makes me think of Ladies, not Left. It really hurts my
brain!
I am all for anyone dancing with anyone. I dance the Lady’s role and will Swing anyone.
I love Chaos Lines! (And please don’t assume that you know anything about my sexuality!)
I feel that it is very sad that the traditional and historic concepts are being lost.
Our culture has always been very inclusive, with everyone welcome and anyone dancing with
anyone they want. I am not at all convinced that any benefits outweigh the losses.
Happy dancing,
John
John Sweeney, Dancer, England john(a)modernjive.com <mailto:john@modernjive.com>
01233 625 362 & 07802 940 574
http://www.contrafusion.co.uk <http://www.contrafusion.co.uk/> for Dancing in Kent
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
<mailto:contracallers@lists.sharedweight.net>
To unsubscribe send an email to contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
<mailto:contracallers-leave@lists.sharedweight.net>
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
<mailto:contracallers@lists.sharedweight.net>
To unsubscribe send an email to contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
<mailto:contracallers-leave@lists.sharedweight.net>
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
<mailto:contracallers@lists.sharedweight.net>
To unsubscribe send an email to contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
<mailto:contracallers-leave@lists.sharedweight.net>
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
3:22 p.m.
New subject: preference for dancing with opposite gender?
I know 2 elderly dancers in our community who obviously need help while
dancing. Almost everyone knows that, and helps them. Sometimes they skip
moves, shorten and slow a swing, "swing" without turning, exit the dance at
the end of the line, or make whatever accomodations are needed to help
them. I've never heard anyone complain about them, and I regularly see them
sitting out talking with other dancers, myself included. It's another
example of what I love about our community.
On another part of that spectrum are the middle-age men who only dance with
young women, almost always new dancers who don't know how to say no. It's
been a while since I've seen it, but we used to get complaints about
stalking on the dance floor and in the parking lot. We started writing down
those complaints, dating them, and confronting the offender about it. We
had to "uninvite" a couple guys.
Word got around, and we've not seen that behavior in the 18 months since we
reopened our dance. It really helps that everyone knows dancers can come to
the organizers with a problem and we will swiftly deal with it.
Then there are the children. We've had to ask people not to pick up the
small dancers and swing them off their feet. A gentle, occasional reminder
is helpful.
-Amy
On Tue, Mar 12, 2024, 11:38 AM Richard Fischer via Contra Callers <
contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
Since "ageism" has been mentioned, I'd
like to share an idea I've often
had. I wonder if anyone thinks it's a good idea, or if it's already done at
any contra dances. What if one dance per evening, perhaps in the first
half, were done at a slightly slower tempo, and featured choreography that
allowed for some standing around. Perhaps a dance like Chorus Jig, where
some folks could choose to join at the end. Or a more recent dance that
still features down time, for example one where the 1's and 2's have
separate swings. I think that might be helpful to some elderly dancers, if
you have them, and to others who may not have a lot of stamina, or who get
dizzy easily, etc. It might be a way to make contra dancing even more
welcoming than it already is.
Richard
in Arlington, MA
On Mar 12, 2024, at 1:36 PM, Julian Blechner via Contra Callers <
contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
I'm nodding with a lot of comments from the last couple days. Louise
articulated some base concepts clearly, which a lot of y'all expanded on.
There are some contradictory ideas about gender and sexuality with dance,
and I think we in general tend to shy away from delving too deeply in
public discussion. I've been accused of "shaming" people for asking why a
man may prefer dancing with women. The thing is, I've also said what I
think nearly everyone - including most/all of the strongest advocates for
genderfree contra - has said: its OK to have preferences for partners. I
think it is sometimes hard to presume these discussions are done assuming
the benefit of good intent, given how much gender and sexuality is an
enormous political and civil rights topic in the US and most Western
nations. But, I presume this good intent, and I think nearly everyone here
does, too, so, I'm taking another stab at this topic.
Here's some ideas I've been chewing over in an attempt to dig into this
more deeply:
- dance is often a courtship ritual
- despite this, inter-gender set dancing has a long tradition in Western
dance, and partnering with someone hasn't really ever been a "oh, I am
attracted to them". To use the overused example of Jane Austen novels, even
then it's clear family dance together, friends dance together, and
strangers dance together just to have any partner.
- children are at our dances. So if a person is choosing partners based on
heterosexual tradition, why, um: EW
And thus is where the conversation often stops. But to break it down more:
- So, when someone says they prefer to dance in non-genderfree dances,
with a partner of a different binary-presenting gender person, in trad
roles, there's 2 possible, non-exclusive reasons:
1. That their choice is about courtship, but "make exceptions" for people
you're not attracted to. Which, I guess is fine in and of itself, but I
think people with this preference often may not consider _just how many
exceptions_ there are.
2. Their choice is more about embracing traditional gender roles. I'll get
back to this.
So, in the case of #1, the problem isn't just about "what do we do with
the fact that about 5% of people aren't straight". (And realize the number
being 3 or 4 times as high among surveyed youth, with numbers lower in
areas where anti-lgbtq law and sentiment pervades).
The problem is also about fat phobia. And bias against people who aren't
"conventionally attractive". And ageism. And disability phobia. Then
there's the even worse case of when a person both claims attraction is
their main factor for partner preference ... and also has a preference for
much younger dancers. :|
Pushing back on the idea of "partner preference because of sexual
preference" is about all these issues - fatphobia, ageism, disability
phobia, beauty-bias, etc. Now, maybe these things aren't a priority to
everyone, but, I'm going to assume that the overwhelming majority of people
on Shared Weight are interested in most, if not all of them. And,
inevitably, remember - youth, beauty, and able-bodiedness all will fade for
everyone.
In reality, I think partner and role preference for trad-gender-partnering
actually has to do more with gender norms. So insofar as sexual-attraction
for partner preference, I think pushing back, openly, against this, can
benefit dance communities in many ways. And, ultimately if that's not
actually the main reason, then it isn't really harming anyone if we present
it and deal with it with compassion and patience for those having
difficulty with the change. It's not like people aren't going to flirt and
meet sexual partners anyway; we simply don't need to establish dance as a
courtship-by-default space.
Which leads to look at the other reason, #2: wanting trad gender
partnering because you just like trad gender roles.
In and of itself, that's fine. If you like ways of having your binary
gender reinforced, there's nothing wrong with that. And while I'm not
transgender, my friends who are and have shifted/come out as a different
binary gender identity deserve to have their gender affirmed, too. While
me, personally, I don't need reinforcement about being man (which is its
own privilege), I respect people's desire for their gender to be respected
and celebrated.
So, what does that mean for dancing?
- Ultimately, as long as people are finding partners and having fun and
people are respectful of anyone they meet in line, great!
- As noted, splitting up people because of gender is disrespectful on
several levels.
- That complaining about "ah, so many neighbors are my same gender" is
setting one's own preference above everyone else's. In short: it's selfish.
- If someone refuses to dance with someone of the same gender (or
nonbinary/agender folks who "don't look like the opposite gender") then
that's selfish. It's not _as_ selfish as the last item, and, generally, if
this is what they choose, I don't see the positive outcomes from pushing it.
So, if someone wants to just dance trad gender preference in partners,
that's fine to me.
There is, though, the big Catch 22:
If someone believes gendered roles "are just role names", while
simultaneously have a strong/sole preference trad-gender-partnering, this
is self-contradictory. That person is trying to have it both ways.
And so, I leave with the thought: this last bit I see as a core sticking
point to more equality and inclusion at dances.
How do we address this?
Can we start looking at this more openly in a way that is compassionate
buy also more direct that we have been?
In dance,
Julian Blechner
He/Him
Western Mass
On Tue, Mar 12, 2024, 12:24 PM Tanya Merchant via Contra Callers <
contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
I’m bumping this for folks who want to talk about
gender preference in
dance partners.
And while I understand the valid social and historical context that would
make inactive roles a good thing for the social part of social dancing,
like Jeff, I’m also really glad we don’t do that much anymore.
Tanya H. Merchant
On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 06:01 Jeff Kaufman via Contra Callers <
contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
"The whole point of moving away from Proper
to First Couples Improper
or Becket was that you then had people of the opposite gender on both
sides of you in your minor set, so that all Neighbour and Partner
interactions were with the opposite gender"
That's one advantage for some people, but another advantage of
Improper and Becket is that they make it much easier to have
equal-turn dances, where everyone is 'active' simultaneously. No more
waiting fifteen times through for a chance to be a "one" and then only
getting to dance it twice before the music stops.
