Import1

import1@lists2.sharedweight.net

2524 discussions

Re: [Callers] Problem dancers / Crying Wolf

by Ron Blechner via Callers

Maybe. Maybe not. My point was that we should be very, very careful about making a definitive statement about something being "just an accusation", especially when in your example, there was a second problem - even if it was a year earlier. On Sep 9, 2015 10:39 AM, "Lindsay Morris via Callers" < callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > Appreciate that. Don't think the "where there's smoke there's fire" issue > applies here, though. It would if there were several *different* women > complaining about one man... > > -------------------- > Lindsay Morris > CEO, TSMworks > Tel. 1-859-539-9900 > lindsay(a)tsmworks.com > > On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Ron Blechner <contraron(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi Lindsay, >> >> I realize this is a tricky topic, so apologies in advance if my brevity >> comes off as bruskness. >> >> These two suggestions work for Amherst Contra. >> >> As a proxy complaint comes in, a board member would seek out the source. >> Anonymous complaints are permitted, and a high level of ensuring that we >> ask open-ended questions, and not leading questions. >> >> We also wear board member buttons at dances and make regular >> announcements about us being available for any reason. Usually 4-7 members >> of our board attend any dance. >> >> You might speak privately to Will Loving, our lead organizer, if you're >> interested in more specifics. >> >> I would also caution about making such definitive statements as "just an >> accusation". In my experience, where there's smoke, there's fire. For every >> accusation, there's five people who are too uncomfortable to speak up. >> >> That said, I have seen the success of proactive addressing of issues. The >> biggest benefit is simple: >> >> Address it early when it's small, and not a huge deal. Maybe it's a >> simple misunderstanding. Maybe the person needed a clear boundary drawn. >> But wait until there's a pile of complaints, and you've already lost >> dancers and the resolution will need to be more severe for the offender. >> >> Best regards, >> Ron Blechner >> On Sep 9, 2015 10:08 AM, "Lindsay Morris via Callers" < >> callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >> >>> Chris Weiler's Positive Solutions >>> <http://www.puttinonthedance.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Positive-Solutio…> >>> on dealing with problem dancers, and the CDU Policy >>> <http://www.puttinonthedance.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/09-12-16-CDU-pol…> >>> are thoughtful and useful documents. >>> >>> We have a different problem here. >>> >>> One woman often complains to board members about men she sees as >>> creepers or sexual predators. She reports their misbehavior on behalf of >>> their victims. The victims don't initiate these reports.* >>> >>> Many others *don't* see these men as creepy or inappropriate. Recently >>> one of the "victims" clarified that her discomfort with the man was a year >>> ago and she'd long ago dealt with it to her satisfaction. The man in >>> question had heard only rumors that some nameless woman was unhappy about >>> some nameless thing he'd done. >>> >>> This woman also publicly asked that young women who feel harassed should >>> talk to her about it. We feel that's the Board's job, not hers. >>> >>> It seems that this woman is fishing for - or even inventing - >>> "naughty-dancer" problems. >>> >>> When a married man gets accused of being a sexual predator, his wife has >>> to wonder if it's true. This adds to any marital tensions they may already >>> have. So, while this woman is not actually punching anybody in the face, >>> it seems to me that she's committing violence. >>> >>> How should we handle this? >>> >>> - I think we need a "No proxy complaints" policy - i.e., the victim >>> has to speak up (and then our process will usually fix simple >>> miscommunication issues). >>> - We need to clearly identify board members, so genuine victims know >>> who to talk to. >>> >>> But does anybody have other ideas about preventing one person's issues >>> from poisoning the atmosphere of a mostly friendly dance? >>> >>> ____ >>> * I know, victims often have a hard time stepping up and complaining, so >>> advocacy may be a good thing. But that's a different discussion. In these >>> situations, there's no victim; there's no predator; there's just an >>> accusation with little to back it up. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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, 3 months

