Care to branch off non-jet/ruby terms to a new email please? On May 29, 2015 2:45 PM, "Amy Wimmer via Callers" < [email protected]> 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 < > [email protected]> 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 Elberger > Lowell, Massachusetts > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Delia Clark via Callers <[email protected]> > *To:* "<[email protected]>" <[email protected]> > *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 < > [email protected]> 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 < > [email protected]> 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 > [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 > > > > <>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<> > > Delia Clark > PO Box 45 > Taftsville, VT 05073 > 802-457-2075 > [email protected] > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > >
