Hi, In my opinion it's important that the replacement terms don't resemble any gendered words. The point of gender-neutral role terms is to break the association between a role name and a gender. (Personally, it also grates on me when standard terms contain a joke, as if we're supposed to be chuckling constantly.) regards, ajr, dancing in and near Toronto, Canada _______________________________________________ Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net To unsubscribe send an email to contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net

So you're NOT in favor of trying Oaks / Maples, then, right? :D -Julian On Tue, Feb 7, 2023 at 1:08 PM Becky Liddle 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

I still have great trouble reading dances written with Larks/Ravens – for me the L means Ladies means the ones on the right. I have to think twice to understand the notation. When I am using gendered terms (which many of my groups/customers still prefer) I would rather use Men than Gents. It has a much clearer sound. 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

Hi, Allison! Spitball suggestion about courtesy turns for your group in particular (not that I’d do it in a regular beginner workshop). Teach them the courtesy turn hold as a promenade hold (left in left in front, right in right behind), then do a super-simple mixer (partners promenade in that hold, still in that hold, forward and back to the center, turn as a couple with the lark backing and robin going forward, promenade the other direction, turn as a couple enough to be facing in, forward and back to the center, face original promenade direction, robins peel off to the lark behind them and take left in left, right behind, wheeling all the way round to face promenade direction. (I’m not counting beats - work through and modify this as needed for the music you’ve got). I think that gets to a possibly fun-nish dance that teaches the courtesy turn divorced from right and left through or chain, and has more elastic timing than a regular contra.. (I don’t have a swing or anything because I’m really trying to get them used to that courtesy turn hold but only have to figure it out once per partner. Once they’re used to the hold and the scoop I think that then teaching chain or r&l thru should be a piece of cake. You can even turn this into a scatter mixer where you promenade around and find another couple, r&l t over and back, chain one way, keep the new partner and scatter around.) I hope this is helpful. I am just pulling this out of nowhere right now and haven’t tried it at all, but it seems like it might help in your particular circumstances and if you think so too, give it a try, modify as needed. — Alan ________________________________________ From: Allison Jonjak via Contra Callers < contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net&gt; Sent: Tuesday, February 7, 2023 11:40 AM To: John Sweeney Cc: contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net Subject: [Callers] Re: Gentlespoons/Ladles (from Rompin' Stompin') On gentlespoons/ladles, that's the "default" nomenclature set up for contradb.com--EXPLICITLY BECAUSE it's so ridiculous that it "forces" a user to change their dialect to the terms being called at their dance series. (Larks/robins, ladies/gents, a couple other defaults I don't recall off the cuff, and any custom term set is supported). We just didn't want to drive off users by "looking like" we were prescribing one term set or another. The downside is if you take a screenshot of a dance when you're not logged in, it gives ladles/gentlespoons... sorry! I was one who "last heard" that the terms were larks/ravens pre-pandemic, and have now switched to larks/robins in my local dance series. I'm nervous about teaching courtesy turns to a group where 0 dancers have experience, but that's only my hangup to address as a caller. (And I'm just circumventing it until i gain confidence, which I'm sure I'll work up soon.) I've had no pushback from my dancers. (The only feedback I've gotten at a break once was "is larks/ravens so you don't have to call us men and women?" I nodded. "That's smart!" was the reply.) On Tue, Feb 7, 2023 at 1:28 PM John Sweeney via Contra Callers < contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net&lt;mailtolto: contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net&gt;&gt; wrote: I still have great trouble reading dances written with Larks/Ravens – for me the L means Ladies means the ones on the right. I have to think twice to understand the notation. When I am using gendered terms (which many of my groups/customers still prefer) I would rather use Men than Gents. It has a much clearer sound. Happy dancing, John John Sweeney, Dancer, England john(a)modernjive.com&lt;mailtolto: john(a)modernjive.com&gt; 01233 625 362 & 07802 940 574 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> -- Pardon brevity; sent by smartphone. _______________________________________________ Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net To unsubscribe send an email to contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net

When I started dancing in the late 1980s… Callers were taking the revolutionary step of not calling "men" and "women" but rather using "ladies" and "gents", to signal that switching roles was ok, since nobody referred to themselves as a "lady" or a "gent" in casual conversation.