Re: [Callers] Creating a safe dance space (was Shadow Swing Disclaimers)

by Perry Shafran via Callers

I think the real crux of the issue is this. How far are we willing to go to create a safe dance space? The problem is, if you are going to say "if you are uncomfortable with your shadow, feel free to move", that could cause a whole new realm of problems for dancers. How would you feel if, after someone identified you as their shadow, they moved to another line? If given this option, I foresee people moving for all sorts of reasons that I identified in my previous email (too fat, too old, too new, etc), and none of them were related to creepers. The caller is there to help build community. How is it building community of you suggest "if you don't want to dance with someone, then move"? You are basically inviting people to refuse to interact with people for ANY reason - creeper or otherwise. I have never, in 15 years of dancing, heard a caller suggest avoiding dancing with any person. Building community means that everyone is welcome and treated like they are welcome. Even society's outcasts. Of course we should ALL be on alert for people who behave inappropriately, but I think we are beginning to move away from a shared sense of community to promoting dancing with only people you are the most comfortable with. Which basically means cliques. It is a risk to dance with brand new people who come to your dance. You know NOTHING about a person who comes to your dance. Suggesting that you may wish to avoid this person because that person might be creepy - or might not be - really seems harmful to community building. Please note that I am not saying ignore creepers. If there is a problem dancer, the community needs to deal with that person and get that person out of the community if necessary. But if interactions with people might somehow become harmful and we wish to ward off all potential problems, then don't call dances with shadow swings, and maybe we ought not to call dances with neighbor swings. Then you could never have to swing any person not of your choosing. Perry From: Ron Blechner via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> To: Eric Black <eric(a)eric-black.com> Cc: callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> Sent: Wednesday, September 9, 2015 10:01 AM Subject: [Callers] Creating a safe dance space (was Shadow Swing Disclaimers) Erik,I'm alarmed at reading your reply in the shadow swing thread.I have seen, as a dancer, caller, and organizer, at a variety of dances, far too many incidents of inappropriate behavior. I refuse to simply wash my hands and say "oh, it's not the caller's place to worry about this." A caller is the MC, the coordinator, and often from the stage we can see everything happening in the room. It absolutely is our paid job to help create a safe dance space.I want to focus on what seems to be the crux of your statement from the shadow swing email:" that interpersonal conflicts will happen, and yet social interactions are required. They understand how to make everyone work together. Family schisms are inevitable."How many "conflicts" does it take before we take responsibility and address inappropriate behavior at a dance? I have seen many occasions where *one* conflict means a dancer who is new never returns, or an experienced dancer never returns, or they wind up having to spend every night avoiding *that creepy dude*. I know first hand what having a *single* bad experience can mean for a dancer.So if we leave these as "inevitable", then the people we lose aren't the people doing the inappropriate behavior - no, those jerks stay, stubbornly - we lose the nicer people who were victimized, harassed, made uncomfortable.Is that the kind of dance environment you want to promote?I don't believe so.Instead, asking questions, as Maia did, about things a caller can do to create a safe dance space, is essential to long term community building. This doesn't mean we are "dance police" or do anything extraordinary. But it does mean that we should be considerate to dancers and not write off their bad experiences as things that they need to merely tolerate and "be an adult" as you put it.Sincerely, Ron Blechner _______________________________________________ Callers mailing list Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net

