Import1

import1@lists2.sharedweight.net

2524 discussions

Re: [Callers] What dance series are using what gender-free terms?

by Nick Cuccia via Callers

On 01/25/2017 11:25 AM, Jeff Kaufman via Callers wrote: > I know several dance series use gender-free terms: > > Jets/Rubies: Portland ME > Lead/Follow: Hampshire College, Contradelphia [defunct?] > Bands/Bare-arms: JP, Western MA > Larks/ Ravens: Circle Left, South Bay > > Does anyone know of other dances that are gender free, and what terms they use? The BACDS Berkeley (Wednesday) and Hayward (Sunday) contras also use Larks/Ravens. --Nick

7 years, 11 months

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

by Ron Blechner via Callers

Let's please not presume to speak for the feelings of marginalized groups? Not thinking something is a problem because it doesn't affect you personally is super privileged. Ron Blechner On Jan 25, 2017 1:36 PM, "Barbara Groh via Callers" < callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > Michael, if this view makes you a Luddite, sign me up as a member of the > Luddite Club. I think it's realistic to say that the members of all the > contra, English, and Square Dance groups will NEVER all agree on which > alternative terms to use for ladies and gents, so all these new terms being > bounced around will only cause confusion (and some eye-rolling). > > You've already made a solid argument for the Luddite position, so I won't > say anything more....except this: Please, let's not start an argument over > whether it's pejorative to use the term Luddite! > > Barbara Groh > > On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 4:55 PM, Michael Barraclough via Callers < > callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > >> I guess that I am a Luddite. Here's how I see it. >> >> Somewhere between 80-90% of the population is 'straight'. Surely, we >> want these people as well to come to our dances. It can be difficult >> enough to get past the dance lingo without adding the complexity of >> renaming labels for people that almost everyone already understands. To me, >> what really matters is that we run dances where everyone accepts everyone >> else's sexuality; where individual dancers can feel free to dance either >> role; where everyone is welcome. I am not convinced that 'non-straight' >> individuals are put off by the historical labels that we use, rather the >> lack of the 3 conditions that I have just outlined. >> >> Census data show the U.S. adult population is about 239m. Searching the >> web I can find around 300 contra dances, 150 English Country Dances and >> 1000 MWSD clubs. My generous guess is that less than 100,000 people go >> to these dances, less than 50,000 if we ignore MWSD. Did you know that >> over 700,000 people in the U.S. own a ferret? That means there are 7x as >> many people in the USA who own a ferret compared to the number of people >> who go to our dances! >> >> Let's put less rather than more barriers in the way of getting those >> who don't dance with us (that's 99.6% of the population) to join us. >> >> Michael Barraclough >> www.michaelbarraclough.com >> >> >> >> On Tue, 2017-01-24 at 16:19 -0500, Ron Blechner via Callers wrote: >> > I know I'd appreciate it if people had new suggestions, they'd review >> > existing considerations for what makes terms usable. Things like 1:2 >> > syllable ratio, distinct vowel sounds - these disqualify a lot of >> > terms as being unfeasible for the same reason "bare arms / arm bands" >> > as terms are not preferable. The PDF spreadsheet that Dugan linked is >> > the result of my study with teamwork and sourcing from many dancers. >> > >> > Best, >> > Ron Blechner >> > >> > >> > On Jan 20, 2017 7:28 PM, "Keith Tuxhorn via Callers" <callers(a)lists.s >> > haredweight.net> wrote: >> > > This conversation exhausts me, even though I know and accept it's >> > > all part of the folk process. >> > > >> > > So I will make my one contribution... two terms I thought of a >> > > couple weeks ago. >> > > >> > > Mun and Wem. >> > > >> > > They sound enough like the current terms that the brains of both >> > > callers and dancers can make an easy transition. They're made-up >> > > words, so they have no gender. And they're short. And easy to say. >> > > >> > > Mun and Wem. >> > > >> > > Okay, I've done my bit. >> > > >> > > Keith Tuxhorn >> > > Springfield IL >> > > >> > > On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 4:04 PM, Dugan Murphy via Callers <callers@ >> > > lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >> > > > Since it was an article about my dance series that started this >> > > > conversation about role terms, I'll offer that the primary reason >> > > > we chose "jets" and "rubies" as gender-free terms is so that >> > > > regular contra dancers from other places can come in and dance >> > > > without needing anything to be explained to them since the terms >> > > > are pretty similar to "gents" and "ladies." >> > > > >> > > > We also took a look at this graphic of Ron Blechner's analysis of >> > > > gender-free role terms people have been talking about: http://amh >> > > > erstcontra.org/ContraDanceRoleTerms.pdf >> > > > >> > > > We may not use "jets" and "rubies" forever, but we figured we'd >> > > > give it a try. There didn't seem to be any reasons not to try >> > > > and there are certainly plenty of reasons to try. >> > > > >> > > > Most men at our dance dance as jets and most women dance as >> > > > rubies, but for the few who dance opposite, switch around, or >> > > > whose gender expression doesn't fit the man/woman binary, I'd >> > > > like to think that formally separating dance roles from gender is >> > > > validating in a meaningful way. >> > > > >> > > > Dugan Murphy >> > > > Portland, Maine >> > > > dugan at duganmurphy.com >> > > > >> > > > www.DuganMurphy.com >> > > > www.PortlandIntownContraDance.com >> > > > www.NufSed.consulting >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > _______________________________________________ >> > > > Callers mailing list >> > > > Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net >> > > > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.n >> > > > et >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > _______________________________________________ >> > > 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 > >