Aside: does anyone have a copy of the "I am not a lady" essay? I'd be interested to read it. Jeff On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 9:54 AM Tony Parkes via Contra Callers < contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net&gt; wrote: _______________________________________________ Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net To unsubscribe send an email to contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net

I believe it’s in Myrtle Wilhite’s *Lullaby of the Swing and other contra dances, tunes, waltzes, and essays* (Madison, WI, 1993). I can’t lay my hand on my copy at the moment, but perhaps someone else has one. Tony Parkes Billerica, Mass. www.hands4.com New book! Square Dance Calling: An Old Art for a New Century (available now) *From:* Mary Collins &lt;nativedae(a)gmail.com&gt; *Sent:* Wednesday, February 8, 2023 2:11 PM *To:* Jeff Kaufman &lt;jeff(a)alum.swarthmore.edu&gt; *Cc:* Tony Parkes &lt;tony(a)hands4.com&gt;om>; Joe Harrington < contradancerjoe(a)gmail.com&gt;gt;; contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net *Subject:* Re: [Callers] Re: Gentlespoons/Ladles (from Rompin' Stompin') Jeff, me too...if you find it, share please. mary "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 Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 9:58 AM Jeff Kaufman via Contra Callers < contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net&gt; wrote: Aside: does anyone have a copy of the "I am not a lady" essay? I'd be interested to read it. Jeff On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 9:54 AM Tony Parkes via Contra Callers < contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net&gt; wrote: Joe Harrington wrote: *> *When I started dancing in the late 1980s… Callers were taking the revolutionary step of not calling "men" and "women" but rather using "ladies" and "gents", to signal that switching roles was ok, since nobody referred to themselves as a "lady" or a "gent" in casual conversation. Where was this, Joe? And are you talking about contra callers (rather than ECD)? I can only speak about the NYC area in the 1960s and early ’70s, and New England starting in the late ’60s and continuing to the present. In both regions, square/contra callers (contras were a subcategory of square dance until around 1975) universally used “gents/ladies.” (I believe ECD teachers have always used “men/women,” presumably emulating Playford and Cecil Sharp.) AFAIK, northeastern callers pretty consistently used “gents/ladies” until some of them started to move away from gender-related terms. Tolman and Page’s *Country Dance Book* (1937) uses “gents/ladies,” as do most of the other standard American dance books from the 1900s to the 1950s (a few, aimed at schoolteachers, use “boys/girls”). I know of no region where callers changed from “men/women” to “gents/ladies.” I know that some callers, beginning I think in the ’80s, changed from “gents/ladies” to “men/women,” feeling that “gentlemen” and “ladies” smacked of classism. (One female caller, in an essay titled “I am not a lady,” requested that other callers not use her contra compositions if they adhered to “gents/ladies.”) As an amateur (= lover) of dance history, I would like to know about past changes of which I was unaware. Tony Parkes Billerica, Mass. www.hands4.com New book! Square Dance Calling: An Old Art for a New Century (available now) _______________________________________________ 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 _______________________________________________ Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net To unsubscribe send an email to contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net

Since no one else has mentioned this, I'll just say that my entire personal difficulty with birds comes from fairy tales and ornithology. When we say "robin" we are mostly thinking about that bird with the "red breast", right? Not something kinda reddish-brownish? That's the male. In my childhood I read any number of books with anthropomorphised birds, and Mister Robin Redbreast was male. In a bunch of the stories there was also small, sweet-singing female lark. Add to that that in the states the robin is a different bird from in the UK, and much larger, I've got two good reasons to think of the robin as being the "male" role. My brain weighs the imagery and memories against that silly little detail of starting with "R" or "L" and defaults obstinately to the exact wrong conclusion every time. EVERY time. It's somewhat maddening. But "Ravens" was even worse, because ravens are black and men in formal clothing dress in black, so I guess things are better now?? Whew. Change is hard. On 2/9/23, Peghesley via Contra Callers &lt;contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net&gt; wrote: reference to in female time terms role. contra who be using (rather early the “men/women,” other an 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

As a member of the LGBT community, my view (personal, from talking to others, and from votes in local contra dances in Western Massachusetts) is it's very good to have a consistent term that isn't inherently gendered. After local debate and dance-specific polls, we've been using larks and robins/ravens here since about 2018, and I think it's been a big improvement over ladies/gents. Larks and robins are my personal preference, since it's what everyone here is used to, and I at least don't have enough bird knowledge to get confused about robins or larks having some inherent gendering. I don't have any cultural stance against positional calling, but the confusion of "lefts allemande right" seems a lot worse than learning new terms. Thanks, Gabrielle On Feb 9, 2023, at 13:45, Jim Thaxter via Contra Callers < contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net&gt; wrote: Just a thought, but has anyone checked with the lgbtq community about what terms they would like to have used? Another thought, someone mentioned earlier in the thread that the terminology issue had been discussed thoroughly some time ago and the decision had been made to go with the birds. I don’t remember seeing or hearing about a general survey sent out to all the CDSS affiliates or any other general list of dance groups around the country or world vetting that decision Personally, I’m exploring positional calling. Just my gut feeling, but I think fewer people would be challenged by right/left directional calls than by being called bird names. Jim Thaxter Columbia, MO On Thu, Feb 9, 2023 at 6:31 AM Amy Cann via Contra Callers < contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net&gt; 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

