There's a lot to unpack with all of these issues
(size/weight/age/disability/gender-attachment/historical
precedents/etc/etc/etc).

I know an older, colleague (caller) who deals with people not wanting to
dance with him (b/c of age),.
At the same time, he has no interest in dancing (mostly the swinging part)
with another man. He's okay with alternate swing holds, but really had a
hard time when someone "insisted" on ballroom hold - he just flat out said
no.

I've personally dealt with issues over the years - people who strong-arm
you; people who decide there are no boundaries; people who think it's fun
to swing you off your feet. I've never had any problem dealing with any of
the situations, but I have talked with a number of people over the years
who've left dances b/c of things like that.

That brings up the need to remind people that we all have various comfort
levels, and if someone offers an alternative hold (or way of doing a
figure) that is less "intimate", that should be honored. I know many people
who are extremely uncomfortable with a "right-shoulder-round meltdown"
(trying to remember to refrain from the term most aren't using anymore).

Back in the day (lol), callers used to offer very brief (1-2 minutes) but
important "dance etiquette" moments scattered throughout the evening - I
think it's still greatly needed. Easier to do at a family dance or a
community dance, but no less important (maybe more so) at many contra
dances.

My 2 cents -

Patricia

Patricia Campbell
(she/her)
Biddeford, ME



On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 1:36 PM Julian Blechner via Contra Callers <
[email protected]> wrote:

> I'm nodding with a lot of comments from the last couple days. Louise
> articulated some base concepts clearly, which a lot of y'all expanded on.
>
> There are some contradictory ideas about gender and sexuality with dance,
> and I think we in general tend to shy away from delving too deeply in
> public discussion. I've been accused of "shaming" people for asking why a
> man may prefer dancing with women. The thing is, I've also said what I
> think nearly everyone - including most/all of the strongest advocates for
> genderfree contra - has said: its OK to have preferences for partners. I
> think it is sometimes hard to presume these discussions are done assuming
> the benefit of good intent, given how much gender and sexuality is an
> enormous political and civil rights topic in the US and most Western
> nations. But, I presume this good intent, and I think nearly everyone here
> does, too, so, I'm taking another stab at this topic.
>
> Here's some ideas I've been chewing over in an attempt to dig into this
> more deeply:
> - dance is often a courtship ritual
> - despite this, inter-gender set dancing has a long tradition in Western
> dance, and partnering with someone hasn't really ever been a "oh, I am
> attracted to them". To use the overused example of Jane Austen novels, even
> then it's clear family dance together, friends dance together, and
> strangers dance together just to have any partner.
> - children are at our dances. So if a person is choosing partners based on
> heterosexual tradition, why, um: EW
>
> And thus is where the conversation often stops. But to break it down more:
>
> - So, when someone says they prefer to dance in non-genderfree dances,
> with a partner of a different binary-presenting gender person, in trad
> roles, there's 2 possible, non-exclusive reasons:
> 1. That their choice is about courtship, but "make exceptions" for people
> you're not attracted to. Which, I guess is fine in and of itself, but I
> think people with this preference often may not consider _just how many
> exceptions_ there are.
> 2. Their choice is more about embracing traditional gender roles. I'll get
> back to this.
>
> So, in the case of #1, the problem isn't just about "what do we do with
> the fact that about 5% of people aren't straight". (And realize the number
> being 3 or 4 times as high among surveyed youth, with numbers lower in
> areas where anti-lgbtq law and sentiment pervades).
>
> The problem is also about fat phobia. And bias against people who aren't
> "conventionally attractive". And ageism. And disability phobia. Then
> there's the even worse case of when a person both claims attraction is
> their main factor for partner preference ... and also has a preference for
> much younger dancers. :|
>
> Pushing back on the idea of "partner preference because of sexual
> preference" is about all these issues - fatphobia, ageism, disability
> phobia, beauty-bias, etc. Now, maybe these things aren't a priority to
> everyone, but, I'm going to assume that the overwhelming majority of people
> on Shared Weight are interested in most, if not all of them. And,
> inevitably, remember - youth, beauty, and able-bodiedness all will fade for
> everyone.
>
> In reality, I think partner and role preference for trad-gender-partnering
> actually has to do more with gender norms. So insofar as sexual-attraction
> for partner preference, I think pushing back, openly, against this, can
> benefit dance communities in many ways. And, ultimately if that's not
> actually the main reason, then it isn't really harming anyone if we present
> it and deal with it with compassion and patience for those having
> difficulty with the change. It's not like people aren't going to flirt and
> meet sexual partners anyway; we simply don't need to establish dance as a
> courtship-by-default space.
>
> Which leads to look at the other reason, #2: wanting trad gender
> partnering because you just like trad gender roles.
>
> In and of itself, that's fine. If you like ways of having your binary
> gender reinforced, there's nothing wrong with that. And while I'm not
> transgender, my friends who are and have shifted/come out as a different
> binary gender identity deserve to have their gender affirmed, too. While
> me, personally, I don't need reinforcement about being man (which is its
> own privilege), I respect people's desire for their gender to be respected
> and celebrated.
>
> So, what does that mean for dancing?
> - Ultimately, as long as people are finding partners and having fun and
> people are respectful of anyone they meet in line, great!
> - As noted, splitting up people because of gender is disrespectful on
> several levels.
> - That complaining about "ah, so many neighbors are my same gender" is
> setting one's own preference above everyone else's. In short: it's selfish.
> - If someone refuses to dance with someone of the same gender (or
> nonbinary/agender folks who "don't look like the opposite gender") then
> that's selfish. It's not _as_ selfish as the last item, and, generally, if
> this is what they choose, I don't see the positive outcomes from pushing it.
>
> So, if someone wants to just dance trad gender preference in partners,
> that's fine to me.
>
> There is, though, the big Catch 22:
>
> If someone believes gendered roles "are just role names", while
> simultaneously have a strong/sole preference trad-gender-partnering, this
> is self-contradictory. That person is trying to have it both ways.
>
> And so, I leave with the thought: this last bit I see as a core sticking
> point to more equality and inclusion at dances.
>
> How do we address this?
>
> Can we start looking at this more openly in a way that is compassionate
> buy also more direct that we have been?
>
> In dance,
> Julian Blechner
> He/Him
> Western Mass
>
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2024, 12:24 PM Tanya Merchant via Contra Callers <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I’m bumping this for folks who want to talk about gender preference in
>> dance partners.
>>
>> And while I understand the valid social and historical context that would
>> make inactive roles a good thing for the social part of social dancing,
>> like Jeff, I’m also really glad we don’t do that much anymore.
>>
>>
>> Tanya H. Merchant
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 06:01 Jeff Kaufman via Contra Callers <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> "The whole point of moving away from Proper to First Couples Improper