Jeff
On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 8:54 AM Katherine Kitching via Contra Callers
<contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to
contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
On the topic of a comfortable swing that maintains the ballroom hold,
i'll
repeat the suggestion I offered a few months back.
As part of our transition to promoting a culture of "we encourage
everyone to
dance with everyone else, regardless of gender, age, level of
experience or any other factor" - and also as a reaction to covid, we've
started designating the standard neighbour swing (and default partner
swing, if you don't know your partner and don't want to experiment), as a
"modified ballroom hold" - which we call the "elbow hold".
This swing gives a little more space between the couple, without in
any way
compromising the effectiveness of the swing in my opinion. (Though
I am sure there will be some other opinions out there ;). )
Ballroom hands same as always.
Other hand cupped around the back of the upper arm of your partner,
just above the
elbow.
Taller person's arm goes above the shorter persons arm.
The more I practice this hold, the more I like it.
I find it makes me more comfortable with everyone (and in fact, as a
cisgender
woman I find it makes the most difference to me when dancing with
men, I have found I like having a bit of extra space between me and any man
who is not my spouse :) )
I offer this in the spirit of "something my group finds effective".
KK
Mar 12, 2024 7:18:46 AM John Sweeney via Contra Callers <
contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net>gt;:
Hi all,
I once called Chris Page’s dance where the dancers
scatter
individually and find someone with whom to do a Gypsy Meltdown
(Gypsy & Swing). Many of the ladies got together leaving two men alone in
the middle of the dance-floor. There was absolutely no way that those two
men were going to Swing each other in a Ballroom Hold.
There was an article in the EFDSS magazine not so long
ago about
this very challenge. The author was concerned that by going
gender-free they would lose many good male dancers who weren’t comfortable
with the situation.
Someone in these threads said that, if you prefer
dancing with
ladies, then there is nothing preventing you from only asking
ladies for a dance. But what happens when you get in the set and find that
every Neighbour that you meet is a man!
I and my wife dance many styles, West Coast Swing, Blues, Ceroc,
Modern Jive,
Tango, Salsa, etc. 99% of the time it is one man with one
lady (OK, I specialise in dancing with two ladies at once, but that is
another matter!). Occasionally there will be same-sex pairings, and nobody
thinks anything of it. But it is not being forced on them in the way that
contra dancing is forcing same-sex pairings as you meet and interact with
all your Neighbours.
The whole point of moving away from Proper to First Couples Improper
or Becket was
that you then had people of the opposite gender on both sides
of you in your minor set, so that all Neighbour and Partner interactions
were with the opposite gender!
I think part of the challenge is the very close Ballroom-Hold Swing
which many men
find too intimate with another man. Of course there are
lots of symmetrical holds that don’t have the same challenge – you are
further apart. They don’t have the “Pointy Hand” to help you remember
which side to finish on. I often use these myself in contra dances when I
have a good partner, doing a different Swing each time through the dance,
but I know which side to finish the Swing on. I suspect the Ballroom-Hold
Swing is too embedded in Contra Dance culture to change now, though, of
course, it was not always so.
The communities that I call for all want men dancing with ladies. I
use
geographic and positional calling where it helps. I start most
sessions by saying, “Find a partner, traditionally one man and one lady,
but anyone can dance with anyone.” 99% of the time they will dance with
the opposite gender.
Personally I have a real problem with Larks & Robins since I use Men &
Ladies in my calling. For me the L in Lark makes me think of Ladies, not
Left. It really hurts my brain!
I am all for anyone dancing with anyone. I dance the Lady’s role and
will Swing
anyone. I love Chaos Lines! (And please don’t assume that you
know anything about my sexuality!)
I feel that it is very sad that the traditional and historic concepts
are being
lost. Our culture has always been very inclusive, with everyone
welcome and anyone dancing with anyone they want. I am not at all convinced
that any benefits outweigh the losses.
Happy dancing,
John
John Sweeney, Dancer, England john(a)modernjive.com 01233 625 362 &
07802 940
574
http://www.contrafusion.co.uk for Dancing in Kent
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to
contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to
contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
4:53 p.m.
New subject: preference for dancing with opposite gender?
There's a lot to unpack with all of these issues
(size/weight/age/disability/gender-attachment/historical
precedents/etc/etc/etc).
I know an older, colleague (caller) who deals with people not wanting to
dance with him (b/c of age),.
At the same time, he has no interest in dancing (mostly the swinging part)
with another man. He's okay with alternate swing holds, but really had a
hard time when someone "insisted" on ballroom hold - he just flat out said
no.
I've personally dealt with issues over the years - people who strong-arm
you; people who decide there are no boundaries; people who think it's fun
to swing you off your feet. I've never had any problem dealing with any of
the situations, but I have talked with a number of people over the years
who've left dances b/c of things like that.
That brings up the need to remind people that we all have various comfort
levels, and if someone offers an alternative hold (or way of doing a
figure) that is less "intimate", that should be honored. I know many people
who are extremely uncomfortable with a "right-shoulder-round meltdown"
(trying to remember to refrain from the term most aren't using anymore).
Back in the day (lol), callers used to offer very brief (1-2 minutes) but
important "dance etiquette" moments scattered throughout the evening - I
think it's still greatly needed. Easier to do at a family dance or a
community dance, but no less important (maybe more so) at many contra
dances.
My 2 cents -
Patricia
Patricia Campbell
(she/her)
Biddeford, ME
On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 1:36 PM Julian Blechner via Contra Callers <
contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
I'm nodding with a lot of comments from the last
couple days. Louise
articulated some base concepts clearly, which a lot of y'all expanded on.
There are some contradictory ideas about gender and sexuality with dance,
and I think we in general tend to shy away from delving too deeply in
public discussion. I've been accused of "shaming" people for asking why a
man may prefer dancing with women. The thing is, I've also said what I
think nearly everyone - including most/all of the strongest advocates for
genderfree contra - has said: its OK to have preferences for partners. I
think it is sometimes hard to presume these discussions are done assuming
the benefit of good intent, given how much gender and sexuality is an
enormous political and civil rights topic in the US and most Western
nations. But, I presume this good intent, and I think nearly everyone here
does, too, so, I'm taking another stab at this topic.
Here's some ideas I've been chewing over in an attempt to dig into this
more deeply:
- dance is often a courtship ritual
- despite this, inter-gender set dancing has a long tradition in Western
dance, and partnering with someone hasn't really ever been a "oh, I am
attracted to them". To use the overused example of Jane Austen novels, even
then it's clear family dance together, friends dance together, and
strangers dance together just to have any partner.
- children are at our dances. So if a person is choosing partners based on
heterosexual tradition, why, um: EW
And thus is where the conversation often stops. But to break it down more:
- So, when someone says they prefer to dance in non-genderfree dances,
with a partner of a different binary-presenting gender person, in trad
roles, there's 2 possible, non-exclusive reasons:
1. That their choice is about courtship, but "make exceptions" for people
you're not attracted to. Which, I guess is fine in and of itself, but I
think people with this preference often may not consider _just how many
exceptions_ there are.
2. Their choice is more about embracing traditional gender roles. I'll get
back to this.
So, in the case of #1, the problem isn't just about "what do we do with
the fact that about 5% of people aren't straight". (And realize the number
being 3 or 4 times as high among surveyed youth, with numbers lower in
areas where anti-lgbtq law and sentiment pervades).
The problem is also about fat phobia. And bias against people who aren't
"conventionally attractive". And ageism. And disability phobia. Then
there's the even worse case of when a person both claims attraction is
their main factor for partner preference ... and also has a preference for
much younger dancers. :|
Pushing back on the idea of "partner preference because of sexual
preference" is about all these issues - fatphobia, ageism, disability
phobia, beauty-bias, etc. Now, maybe these things aren't a priority to
everyone, but, I'm going to assume that the overwhelming majority of people
on Shared Weight are interested in most, if not all of them. And,
inevitably, remember - youth, beauty, and able-bodiedness all will fade for
everyone.
