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@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@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@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@lists.sharedweight.net >> > > > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.n >> > > > et >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > _______________________________________________ >> > > Callers mailing list >> > > Callers@lists.sharedweight.net >> > > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >> > > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Callers mailing list >> > Callers@lists.sharedweight.net >> > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >> _______________________________________________ >> Callers mailing list >> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net >> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > Callers@lists.sharedweight.net > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net > >