>>> or Becket was that you then had people of the opposite gender on both
>>> sides of you in your minor set, so that all Neighbour and Partner
>>> interactions were with the opposite gender"
>>>
>>> That's one advantage for some people, but another advantage of
>>> Improper and Becket is that they make it much easier to have
>>> equal-turn dances, where everyone is 'active' simultaneously.  No more
>>> waiting fifteen times through for a chance to be a "one" and then only
>>> getting to dance it twice before the music stops.
>>>
>>> Jeff
>>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 8:54 AM Katherine Kitching via Contra Callers
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > On the topic of a comfortable swing that maintains the ballroom hold,
>>> i'll repeat the suggestion I offered a few months back.
>>> >
>>> > As part of our transition to promoting a culture of "we encourage
>>> everyone to dance with everyone else, regardless of gender, age, level of
>>> experience or any other factor" - and also as a reaction to covid, we've
>>> started designating the standard neighbour swing (and default partner
>>> swing, if you don't know your partner and don't want to experiment), as a
>>> "modified ballroom hold" - which we call the "elbow hold".
>>> >
>>> > This swing gives a little more space between the couple, without in
>>> any way compromising the effectiveness of the swing in my opinion. (Though
>>> I am sure there will be some other opinions out there ;). )
>>> >
>>> > Ballroom hands same as always.
>>> >
>>> > Other hand cupped around the back of the upper arm of your partner,
>>> just above the elbow.
>>> >
>>> > Taller person's arm goes above the shorter persons arm.
>>> >
>>> > The more I practice this hold, the more I like it.
>>> > I find it makes me more comfortable with everyone (and in fact, as a
>>> cisgender woman I find it makes the most difference to me when dancing with
>>> men, I have found I like having a bit of extra space between me and any man
>>> who is not my spouse :) )
>>> >
>>> > I offer this in the spirit of "something my group finds effective".
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > KK
>>> >
>>> > Mar 12, 2024 7:18:46 AM John Sweeney via Contra Callers <
>>> [email protected]>:
>>> >
>>> > Hi all,
>>> >
>>> >               I once called Chris Page’s dance where the dancers
>>> scatter individually and find someone with whom to do a Gypsy Meltdown
>>> (Gypsy & Swing).  Many of the ladies got together leaving two men alone in
>>> the middle of the dance-floor.  There was absolutely no way that those two
>>> men were going to Swing each other in a Ballroom Hold.
>>> >
>>> >               There was an article in the EFDSS magazine not so long
>>> ago about this very challenge.  The author was concerned that by going
>>> gender-free they would lose many good male dancers who weren’t comfortable
>>> with the situation.
>>> >
>>> >               Someone in these threads said that, if you prefer
>>> dancing with ladies, then there is nothing preventing you from only asking
>>> ladies for a dance.  But what happens when you get in the set and find that
>>> every Neighbour that you meet is a man!
>>> >
>>> > I and my wife dance many styles, West Coast Swing, Blues, Ceroc,
>>> Modern Jive, Tango, Salsa, etc.  99% of the time it is one man with one
>>> lady (OK, I specialise in dancing with two ladies at once, but that is
>>> another matter!).  Occasionally there will be same-sex pairings, and nobody
>>> thinks anything of it.  But it is not being forced on them in the way that
>>> contra dancing is forcing same-sex pairings as you meet and interact with
>>> all your Neighbours.
>>> >
>>> > The whole point of moving away from Proper to First Couples Improper
>>> or Becket was that you then had people of the opposite gender on both sides
>>> of you in your minor set, so that all Neighbour and Partner interactions
>>> were with the opposite gender!
>>> >
>>> > I think part of the challenge is the very close Ballroom-Hold Swing
>>> which many men find too intimate with another man.  Of course there are
>>> lots of symmetrical holds that don’t have the same challenge – you are
>>> further apart.  They don’t have the “Pointy Hand” to help you remember
>>> which side to finish on.  I often use these myself in contra dances when I
>>> have a good partner, doing a different Swing each time through the dance,
>>> but I know which side to finish the Swing on.  I suspect the Ballroom-Hold
>>> Swing is too embedded in Contra Dance culture to change now, though, of
>>> course, it was not always so.
>>> >
>>> > The communities that I call for all want men dancing with ladies.  I
>>> use geographic and positional calling where it helps.  I start most
>>> sessions by saying, “Find a partner, traditionally one man and one lady,
>>> but anyone can dance with anyone.”  99% of the time they will dance with
>>> the opposite gender.
>>> >
>>> > Personally I have a real problem with Larks & Robins since I use Men &
>>> Ladies in my calling.  For me the L in Lark makes me think of Ladies, not
>>> Left.  It really hurts my brain!
>>> >
>>> > I am all for anyone dancing with anyone.  I dance the Lady’s role and
>>> will Swing anyone.  I love Chaos Lines!  (And please don’t assume that you
>>> know anything about my sexuality!)
>>> >
>>> > I feel that it is very sad that the traditional and historic concepts
>>> are being lost.  Our culture has always been very  inclusive, with everyone
>>> welcome and anyone dancing with anyone they want. I am not at all convinced
>>> that any benefits outweigh the losses.
>>> >
>>> >             Happy dancing,
>>> >
>>> >                    John
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > John Sweeney, Dancer, England   [email protected] 01233 625 362 &
>>> 07802 940 574
>>> >
>>> > http://www.contrafusion.co.uk for Dancing in Kent
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > Contra Callers mailing list -- [email protected]
>>> > To unsubscribe send an email to
>>> [email protected]
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Contra Callers mailing list -- [email protected]
>>> To unsubscribe send an email to
>>> [email protected]
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Contra Callers mailing list -- [email protected]
>> To unsubscribe send an email to
>> [email protected]
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Contra Callers mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to