In reality, I think partner and role preference for trad-gender-partnering
actually has to do more with gender norms. So insofar as sexual-attraction
for partner preference, I think pushing back, openly, against this, can
benefit dance communities in many ways. And, ultimately if that's not
actually the main reason, then it isn't really harming anyone if we present
it and deal with it with compassion and patience for those having
difficulty with the change. It's not like people aren't going to flirt and
meet sexual partners anyway; we simply don't need to establish dance as a
courtship-by-default space.
Which leads to look at the other reason, #2: wanting trad gender
partnering because you just like trad gender roles.
In and of itself, that's fine. If you like ways of having your binary
gender reinforced, there's nothing wrong with that. And while I'm not
transgender, my friends who are and have shifted/come out as a different
binary gender identity deserve to have their gender affirmed, too. While
me, personally, I don't need reinforcement about being man (which is its
own privilege), I respect people's desire for their gender to be respected
and celebrated.
So, what does that mean for dancing?
- Ultimately, as long as people are finding partners and having fun and
people are respectful of anyone they meet in line, great!
- As noted, splitting up people because of gender is disrespectful on
several levels.
- That complaining about "ah, so many neighbors are my same gender" is
setting one's own preference above everyone else's. In short: it's selfish.
- If someone refuses to dance with someone of the same gender (or
nonbinary/agender folks who "don't look like the opposite gender") then
that's selfish. It's not _as_ selfish as the last item, and, generally, if
this is what they choose, I don't see the positive outcomes from pushing it.
So, if someone wants to just dance trad gender preference in partners,
that's fine to me.
There is, though, the big Catch 22:
If someone believes gendered roles "are just role names", while
simultaneously have a strong/sole preference trad-gender-partnering, this
is self-contradictory. That person is trying to have it both ways.
And so, I leave with the thought: this last bit I see as a core sticking
point to more equality and inclusion at dances.
How do we address this?
Can we start looking at this more openly in a way that is compassionate
buy also more direct that we have been?
In dance,
Julian Blechner
He/Him
Western Mass
On Tue, Mar 12, 2024, 12:24 PM Tanya Merchant via Contra Callers <
contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
I’m bumping this for folks who want to talk about
gender preference in
dance partners.
And while I understand the valid social and historical context that would
make inactive roles a good thing for the social part of social dancing,
like Jeff, I’m also really glad we don’t do that much anymore.
Tanya H. Merchant
On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 06:01 Jeff Kaufman via Contra Callers <
contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
"The whole point of moving away from Proper
to First Couples Improper
or Becket was that you then had people of the opposite gender on both
sides of you in your minor set, so that all Neighbour and Partner
interactions were with the opposite gender"
That's one advantage for some people, but another advantage of
Improper and Becket is that they make it much easier to have
equal-turn dances, where everyone is 'active' simultaneously. No more
waiting fifteen times through for a chance to be a "one" and then only
getting to dance it twice before the music stops.
Jeff
On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 8:54 AM Katherine Kitching via Contra Callers
<contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to
contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
On the topic of a comfortable swing that maintains the ballroom hold,
i'll
repeat the suggestion I offered a few months back.
As part of our transition to promoting a culture of "we encourage
everyone to
dance with everyone else, regardless of gender, age, level of
experience or any other factor" - and also as a reaction to covid, we've
started designating the standard neighbour swing (and default partner
swing, if you don't know your partner and don't want to experiment), as a
"modified ballroom hold" - which we call the "elbow hold".
This swing gives a little more space between the couple, without in
any way
compromising the effectiveness of the swing in my opinion. (Though
I am sure there will be some other opinions out there ;). )
Ballroom hands same as always.
Other hand cupped around the back of the upper arm of your partner,
just above the
elbow.
Taller person's arm goes above the shorter persons arm.
The more I practice this hold, the more I like it.
I find it makes me more comfortable with everyone (and in fact, as a
cisgender
woman I find it makes the most difference to me when dancing with
men, I have found I like having a bit of extra space between me and any man
who is not my spouse :) )
I offer this in the spirit of "something my group finds effective".
KK
Mar 12, 2024 7:18:46 AM John Sweeney via Contra Callers <
contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net>gt;:
Hi all,
I once called Chris Page’s dance where the dancers
scatter
individually and find someone with whom to do a Gypsy Meltdown
(Gypsy & Swing). Many of the ladies got together leaving two men alone in
the middle of the dance-floor. There was absolutely no way that those two
men were going to Swing each other in a Ballroom Hold.
There was an article in the EFDSS magazine not so long
ago about
this very challenge. The author was concerned that by going
gender-free they would lose many good male dancers who weren’t comfortable
with the situation.
Someone in these threads said that, if you prefer
dancing with
ladies, then there is nothing preventing you from only asking
ladies for a dance. But what happens when you get in the set and find that
every Neighbour that you meet is a man!
I and my wife dance many styles, West Coast Swing, Blues, Ceroc,
Modern Jive,
Tango, Salsa, etc. 99% of the time it is one man with one
lady (OK, I specialise in dancing with two ladies at once, but that is
another matter!). Occasionally there will be same-sex pairings, and nobody
thinks anything of it. But it is not being forced on them in the way that
contra dancing is forcing same-sex pairings as you meet and interact with
all your Neighbours.
The whole point of moving away from Proper to First Couples Improper
or Becket was
that you then had people of the opposite gender on both sides
of you in your minor set, so that all Neighbour and Partner interactions
were with the opposite gender!
I think part of the challenge is the very close Ballroom-Hold Swing
which many men
find too intimate with another man. Of course there are
lots of symmetrical holds that don’t have the same challenge – you are
further apart. They don’t have the “Pointy Hand” to help you remember
which side to finish on. I often use these myself in contra dances when I
have a good partner, doing a different Swing each time through the dance,
but I know which side to finish the Swing on. I suspect the Ballroom-Hold
Swing is too embedded in Contra Dance culture to change now, though, of
course, it was not always so.
The communities that I call for all want men dancing with ladies. I
use
geographic and positional calling where it helps. I start most
sessions by saying, “Find a partner, traditionally one man and one lady,
but anyone can dance with anyone.” 99% of the time they will dance with
the opposite gender.
Personally I have a real problem with Larks & Robins since I use Men &
Ladies in my calling. For me the L in Lark makes me think of Ladies, not
Left. It really hurts my brain!
I am all for anyone dancing with anyone. I dance the Lady’s role and
will Swing
anyone. I love Chaos Lines! (And please don’t assume that you
know anything about my sexuality!)
I feel that it is very sad that the traditional and historic concepts
are being
lost. Our culture has always been very inclusive, with everyone
welcome and anyone dancing with anyone they want. I am not at all convinced
that any benefits outweigh the losses.
Happy dancing,
John
John Sweeney, Dancer, England john(a)modernjive.com 01233 625 362 &
07802 940
574
http://www.contrafusion.co.uk for Dancing in Kent
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to
contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to
contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
17 Mar
17 Mar
11:27 a.m.
New subject: preference for dancing with opposite gender?
I’m kinda doubtful about how common reason 2 is, I think most of what might superficially
seem like insisting on conventional gender roles is actually (men's)
homophobia—dancing with a man might make me look like a…, or the man dancing with me might
be a…. (I specify men because I’ve never once lived and danced where women were exercised
about this—occasionally a preference for mixed-gender, but never a strong one). The guy
who assaulted me at NEFFA years ago because he came across me in the line dancing the
“wrong” role didn’t do so because I was rejecting conventional gender roles, he did it
because of homophobia.
Read Weaver
Jamaica Plain, MA
http://lcfd.org
On Mar 12, 2024, at 1:36 PM, Julian Blechner via
Contra Callers <contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
...
- So, when someone says they prefer to dance in non-genderfree dances, with a partner of
a different binary-presenting gender person, in trad roles, there's 2 possible,
non-exclusive reasons:
1. That their choice is about courtship, but "make exceptions" for people
you're not attracted to. Which, I guess is fine in and of itself, but I think people
with this preference often may not consider _just how many exceptions_ there are.
2. Their choice is more about embracing traditional gender roles. I'll get back to
this
...
6:54 p.m.
New subject: preference for dancing with opposite gender?
Hi Read! I wanted to add that the times when I (a non-binary person that is
generally assumed to be a man) have encountered neighbor men who refuse to
swing with me, it has often been accompanied with either thinly-veiled
disgust or even an overt "ew I'm not dancing with a man." I'm so sorry
that
you were physically assaulted, though I'm not surprised.
