Import1 June 2015

import1@lists2.sharedweight.net

1 participants
123 discussions

Re: [Callers] Another approach to Gender Free calling

by Ron Blechner via Callers

RE: Dave: Clockwise / counterclockwise - too wordy, and some people have trouble with this regardless. Hey: What about on the left diagonal? Along the set? I also really don't like the blaming of the dance if it's not 100% intuitive. Plenty of dances flow great but have a counter-intuitive element. Restricting dances to those without counter-intuitive moves is basically saying, "Sorry, if we want to be genderfree, we need to put a cap on how difficult a dance is. Sorry genderfree dancers, you aren't allowed to dance too advanced." That's a big problem. Rollaways can *not* be handled from left to right - who does the rolling is not indicated at all! On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 1:23 PM, Dave Casserly <david.j.casserly(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Also with regard to Ron's questions, numbers 2 and 3 (who-leads-whom and > who-walks-forward) can be handled by using the terms "clockwise" and > "counterclockwise." As to 4 (who passes whom for a hey), I agree with Bob > that if the dance is good, it should be obvious, but even if not, "pass left > shoulders in the middle for a hey for four" can only be interpreted one way, > so that fixes the issue of referring to roles. Roll-aways can be handled > with "roll away from the left to the right" or "roll away from the right to > the left." > > I'm not saying that it's perfect, but it is actually quite doable to call a > dance without referring to roles at all, even without resorting to first or > second corners. > > Perry asked for an example of a dance with global terminology used. Here's > one (just picking a common, typical dance): > > Square Affair, by Becky Hill > > A1 Long Lines, 1st corners chain (or just say "chain" if you're dealing with > experienced dancers and don't want to use the corners terminology) > A2 Balance and pull by partner, pull by neighbor, balance and pull by > partner, pull by neighbor > B1 New neighbors balance and swing > B2 Circle 3/4, partner swing > > Perry, you also mentioned that you are trying to figure out how global > terminology would work for proper dances. I have always called proper > dances using global terminology without even thinking about it. For Chorus > Jig, for instance, why would you ever need to use the term "gent" or "lady"? > Down the outside, back, down the middle, back and neighbor around-the-waist > turn, 1s turn contra corners, 1s balance and swing. Nothing that any > particular role does that the other role isn't doing at the same time. > > On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 9:41 AM, Bob Morgan via Callers > <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >> >> With regard to Ron's questions >> >> 1. Would be easily covered by 1st or 2nd corners walk forward to a wave >> >> 2. Again can be done with reference to corners >> >> 3. Not so familiar with these. >> >> 4. You usually only need an obvious first pass person so not an issue I >> think >> >> 5. If you're facing out you turn, if you're facing across you walk is how >> I call it anyway >> >> Bob >> >> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 5:09 PM, Ron Blechner via Callers >> <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >>> >>> Andrea, how would you handle the following: >>> >>> 1. Lines of one role/position to the center to a wavy line, as in Trip to >>> Lambertville, et all? >>> >>> 2. Indication of who walks forward / backs up in a gypsy star? >>> >>> 3. Indication of who-leads-who, such as in Ramsay Chase, Pedal Pushers, >>> Jurassic Redheads, etc. >>> >>> 4. Indication of who is passing while calling a hey. >>> >>> 5. Indication of who crosses, who turns in a box circulate? >>> >>> 6. Indication any other role/position specific move that I haven't >>> mentioned? Turn over right shoulder, as in Fairport Harbour? Rollaways? >>> >>> None of these fall under the "most unusual figures" as you stated. >>> >>> Ron >>> >>> On Jun 1, 2015 11:59 AM, "Andrea Nettleton via Callers" >>> <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >>>> >>>> In previous discussions here, on FB, and privately with organizers at >>>> Hampshire over the last two years, I have discussed the possible use of >>>> global terminology for gender free contra. I would contend that if used, >>>> everyone would become more aware of the structure of dances. Only the most >>>> unusual figures/sequences would be unable to be called. The addition of >>>> first and second corner positions to the arsenal makes it possible for same >>>> role dancers to also be called upon to dance together without reference to >>>> gender. Second corners chain, or first corners allemande L 1 1/2 for >>>> example. It would have to be agreed that this refers to those standing in >>>> those positions at that moment. In ECD we use first and second corners to >>>> refer to the people, first and second diagonals for the positions. But >>>> since we use diagonal to refer to those across and over one set, this seems >>>> unhelpful. Simply corner positions works better. I'm glad some folks are >>>> trying it out at last. I had hoped for an opportunity myself before now. >>>> Cheers, >>>> Andrea >>>> >>>> Sent from my iOnlypretendtomultitask >>>> >>>> On Jun 1, 2015, at 8:37 AM, Jim Hemphill via Callers >>>> <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >>>> >>>> The recent discussions on this topic inspired me to try an experiment in >>>> gender free calling. Last night I called the contra dance in St. Louis >>>> using gender free calling without telling anyone. The experiment was a >>>> great success. I received lots of positive feedback on the evenings dance. >>>> At the break and after the dance I made a point to ask several dancers, some >>>> were callers as well, if they noticed anything different or unusual about >>>> the dances or how I taught them. One person noticed that there were more >>>> dances that included a swing in the center for couple 2 than usual. No one >>>> I talked to noticed that the calls and teaching were gender free. >>>> >>>> It took some extra time to construct a fun, diverse 3 hour program, but >>>> it is certainly possible. Re-labeling the dancers is not the only way to >>>> call gender free. >>>> >>>> If you are interested in the program I used or the larger collection of >>>> gender free dances I chose the program from, send me an email, >>>> arcadian35(a)gmail.com. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Jim Hemphill >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Callers mailing list >>>> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net >>>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Callers mailing list >>>> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net >>>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Callers mailing list >>> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net >>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Callers mailing list >> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net >> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >> > > > > -- > David Casserly > (cell) 781 258-2761