On Feb 10, 2023, at 1:51 PM, Winston, Alan P. &lt;winston(a)slac.stanford.edu&gt; wrote: Jeff Spero wrote: -------------- But… as dancing resumed, there seemed to be a shortage of callers here and I ended up being asked to call the first dance since the beginning of the pandemic. I was not thrilled about calling ladies/gents, nor was I prepared to call larks/ravens. So I tackled positional calling, and there were no complaints. None. Just compliments. I’ve called since then and have been experimenting with ECD terminology of first corners / second corners, and that seemed to work quite nicely - and it has the added benefit of helping bridge the gap between dancers who only dance in one of those communities. Hopefully, it will catch on with other local callers here, as that’s where I’m headed. ----------------- That this is working is fantastic! I've certainly found "corners" incredibly useful in calling ECD geographically. Do you use first corners as quondam role names - that is, the people who started out on the first corners, wherever they are now - or instantaneously positional? What do you about Becket dances? (In duple minor improper first corners = robins; in Becket, same corners with respect to the stage = larks.). DId you have enough English dancers on the contra floor that this was an easy sell? (In my community there's not a huge overlap in the two groups.). —Alan

Bree, I’m making the same change as well and am calling without reference to role and don’t need bird terms. Louise Siddons’ position is a compelling one. Peg Hesley www.peghesley.com<http://www.peghesley.com/> Sent from my iPhone using voice recognition

Bree, I’m making the same change as well and am calling without reference to role and don’t need bird terms. Louise Siddons’ position is a compelling one. Peg Hesley www.peghesley.com<http://www.peghesley.com/> Sent from my iPhone using voice recognition