I agree with Read that this is just general homophobia, and again it makes
me worry about the women these men are dancing with, simply because they
clearly don't want to "hold a man" in the same way that they are
"holding"
all the women they neighbor/partner with.
Polite declining is 100% acceptable and I've never been upset by it. But
more often than not, men refusing to dance with me has been a rather
dramatic production that leaves me feeling icky. 🤷
On Sun, Mar 17, 2024, 11:27 Read Weaver via Contra Callers <
contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
I’m kinda doubtful about how common reason 2 is, I
think most of what
might superficially seem like insisting on conventional gender roles is
actually (men's) homophobia—dancing with a man might make me look like a…,
or the man dancing with me might be a…. (I specify men because I’ve never
once lived and danced where women were exercised about this—occasionally a
preference for mixed-gender, but never a strong one). The guy who assaulted
me at NEFFA years ago because he came across me in the line dancing the
“wrong” role didn’t do so because I was rejecting conventional gender
roles, he did it because of homophobia.
Read Weaver
Jamaica Plain, MA
http://lcfd.org
On Mar 12, 2024, at 1:36 PM, Julian Blechner via
Contra Callers <
contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
...
- So, when someone says they prefer to dance in non-genderfree dances,
with a
partner of a different binary-presenting gender person, in trad
roles, there's 2 possible, non-exclusive reasons:
1. That their choice is about courtship, but
"make exceptions" for
people you're not attracted to. Which, I guess
is fine in and of itself,
but I think people with this preference often may not consider _just how
many exceptions_ there are.
2. Their choice is more about embracing
traditional gender roles. I'll
get back to this
...
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
7:24 p.m.
New subject: preference for dancing with opposite gender?
Read and JJ,
This is where I tread carefully, because _all men_ (or nearly so) are
raised with some pretty toxic beliefs doused all over them (and women, but
they seem to do a bit better than us men at dealing with it). Sometimes
it's hard to tell the boundary between "traditional gender roles" versus
homophobia. And that's why it's absolutely a reason why it's a touchy
subject.
Anytime "doing X in dancing is homophobic" is brought up, it's:
1. Not always accurate
2. When it is accurate, it's just going to shut down most discussion. No
one wants to hear their deeply ingrained societal norms and beliefs are
bigoted, right? It's a non-starter for conversation.
That said, lgbtqia folks (myself included) absolutely should talk about the
negative effects of it (ex: Two women are split up so men can have
partners, or the "dramatic production" JJ mentioned in their reply). It's
critical these stories continue to be told so people can understand the
harm that is done sometimes in the name of "tradition".
But in terms of how we - as performers and organizers - look forward and
improve things, I think if the goal is persuasiveness, it's more effective
to let people judge for themselves whether and how their ingrained societal
norms are homophobic or not.
Changing these things is hard work and takes a long time. Gender and
sexuality are core parts of our identities, so any discussion of it can be
intensely personal for anyone.
In dance,
Julian Blechner
He/him
Western Massachusetts
On Sun, Mar 17, 2024, 6:55 PM JJ <jcgj95(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Read! I wanted to add that the times when I (a
non-binary person that
is generally assumed to be a man) have encountered neighbor men who refuse
to swing with me, it has often been accompanied with either thinly-veiled
disgust or even an overt "ew I'm not dancing with a man." I'm so sorry
that
you were physically assaulted, though I'm not surprised.
I agree with Read that this is just general homophobia, and again it makes
me worry about the women these men are dancing with, simply because they
clearly don't want to "hold a man" in the same way that they are
"holding"
all the women they neighbor/partner with.
Polite declining is 100% acceptable and I've never been upset by it. But
more often than not, men refusing to dance with me has been a rather
dramatic production that leaves me feeling icky. 🤷
On Sun, Mar 17, 2024, 11:27 Read Weaver via Contra Callers <
contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
> I’m kinda doubtful about how common reason 2 is, I think most of what
> might superficially seem like insisting on conventional gender roles is
> actually (men's) homophobia—dancing with a man might make me look like a…,
> or the man dancing with me might be a…. (I specify men because I’ve never
> once lived and danced where women were exercised about this—occasionally a
> preference for mixed-gender, but never a strong one). The guy who assaulted
> me at NEFFA years ago because he came across me in the line dancing the
> “wrong” role didn’t do so because I was rejecting conventional gender
> roles, he did it because of homophobia.
>
> Read Weaver
> Jamaica Plain, MA
> http://lcfd.org
>
> > On Mar 12, 2024, at 1:36 PM, Julian Blechner via Contra Callers <
> contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
> >
> > ...
> > - So, when someone says they prefer to dance in non-genderfree dances,
> with a partner of a different binary-presenting gender person, in trad
> roles, there's 2 possible, non-exclusive reasons:
> > 1. That their choice is about courtship, but "make exceptions" for
> people you're not attracted to. Which, I guess is fine in and of itself,
> but I think people with this preference often may not consider _just how
> many exceptions_ there are.
> > 2. Their choice is more about embracing traditional gender roles. I'll
> get back to this
> ...
> _______________________________________________
> Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
> To unsubscribe send an email to
> contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
>
>
9:50 p.m.
New subject: preference for dancing with opposite gender?
My 2¢
I agree - it's not always homophobia that is behind the reaction -
sometimes it's entire generations of upbringing that make it extremely
difficult/awkward for some men to be in a more physically intimate space
than they usually find themselves in.
And it's one thing to do an allemande left with another man - you're not as
physically close for as long)... many men are only used to being in close
proximity with other men in a sports role or a slap on the back "hello" (in
the *American* culture - other cultures aren't anywhere near as uptight).
I think that some of the alternative swing suggestions made will go a long
way to easing the reactions - they're just less intimate, less of a
"threat" of any kind (whether cultural boundaries/homophobia/whatever).
My opinions...
Patricia
Patricia Campbell
southern ME
(she/her)
On Sun, Mar 17, 2024 at 7:24 PM Julian Blechner via Contra Callers <
contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
Read and JJ,
This is where I tread carefully, because _all men_ (or nearly so) are
raised with some pretty toxic beliefs doused all over them (and women, but
they seem to do a bit better than us men at dealing with it). Sometimes
it's hard to tell the boundary between "traditional gender roles" versus
homophobia. And that's why it's absolutely a reason why it's a touchy
subject.
Anytime "doing X in dancing is homophobic" is brought up, it's:
1. Not always accurate
2. When it is accurate, it's just going to shut down most discussion. No
one wants to hear their deeply ingrained societal norms and beliefs are
bigoted, right? It's a non-starter for conversation.
That said, lgbtqia folks (myself included) absolutely should talk about
the negative effects of it (ex: Two women are split up so men can have
partners, or the "dramatic production" JJ mentioned in their reply). It's
critical these stories continue to be told so people can understand the
harm that is done sometimes in the name of "tradition".
But in terms of how we - as performers and organizers - look forward and
improve things, I think if the goal is persuasiveness, it's more effective
to let people judge for themselves whether and how their ingrained societal
norms are homophobic or not.
Changing these things is hard work and takes a long time. Gender and
sexuality are core parts of our identities, so any discussion of it can be
intensely personal for anyone.
In dance,
Julian Blechner
He/him
Western Massachusetts
On Sun, Mar 17, 2024, 6:55 PM JJ <jcgj95(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Read! I wanted to add that the times when I (a
non-binary person that
is generally assumed to be a man) have encountered neighbor men who refuse
to swing with me, it has often been accompanied with either thinly-veiled
disgust or even an overt "ew I'm not dancing with a man." I'm so sorry
that
you were physically assaulted, though I'm not surprised.
I agree with Read that this is just general homophobia, and again it
makes me worry about the women these men are dancing with, simply because
they clearly don't want to "hold a man" in the same way that they are
"holding" all the women they neighbor/partner with.
Polite declining is 100% acceptable and I've never been upset by it. But
more often than not, men refusing to dance with me has been a rather
dramatic production that leaves me feeling icky. 🤷
On Sun, Mar 17, 2024, 11:27 Read Weaver via Contra Callers <
contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
> I’m kinda doubtful about how common reason 2 is, I think most of what
> might superficially seem like insisting on conventional gender roles is
> actually (men's) homophobia—dancing with a man might make me look like a…,
> or the man dancing with me might be a…. (I specify men because I’ve never
> once lived and danced where women were exercised about this—occasionally a
> preference for mixed-gender, but never a strong one). The guy who assaulted
> me at NEFFA years ago because he came across me in the line dancing the
> “wrong” role didn’t do so because I was rejecting conventional gender
> roles, he did it because of homophobia.