9 years, 6 months

Re: [Callers] Another approach to Gender Free calling

by Kalia Kliban via Callers

On 6/1/2015 10:23 AM, Dave Casserly via Callers wrote: > Also with regard to Ron's questions, numbers 2 and 3 (who-leads-whom and > who-walks-forward) can be handled by using the terms "clockwise" and > "counterclockwise." As to 4 (who passes whom for a hey), I agree with > Bob that if the dance is good, it should be obvious, but even if not, > "pass left shoulders in the middle for a hey for four" can only be > interpreted one way, so that fixes the issue of referring to roles. Mostly, yes, but with oddball dances like Earth and Sky (Rick Mohr) that have an unusual entry into the hey you do need to give some more specific instruction. A1: Gypsy with neighbor (8) Swing neighbor (8) A2: Circle left 3/4 (8) Allemande right with partner 1 1/2 (8) B1: Allemande left with shadow (6) Swing partner (10) B2: 5/8 hey (men pass right shoulders to start) (8) Gypsy (left shoulder) with neighbor (8) Just as a brain exercise, how would you tackle this one with global terminology? There's usually a way to make it work, but sometimes it can be pretty clunky to avoid the role terms. > I'm not saying that it's perfect, but it is actually quite doable to > call a dance without referring to roles at all, even without resorting > to first or second corners. > > Perry asked for an example of a dance with global terminology used. > Here's one (just picking a common, typical dance): > > Square Affair, by Becky Hill > > A1 Long Lines, 1st corners chain (or just say "chain" if you're dealing > with experienced dancers and don't want to use the corners terminology) That would need to be 2nd corners. > A2 Balance and pull by partner, pull by neighbor, balance and pull by > partner, pull by neighbor > B1 New neighbors balance and swing > B2 Circle 3/4, partner swing Kalia Kliban Sebastopol, CA