It feels to me that one of the things that modern contra is trying to do is to make the roles more symmetrical. I mean, we can all do the ladies/robins right-hand chain with no problem, but when it comes to any other chain (lark RH chain or any LH chain), even the most adept contra dancers get confused. I feel that this comes from the notion that one role leads and one role follows. Even in a robins RH chain, the robin bears some responsibility in both direction of the flow and also the weight given. If it's treated as a shared move, it actually feels more graceful and feels better. Swings also should be taught as a shared move, and robins should easily be able to decide the speed and ending of the swing if need be. This can be demonstrated by observing an experienced robin dancer dancing/teaching a new lark dancer. I *do* suggest that people should learn to be comfortable in one role first before tackling the other role, perhaps after several evenings of dance. But I'm not totally *un*comfortable in suggesting that there aren't much differences between the roles other than one starts on the left and the other on the right. And while I'm here, on the topic of positional dancing, after having taken a workshop with Louise recently, I've begun to learn that positional calling is a newly learned skill, way beyond just "lefts turn right" and such. The way it was described set off a light bulb for me to the point where it makes a lot of sense to teach that way. And it seemed that Louise agreed that if it's a good way to bridge the gap between dancers, why not try it? I certainly need much more learning before I decide to try positional on a full-time basis, but I do think it's good to understand what positional calling is and positional calling isn't before passing judgement. It seems to have worked really well in places where it has been used, and when done well, it's so smooth that most dancers don't even know that it's positional calling. But I'm still going to use larks/robins for the time being. Perry On Thursday, February 9, 2023 at 10:36:01 AM EST, Tony Parkes via Contra Callers &lt;contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net&gt; wrote: Ridge’s point about ballroom vs. symmetrical swings is related to an issue that I have about the trend toward de-gendered roles. I haven’t said much about this publicly, as I hesitate to appear to be either on the “wrong” side of a controversy or unwilling to listen and possibly change my mind. Many contra series provide a 20-30 minute teaching session before each dance event. There’s a limit to what can be conveyed to a first-timer in such a brief session, but obviously it’s essential to explain the two roles and what differentiates one from the other. Fine. Many contra series have adopted “larks/robins” as their standard terms for the roles. Also fine. But some series – I don’t know how many – have instructed their teachers not to indicate in any way which role is which with respect to either male/female or leading/following. This, I submit, is a disservice to new dancers *as long as* the contra dance repertoire includes (a) an asymmetrical swing position and/or (b) moves (e.g. courtesy turns and “official” turn-unders) where one role very often leads the other (and a reverse lead is extremely rare). I get that it’s seen as desirable to allow new dancers to assume the role of their choice, without regard to gender – without the stigma of doing a part associated with a gender other than their own. But IMO that works only if the two roles are truly equal in the physical movements required and the physical sensations experienced. There is some element of leading and following in present-day contra moves, no matter if it’s vestigial or seen as something to work toward extinguishing. I feel that to be fair and consistent, the contra world should either do away with the asymmetrical moves (not likely) or give new folks the option of choosing to lead or follow. At a teaching session, I’m inclined to say something like “The two roles are fairly equal, but there’s a tiny bit of leading and following left over from an earlier day. If you’re more comfortable with leading, I suggest you start as a lark; if you’re more comfortable being led, try starting as a robin.” I fail to see the problem with this. As an aside, leading (sorry) into another can of worms (any hungry robins about?), I’m a bit nervous about teaching newbies that a good dancer learns both roles and that the ability to swap roles during a number is “a consummation devoutly to be wished.” I have no philosophical quarrel with this, but it inevitably widens the gap between what a newbie knows / can do and what one must know / be able to do to survive at a mostly-experienced dance. That gap has been widening over the last couple of decades anyway, as the list of accepted contra basics has grown from 12-15 to the 30s. But I’ve said enough for now. Tony Parkes Billerica, Mass. www.hands4.com New book! Square Dance Calling: An Old Art for a New Century (available now) *From:* Ridge Kennedy via Contra Callers < contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net&gt; *Sent:* Thursday, February 9, 2023 9:52 AM *To:* Shared Weight Contra Callers &lt;contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net&gt; *Subject:* [Callers] Re: Gentlespoons/Ladles (from Rompin' Stompin') Dear All, I have thought a lot about the nomenclature issues. I too went from ladies to women and back to ladies, worked with armbands and bare arms, leaders and followers, larks and robins, and have lapsed almost accidentally into positional calling out of an abundance of trying not to say the wrong thing. Yet, for all the talk about the talk, there remains, for me, a big problem in the actual dancing. "Comfort" and "comfortable" and words like that can be found in abundance in the charters, mission statements, and announcements that dance groups publish on their websites and read at dances. I'm in full agreement -- anyone who attends a dance should feel safe and comfortable. If a dance community wants to change the words it uses in order to achieve that goal, then I must, perforce, support that decision. Still, I (he, him, his, etc.) personally feel distinctly uncomfortable doing a ballroom swing with other same-gender dancers. I've discussed my feelings with other dancers in my area, and I know I am not alone, both among dancers of my gender and dancers of the opposite gender. Yet, by even raising the question, I have also been described (not to my face) in very unflattering terms. About ten thousand years ago, when I first started dancing, there was a commonly accepted symmetrical swing that was used. It was, in retrospect, a little bit uncomfortable as it involved reaching the right arm across the other dancer's body and hooking a hand around the other dancer's torso. In retrospect, not good. A two-hand turn is, in my mind, not a very acceptable alternative to a ballroom swing. I have seen some folks do some lively variations with crossed hands and such so that it can work, but I think there is a better option that I have been encouraging dancers to learn. I call it a Scottish swing. (John Sweeny includes it in his videos of eleventy-seven ways to swing as a Northumbrian swing.) Here's what it looks like. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HWhKWRn_jk> I like it because I can give a clear signal for the kind of swing that I want to do, I feel completely comfortable doing it with any dancer, and it allows my swinging partner and me to enjoy a very satisfactory swing. It's easy to learn. I have even found that I can teach it to dancers on the fly in the middle of a dance. Maybe it is not the best option for a symmetrical swing (an alternative to a ballroom swing). If someone can propose a better alternative, I'll give it a try. But for all of the concern about words and terminology, it seems to me that the overall dance community ought to pay attention to this particular aspect of actually dancing. Sincerely, Ridge Ridge Kennedy [Exit 145] Hey -- I wrote a book! *Murder & Miss Austen's Ball. * It's a novel with musical accompaniment. Now that's different. Read all about it here! <https://www.hedgehoghousebooks.com> On Thu, Feb 9, 2023 at 8:57 AM Gabrielle Taylor via Contra Callers < contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net&gt; wrote: As a member of the LGBT community, my view (personal, from talking to others, and from votes in local contra dances in Western Massachusetts) is it's very good to have a consistent term that isn't inherently gendered. After local debate and dance-specific polls, we've been using larks and robins/ravens here since about 2018, and I think it's been a big improvement over ladies/gents. Larks and robins are my personal preference, since it's what everyone here is used to, and I at least don't have enough bird knowledge to get confused about robins or larks having some inherent gendering. I don't have any cultural stance against positional calling, but the confusion of "lefts allemande right" seems a lot worse than learning new terms. Thanks, Gabrielle On Feb 9, 2023, at 13:45, Jim Thaxter via Contra Callers < contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net&gt; wrote: Just a thought, but has anyone checked with the lgbtq community about what terms they would like to have used? Another thought, someone mentioned earlier in the thread that the terminology issue had been discussed thoroughly some time ago and the decision had been made to go with the birds. I don’t remember seeing or hearing about a general survey sent out to all the CDSS affiliates or any other general list of dance groups around the country or world vetting that decision Personally, I’m exploring positional calling. Just my gut feeling, but I think fewer people would be challenged by right/left directional calls than by being called bird names. Jim Thaxter Columbia, MO On Thu, Feb 9, 2023 at 6:31 AM Amy Cann via Contra Callers < contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net&gt; wrote: Since no one else has mentioned this, I'll just say that my entire personal difficulty with birds comes from fairy tales and ornithology. When we say "robin" we are mostly thinking about that bird with the "red breast", right? Not something kinda reddish-brownish? That's the male. In my childhood I read any number of books with anthropomorphised birds, and Mister Robin Redbreast was male. In a bunch of the stories there was also small, sweet-singing female lark. Add to that that in the states the robin is a different bird from in the UK, and much larger, I've got two good reasons to think of the robin as being the "male" role. My brain weighs the imagery and memories against that silly little detail of starting with "R" or "L" and defaults obstinately to the exact wrong conclusion every time. EVERY time. It's somewhat maddening. But "Ravens" was even worse, because ravens are black and men in formal clothing dress in black, so I guess things are better now?? Whew. Change is hard. On 2/9/23, Peghesley via Contra Callers &lt;contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net&gt; wrote: reference to in female time terms role. contra who be using (rather early the “men/women,” other an 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 _______________________________________________ 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 _______________________________________________ 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