>
> Read Weaver
> Jamaica Plain, MA
> http://lcfd.org
>
> > On Mar 12, 2024, at 1:36 PM, Julian Blechner via Contra Callers <
> contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
> >
> > ...
> > - So, when someone says they prefer to dance in non-genderfree dances,
> with a partner of a different binary-presenting gender person, in trad
> roles, there's 2 possible, non-exclusive reasons:
> > 1. That their choice is about courtship, but "make exceptions" for
> people you're not attracted to. Which, I guess is fine in and of itself,
> but I think people with this preference often may not consider _just how
> many exceptions_ there are.
> > 2. Their choice is more about embracing traditional gender roles. I'll
> get back to this
> ...
> _______________________________________________
> Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
> To unsubscribe send an email to
> contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
>
> _______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list --
contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
10:58 p.m.
New subject: preference for dancing with opposite gender?
I'll just speak up for the "it's not always homophobia" contingent.
There
are a multitude of reasons why dancers (of all genders) may not wish to
dance with men in particular. Not the least of which is we can't possibly
know the burdens others carry. Trauma is real and there are reasons we
can't possibly know why an individual may wish to go dancing, but not wish
to dance closely with a person or with men (or others) more generally. I'm
fortunate not to carry such trauma, but I can offer another perspective
being a disabled person, who passes as able bodied and (still) young. I
used to dance more frequently with other men when I was younger, but all
instances where I've fallen, felt unsafe, or had to leave a set midway
through a dance have been with men who have made assumptions about my
capabilities, especially during swings. I'll note that this happens even in
"traditionally gendered" settings (though less so) with things like
larks allemanding left 1.5 or men taking liberties during full heys. In
those moments, I appreciate role switching because I'll use it sometimes to
avoid doing a particular figure with someone upcoming in the line -- these
men have even been experienced and talented dancers. There is a certain
roughhousing nature that men tend to have uniquely with other men, as
though it's expected to just want to see who can out-muscle whom. This
amplifies the exuberance that some men have in dancing. I'd ask men reading
this to reflect on whether they do this too, but I also recognize that it's
a part of what brings some men joy when dancing with other men. It's tricky.
Anyway, all that is to say: if I'm one of a few guys who hasn't partnered
during paring time, I would rather sit out than dance with most men, whose
dancing I don't know and trust. And, yes, I realize an answer here is to
just simply tell the people I dance with to treat me in certain ways, and
sometimes I do do that. But I also don't want to do a PSA about how to
interact with me specifically. If I go to a dance it's to have a fun time,
not to dwell on my physical limitations. Not to mention that there's no
guarantee my explanations will be heeded. Sidestepping is just plain
easier, and my hope is that others not judge me for that.
S
On Sun, Mar 17, 2024 at 9:51 PM Patricia Campbell via Contra Callers <
contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
My 2¢
I agree - it's not always homophobia that is behind the reaction -
sometimes it's entire generations of upbringing that make it extremely
difficult/awkward for some men to be in a more physically intimate space
than they usually find themselves in.
And it's one thing to do an allemande left with another man - you're not
as physically close for as long)... many men are only used to being in
close proximity with other men in a sports role or a slap on the back
"hello" (in the *American* culture - other cultures aren't anywhere near
as
uptight).
I think that some of the alternative swing suggestions made will go a long
way to easing the reactions - they're just less intimate, less of a
"threat" of any kind (whether cultural boundaries/homophobia/whatever).
My opinions...
Patricia
Patricia Campbell
southern ME
(she/her)
On Sun, Mar 17, 2024 at 7:24 PM Julian Blechner via Contra Callers <
contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
Read and JJ,
This is where I tread carefully, because _all men_ (or nearly so) are
raised with some pretty toxic beliefs doused all over them (and women, but
they seem to do a bit better than us men at dealing with it). Sometimes
it's hard to tell the boundary between "traditional gender roles" versus
homophobia. And that's why it's absolutely a reason why it's a touchy
subject.
Anytime "doing X in dancing is homophobic" is brought up, it's:
1. Not always accurate
2. When it is accurate, it's just going to shut down most discussion. No
one wants to hear their deeply ingrained societal norms and beliefs are
bigoted, right? It's a non-starter for conversation.
That said, lgbtqia folks (myself included) absolutely should talk about
the negative effects of it (ex: Two women are split up so men can have
partners, or the "dramatic production" JJ mentioned in their reply). It's
critical these stories continue to be told so people can understand the
harm that is done sometimes in the name of "tradition".
But in terms of how we - as performers and organizers - look forward and
improve things, I think if the goal is persuasiveness, it's more effective
to let people judge for themselves whether and how their ingrained societal
norms are homophobic or not.
Changing these things is hard work and takes a long time. Gender and
sexuality are core parts of our identities, so any discussion of it can be
intensely personal for anyone.
In dance,
Julian Blechner
He/him
Western Massachusetts
On Sun, Mar 17, 2024, 6:55 PM JJ <jcgj95(a)gmail.com> wrote:
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Hi Read! I wanted to add that the times when I (a
non-binary person that
is generally assumed to be a man) have encountered neighbor men who refuse
to swing with me, it has often been accompanied with either thinly-veiled
disgust or even an overt "ew I'm not dancing with a man." I'm so sorry
that
you were physically assaulted, though I'm not surprised.
I agree with Read that this is just general homophobia, and again it
makes me worry about the women these men are dancing with, simply because
they clearly don't want to "hold a man" in the same way that they are
"holding" all the women they neighbor/partner with.
Polite declining is 100% acceptable and I've never been upset by it. But
more often than not, men refusing to dance with me has been a rather
dramatic production that leaves me feeling icky. 🤷
On Sun, Mar 17, 2024, 11:27 Read Weaver via Contra Callers <
contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
> I’m kinda doubtful about how common reason 2 is, I think most of what
> might superficially seem like insisting on conventional gender roles is
> actually (men's) homophobia—dancing with a man might make me look like a…,
> or the man dancing with me might be a…. (I specify men because I’ve never
> once lived and danced where women were exercised about this—occasionally a
> preference for mixed-gender, but never a strong one). The guy who assaulted
> me at NEFFA years ago because he came across me in the line dancing the
> “wrong” role didn’t do so because I was rejecting conventional gender
> roles, he did it because of homophobia.
>
> Read Weaver
> Jamaica Plain, MA
> http://lcfd.org
>
> > On Mar 12, 2024, at 1:36 PM, Julian Blechner via Contra Callers <
> contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
> >
> > ...
> > - So, when someone says they prefer to dance in non-genderfree
> dances, with a partner of a different binary-presenting gender person, in
> trad roles, there's 2 possible, non-exclusive reasons:
> > 1. That their choice is about courtship, but "make exceptions" for
> people you're not attracted to. Which, I guess is fine in and of itself,
> but I think people with this preference often may not consider _just how
> many exceptions_ there are.
> > 2. Their choice is more about embracing traditional gender roles.
> I'll get back to this
> ...
> _______________________________________________
> Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
> To unsubscribe send an email to
> contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
>
> _______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list --
contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to
contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
11 Mar
11 Mar
11:02 a.m.
New subject: "Assigning" roles in the beginners' lesson?
If you wish, you can suggest that the roles might have once been based in gender. But in
the larger picture, there is no reason that one role must be danced by one gender and the
other role must be danced by the other. Gendered terms have suggested that they should,
but other than that, there is no reason, and that is why genderless terms have been
invented and are now coming into wider use.
So when you *are* using larks/robins, then we need to completely erase gender from the
equation and have people understand that there is a lark and a robin, and you could be
either. Try both roles and see what you are most comfortable in. That's the goal of
gender free terms.
And now we are getting beyond Maia's original request of not relitigating gender free
dancing in this thread, so I would politely suggest starting another thread for those who
prefer gendered dancing and calling that is not this one.
Respectfully,
Perry
On Monday, March 11, 2024 at 10:53:02 AM EDT, K P via Contra Callers
<contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
John,
<Perhaps, “the roles were originally (completely and utterly) based on gender”!
Ya think? :)
I had what I assume is a similar response when I read that, John.