9 years, 6 months

Re: [Callers] Another approach to Gender Free calling

by Luke Donforth via Callers

We have a caller in the Mad Robin group that calls our monthly dance that doesn't use gendered terms. They only call a few dances in the evening, so it's easier to pick a few dances that you can finesse around the language. If you go into every swing saying where you end relative to the person you're swinging "swing your neighbor and end in their place" versus "swing your neighbor and end where you started" lets you say "the folks that ended on the right now allemande in the middle", etc. It's finaglable, but gets cumbersome. Jim, while I applaud your dedication to making it happen, I'd personally want the buy-in and support of my community before engineering a vocabulary restructuring (we did an entire evening using explicit gender free at our monthly dance, it was warmly received as a one-off, but folks were not eager to see a permanent transition). A large part of the knowledge transfer to new dancers happens between the folks on the floor; and if you're using different language than the community, I worry about the new dancers. As a small note, I personally object to the idea that "chain" by itself is fine in this context; as it's using a learned association without acknowledging it. To me, it seems to reinforce the dichotomy while making the dance less accessible to new dancers. On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 1:23 PM, Dave Casserly via Callers < callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > Also with regard to Ron's questions, numbers 2 and 3 (who-leads-whom and > who-walks-forward) can be handled by using the terms "clockwise" and > "counterclockwise." As to 4 (who passes whom for a hey), I agree with Bob > that if the dance is good, it should be obvious, but even if not, "pass > left shoulders in the middle for a hey for four" can only be interpreted > one way, so that fixes the issue of referring to roles. Roll-aways can be > handled with "roll away from the left to the right" or "roll away from the > right to the left." > > I'm not saying that it's perfect, but it is actually quite doable to call > a dance without referring to roles at all, even without resorting to first > or second corners. > > Perry asked for an example of a dance with global terminology used. > Here's one (just picking a common, typical dance): > > Square Affair, by Becky Hill > > A1 Long Lines, 1st corners chain (or just say "chain" if you're dealing > with experienced dancers and don't want to use the corners terminology) > A2 Balance and pull by partner, pull by neighbor, balance and pull by > partner, pull by neighbor > B1 New neighbors balance and swing > B2 Circle 3/4, partner swing > > Perry, you also mentioned that you are trying to figure out how global > terminology would work for proper dances. I have always called proper > dances using global terminology without even thinking about it. For Chorus > Jig, for instance, why would you ever need to use the term "gent" or > "lady"? Down the outside, back, down the middle, back and neighbor > around-the-waist turn, 1s turn contra corners, 1s balance and swing. > Nothing that any particular role does that the other role isn't doing at > the same time. > > On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 9:41 AM, Bob Morgan via Callers < > callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > >> With regard to Ron's questions >> >> 1. Would be easily covered by 1st or 2nd corners walk forward to a wave >> >> 2. Again can be done with reference to corners >> >> 3. Not so familiar with these. >> >> 4. You usually only need an obvious first pass person so not an issue I >> think >> >> 5. If you're facing out you turn, if you're facing across you walk is >> how I call it anyway >> >> Bob >> >> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 5:09 PM, Ron Blechner via Callers < >> callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >> >>> Andrea, how would you