7 years, 11 months

Re: [Callers] What dance series are using what gender-free terms?

by Jeremy Gmail via Callers

I use Mods and Rockers, which meets pretty much all of the various criteria suggested for role identifiers. That's in the UK though - I'm not sure if the word pairing is recognised across the pond. Jeremy -----Original Message----- From: Callers [mailto:callers-bounces@lists.sharedweight.net] On Behalf Of Jeff Kaufman via Callers Sent: 25 January 2017 19:25 To: Caller's discussion list Subject: [Callers] What dance series are using what gender-free terms? I know several dance series use gender-free terms: Jets/Rubies: Portland ME Lead/Follow: Hampshire College, Contradelphia [defunct?] Bands/Bare-arms: JP, Western MA Larks/ Ravens: Circle Left, South Bay Does anyone know of other dances that are gender free, and what terms they use? Jeff _______________________________________________ Callers mailing list Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net

7 years, 11 months

[Callers] What dance series are using what gender-free terms?

by Jeff Kaufman via Callers

I know several dance series use gender-free terms: Jets/Rubies: Portland ME Lead/Follow: Hampshire College, Contradelphia [defunct?] Bands/Bare-arms: JP, Western MA Larks/ Ravens: Circle Left, South Bay Does anyone know of other dances that are gender free, and what terms they use? Jeff