Aside to John: In this entire, ongoing discussion, it seems to me that there is an active
conspiracy of pretense (along the lines of 'the emperor's new clothes') that
the elephant sitting squarely in the middle of the room is actually a blueberry muffin.
Open and honest questions:
Am I the only living person who has a preference for dancing with the opposite cisgender
(realizing that any particular, such opposite, cisgendered individual may, in fact, have a
different preference)?
If the above is a reasonable question, what is wrong with saying "If you have a
preference to dance primarily with women, I recommend dancing the left role. If you have a
preference to dance with men, I'd recommend dancing the right-side role; if you have
no preference, it doesn't matter"?
What is the surveyed percentage of dancers in your community who have such a preference vs
those who don't?
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
11:35 a.m.
New subject: "Assigning" roles in the beginners' lesson?
I did, in fact, retain Maia's request in front of mind when I posed my
"open and honest" questions. They specifically address the question of,
like the hat in Harry Potter, streaming new arrivals.
"...there is no reason that one role must be danced by one gender and the
other role must be danced by the other. "
I totally agree with you, Perry.
"So when you *are* using larks/robins, then we need to completely erase
gender from the equation and have people understand that there is a lark
and a robin, and you could be either. Try both roles and see what you are
most comfortable in."
And if there is, in fact, a discernable difference in comfort (for an ab
initio dancer trying out both left and right roles for the first time), I
posit that the various characteristics of the people you encounter while
dancing one role, versus the other, will necessarily be one determinant of
the comfort level.
"And now we are getting beyond Maia's original request of not relitigating
gender free dancing in this thread, so I would politely suggest starting
another thread for those who prefer gendered dancing and calling that is
not this one."
I disagree. Please see above.
Respectfully,
Ken Panton
5:56 p.m.
New subject: "Assigning" roles in the beginners' lesson?
On Mon, 11 Mar 2024 10:52:25 -0400, K P via Contra Callers wrote:
Am I the only living person who has a preference for
dancing with the opposite cisgender (realizing that any
particular, such opposite, cisgendered individual may, in fact, have a different
preference)?
I wasn't going to get involved in all this, but I have to side with Ken Panton -
I'm a man and I certainly prefer
dancing with women. And I very much enjoy dancing with Louise Siddons even though she may
generally have a different
preference.
Colin Hume
6:13 p.m.
New subject: "Assigning" roles in the beginners' lesson?
The point is that if you announce it loudly, then you're making it gender
free in name only. If larks is just code for gents, then people who want to
dance a role that doesn't match their gender expression or identity (or who
are non-binary for that matter) will be more uncomfortable than if the
dance is truly gender free. You announce it quietly not because it's
shameful to have a preference, but because it's shaming the people who
don't match if you announce it loudly.
On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 5:56 PM Colin Hume via Contra Callers <
contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
On Mon, 11 Mar 2024 10:52:25 -0400, K P via Contra
Callers wrote:
Am I the only living person who has a preference
for dancing with the
opposite cisgender (realizing that any
particular, such opposite, cisgendered individual
may, in fact, have a
different preference)?
I wasn't going to get involved in all this, but I have to side with Ken
Panton - I'm a man and I certainly prefer
dancing with women. And I very much enjoy dancing with Louise Siddons
even though she may generally have a different
preference.
Colin Hume
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
6:59 p.m.
New subject: "Assigning" roles in the beginners' lesson?
You’re welcome to have your preferences! I don’t understand how giving
folks of any gender the freedom to dance with whomever they want, on
whichever side of the swing they want, prevents you from only asking
(people you perceive to be) cos women to dance.
The goal of “encouraging everyone to partner with who they want to and
dance on the side they want to” seems an unambiguous good to me! Or am I
misunderstanding?
Cheers,
Maia
--
Maia McCormick (she/her)
917.279.8194
On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 6:14 PM Chris Lahey via Contra Callers <
contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
The point is that if you announce it loudly, then
you're making it gender
free in name only. If larks is just code for gents, then people who want to
dance a role that doesn't match their gender expression or identity (or who
are non-binary for that matter) will be more uncomfortable than if the
dance is truly gender free. You announce it quietly not because it's
shameful to have a preference, but because it's shaming the people who
don't match if you announce it loudly.
On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 5:56 PM Colin Hume via Contra Callers <
contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
On Mon, 11 Mar 2024 10:52:25 -0400, K P via
Contra Callers wrote:
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Am I the only living person who has a preference
for dancing with the
opposite cisgender (realizing that any
particular, such opposite, cisgendered individual
may, in fact, have a
different preference)?
I wasn't going to get involved in all this, but I have to side with Ken
Panton - I'm a man and I certainly prefer
dancing with women. And I very much enjoy dancing with Louise Siddons
even though she may generally have a different
preference.
Colin Hume
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to
contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
7:03 p.m.
New subject: "Assigning" roles in the beginners' lesson?
Er, typo, first paragraph should read “cis women”.
--
Maia McCormick (she/her)
917.279.8194
On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 6:59 PM Maia McCormick <maia.mcc(a)gmail.com> wrote:
You’re welcome to have your preferences! I don’t
understand how giving
folks of any gender the freedom to dance with whomever they want, on
whichever side of the swing they want, prevents you from only asking
(people you perceive to be) cos women to dance.
The goal of “encouraging everyone to partner with who they want to and
dance on the side they want to” seems an unambiguous good to me! Or am I
misunderstanding?
Cheers,
Maia
--
Maia McCormick (she/her)
917.279.8194
On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 6:14 PM Chris Lahey via Contra Callers <
contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
The point is that if you announce it loudly, then
you're making it gender
free in name only. If larks is just code for gents, then people who want to
dance a role that doesn't match their gender expression or identity (or who
are non-binary for that matter) will be more uncomfortable than if the
dance is truly gender free. You announce it quietly not because it's
shameful to have a preference, but because it's shaming the people who
don't match if you announce it loudly.
On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 5:56 PM Colin Hume via Contra Callers <
contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
On Mon, 11 Mar 2024 10:52:25 -0400, K P via
Contra Callers wrote:
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to
contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Am I the only living person who has a preference
for dancing with the
opposite cisgender (realizing that any
particular, such opposite, cisgendered individual
may, in fact, have a
different preference)?
I wasn't going to get involved in all this, but I have to side with Ken
Panton - I'm a man and I certainly prefer
dancing with women. And I very much enjoy dancing with Louise Siddons
even though she may generally have a different
preference.
Colin Hume
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to
contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
12 Mar
12 Mar
7:50 a.m.
New subject: "Assigning" roles in the beginners' lesson?
Colin wrote:
I wasn't going to get involved in all this, but I
have to side with Ken Panton - I'm a man and I certainly prefer
dancing with women. And I very much enjoy dancing with Louise Siddons even though she
may generally have a different preference.
It always surprises me when people bring sexuality into this conversation, even though at
this point I should know better. I enjoy dancing with Colin, just as I enjoy dancing with
anyone who is a good dancer (or making a good-faith effort, or having a tonne of fun) and
an interesting, kind, thoughtful human being, and I am pleased that we are friends both on
and off the dance floor. When he (or anyone) asks me to dance, my first thought is not “oh
good, I'm sexually attracted to this person” — it’s “oh good, this will be fun!”
Recently at a contra dance I was separated from my partner, a woman, by two men who didn’t
want to dance with each other and perceived my partner and I as acceptable alternatives. I
was visibly upset by it and declined to dance at all; I am not a commodity). One of the
men came over afterwards to apologise (as did my partner; older than me and not in her
home community, I think she felt more social pressure to accede). He explained that he
knew how I felt because he “has a daughter like you” — meaning, lesbian. I explained back
to him that I wasn’t upset because I’m a lesbian, I was upset because I had asked someone
to dance, they had accepted, and that agreement had been disregarded in deference to two
men’s discomfort. To be honest, I am squicked out by the idea that someone looks at me
dancing with another person and thinks first of my sexuality — that’s a creepy worldview
in the context of contra dancing.
There are dance communities determined to hold onto a heterocentric model, and that’s
their choice — but we are, as a society, attempting to heal from a long — but ultimately
quite recent — history of toxic gender models and so I think it’s a bad choice. Men being
afraid or disgusted to touch other men is a social illness, not something to preserve or
protect. Based on people’s comments in this discussion, gender-free dance communities
understand, consciously or otherwise, that contra dance is a collective enterprise, that
we are all dancing with each other, and that the community is healthier when it doesn’t
put limits around how that happens. Friends can dance with each other — yes, even if
they’re men! — and family members, and strangers, and lovers can all dance with each
other, and they can bring different aspects of themselves to every interaction within the
dance, whether with partner or neighbour.