handle the following: >>> >>> 1. Lines of one role/position to the center to a wavy line, as in Trip >>> to Lambertville, et all? >>> >>> 2. Indication of who walks forward / backs up in a gypsy star? >>> >>> 3. Indication of who-leads-who, such as in Ramsay Chase, Pedal Pushers, >>> Jurassic Redheads, etc. >>> >>> 4. Indication of who is passing while calling a hey. >>> >>> 5. Indication of who crosses, who turns in a box circulate? >>> >>> 6. Indication any other role/position specific move that I haven't >>> mentioned? Turn over right shoulder, as in Fairport Harbour? Rollaways? >>> >>> None of these fall under the "most unusual figures" as you stated. >>> >>> Ron >>> On Jun 1, 2015 11:59 AM, "Andrea Nettleton via Callers" < >>> callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >>> >>>> In previous discussions here, on FB, and privately with organizers at >>>> Hampshire over the last two years, I have discussed the possible use of >>>> global terminology for gender free contra. I would contend that if used, >>>> everyone would become more aware of the structure of dances. Only the most >>>> unusual figures/sequences would be unable to be called. The addition of >>>> first and second corner positions to the arsenal makes it possible for same >>>> role dancers to also be called upon to dance together without reference to >>>> gender. Second corners chain, or first corners allemande L 1 1/2 for >>>> example. It would have to be agreed that this refers to those standing in >>>> those positions at that moment. In ECD we use first and second corners to >>>> refer to the people, first and second diagonals for the positions. But >>>> since we use diagonal to refer to those across and over one set, this seems >>>> unhelpful. Simply corner positions works better. I'm glad some folks are >>>> trying it out at last. I had hoped for an opportunity myself before now. >>>> Cheers, >>>> Andrea >>>> >>>> Sent from my iOnlypretendtomultitask >>>> >>>> On Jun 1, 2015, at 8:37 AM, Jim Hemphill via Callers < >>>> callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >>>> >>>> The recent discussions on this topic inspired me to try an experiment >>>> in gender free calling. Last night I called the contra dance in St. Louis >>>> using gender free calling without telling anyone. The experiment was a >>>> great success. I received lots of positive feedback on the evenings >>>> dance. At the break and after the dance I made a point to ask several >>>> dancers, some were callers as well, if they noticed anything different or >>>> unusual about the dances or how I taught them. One person noticed that >>>> there were more dances that included a swing in the center for couple 2 >>>> than usual. No one I talked to noticed that the calls and teaching were >>>> gender free. >>>> >>>> It took some extra time to construct a fun, diverse 3 hour program, but >>>> it is certainly possible. Re-labeling the dancers is not the only way to >>>> call gender free. >>>> >>>> If you are interested in the program I used or the larger collection of >>>> gender free dances I chose the program from, send me an email, >>>> arcadian35(a)gmail.com. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Jim Hemphill >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Callers mailing list >>>> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net >>>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Callers mailing list >>>> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net >>>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Callers mailing list >>> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net >>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Callers mailing list >> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net >> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >> >> > > > -- > David Casserly > (cell) 781 258-2761 > > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net > > -- Luke Donforth Luke.Donforth(a)gmail.com <Luke.Donev(a)gmail.com>