7 years, 11 months

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

by Michael Barraclough via Callers

I guess that I am a Luddite. Here's how I see it. Somewhere between 80-90% of the population is 'straight'. Surely, we want these people as well to come to our dances. It can be difficult enough to get past the dance lingo without adding the complexity of renaming labels for people that almost everyone already understands. To me, what really matters is that we run dances where everyone accepts everyone else's sexuality; where individual dancers can feel free to dance either role; where everyone is welcome. I am not convinced that 'non-straight' individuals are put off by the historical labels that we use, rather the lack of the 3 conditions that I have just outlined. Census data show the U.S. adult population is about 239m. Searching the web I can find around 300 contra dances, 150 English Country Dances and 1000 MWSD clubs. My generous guess is that less than 100,000 people go to these dances, less than 50,000 if we ignore MWSD. Did you know that over 700,000 people in the U.S. own a ferret? That means there are 7x as many people in the USA who own a ferret compared to the number of people who go to our dances! Let's put less rather than more barriers in the way of getting those who don't dance with us (that's 99.6% of the population) to join us. Michael Barraclough www.michaelbarraclough.com On Tue, 2017-01-24 at 16:19 -0500, Ron Blechner via Callers wrote: > I know I'd appreciate it if people had new suggestions, they'd review > existing considerations for what makes terms usable. Things like 1:2 > syllable ratio, distinct vowel sounds - these disqualify a lot of > terms as being unfeasible for the same reason "bare arms / arm bands" > as terms are not preferable. The PDF spreadsheet that Dugan linked is > the result of my study with teamwork and sourcing from many dancers. > > Best, > Ron Blechner > > > On Jan 20, 2017 7:28 PM, "Keith Tuxhorn via Callers" <callers(a)lists.s > haredweight.net> wrote: > > This conversation exhausts me, even though I know and accept it's > > all part of the folk process. > > > > So I will make my one contribution... two terms I thought of a > > couple weeks ago. > > > > Mun and Wem. > > > > They sound enough like the current terms that the brains of both > > callers and dancers can make an easy transition. They're made-up > > words, so they have no gender. And they're short. And easy to say. > > > > Mun and Wem. > > > > Okay, I've done my bit. > > > > Keith Tuxhorn > > Springfield IL > > > > On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 4:04 PM, Dugan Murphy via Callers <callers@ > > lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > > > Since it was an article about my dance series that started this > > > conversation about role terms, I'll offer that the primary reason > > > we chose "jets" and "rubies" as gender-free terms is so that > > > regular contra dancers from other places can come in and dance > > > without needing anything to be explained to them since the terms > > > are pretty similar to "gents" and "ladies." > > > > > > We also took a look at this graphic of Ron Blechner's analysis of > > > gender-free role terms people have been talking about: http://amh > > > erstcontra.org/ContraDanceRoleTerms.pdf > > > > > > We may not use "jets" and "rubies" forever, but we figured we'd > > > give it a try. There didn't seem to be any reasons not to try > > > and there are certainly plenty of reasons to try. > > > > > > Most men at our dance dance as jets and most women dance as > > > rubies, but for the few who dance opposite, switch around, or > > > whose gender expression doesn't fit the man/woman binary, I'd > > > like to think that formally separating dance roles from gender is > > > validating in a meaningful way. > > > > > > Dugan Murphy > > > Portland, Maine > > > dugan at duganmurphy.com > > > > > > www.DuganMurphy.com > > > www.PortlandIntownContraDance.com > > > www.NufSed.consulting > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Callers mailing list > > > Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net > > > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.n > > > et > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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

7 years, 11 months

Re: [Callers] Contras which feature a "Dublin Bay" figure ("Pivot the Line", yay)

by Richard Fischer via Callers

Well, I don’t write a lot of dances, but I’ve been inspired by all the Dublin Bay dances. In mine I’ve tried to use the figure as I recall dancing it in the English dance of that name. Comments or corrections most welcome! Sheepshead Bay Improper Richard Fischer A1 Balance & swing neighbor. End facing down and form a line of four. A2 Up the hall, moving backwards (4), down the hall forwards and all turn halfway to reform the line (4), down the hall, moving backwards (4), up the hall forwards (4) B1 Ones gate the twos; twos swing in the center and end facing up towards their neighbors. B2 Circle left halfway; ones swing in the center and end facing down to new neighbors. Richard > On Jan 24, 2017, at 11:49 PM, Roger Hayes via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > > "Pivot the Line" is a good dance; I called it at our regular Madison dance tonight, it went well. I enjoyed seeing the dancers figure out how to dance the unfamiliar figures -- nothing was too hard, the beginners got through it fine, and people enjoyed refining the timing for the Dublin Bay figure. I taught it without being very precise on the timing, to give people the joy of discovery. > > It was interesting to me that practically none of the dancers pre-bent the line for the A2. I think the 2's were enjoying the swoop across the set to start the (figure formerly known as a) gypsy; it's more dramatic than the usual oh-you're-here-already start of that figure. > > - Roger H > > On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 9:28 PM, QuiAnn2 via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net <mailto:callers@lists.sharedweight.net>> wrote: > I’ve also written a dance with this down the hall figure in it. I like to call it early in the evening since it’s very connected and has “rest” time for each couple. I haven’t run it through the Shared Weight gauntlet to see if anyone else has written it. Please let me know if it’s already out there. > > Pivot the Line > by Jacqui Grennan, 5/1/2016 > Contra/Improper/Easy > > A1 ----------- > Four steps down the hall, turn alone, rejoin hands in lines of 4 > Four more steps down the hall, walking backwards > Four steps up the hall, turn alone, rejoin hands in lines of 4 > Four more steps up the hall, walking backwards. Bend the line > A2 ----------- > (16) 2’s gypsy RIGHT/swing, face up to same N’s > B1 ----------- > (16) Same N B&Sw > B2 ----------- > (8) 1’s DSD across set > (8) 1’s P Sw (2’s get ready for DTH, 1’s end the swing facing down between new neighbors). > > > > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net