Louise.
10:58 a.m.
New subject: "Assigning" roles in the beginners' lesson?
What Louise said!!! Thank you.
If I may, I'd like to share this with my home, very traditional, dance.
Mary
On Tue, Mar 12, 2024, 7:51 AM Louise Siddons via Contra Callers <
contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
Colin wrote:
I wasn't going to get involved in all this, but I have to side with Ken
Panton - I'm a man and I certainly prefer
dancing with women. And I very much enjoy dancing with Louise Siddons
even though she may generally have a different preference.
It always surprises me when people bring sexuality into this conversation,
even though at this point I should know better. I enjoy dancing with Colin,
just as I enjoy dancing with anyone who is a good dancer (or making a
good-faith effort, or having a tonne of fun) and an interesting, kind,
thoughtful human being, and I am pleased that we are friends both on and
off the dance floor. When he (or anyone) asks me to dance, my first thought
is not “oh good, I'm sexually attracted to this person” — it’s “oh good,
this will be fun!”
Recently at a contra dance I was separated from my partner, a woman, by
two men who didn’t want to dance with each other and perceived my partner
and I as acceptable alternatives. I was visibly upset by it and declined to
dance at all; I am not a commodity). One of the men came over afterwards to
apologise (as did my partner; older than me and not in her home community,
I think she felt more social pressure to accede). He explained that he knew
how I felt because he “has a daughter like you” — meaning, lesbian. I
explained back to him that I wasn’t upset because I’m a lesbian, I was
upset because I had asked someone to dance, they had accepted, and that
agreement had been disregarded in deference to two men’s discomfort. To be
honest, I am squicked out by the idea that someone looks at me dancing with
another person and thinks first of my sexuality — that’s a creepy worldview
in the context of contra dancing.
There are dance communities determined to hold onto a heterocentric model,
and that’s their choice — but we are, as a society, attempting to heal from
a long — but ultimately quite recent — history of toxic gender models and
so I think it’s a bad choice. Men being afraid or disgusted to touch other
men is a social illness, not something to preserve or protect. Based on
people’s comments in this discussion, gender-free dance communities
understand, consciously or otherwise, that contra dance is a collective
enterprise, that we are all dancing with each other, and that the community
is healthier when it doesn’t put limits around how that happens. Friends
can dance with each other — yes, even if they’re men! — and family members,
and strangers, and lovers can all dance with each other, and they can bring
different aspects of themselves to every interaction within the dance,
whether with partner or neighbour.
Louise.
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
11:14 a.m.
New subject: "Assigning" roles in the beginners' lesson?
I must say that I am very disappointed to hear that male dancers are still attempting to
forcibly split female couples up so that men don't have to sit out or dance with other
men. We need to figure out whether this desire for these actions is somehow steeped in
"tradition" or whether it is based in some sort of discomfort that some men have
in being in a swing with other men, which some see as some sort of intimate embrace.
One of the things that I have learned that gender free dances do is to create a safe space
for all to dance with people of all genders in both roles. That safety and inclusiveness
is definitely not a hallmark when two women choose to dance with each other and men are
trying to split them up. This shouldn't be happening even if the role terms are
gendered, because we want people to have the ability to dance with the partner of their
choice, regardless of reason.
I think in this era of contra dancing, the mid 2020s, that all people who contra dance
should *expect* to encounter people of the same gender as a neighbor, and act in an
inclusive manner, and that might mean swinging. That's even if they choose to only
dance with people of other genders in the gents role only. Unless your dance is
completely heteronormative in that same-gender dancing is frowned upon, in which case
it's not an inclusive dance because it excludes people who wish to dance either role
for whatever reason.
I'm not sure where the notion of male/female couples being "traditional"
came from, but it totally reminds me of the argument for "traditional" marriage
(meaning one man, one woman) as an excuse to ban same-gender marriages. We need to be
accepting of all forms of coupling on the dance floor if we aim to be an inclusive dance
form.
Perry
On Tuesday, March 12, 2024 at 07:51:02 AM EDT, Louise Siddons via Contra Callers
<contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
Colin wrote:
I wasn't going to get involved in all this, but I have to side with Ken Panton -
I'm a man and I certainly prefer
dancing with women. And I very much enjoy dancing with Louise Siddons even though she may
generally have a different preference.
It always surprises me when people bring sexuality into this conversation, even though at
this point I should know better. I enjoy dancing with Colin, just as I enjoy dancing with
anyone who is a good dancer (or making a good-faith effort, or having a tonne of fun) and
an interesting, kind, thoughtful human being, and I am pleased that we are friends both on
and off the dance floor. When he (or anyone) asks me to dance, my first thought is not “oh
good, I'm sexually attracted to this person” — it’s “oh good, this will be fun!”
Recently at a contra dance I was separated from my partner, a woman, by two men who didn’t
want to dance with each other and perceived my partner and I as acceptable alternatives. I
was visibly upset by it and declined to dance at all; I am not a commodity). One of the
men came over afterwards to apologise (as did my partner; older than me and not in her
home community, I think she felt more social pressure to accede). He explained that he
knew how I felt because he “has a daughter like you” — meaning, lesbian. I explained back
to him that I wasn’t upset because I’m a lesbian, I was upset because I had asked someone
to dance, they had accepted, and that agreement had been disregarded in deference to two
men’s discomfort. To be honest, I am squicked out by the idea that someone looks at me
dancing with another person and thinks first of my sexuality — that’s a creepy worldview
in the context of contra dancing.
There are dance communities determined to hold onto a heterocentric model, and that’s
their choice — but we are, as a society, attempting to heal from a long — but ultimately
quite recent — history of toxic gender models and so I think it’s a bad choice. Men being
afraid or disgusted to touch other men is a social illness, not something to preserve or
protect. Based on people’s comments in this discussion, gender-free dance communities
understand, consciously or otherwise, that contra dance is a collective enterprise, that
we are all dancing with each other, and that the community is healthier when it doesn’t
put limits around how that happens. Friends can dance with each other — yes, even if
they’re men! — and family members, and strangers, and lovers can all dance with each
other, and they can bring different aspects of themselves to every interaction within the
dance, whether with partner or neighbour.
Louise.
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
11:21 a.m.
New subject: "Assigning" roles in the beginners' lesson?
"I'm not sure where the notion of male/female couples being
'traditional' came from"
I'm very much in favor of anyone being able to dance any role, have
been separated from the person I asked to dance because there weren't
"enough men to go around", dance both roles a similar amount, and
think the long history of same-gender dancing is great. But
opposite-gender dancing is "traditional" in the same sense that almost
everything else we call "traditional" is: because that's how it was
usually done for a long time. That doesn't at all mean we need to
stick with it, as is the case with any tradition, but I don't think
it's useful to push back on people using that phrasing.
Jeff
On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 11:15 AM Perry Shafran via Contra Callers
<contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
I must say that I am very disappointed to hear that male dancers are still attempting to
forcibly split female couples up so that men don't have to sit out or dance with other
men. We need to figure out whether this desire for these actions is somehow steeped in
"tradition" or whether it is based in some sort of discomfort that some men have
in being in a swing with other men, which some see as some sort of intimate embrace.
One of the things that I have learned that gender free dances do is to create a safe
space for all to dance with people of all genders in both roles. That safety and
inclusiveness is definitely not a hallmark when two women choose to dance with each other
and men are trying to split them up. This shouldn't be happening even if the role
terms are gendered, because we want people to have the ability to dance with the partner
of their choice, regardless of reason.
I think in this era of contra dancing, the mid 2020s, that all people who contra dance
should *expect* to encounter people of the same gender as a neighbor, and act in an
inclusive manner, and that might mean swinging. That's even if they choose to only
dance with people of other genders in the gents role only. Unless your dance is
completely heteronormative in that same-gender dancing is frowned upon, in which case
it's not an inclusive dance because it excludes people who wish to dance either role
for whatever reason.
I'm not sure where the notion of male/female couples being "traditional"
came from, but it totally reminds me of the argument for "traditional" marriage
(meaning one man, one woman) as an excuse to ban same-gender marriages. We need to be
accepting of all forms of coupling on the dance floor if we aim to be an inclusive dance
form.