9 years, 6 months

Re: [Callers] Global terminology in contra dances

by Don Veino via Callers

Note, that page doesn't use the phrase "Global Terminology". More specifically, the word "global" doesn't appear anywhere on it. It does include a "Heather and Rose Terminology" section which is what I believe is being referenced. I only bring this up because it caused me some confusion at first, as it was not clear in which section the referenced "global" material was. On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 12:51 PM, Linda Leslie via Callers < callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > In an earlier email, David Casserly shared the following link, which > defines the approach very, very well! > http://heatherandrose.org/terms.shtml > Linda > >

9 years, 6 months

Re: [Callers] Another approach to Gender Free calling

by Dave Casserly via Callers

Also with regard to Ron's questions, numbers 2 and 3 (who-leads-whom and who-walks-forward) can be handled by using the terms "clockwise" and "counterclockwise." As to 4 (who passes whom for a hey), I agree with Bob that if the dance is good, it should be obvious, but even if not, "pass left shoulders in the middle for a hey for four" can only be interpreted one way, so that fixes the issue of referring to roles. Roll-aways can be handled with "roll away from the left to the right" or "roll away from the right to the left." I'm not saying that it's perfect, but it is actually quite doable to call a dance without referring to roles at all, even without resorting to first or second corners. Perry asked for an example of a dance with global terminology used. Here's one (just picking a common, typical dance): Square Affair, by Becky Hill A1 Long Lines, 1st corners chain (or just say "chain" if you're dealing with experienced dancers and don't want to use the corners terminology) A2 Balance and pull by partner, pull by neighbor, balance and pull by partner, pull by neighbor B1 New neighbors balance and swing B2 Circle 3/4, partner swing Perry, you also mentioned that you are trying to figure out how global terminology would work for proper dances. I have always called proper dances using global terminology without even thinking about it. For Chorus Jig, for instance, why would you ever need to use the term "gent" or "lady"? Down the outside, back, down the middle, back and neighbor around-the-waist turn, 1s turn contra corners, 1s balance and swing. Nothing that any particular role does that the other role isn't doing at the same time. On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 9:41 AM, Bob Morgan via Callers < callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > With regard to Ron's questions > > 1. Would be easily covered by 1st or 2nd corners walk forward to a wave > > 2. Again can be done with reference to corners > > 3. Not so familiar with these. > > 4. You usually only need an obvious first pass person so not an issue I > think > > 5. If you're facing out you turn, if you're facing across you walk is how > I call it anyway > > Bob > > On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 5:09 PM, Ron Blechner via Callers < > callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > >> Andrea, how would you handle the following: >> >> 1. Lines of one role/position to the center to a wavy line, as in Trip to >> Lambertville, et all? >> >> 2. Indication of who walks forward / backs up in a gypsy star? >> >> 3. Indication of who-leads-who, such as in Ramsay Chase, Pedal Pushers, >> Jurassic Redheads, etc. >> >> 4. Indication of who is passing while calling a hey. >> >> 5. Indication of who crosses, who turns in a box circulate? >> >> 6. Indication any other role/position specific move that I haven't >> mentioned? Turn over right shoulder, as in Fairport Harbour? Rollaways? >> >> None of these fall under the "most unusual figures" as you stated. >> >> Ron >> On Jun 1, 2015 11:59 AM, "Andrea Nettleton via Callers" < >> callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >> >>> In previous discussions here, on FB, and privately with organizers at >>> Hampshire over the last two years, I have discussed the possible use of >>> global terminology for gender free contra. I would contend that if used, >>> everyone would become more aware of the structure of dances. Only the most >>> unusual figures/sequences would be unable to be called. The addition of >>> first and second corner positions to the arsenal makes it possible for same >>> role dancers to also be called upon to dance together without reference to >>> gender. Second corners chain, or first corners allemande L 1 1/2 for >>> example. It would have to be agreed that this refers to those standing in >>> those positions at that moment. In ECD we use first and second corners to >>> refer to the people, first and second diagonals for the positions. But >>> since we use diagonal to refer to those across and over one set, this seems >>> unhelpful. Simply corner positions works better. I'm glad some folks are >>> trying it out at last. I had hoped for an opportunity myself before now. >>> Cheers, >>> Andrea >>> >>> Sent from my iOnlypretendtomultitask >>> >>> On Jun 1, 2015, at 8:37 AM, Jim Hemphill via Callers < >>> callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >>> >>> The recent discussions on this topic inspired me to try an experiment in >>> gender free calling. Last night I called the contra dance in St. Louis >>> using gender free calling without telling anyone. The experiment was a >>> great success. I received lots of positive feedback on the evenings >>> dance. At the break and after the dance I made a point to ask several >>> dancers, some were callers as well, if they noticed anything different or >>> unusual about the dances or how I taught them. One person noticed that >>> there were more dances that included a swing in the center for couple 2 >>> than usual. No one I talked to noticed that the calls and teaching were >>> gender free. >>> >>> It took some extra time to construct a fun, diverse 3 hour program, but >>> it is certainly possible. Re-labeling the dancers is not the only way to >>> call gender free. >>> >>> If you are interested in the program I used or the larger collection of >>> gender free dances I chose the program from, send me an email, >>> arcadian35(a)gmail.com. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Jim Hemphill >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Callers mailing list >>> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net >>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Callers mailing list >>> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net >>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Callers mailing list >> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net >> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net > > -- David Casserly (cell) 781 258-2761

