It would be interesting to get some dancers' reactions to these various terminologies.
Has anyone thought of using two different pairings in a dance evening and then asking the dancers which they thought was clearer to their ears and which they preferred? Of course this is even a bigger burden on the caller. On May 29, 2015, at 11:43 AM, Ron Blechner via Callers wrote: > Erik, neat cheat. > > For reference, my own thoughts on the terms, and a general FAQ about gender > free terms: > http://contradances.tumblr.com/post/113203981035/genderfree-contra-dance-term-faq > > I have not updated it with gems / rubies. > > I like jets / rubies, but I think gems / rubies is better: > > 1. I disagree that the "em" sound is harder to hear than the "et" in jet. > Good mic skills / having a foam pad on a mic will dull the sharp "ts" in > "gents", and thus, "jets". Because a loud "ts" on the mic is harsh. > Therefore, this argument against "gems" is not an issue. > > 2. A lot of people don't know "jet" is a gemstone, and so they think > airplane. I've had a lot of gender free dancers complain about this. Given > that the terms need to serve the LGBTQ community, and not merely us as > callers, I take this complaint seriously. Thus, "gem" is a better choice. > > 3. Yes, a ruby is a gem. So what? They're both gems. > > 4. There's a gender connotation to thinking jet = airplane, since it's either > phallic, or people think the NY/NJ football team, or the West Side Story > fictional gang. Again, the terms are here to serve the dancers, not merely us. > > 5. Gem has all the same advantages as jet. > > I thus think gem / ruby is a superior pair than jet / ruby. > > Ron Blechner > > On May 29, 2015 11:32 AM, "Erik Hoffman via Callers" > <[email protected]> wrote: > We are still using larks and ravens at the Berkeley dance. And, though I > don't seem to have too much trouble using different words for different > dances -- so far I've used men/women, ladies/gents, bands/bares, > trees/squirrels, and larks/ravens without changing my mess of dance notes -- > I understand that others can't switch so easily. On this note, at the > Berkeley dance a caller recently did the following: > > 1) asked if anyone had some post-its. When found some > 2) wrote "lark" and "raven" on the sticky end > 3) cut out these little cheat-sheets > 4) covered the words "gents" and "ladies" with the post-it cheats > 5) move cheats to next card as needed > > Thereby changing their cards to the current words on the fly. I was impressed. > > ~erik hoffman > oakland, ca > > On 5/28/2015 8:01 PM, Kalia Kliban via Callers wrote: > On Thu, May 28, 2015, Alan Winston via Callers 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. > > Me too. I haven't yet tried calling with the jets and rubies terminology, > though I've used bands/bares and larks/ravens. I can't say I'm eager to add > yet another set of translated cards to my files. > Kalia Kliban > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