9 years, 3 months

Re: [Callers] Problem dancers / Crying Wolf

by Lindsay Morris via Callers

Appreciate that. Don't think the "where there's smoke there's fire" issue applies here, though. It would if there were several *different* women complaining about one man... -------------------- Lindsay Morris CEO, TSMworks Tel. 1-859-539-9900 lindsay(a)tsmworks.com On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Ron Blechner <contraron(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Lindsay, > > I realize this is a tricky topic, so apologies in advance if my brevity > comes off as bruskness. > > These two suggestions work for Amherst Contra. > > As a proxy complaint comes in, a board member would seek out the source. > Anonymous complaints are permitted, and a high level of ensuring that we > ask open-ended questions, and not leading questions. > > We also wear board member buttons at dances and make regular announcements > about us being available for any reason. Usually 4-7 members of our board > attend any dance. > > You might speak privately to Will Loving, our lead organizer, if you're > interested in more specifics. > > I would also caution about making such definitive statements as "just an > accusation". In my experience, where there's smoke, there's fire. For every > accusation, there's five people who are too uncomfortable to speak up. > > That said, I have seen the success of proactive addressing of issues. The > biggest benefit is simple: > > Address it early when it's small, and not a huge deal. Maybe it's a simple > misunderstanding. Maybe the person needed a clear boundary drawn. But wait > until there's a pile of complaints, and you've already lost dancers and the > resolution will need to be more severe for the offender. > > Best regards, > Ron Blechner > On Sep 9, 2015 10:08 AM, "Lindsay Morris via Callers" < > callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > >> Chris Weiler's Positive Solutions >> <http://www.puttinonthedance.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Positive-Solutio…> >> on dealing with problem dancers, and the CDU Policy >> <http://www.puttinonthedance.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/09-12-16-CDU-pol…> >> are thoughtful and useful documents. >> >> We have a different problem here. >> >> One woman often complains to board members about men she sees as creepers >> or sexual predators. She reports their misbehavior on behalf of their >> victims. The victims don't initiate these reports.* >> >> Many others *don't* see these men as creepy or inappropriate. Recently >> one of the "victims" clarified that her discomfort with the man was a year >> ago and she'd long ago dealt with it to her satisfaction. The man in >> question had heard only rumors that some nameless woman was unhappy about >> some nameless thing he'd done. >> >> This woman also publicly asked that young women who feel harassed should >> talk to her about it. We feel that's the Board's job, not hers. >> >> It seems that this woman is fishing for - or even inventing - >> "naughty-dancer" problems. >> >> When a married man gets accused of being a sexual predator, his wife has >> to wonder if it's true. This adds to any marital tensions they may already >> have. So, while this woman is not actually punching anybody in the face, >> it seems to me that she's committing violence. >> >> How should we handle this? >> >> - I think we need a "No proxy complaints" policy - i.e., the victim >> has to speak up (and then our process will usually fix simple >> miscommunication issues). >> - We need to clearly identify board members, so genuine victims know >> who to talk to. >> >> But does anybody have other ideas about preventing one person's issues >> from poisoning the atmosphere of a mostly friendly dance? >> >> ____ >> * I know, victims often have a hard time stepping up and complaining, so >> advocacy may be a good thing. But that's a different discussion. In these >> situations, there's no victim; there's no predator; there's just an >> accusation with little to back it up. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Callers mailing list >> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net >> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >> >>

9 years, 3 months

Re: [Callers] Problem dancers / Crying Wolf

by Ron Blechner via Callers

Hi Lindsay, I realize this is a tricky topic, so apologies in advance if my brevity comes off as bruskness. These two suggestions work for Amherst Contra. As a proxy complaint comes in, a board member would seek out the source. Anonymous complaints are permitted, and a high level of ensuring that we ask open-ended questions, and not leading questions. We also wear board member buttons at dances and make regular announcements about us being available for any reason. Usually 4-7 members of our board attend any dance. You might speak privately to Will Loving, our lead organizer, if you're interested in more specifics. I would also caution about making such definitive statements as "just an accusation". In my experience, where there's smoke, there's fire. For every accusation, there's five people who are too uncomfortable to speak up. That said, I have seen the success of proactive addressing of issues. The biggest benefit is simple: Address it early when it's small, and not a huge deal. Maybe it's a simple misunderstanding. Maybe the person needed a clear boundary drawn. But wait until there's a pile of complaints, and you've already lost dancers and the resolution will need to be more severe for the offender. Best regards, Ron Blechner On Sep 9, 2015 10:08 AM, "Lindsay Morris via Callers" < callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > Chris Weiler's Positive Solutions > <http://www.puttinonthedance.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Positive-Solutio…> > on dealing with problem dancers, and the CDU Policy > <http://www.puttinonthedance.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/09-12-16-CDU-pol…> > are thoughtful and useful documents. > > We have a different problem here. > > One woman often complains to board members about men she sees as creepers > or sexual predators. She reports their misbehavior on behalf of their > victims. The victims don't initiate these reports.* > > Many others *don't* see these men as creepy or inappropriate. Recently > one of the "victims" clarified that her discomfort with the man was a year > ago and she'd long ago dealt with it to her satisfaction. The man in > question had heard only rumors that some nameless woman was unhappy about > some nameless thing he'd done. > > This woman also publicly asked that young women who feel harassed should > talk to her about it. We feel that's the Board's job, not hers. > > It seems that this woman is fishing for - or even inventing - > "naughty-dancer" problems. > > When a married man gets accused of being a sexual predator, his wife has > to wonder if it's true. This adds to any marital tensions they may already > have. So, while this woman is not actually punching anybody in the face, > it seems to me that she's committing violence. > > How should we handle this? > > - I think we need a "No proxy complaints" policy - i.e., the victim > has to speak up (and then our process will usually fix simple > miscommunication issues). > - We need to clearly identify board members, so genuine victims know > who to talk to. > > But does anybody have other ideas about preventing one person's issues > from poisoning the atmosphere of a mostly friendly dance? > > ____ > * I know, victims often have a hard time stepping up and complaining, so > advocacy may be a good thing. But that's a different discussion. In these > situations, there's no victim; there's no predator; there's just an > accusation with little to back it up. > > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net > >