Hello from Halifax, NS, Canada! I'd like to add to this convo by saying that for many years (as both a dancer and then a caller), I've had the desire to cultivate the roles as equal, rather than the Larks having more of a leader role. I wasn't sure that that was an ok thing to want though, so I kept it to myself at first. I'm thrilled to now read that there are others also consciously pushing the roles in that direction. Our group was doing gents and ladies when i started to dance, and there were definitely many gents in our group who wanted to lead me around. I didn't particularly enjoy being relegated to the follow role because of my gender. (and yes, there was in theory the option to dance the other role, but as I was easily confused back then, I preferred to stick with the role I was slowly getting used to). At the same time, as I started to learn more, I noticed there were many "gents" who had no sense of leading, and I began to enjoy as the "lady" being able to "back-lead" them to help them feel the wonderful centripetal and balancy forces at play. I became quite the expert back-leader in the ladies chain! But I always hated the term "back-lead" as I felt it had a negative connotation. (That pushy lady is back-leading the gent, just like a back-seat driver!). I even remember once, an experienced dancer from the US telling me it was totally inappropriate to desire to "back-lead" and I still feel annoyed by that today ;) Anyhow, we've now switched over to a non-gendered dance with Larks and Ravens (with beautiful bird-labels that the dancers wear, which is why we haven't evolved to Robins here) and it is working wonderfully for us. With so many new dancers coming in and old ones fading away over the years, I think the majority of our dancers don't have any idea there even *were* gender roles in our type of dancing. (We are quite an isolated community out here, so for many people, we are the only thing they know about contra dancing). I think that is so cool! When you look around the room at our dances, we have reached the point where there is no correlation between visible gender and bird-role - everyone randomly assigns themselves. For us, it's been an amazing change - and we've heard directly from both the queer community and from many women that they feel more comfortable at our dances now. And the cisgender men keep coming so I presume they are having an ok time too :) As I've become more confident in my calling and am now the defacto caller for our group (nobody else is currently available though I'm going to train some new folks this spring), I've felt more bold to cultivate the roles as I'd like to see them. I never mention a notion of leading or following, and instead I talk about the delightful "push-me-pull-you" feeling of contra, where each dancer feels an "elastic connection" to the other, and how (in my view) this special shared connection, along with a feeling of never-ending movement, is what makes contra magical. We get a very large proportion of beginners each month, and also many repeat dancers who don't become particularly skilled (they perhaps attend once every 2-3 months on average, so their learning curve is slow, and they forget a lot after our 3-month summer break). As such, we do a lot of dances without swings (I try to get at least halfway through the dance without introducing a swing), and I'm trying Larks chains as well as Robins chains prior to swinging these days. Post-covid, we've been doing swings with a modified ballroom hold (Larks left hand in Robins' right, but other hands cupped on each others' elbows), which creates more space between the dancers -- both for personal comfort for any gender when dancing with a stranger--and also less germs-in-face feeling during these covid times. (Though I plan to try the Scottish Swing that Ridge suggested at our next dance, just out of interest! :) ) I find the swing in this modified ballroom position feels symmetrical to me and to our dancers- both dancers are supporting each other by the elbow, and one does not feel more inherently "lead-y". I've also replaced "California Twirl" with what I call "tug and turn" - I tell the dancers to tug off the hand they are holding (i.e inside hand) to pass by the right shoulder - then catch by the new inside hand facing the other way. When this happens with partners, sometimes they end up doing a cali-twirl as an embellishment - but the base move is symmetrical. So I feel I'm close to achieving my personal vision for a no leads/follow dance. :D I have always loved contra as a way for two dancers or 4 dancers or a whole line of dancers to feel these interesting connections and forces at play, while never stopping moving. I personally have never been interested in contra as something that resembles "couples dancing", so the approach we have in our group is emphasizing the elements of contra that I personally love best. As our dances are well attended and growing, it seems to be working for our group. Which is gratifying for me for sure :) All that said! One of the most interesting parts of this discussion is to read about all the diverse approaches that callers are taking throughout the world, and how different approaches seem to work super well in different communities. I am totally intrigued by positional calling. I don't forsee trying it myself any time soon, only because what we have going for us right now is working really well and it's taken many years to get here... but I'm super keen to try it out at a dance elsewhere, and maybe in the future I'll give it a try in Halifax. And while I LOVE our non-gendered dances here in Halifax, I could see myself as a cisgender person getting a kick out of going to a dance somewhere far away with my sweetheart on a date night, where they call with men and ladies and the gender roles are quite rigid, and getting into that vibe for the evening. And though I am personally terrified of the idea of dancing at one of those fusion events where the contra dancers do some red-hot swing/blues type dancing with their partners, I *adore* watching videos of it, it's amazing! So I wanted to say that I hope everyone continues to contribute to this discussion in the spirit of "Here is what works for me/ here is what works for my group in case it interests you" rather than in a critical or prosthelytizing fashion :) Cheers from Halifax! Kat Kitching https://halifaxcontra.ca <http://www.halifaxcontra.c> Perry Shafran via Contra Callers &lt;contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net&gt; Thursday, February 9, 2023 10:55 AM It feels to me that one of the things that modern contra is trying to do is to make the roles more symmetrical. I mean, we can all do the ladies/robins right-hand chain with no problem, but when it comes to any other chain (lark RH chain or any LH chain), even the most adept contra dancers get confused. I feel that this comes from the notion that one role leads and one role follows. Even in a robins RH chain, the robin bears some responsibility in both direction of the flow and also the weight given. If it's treated as a shared move, it actually feels more graceful and feels better. Swings also should be taught as a shared move, and robins should easily be able to decide the speed and ending of the swing if need be. This can be demonstrated by observing an experienced robin dancer dancing/teaching a new lark dancer. I *do* suggest that people should learn to be comfortable in one role first before tackling the other role, perhaps after several evenings of dance. But I'm not totally *un*comfortable in suggesting that there aren't much differences between the roles other than one starts on the left and the other on