7 years, 11 months

Re: [Callers] Contras which feature a "Dublin Bay" figure

by Martha Wild via Callers

To Ron, > > > Personally, I find Dublin Bay in a contra dance an exercise of "why aren't we just going down the hall?" It just feels gimmicky to me. But I enjoy the dance Dublin Bay - so it's not a criticism on the figure, but its use. > I don’t feel this way at all about this figure. I called “Please Don’t Call Me Surely” last weekend, after all the sharing of various Dublin Bay figures here got me thinking about them, and because of lots of rain resulting in low turnout at the start, I jumped in to dance. The transition from forward movement to continuing backward as you turn towards your neighbor when done smoothly and with brio is a heck of a lot of fun. We had a few beginners but they caught on quickly so no one was refusing to move and blocking the rest of the lines, and everyone seemed to enjoy it. I don’t think it’s just gratuitous,it’s a good move in its own right. Martha

7 years, 11 months

Re: [Callers] Contras which feature a "Dublin Bay" figure ("Pivot the Line", yay)

by Roger Hayes via Callers

"Pivot the Line" is a good dance; I called it at our regular Madison dance tonight, it went well. I enjoyed seeing the dancers figure out how to dance the unfamiliar figures -- nothing was too hard, the beginners got through it fine, and people enjoyed refining the timing for the Dublin Bay figure. I taught it without being very precise on the timing, to give people the joy of discovery. It was interesting to me that practically none of the dancers pre-bent the line for the A2. I think the 2's were enjoying the swoop across the set to start the (figure formerly known as a) gypsy; it's more dramatic than the usual oh-you're-here-already start of that figure. - Roger H On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 9:28 PM, QuiAnn2 via Callers < callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > I’ve also written a dance with this down the hall figure in it. I like to > call it early in the evening since it’s very connected and has “rest” time > for each couple. I haven’t run it through the Shared Weight gauntlet to see > if anyone else has written it. Please let me know if it’s already out there. > > *Pivot the Line* > by Jacqui Grennan, 5/1/2016 > Contra/Improper/Easy > > A1 ----------- > Four steps down the hall, turn alone, rejoin hands in lines of 4 > Four more steps down the hall, walking backwards > Four steps up the hall, turn alone, rejoin hands in lines of 4 > Four more steps up the hall, walking backwards. Bend the line > A2 ----------- > (16) 2’s gypsy RIGHT/swing, face up to same N’s > B1 ----------- > (16) Same N B&Sw > B2 ----------- > (8) 1’s DSD across set > (8) 1’s P Sw (2’s get ready for DTH, 1’s end the swing facing down between > new neighbors). > > > >