9 years, 3 months

[Callers] Problem dancers / Crying Wolf

by Lindsay Morris via Callers

Chris Weiler's Positive Solutions <http://www.puttinonthedance.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Positive-Solutio…> on dealing with problem dancers, and the CDU Policy <http://www.puttinonthedance.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/09-12-16-CDU-pol…> are thoughtful and useful documents. We have a different problem here. One woman often complains to board members about men she sees as creepers or sexual predators. She reports their misbehavior on behalf of their victims. The victims don't initiate these reports.* Many others *don't* see these men as creepy or inappropriate. Recently one of the "victims" clarified that her discomfort with the man was a year ago and she'd long ago dealt with it to her satisfaction. The man in question had heard only rumors that some nameless woman was unhappy about some nameless thing he'd done. This woman also publicly asked that young women who feel harassed should talk to her about it. We feel that's the Board's job, not hers. It seems that this woman is fishing for - or even inventing - "naughty-dancer" problems. When a married man gets accused of being a sexual predator, his wife has to wonder if it's true. This adds to any marital tensions they may already have. So, while this woman is not actually punching anybody in the face, it seems to me that she's committing violence. How should we handle this? - I think we need a "No proxy complaints" policy - i.e., the victim has to speak up (and then our process will usually fix simple miscommunication issues). - We need to clearly identify board members, so genuine victims know who to talk to. But does anybody have other ideas about preventing one person's issues from poisoning the atmosphere of a mostly friendly dance? ____ * I know, victims often have a hard time stepping up and complaining, so advocacy may be a good thing. But that's a different discussion. In these situations, there's no victim; there's no predator; there's just an accusation with little to back it up.

9 years, 3 months

[Callers] Creating a safe dance space (was Shadow Swing Disclaimers)

by Ron Blechner via Callers

Erik, I'm alarmed at reading your reply in the shadow swing thread. I have seen, as a dancer, caller, and organizer, at a variety of dances, far too many incidents of inappropriate behavior. I refuse to simply wash my hands and say "oh, it's not the caller's place to worry about this." A caller is the MC, the coordinator, and often from the stage we can see everything happening in the room. It absolutely is our paid job to help create a safe dance space. I want to focus on what seems to be the crux of your statement from the shadow swing email: " that interpersonal conflicts will happen, and yet social interactions are required. They understand how to make everyone work together. Family schisms are inevitable." How many "conflicts" does it take before we take responsibility and address inappropriate behavior at a dance? I have seen many occasions where *one* conflict means a dancer who is new never returns, or an experienced dancer never returns, or they wind up having to spend every night avoiding *that creepy dude*. I know first hand what having a *single* bad experience can mean for a dancer. So if we leave these as "inevitable", then the people we lose aren't the people doing the inappropriate behavior - no, those jerks stay, stubbornly - we lose the nicer people who were victimized, harassed, made uncomfortable. Is that the kind of dance environment you want to promote? I don't believe so. Instead, asking questions, as Maia did, about things a caller can do to create a safe dance space, is essential to long term community building. This doesn't mean we are "dance police" or do anything extraordinary. But it does mean that we should be considerate to dancers and not write off their bad experiences as things that they need to merely tolerate and "be an adult" as you put it. Sincerely, Ron Blechner

9 years, 3 months

[Callers] Amy dances

by Andrea Nettleton via Callers

Hi friends, I'm calling at my home dance this weekend, and my good friend Amy let me know it's her birthday. I want to call some dances with Amy in the title to honor her. Could you please share any Amy titled dances with me? Include instructions if you have them, so I don't have to hunt around. Amy and I thank you, Andrea N. Atlanta Sent from my iPad

9 years, 3 months

Re: [Callers] Shadow Swing Disclaimers?