the right. And while I'm here, on the topic of positional dancing, after having taken a workshop with Louise recently, I've begun to learn that positional calling is a newly learned skill, way beyond just "lefts turn right" and such. The way it was described set off a light bulb for me to the point where it makes a lot of sense to teach that way. And it seemed that Louise agreed that if it's a good way to bridge the gap between dancers, why not try it? I certainly need much more learning before I decide to try positional on a full-time basis, but I do think it's good to understand what positional calling is and positional calling isn't before passing judgement. It seems to have worked really well in places where it has been used, and when done well, it's so smooth that most dancers don't even know that it's positional calling. But I'm still going to use larks/robins for the time being. Perry On Thursday, February 9, 2023 at 10:36:01 AM EST, Tony Parkes via Contra Callers &lt;contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net&gt; &lt;contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net&gt; wrote: Ridge’s point about ballroom vs. symmetrical swings is related to an issue that I have about the trend toward de-gendered roles. I haven’t said much about this publicly, as I hesitate to appear to be either on the “wrong” side of a controversy or unwilling to listen and possibly change my mind. Many contra series provide a 20-30 minute teaching session before each dance event. There’s a limit to what can be conveyed to a first-timer in such a brief session, but obviously it’s essential to explain the two roles and what differentiates one from the other. Fine. Many contra series have adopted “larks/robins” as their standard terms for the roles. Also fine. But some series – I don’t know how many – have instructed their teachers not to indicate in any way which role is which with respect to either male/female or leading/following. This, I submit, is a disservice to new dancers *as long as* the contra dance repertoire includes (a) an asymmetrical swing position and/or (b) moves (e.g. courtesy turns and “official” turn-unders) where one role very often leads the other (and a reverse lead is extremely rare). I get that it’s seen as desirable to allow new dancers to assume the role of their choice, without regard to gender – without the stigma of doing a part associated with a gender other than their own. But IMO that works only if the two roles are truly equal in the physical movements required and the physical sensations experienced. There is some element of leading and following in present-day contra moves, no matter if it’s vestigial or seen as something to work toward extinguishing. I feel that to be fair and consistent, the contra world should either do away with the asymmetrical moves (not likely) or give new folks the option of choosing to lead or follow. At a teaching session, I’m inclined to say something like “The two roles are fairly equal, but there’s a tiny bit of leading and following left over from an earlier day. If you’re more comfortable with leading, I suggest you start as a lark; if you’re more comfortable being led, try starting as a robin.” I fail to see the problem with this. As an aside, leading (sorry) into another can of worms (any hungry robins about?), I’m a bit nervous about teaching newbies that a good dancer learns both roles and that the ability to swap roles during a number is “a consummation devoutly to be wished.” I have no philosophical quarrel with this, but it inevitably widens the gap between what a newbie knows / can do and what one must know / be able to do to survive at a mostly-experienced dance. That gap has been widening over the last couple of decades anyway, as the list of accepted contra basics has grown from 12-15 to the 30s. But I’ve said enough for now. Tony Parkes Billerica, Mass. www.hands4.com New book! Square Dance Calling: An Old Art for a New Century (available now) *From:* Ridge Kennedy via Contra Callers &lt;contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net&gt; &lt;contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net&gt; *Sent:* Thursday, February 9, 2023 9:52 AM *To:* Shared Weight Contra Callers &lt;contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net&gt; &lt;contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net&gt; *Subject:* [Callers] Re: Gentlespoons/Ladles (from Rompin' Stompin') Dear All, I have thought a lot about the nomenclature issues. I too went from ladies to women and back to ladies, worked with armbands and bare arms, leaders and followers, larks and robins, and have lapsed almost accidentally into positional calling out of an abundance of trying not to say the wrong thing. Yet, for all the talk about the talk, there remains, for me, a big problem in the actual dancing. "Comfort" and "comfortable" and words like that can be found in abundance in the charters, mission statements, and announcements that dance groups publish on their websites and read at dances. I'm in full agreement -- anyone who attends a dance should feel safe and comfortable. If a dance community wants to change the words it uses in order to achieve that goal, then I must, perforce, support that decision. Still, I (he, him, his, etc.) personally feel distinctly uncomfortable doing a ballroom swing with other same-gender dancers. I've discussed my feelings with other dancers in my area, and I know I am not alone, both among dancers of my gender and dancers of the opposite gender. Yet, by even raising the question, I have also been described (not to my face) in very unflattering terms. About ten thousand years ago, when I first started dancing, there was a commonly accepted symmetrical swing that was used. It was, in retrospect, a little bit uncomfortable as it involved reaching the right arm across the other dancer's body and hooking a hand around the other dancer's torso. In retrospect, not good. A two-hand turn is, in my mind, not a very acceptable alternative to a ballroom swing. I have seen some folks do some lively variations with crossed hands and such so that it can work, but I think there is a better option that I have been encouraging dancers to learn. I call it a Scottish swing. (John Sweeny includes it in his videos of eleventy-seven ways to swing as a Northumbrian swing.) Here's what it looks like. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HWhKWRn_jk> I like it because I can give a clear signal for the kind of swing that I want to do, I feel completely comfortable doing it with any dancer, and it allows my swinging partner and me to enjoy a very satisfactory swing. It's easy to learn. I have even found that I can teach it to dancers on the fly in the middle of a dance. Maybe it is not the best option for a symmetrical swing (an alternative to a ballroom swing). If someone can propose a better alternative, I'll give it a try. But for all of the concern about words and terminology, it seems to me that the overall dance community ought to pay attention to this particular aspect of actually dancing. Sincerely, Ridge Ridge Kennedy [Exit 145] Hey -- I wrote a book! *Murder & Miss Austen's Ball. * It's a novel with musical accompaniment. Now that's different. Read all about it here! <https://www.hedgehoghousebooks.com> On Thu, Feb 9, 2023 at 8:57 AM Gabrielle Taylor via Contra Callers < contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net&gt; 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 _______________________________________________ Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net To unsubscribe send an email to contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net