Perry
On Tuesday, March 12, 2024 at 07:51:02 AM EDT, Louise Siddons via Contra Callers
<contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
Colin wrote:
I wasn't going to get involved in all this, but I have to side with Ken Panton -
I'm a man and I certainly prefer
dancing with women. And I very much enjoy dancing with Louise Siddons even though she
may generally have a different preference.
It always surprises me when people bring sexuality into this conversation, even though at
this point I should know better. I enjoy dancing with Colin, just as I enjoy dancing with
anyone who is a good dancer (or making a good-faith effort, or having a tonne of fun) and
an interesting, kind, thoughtful human being, and I am pleased that we are friends both on
and off the dance floor. When he (or anyone) asks me to dance, my first thought is not “oh
good, I'm sexually attracted to this person” — it’s “oh good, this will be fun!”
Recently at a contra dance I was separated from my partner, a woman, by two men who
didn’t want to dance with each other and perceived my partner and I as acceptable
alternatives. I was visibly upset by it and declined to dance at all; I am not a
commodity). One of the men came over afterwards to apologise (as did my partner; older
than me and not in her home community, I think she felt more social pressure to accede).
He explained that he knew how I felt because he “has a daughter like you” — meaning,
lesbian. I explained back to him that I wasn’t upset because I’m a lesbian, I was upset
because I had asked someone to dance, they had accepted, and that agreement had been
disregarded in deference to two men’s discomfort. To be honest, I am squicked out by the
idea that someone looks at me dancing with another person and thinks first of my sexuality
— that’s a creepy worldview in the context of contra dancing.
There are dance communities determined to hold onto a heterocentric model, and that’s
their choice — but we are, as a society, attempting to heal from a long — but ultimately
quite recent — history of toxic gender models and so I think it’s a bad choice. Men being
afraid or disgusted to touch other men is a social illness, not something to preserve or
protect. Based on people’s comments in this discussion, gender-free dance communities
understand, consciously or otherwise, that contra dance is a collective enterprise, that
we are all dancing with each other, and that the community is healthier when it doesn’t
put limits around how that happens. Friends can dance with each other — yes, even if
they’re men! — and family members, and strangers, and lovers can all dance with each
other, and they can bring different aspects of themselves to every interaction within the
dance, whether with partner or neighbour.
Louise.
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
11:54 a.m.
New subject: "Assigning" roles in the beginners' lesson?
I believe it's traditional that the roles have been *called* "woman" and
"man", but I don't believe that it's traditional that they have always
been *actually* danced by people of the specified gender. For example,
I think that there's a long history of gender-segregated dance where
people are all [believed to be] one particular gender and they all dance
together, half of them taking each dance role. Sometimes for practice
before they dare to be seen dancing by the "opposite" sex at the fancy ball;
sometimes because of sex-phobia under a presumption of heterosexuality.
And plenty of other reasons that people have not adhered to the gender
designations for the roles, for a long time.
regards,
ajr, dancing in and near Toronto, Canada
p.s. I like the young people's saying that "tradition is just peer
pressure from dead people". If doing something the way we've always
done it is fun for everyone and connects you to people at other times
and places, that's cool. But if your response to the question (this is
a quotation) "if I show up at [that dance] with my boyfriend, how will
people react?" is "well, you'll be required to dance exclusively with
women as partners all night because that's the way we've always done it",
then that's not cool, and your dance community will continue to shrink.
12:19 p.m.
New subject: "Assigning" roles in the beginners' lesson?
Hi all,
And thanks Louise for articulating the issue so clearly and kindly.
However, I’m aware that Maia asked specifically that we avoid devolving
into a thread about gendered dance roles and once again we have. Can we
take this off thread? Kat K already started an alternate thread — I’ll go
give that bump.
From my perspective, insisting on dancing with someone even though they
have selected another partner and ignoring initial requests to stick to the
thread’s topic come from similar places (of valuing one’s own preferences
over community priorities). Let’s not do either!
Tanya H. Merchant
On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 08:54 Alan J Rosenthal via Contra Callers <
contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
I believe it's traditional that the roles have
been *called* "woman" and
"man", but I don't believe that it's traditional that they have always
been *actually* danced by people of the specified gender. For example,
I think that there's a long history of gender-segregated dance where
people are all [believed to be] one particular gender and they all dance
together, half of them taking each dance role. Sometimes for practice
before they dare to be seen dancing by the "opposite" sex at the fancy
ball;
sometimes because of sex-phobia under a presumption of heterosexuality.
And plenty of other reasons that people have not adhered to the gender
designations for the roles, for a long time.
regards,
ajr, dancing in and near Toronto, Canada
p.s. I like the young people's saying that "tradition is just peer
pressure from dead people". If doing something the way we've always
done it is fun for everyone and connects you to people at other times
and places, that's cool. But if your response to the question (this is
a quotation) "if I show up at [that dance] with my boyfriend, how will
people react?" is "well, you'll be required to dance exclusively with
women as partners all night because that's the way we've always done it",
then that's not cool, and your dance community will continue to shrink.
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
11:23 a.m.
New subject: "Assigning" roles in the beginners' lesson?
I came here to say exactly this, but I couldn't find a nice way to say it.
Thank you, Louise, you did it.
My dance partner preference has nothing to do with sexuality, and
everything to do with fun. I won't partner with a "man" whose attitude
toward me is "Me man! You woman!"
And now this is on a thread about assigning roles. Sigh....
-Amy
On Tue, Mar 12, 2024, 4:50 AM Louise Siddons via Contra Callers <
contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
Colin wrote:
I wasn't going to get involved in all this, but I have to side with Ken
Panton - I'm a man and I certainly prefer
dancing with women. And I very much enjoy dancing with Louise Siddons
even though she may generally have a different preference.
It always surprises me when people bring sexuality into this conversation,
even though at this point I should know better. I enjoy dancing with Colin,
just as I enjoy dancing with anyone who is a good dancer (or making a
good-faith effort, or having a tonne of fun) and an interesting, kind,
thoughtful human being, and I am pleased that we are friends both on and
off the dance floor. When he (or anyone) asks me to dance, my first thought
is not “oh good, I'm sexually attracted to this person” — it’s “oh good,
this will be fun!”
Recently at a contra dance I was separated from my partner, a woman, by
two men who didn’t want to dance with each other and perceived my partner
and I as acceptable alternatives. I was visibly upset by it and declined to
dance at all; I am not a commodity). One of the men came over afterwards to
apologise (as did my partner; older than me and not in her home community,
I think she felt more social pressure to accede). He explained that he knew
how I felt because he “has a daughter like you” — meaning, lesbian. I
explained back to him that I wasn’t upset because I’m a lesbian, I was
upset because I had asked someone to dance, they had accepted, and that
agreement had been disregarded in deference to two men’s discomfort. To be
honest, I am squicked out by the idea that someone looks at me dancing with
another person and thinks first of my sexuality — that’s a creepy worldview
in the context of contra dancing.
There are dance communities determined to hold onto a heterocentric model,
and that’s their choice — but we are, as a society, attempting to heal from
a long — but ultimately quite recent — history of toxic gender models and
so I think it’s a bad choice. Men being afraid or disgusted to touch other
men is a social illness, not something to preserve or protect. Based on
people’s comments in this discussion, gender-free dance communities
understand, consciously or otherwise, that contra dance is a collective
enterprise, that we are all dancing with each other, and that the community
is healthier when it doesn’t put limits around how that happens. Friends
can dance with each other — yes, even if they’re men! — and family members,
and strangers, and lovers can all dance with each other, and they can bring
different aspects of themselves to every interaction within the dance,
whether with partner or neighbour.
Louise.
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net
248
days inactive
255
days old
contracallers@lists.sharedweight.net
35 comments
21 participants
participants (21)
-
Alan J Rosenthal -
Amy Wimmer -
Chris Lahey -
Colin Hume -
Don Veino -
Jeff Kaufman -
JJ -
John Sweeney -
Julian Blechner -
K P -
Katherine Kitching -
Ken Panton
-
Louise Siddons -
Maia McCormick -
Mary Collins -
Patricia Campbell -
Perry Shafran -
Read Weaver -
Richard Fischer -
Sargon de Jesus -
Tanya Merchant