by Bob Green via Callers

This issue came up for me at a dance weekend just recently. My partner was dreadfully uncomfortable situation with another dancer. A timely gender swap solved the problem. Love this forum! Bob Green Sent from my iPad > On Sep 8, 2015, at 12:30 PM, Luke Donforth via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > > Maia, > > Let me see if I'm correctly reading your goals: > You want to call dances with shadow swings > You want to minimize discomfort > > To do both of those, I think an announcement after folks have lined up is worse than an announcement earlier. If someone is uncomfortable with the idea of swinging a shadow, how comfortable would they be leaving a line after you've made the announcement and highlighting for everyone in the room that there's a problematic interaction? There's no way to surreptitiously drop out; folks have to take new hands four and identify new shadows. I think making the announcement after folks have lined up just puts public pressure on your dancers. > > You can announce it ahead of time, either at the end of the previous dance; or even during the walkthrough of the previous dance. I know some callers do this for mixers: "Alright, thanks everyone for lining up and taking hands four. Just so you know, the dance after this will be a mixer. You'll keep your partner for this dance, but the one after don't expect to stay with your sweetheart." etc. Andrea raises a good point that it's hard to know where the shadow would be when you line up (or if someone lines up after you). > > Other options that come to mind: > Call these dances that are dear to you only in instances where it's unlikely to be an issue. I.e. small dance communities where you know everyone and know it'll be fine; or very large events (dance weekends, etc) where it's much less likely for you to run into someone you have a bad interaction with. If you had a festival session called "Shadow Dances"; then anybody showing up is probably going to expect that they'll swing the occasional shadow. > As Ron suggested, you can modify the dance and say "and this move can be a swing". Might defeat why you're trying to call the dance though. > Make it triplet-esque; in that rather than full long lines, you break folks into small groups (10 dancers, etc) and run the dance for a short time. If there's a shadow, partner, and neighbor swing, chances are you don't want to run the dance super long anyway. You announce "find a partner and about 4 other couples for a special dance" and folks can self select a little more. Smaller groups also let more experienced dancers goof/chaos/play more with repetitive dances without throwing off large portions of the hall (I consider a dance with shadow & partner swing, with or without a neighbor swing; to have a high possibility of repetitiveness). > Hope that helps get you thinking about other options too. Have fun, and remember we're there for the dancers to have a good time. > Luke > >> On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 11:06 AM, Maia McCormick via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >> Hey all, >> >> First, a disclaimer: Some people on this listserv thing shadow swings are problematic. Some don't see any issue with them. This is NOT the conversation I want to have in this thread; I ask that you respond to the question I'm asking and do not debate my premise--at least not in this particular thread. This should help keep this thread on track and hopefully reduce excess noise and go-nowhere discussions on this listserv. Thanks! >> >> Anyway, the actual question I wanted to ask (whew!)-- >> >> There do exist some really fabulous shadow-swing dances that I would love to be able to call, as long as I could do so without putting anyone in an uncomfortable position. Do folks have ideas for ways to mitigate the potential harms of shadow swing dances? I was considering, at the beginning of the dance, having dancers identify their shadow and mentioning, "this will be a shadow swing dance, so if you need to make any changes, do so now" (or something like that)--haven't gotten the wording down-pat, but the idea is giving dancers advance warning of a shadow swing so they can move (thereby changing their shadow) if they need to. Any thoughts on this method? Suggestions of others? >> >> Cheers. >> Maia >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Callers mailing list >> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net >> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >> > > > > -- > Luke Donforth > Luke.Donforth(a)gmail.com > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net

9 years, 3 months

Re: [Callers] back, with a free choreography idea

by John Sweeney via Callers

Dave talked about, "Long lines balance and spin to the right within your line." There are already some dances with this: The Balanced Diet by Sue Rosen The Slithy Dance by John Sweeney http://www.contrafusion.co.uk/Dances/SlithyDance.html Happy dancing, John John Sweeney, Dancer, England john(a)modernjive.com 01233 625 362 http://www.contrafusion.co.uk for Dancing in Kent

9 years, 3 months

Re: [Callers] back, with a free choreography idea

by Alexandra Deis-Lauby via Callers

Nice! On Sun, Sep 6, 2015 at 3:24 PM, Dave Merrill via Callers < callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > Hey fellow members, i unsubscribed a while ago as i was working an online > job that required ridiculous amounts of reading, so i burned out on keeping > up with threads, but i'm back and looking forward to be part of the SW > community. > > Meanwhile, amid composing a dance, i had an idea for a new (progressive! > no pun intended) figure. Consider it the hybrid offspring of Moneymusk > balances in non-wavy lines, and Petronella spins to the right. What do you > get? Long lines balance and spin to the right within your line. I don't > have a use for it in anything currently under construction, so thought i'd > put it out there for y'all choreographers to play with if you so choose. If > you do compose something with it, i'd love to see the result! > > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net > >

9 years, 3 months

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

Import1