9 years, 6 months

Re: [Callers] Another approach to Gender Free calling

by Perry Shafran via Callers

In trying to figure out how this would work, I guess I need to stop thinking of 1st or 2nd corners in ECD, since most of those are proper dances, to using the terminology in contra, since most dances are improper. I'm trying to figure out how it would work for proper dances. And then for becket dances (though I can see that not being too difficult). And then there is contra corners, where 1st and 2nd corners have completely different meanings. In that case we would need to differentiate between a "corner" and a "contra corner". I ran into this when calling a contra dance with 1st and 2nd corners (Centennial Reel) recently. Perry From: Bob Morgan via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> To: Ron Blechner <contraron(a)gmail.com> Cc: Caller's discussion list <callers(a)sharedweight.net> Sent: Monday, June 1, 2015 10:41 AM Subject: Re: [Callers] Another approach to Gender Free calling With regard to Ron's questions 1. Would be easily covered by 1st or 2nd corners walk forward to a wave 2. Again can be done with reference to corners 3. Not so familiar with these. 4. You usually only need an obvious first pass person so not an issue I think 5. If you're facing out you turn, if you're facing across you walk is how I call it anyway Bob On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 5:09 PM, Ron Blechner via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: Andrea, how would you handle the following:1. Lines of one role/position to the center to a wavy line, as in Trip to Lambertville, et all?2. Indication of who walks forward / backs up in a gypsy star?3. Indication of who-leads-who, such as in Ramsay Chase, Pedal Pushers, Jurassic Redheads, etc.4. Indication of who is passing while calling a hey.5. Indication of who crosses, who turns in a box circulate?6. Indication any other role/position specific move that I haven't mentioned? Turn over right shoulder, as in Fairport Harbour? Rollaways? None of these fall under the "most unusual figures" as you stated.Ron On Jun 1, 2015 11:59 AM, "Andrea Nettleton via Callers" <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: In previous discussions here, on FB, and privately with organizers at Hampshire over the last two years, I have discussed the possible use of global terminology for gender free contra. I would contend that if used, everyone would become more aware of the structure of dances. Only the most unusual figures/sequences would be unable to be called. The addition of first and second corner positions to the arsenal makes it possible for same role dancers to also be called upon to dance together without reference to gender. Second corners chain, or first corners allemande L 1 1/2 for example. It would have to be agreed that this refers to those standing in those positions at that moment. In ECD we use first and second corners to refer to the people, first and second diagonals for the positions. But since we use diagonal to refer to those across and over one set, this seems unhelpful. Simply corner positions works better. I'm glad some folks are trying it out at last. I had hoped for an opportunity myself before now.Cheers,Andrea Sent from my iOnlypretendtomultitask On Jun 1, 2015, at 8:37 AM, Jim Hemphill via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: The recent discussions on this topic inspired me to try an experiment in gender free calling. Last night I called the contra dance in St. Louis using gender free calling without telling anyone. The experiment was a great success. I received lots of positive feedback on the evenings dance. At the break and after the dance I made a point to ask several dancers, some were callers as well, if they noticed anything different or unusual about the dances or how I taught them. One person noticed that there were more dances that included a swing in the center for couple 2 than usual. No one I talked to noticed that the calls and teaching were gender free. It took some extra time to construct a fun, diverse 3 hour program, but it is certainly possible. Re-labeling the dancers is not the only way to call gender free. If you are interested in the program I used or the larger collection of gender free dances I chose the program from, send me an email, arcadian35(a)gmail.com. Thanks,Jim Hemphill _______________________________________________ Callers mailing list Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net _______________________________________________ Callers mailing list Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net _______________________________________________ Callers mailing list Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net _______________________________________________ Callers mailing list Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net