7 years, 11 months

Re: [Callers] Contras which feature a "Dublin Bay" figure

by Ron Blechner via Callers

I'd love to see more Dublin Bay dances that aren't all glossary moves surrounding the down-hall move. I like the concept of Erik's dance, but share the courtesy turn concern. Personally, I find Dublin Bay in a contra dance an exercise of "why aren't we just going down the hall?" It just feels gimmicky to me. But I enjoy the dance Dublin Bay - so it's not a criticism on the figure, but its use. So I like that Erik incorporated it into a means of achieving a new choreography - the transition to a swing. That to me is cool. So. What else we got? :) Ron Blechner On Jan 22, 2017 4:27 PM, "K Panton via Callers" < callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: How does this dance feel in practice, Erik? I like the notion of incorporating lesser-used figures. I like both the chain the line - to progress the lady early and setup for a satisfying reunion later - and the Dublin Bay. I am troubled by two things here though. First the courtesy turn duration will vary depending on which side of the set you are on (1/4 or 1+1/4 for the overachiever on one side, 3/4 for the other couple). Second is the transition you mentioned to B2. How to get rid of chain to line of 4? The Dublin Bay to P b&sw "might" be smoothed by the following: on the return, after 4 steps forward, do not turn and backup. Instead, do a funky whatever-we're-calling-a-gypsy just 1/2. I.e. all drop hands. Insides walk around outside person 1/2 way to face P in next 4-some. Outsides kind mad robin around the inside person 1/2 way to face P. Meh. On 1/19/2017 11:49 PM, Erik Hoffman via Callers wrote: I find, when dancing the one or two dances I?ve danced that try to steal the Dublin Bay figure, they have a line backing up bending into a circle. I found this transition not to my taste. So I took a stab at a different transition. I think it works, but it?s a bit tricky: Happy Birthday, Susan Erik Hoffman Becket A1 Wm ?Chain the line? (Wm Al R ?, then to next Wm, Al L ? to meet Nb on R diag ? across from Shadow); Neighbor Swing A2 LLF&B; Wm Chain to Shadow B1 Dublin Bay DH4inL ends loop back, centers step forward to B2 Pt B&S Given to Susan Petrick on her birthday, while on tour with the OpporTunists in 2010 (I think). The Dublin Bay DH4inL: Down for 4, turn alone backing up for 4, up for 4, turn alone, backing up for 4. From the ECD dance Dublin Bay. Others have used the Dublin Bay move, but ended it with a ?fold into a circle. That backing up, then circling has never felt good to me. This is my attempt to come up with a segue I like. Note, even though it?s a Becket dance, there is a difference in roles in this dance between the ?ones? and ?twos?. ~Erik Hoffman Oakland, CA _______________________________________________ , Be _______________________________________________ Callers mailing list Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net

7 years, 11 months

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

by Ron Blechner via Callers

I know I'd appreciate it if people had new suggestions, they'd review existing considerations for what makes terms usable. Things like 1:2 syllable ratio, distinct vowel sounds - these disqualify a lot of terms as being unfeasible for the same reason "bare arms / arm bands" as terms are not preferable. The PDF spreadsheet that Dugan linked is the result of my study with teamwork and sourcing from many dancers. Best, Ron Blechner On Jan 20, 2017 7:28 PM, "Keith Tuxhorn via Callers" < callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > This conversation exhausts me, even though I know and accept it's all > part of the folk process. > > So I will make my one contribution... two terms I thought of a couple > weeks ago. > > Mun and Wem. > > They sound enough like the current terms that the brains of both callers > and dancers can make an easy transition. They're made-up words, so they > have no gender. And they're short. And easy to say. > > Mun and Wem. > > Okay, I've done my bit. > > Keith Tuxhorn > Springfield IL > > On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 4:04 PM, Dugan Murphy via Callers < > callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > >> Since it was an article about my dance series that started this >> conversation about role terms, I'll offer that the primary reason we chose >> "jets" and "rubies" as gender-free terms is so that regular contra dancers >> from other places can come in and dance without needing anything to be >> explained to them since the terms are pretty similar to "gents" and >> "ladies." >> >> We also took a look at this graphic of Ron Blechner's analysis of >> gender-free role terms people have been talking about: >> http://amherstcontra.org/ContraDanceRoleTerms.pdf >> >> We may not use "jets" and "rubies" forever, but we figured we'd give it a >> try. There didn't seem to be any reasons not to try and there are >> certainly plenty of reasons to try. >> >> Most men at our dance dance as jets and most women dance as rubies, but >> for the few who dance opposite, switch around, or whose gender expression >> doesn't fit the man/woman binary, I'd like to think that formally >> separating dance roles from gender is validating in a meaningful way. >> >> Dugan Murphy >> Portland, Maine >> dugan at duganmurphy.com >> www.DuganMurphy.com >> www.PortlandIntownContraDance.com >> www.NufSed.consulting >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > >

7 years, 11 months

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

Import1