Kat, Nice observations. I'll note that your symmetrical version of California Twirl into "Tug and Turn" is almost exactly the definition of "Trade By" in club squares for dancers who are facing out of the set. (For dancers facing in, trade by is functionally the same as "pass through." I like your tweaks toward symmetry, particularly as you're in a position to encourage it across an entire community. I fear a splitting of dance communities as some dancers favor certain terms while others prefer a different set without some consensus. Jerome Grisanti On Thu, Feb 9, 2023, 12:23 PM Katherine Kitching via Contra Callers < contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net&gt; wrote: Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net To unsubscribe send an email to contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net

Great discussion! So, now what do we do with squares? One of my favorites, “Push pa, shove ma” (swing the girl from Arkansas) Darn… but I get it. Should we rewrite the singing squares that don’t comply? It might not be too difficult. I would just like to know what some of you have experienced with your squares. Are these dances and their poetry part of our tradition, or are they dinosaurs? Could they be called with a disclaimer? Jill Allen Lawrence, KS On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 8:17 AM Jeff Kaufman via Contra Callers < contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net&gt; wrote:

you swing her, you promenade her and sing."

yeah, you swing, you promenade (th)'em and sing."

Great discussion! So, now what do we do with squares? One of my favorites, “Push pa, shove ma” (swing the girl from Arkansas) Darn… but I get it. Should we rewrite the singing squares that don’t comply? It might not be too difficult. I would just like to know what some of you have experienced with your squares. Are these dances and their poetry part of our tradition, or are they dinosaurs? Could they be called with a disclaimer? Jill Allen Lawrence, KS

I look forward to a day in the future when the "quaintness" of the gendered terms will be used as a quirky theme for a dance evening, and people will think it's so old fashioned that no one will take offense; gendered terms will just be "the way it was a long time ago" and not the contentious topic it has been for the last few years. If that ever happens, the "Push Pa, Pull Ma" type dances with original will be pure gold! bobfab(a)aol.com On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 3:03 PM, Rich Sbardella via Contra Callers &lt;contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net&gt; 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