9 years, 6 months

Re: [Callers] Another approach to Gender Free calling

by Bob Morgan via Callers

With regard to Ron's questions 1. Would be easily covered by 1st or 2nd corners walk forward to a wave 2. Again can be done with reference to corners 3. Not so familiar with these. 4. You usually only need an obvious first pass person so not an issue I think 5. If you're facing out you turn, if you're facing across you walk is how I call it anyway Bob On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 5:09 PM, Ron Blechner via Callers < callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > Andrea, how would you handle the following: > > 1. Lines of one role/position to the center to a wavy line, as in Trip to > Lambertville, et all? > > 2. Indication of who walks forward / backs up in a gypsy star? > > 3. Indication of who-leads-who, such as in Ramsay Chase, Pedal Pushers, > Jurassic Redheads, etc. > > 4. Indication of who is passing while calling a hey. > > 5. Indication of who crosses, who turns in a box circulate? > > 6. Indication any other role/position specific move that I haven't > mentioned? Turn over right shoulder, as in Fairport Harbour? Rollaways? > > None of these fall under the "most unusual figures" as you stated. > > Ron > On Jun 1, 2015 11:59 AM, "Andrea Nettleton via Callers" < > callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > >> In previous discussions here, on FB, and privately with organizers at >> Hampshire over the last two years, I have discussed the possible use of >> global terminology for gender free contra. I would contend that if used, >> everyone would become more aware of the structure of dances. Only the most >> unusual figures/sequences would be unable to be called. The addition of >> first and second corner positions to the arsenal makes it possible for same >> role dancers to also be called upon to dance together without reference to >> gender. Second corners chain, or first corners allemande L 1 1/2 for >> example. It would have to be agreed that this refers to those standing in >> those positions at that moment. In ECD we use first and second corners to >> refer to the people, first and second diagonals for the positions. But >> since we use diagonal to refer to those across and over one set, this seems >> unhelpful. Simply corner positions works better. I'm glad some folks are >> trying it out at last. I had hoped for an opportunity myself before now. >> Cheers, >> Andrea >> >> Sent from my iOnlypretendtomultitask >> >> On Jun 1, 2015, at 8:37 AM, Jim Hemphill via Callers < >> callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >> >> The recent discussions on this topic inspired me to try an experiment in >> gender free calling. Last night I called the contra dance in St. Louis >> using gender free calling without telling anyone. The experiment was a >> great success. I received lots of positive feedback on the evenings >> dance. At the break and after the dance I made a point to ask several >> dancers, some were callers as well, if they noticed anything different or >> unusual about the dances or how I taught them. One person noticed that >> there were more dances that included a swing in the center for couple 2 >> than usual. No one I talked to noticed that the calls and teaching were >> gender free. >> >> It took some extra time to construct a fun, diverse 3 hour program, but >> it is certainly possible. Re-labeling the dancers is not the only way to >> call gender free. >> >> If you are interested in the program I used or the larger collection of >> gender free dances I chose the program from, send me an email, >> arcadian35(a)gmail.com. >> >> Thanks, >> Jim Hemphill >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Callers mailing list >> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net >> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Callers mailing list >> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net >> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net > >

9 years, 6 months

Re: [Callers] Jets / rubies genderfree terms redux: gems?

