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

Sat May 30 11:00:57 PDT 2015

I do wonder whether this horse has been beaten to death.  I doubt that there will be agreement, and that's fine.  The topic has been on the list several times, and yes, I know I can ignore the postings, but enough seems to be more than enough.

      From: Ron Blechner <contraron at gmail.com>
 To: Amy Wimmer <amywimmer at gmail.com> 
Cc: susanelberger <susanma1950 at yahoo.com>; callers <callers at lists.sharedweight.net> 
 Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 3:10 PM
 Subject: Re: [Callers] Jets / rubies genderfree terms redux: gems?

Care to branch off non-jet/ruby terms to a new email please?On May 29, 2015 2:45 PM, "Amy Wimmer via Callers" <callers at lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:

I kinda like suns and moons better than lots of the other alternatives, for the same reasons Susan lists. Also, there's Sun Dance and Moon Dance, by Robert Cromartie: gents swing in Sun Dance and ladies swing in Moon Dance. A precedence, perhaps?
-Amy

On May 29, 2015, at 8:00 AM, susanelberger via Callers <callers at lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:

I have used suns and moons for years, and prefer them because they have one syllable each, sound completely different from each other, and are easy for the dancers to remember.  I have never had any issue arise about gender bias from them.  The conversation about which gems to use does seem a bit too overthought to me.
Susan ElbergerLowell, Massachusetts
      From: Delia Clark via Callers <callers at lists.sharedweight.net>
 To: "<callers at lists.sharedweight.net>" <callers at lists.sharedweight.net> 
 Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 6:52 AM
 Subject: Re: [Callers] Jets / rubies genderfree terms redux: gems?

Okay, this conversation, plus the lunch table at the Puttin’ On the Dance Conference in Ottawa are FINALLY getting me to give up clinging to moons and stars (the only non-gender term I’ve ever used, which I have liked with families and have found works well, but which I understand is too gender-y to be acceptable as the solution we’re looking for - dang!). I am herewith committing to trying out Jets and Rubies next weekend at a dance I’m calling for a wedding of two women. Will report back.

On May 29, 2015, at 1:56 AM, P. Campbell via Callers <callers at lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:

I like jets & rubies (and have used the terms) for a number of reasons. (Don't like gems for same reason about confusion).
In a weird way, it's close enough to "lefts & rights" for me to have no trouble remembering who's who (with rubies starting with "r"), and, (apologies to those who might be offended), because it fits the same syllables for me as "gents & ladies" (which I use for historical dance) or "men & women".
For some reason I just can't get a feel for larks & ravens (I have an idea of why but not worth sharing), and I'm not at all comfortable using bands & bares.
For me, it's whatever will be the easiest for me to remember which side is which, and if my brain is wired to think of "jets" (black color) as more masculine and "rubies" (red color) as more feminine (so easier for me to link them to left & right), that's my mental visual process. (I tried apples & oranges once with a group of kids - it was terrible because I couldn't remember which was which side - I have to have some frame of reference).
I think one of the reasons I have trouble with larks & ravens is because of having learned a foreign language that has a gender for nouns, and I want to make larks the right side and ravens the left, but then the syllable structure doesn't work for me. 
My 2 cents.
Patricia

Sent from my iPhone
On May 28, 2015, at 3:51 PM, Alan Winston via Callers <callers at lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:

 On 5/28/15 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 ?

 Like. (I'm responding on personal preference alone; I'm aware of some objections to this, which I don't personally share.)

 2. How would gems / rubies compare? 

 Less good, because the soft "ms" would make the call less clear.  Also, rubies _are_ gems, so this is confusing.

 -- Alan

_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
Callers at lists.sharedweight.net
http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net

_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
Callers at lists.sharedweight.net
http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net

<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>
Delia ClarkPO Box 45Taftsville, VT 05073802-457-2075deliaclark8 at gmail.com

_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
Callers at lists.sharedweight.net
http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net

_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
Callers at lists.sharedweight.net
http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net

_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
Callers at lists.sharedweight.net
http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sharedweight.net/pipermail/callers-sharedweight.net/attachments/20150530/ad1557c6/attachment.htm>