Happier days for some, but a lot of us, those "haylcon days" were really not all that. Transgender people and gays and lesbians having to hide who they were, or not able to dance with (let alone marry) their partners for fear of retaliation, or having to go to their own separate dances to feel safe and accepted; women with no recourse if they were touched inappropriately or made to feel unsafe; and more that I don't have a gut sense for, not being part of those groups. For myself, I much prefer the current time. I'm sure it must feel jarring to experience this sort of contention and discomfort, but I promise this is only a fraction of what minorities and vulnerable groups have experienced in the dance scene over the years. I hope that folks who have mostly coasted through a dance world built for them are willing to endure a little proximal discomfort and change for the sake of the people only just finding safety and community here. I know email and especially large group discussions are a pretty lousy way to have discussions and convey nuance; if Jon or anyone else yearning for these "simpler times" is interested in having a one-on-one conversation about this, drop me a line off-list. Take care, Maia -- Maia McCormick (she/her) 917.279.8194 On Sat, Feb 11, 2023 at 5:37 PM Jon Greene via Contra Callers < contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net&gt; wrote: _______________________________________________ Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net To unsubscribe send an email to contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net

Hi Maia, The part of my post referencing role names was meant to be ironic ("when men were men ...") and was triggered by Robert's post about some future nostalgia. I'm sorry if I offended you or anyone else. I have no problem with any of the gender free names. Nor do I have a problem with "right shoulder round" apart from it being a mouthful and that callers no longer emphasize eye contact. But that's fine. I get that not everyone is comfortable with making eye contact with everyone else. Those who want to, do. Neither of these changes has in any way detracted from my dance experience. But the Covid part was not ironic. I definitely miss not being able to simply go to a dance without restrictions. And I miss seeing people's faces. But at least requirements like pre-registration, testing and mask wearing impose reasonable requirements on all dancers, even though I personally have chosen not to go to a dance that requires masking. But I believe that vaccination requirements are out and out exclusionary and that the data is at best mixed as to whether asymptomatic unvaccinated or partially vaccinated dancers pose any greater risk of transmitting Covid than asymptomatic fully vaccinated and boosted dancers, especially as the virus continues to mutate. Requiring that a person puts a synthesized chemical into their body is not equivalent to requiring that they wear a mask. And that's why virtually all vaccination mandates have been dropped, even by organizations like the Metropolitan Opera that caters to older, more vulnerable populations. It's ironic that this thread is all about making dances as inclusive as possible while some of the largest dances in New England exclude over 80% of the population (those who have not gotten the bivalent booster). It doesn't much matter what the role names are when you're not allowed to go to a dance in the first place. - Jon On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 9:47 PM Maia McCormick via Contra Callers < contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net&gt; wrote: _______________________________________________ Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net To unsubscribe send an email to contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net

Bree, I’m making the same change as well and am calling without reference to role and don’t need bird terms. Louise Siddons’ position is a compelling one. Peg Hesley www.peghesley.com<https://shared.outlook.inky.com/link?domain=www.peghes… Sent from my iPhone using voice recognition

At the Ralph Page Legacy day last month, Chrissy Fowler did a session in which she called dances as she called them at different times in her career. In it, she talked about how, at one point, she and other female callers were insisting on the term "women" because they weren't ladies, and then several years later they were insisting on the term "ladies" because that was understood to be the name of a role. I can't give a year when it happened, but I do believe I remember a time when at least some callers were making it explicitly clear that the terms Gents and Ladies referred to roles, and anybody could dance either role. Jacob On Wed, Feb 8, 2023, 2:29 PM Tony Parkes via Contra Callers < contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net&gt; wrote: _______________________________________________ Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net To unsubscribe send an email to contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net

When I started dancing in the late 1980s… Callers were taking the revolutionary step of not calling "men" and "women" but rather using "ladies" and "gents", to signal that switching roles was ok, since nobody referred to themselves as a "lady" or a "gent" in casual conversation.

I LIKE THIS! I hereby nominate "jets and rubies" as the likeliest contender, far outshining my own personal fallback, suns-and-moons. And btw, I'm absolutely seeing "jets" in my mind as black shiny beads, not flying machines. On 2/13/23, Michael Fuerst via Contra Callers &lt;contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net&gt; wrote: consonant. lips new 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

jets/rubies might be the best solution several reasons: (1) no relation to gender roles, (2) sound like gents and ladies, satisfying those who cognitively have difficulty associating larks and robins with the corresponding roles. (3) easier and faster to say. Jets, unlike larks, has no hard consonant. Rubies has a hard consonant "b", but the sound of the "u" leaves one's lips and tongue positioned perfectly to utter the "b". (This is a benefit to new callers, who often have difficulty prompting on time.) ----- _______________________________________________ Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers(a)lists.sharedweight.net To unsubscribe send an email to contracallers-leave(a)lists.sharedweight.net