by Erik Hoffman via Callers

It's funny, but there's a part of me that finds all of these different words a little weird. In a way, I'm not sure I like any of them. But I do like the sense of liberation they give -- the level of comfort that's appearing at dances for people dancing with anyone. In my area, the SF Bay Area, men are definitely getting more comfortable dancing with men. Around here -- as opposed to outlying areas -- there has always been a level of tolerance, but the level of acceptance is growing. I think my sense of weirdness -- slight discomfort -- comes from both working to change my habits, and from the sense of the terms being contrived. OK, my thought/feelings are changing, and my mind is starting to think of this use as being creative rather than contrived. Also, use is working in my favor: the more I call using Larks and Ravens, the more comfortable it's getting for me, and I'm feeling it's less "contrived." But it has been a bit of a hurdle for me to overcome. As for liking jets & rubies, I have the same problem many do: the multiple meaning of the word "jet." OK, I can be told it's a jem, but a machine to fly, developed by the military, designed for aggressive fighting, then given to the public for high-carbon footprint travel is my first thought -- extremely masculine. Second thought that comes to an old geezer like me is a gang in New York's West Side, about which there is a story, which is also masculine... Jet as a gem would be slow to replace the other two. So, were I to try these, I'd go for gems & rubies. But we'll stick with Larks & Ravens for a while... ~erik hoffman oakland, ca On 5/28/2015 12:30 PM, Ron Blechner via Callers wrote: > > For those interested in gender free contra dance terms: > > 1. Do you like or dislike jets / rubies ? > 2. How would gems / rubies compare? > > In dance, > Ron Blechner > > > > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net

9 years, 6 months

Re: [Callers] Another approach to Gender Free calling

by Neal Schlein via Callers

Jim, thank you for testing this! It is precisely what I was trying to describe in my previous email--dances which are themselves gender-free both in their teaching and base pattern without need for term changes. They don't have to be custom-created (as I kind of suggested previously), but they do have to be carefully identified. Perhaps ECD has been more amenable to non-gendered choreography and instruction because many of its identifying terms are already non-gendered (1st corners, 2nd corners, opposite, partner, 1s, 2s) and a lot of the choreography is position-oriented rather than person-oriented. Just a hunch; I don't know of any generally used contra term corresponding to ECD's "1st/2nd corners" other than Gents and Ladies. As for comparable efforts, about a year ago I was at a barn dance where the first third of the night was squares and big sets with 0 gender reference. I had to leave at that point, so I don't know if the patterned continued, but it got me to thinking I could teach things the same way, Now I have a bunch of simple (and even slightly more complex) contras where the dancers can simply end facing their starting direction and everything works out. The more advanced ones I have used at regular dances. Neal

9 years, 6 months

Re: [Callers] Another approach to Gender Free calling

by Jim Hemphill via Callers

A friend told me about Brooke Friendly's style of calling ECD and that was part of the inspiration for this contra program. Jim On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Roger Hayes <roger.hayes(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Check out Brooke Friendly and Chris Sackett's English Country dances - > they use "geographic" terms, and structure the dances without gender roles. > It's different, but the dance does keep changing, it's a live art. > > http://www.brookefriendlydance.com/ > > Aside from Mr. Hemphill's effort recently here described, I know of no > comparable endeavor in contra dance choreography - I suppose we're more > traditional than ECD. Does anyone have info to share? > > Roger Hayes > Jim - I don't think I am alone in wondering how you managed this without > telling the dancers. I take that to mean you didn't make it gender free by > the terminology you used (jets or whatever) but by the kinds of dances you > chose. I'd love to read more details about what this entailed. > > Please share more! > > Amy > 206 330 7408 > Amy(a)calleramy.com > > On Jun 1, 2015, at 5:37 AM, Jim Hemphill via Callers < > callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > > The recent discussions on this topic inspired me to try an experiment in > gender free calling. Last night I called the contra dance in St. Louis > using gender free calling without telling anyone. The experiment was a > great success. I received lots of positive feedback on the evenings > dance. At the break and after the dance I made a point to ask several > dancers, some were callers as well, if they noticed anything different or > unusual about the dances or how I taught them. One person noticed that > there were more dances that included a swing in the center for couple 2 > than usual. No one I talked to noticed that the calls and teaching were > gender free. > > It took some extra time to construct a fun, diverse 3 hour program, but it > is certainly possible. Re-labeling the dancers is not the only way to call > gender free. > > If you are interested in the program I used or the larger collection of > gender free dances I chose the program from, send me an email, > arcadian35(a)gmail.com. > > Thanks, > Jim Hemphill > > > > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net > > > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net > >

9 years, 6 months

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

Import1 June 2015