Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

> > -Original Message- > From: Amy Wimmer <amywim...@gmail.com> > To: Donna Hunt <dhuntdan...@aol.com> > Cc: jeff <j...@alum.swarthmore.edu>; Dave Casserly > <david.j.casse...@gmail.com>; callers <callers@lists.sharedweight.net> > Sent:

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

redweight.net> Sent: Tue, Jan 31, 2017 12:32 pm Subject: Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies" Donna, I can imagine a scenario in which organizers would be shy to share this information for fear of retaliation or pressure from those who want them to change

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

Champaign-Urbana may be switching over to gender-free, though not LGBTQ, as well - check with them to verify? Meg (Chicago) On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 11:16 AM, Alexandra Deis-Lauby via Callers < callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > There's also a gender free LGBTQ dance in Chicago. > > Sent

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

It seems to come and go On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 12:24 PM, Jeff Kaufman wrote: > Looking at https://www.facebook.com/ContraChicago and > http://lcfd.org/queer-contra-dance-chicago.html it looks like the > Chicago dance is defunct? > > On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 12:16 PM,

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

---Original Message- From: Dave Casserly via Callers <callers@lists.sharedweight.net> To: Jeff Kaufman <j...@alum.swarthmore.edu> Cc: callers <callers@lists.sharedweight.net> Sent: Mon, Jan 30, 2017 4:12 pm Subject: Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

Looking at https://www.facebook.com/ContraChicago and http://lcfd.org/queer-contra-dance-chicago.html it looks like the Chicago dance is defunct? On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 12:16 PM, Alexandra Deis-Lauby wrote: > There's also a gender free LGBTQ dance in Chicago. > > Sent from

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

There's also a gender free LGBTQ dance in Chicago. Sent from my iPhone > On Jan 30, 2017, at 11:10 AM, Jeff Kaufman via Callers > wrote: > >> On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 10:54 AM, Donna Hunt wrote: >> Is there any data >> that reflects where

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

en create the Doc unless folks are willing to post the data. Donna Hunt -Original Message- From: Dave Casserly via Callers <callers@lists.sharedweight.net> To: Jeff Kaufman <j...@alum.swarthmore.edu> Cc: callers <callers@lists.sharedweight.net> Sent: Mon, Jan 30,

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

In the New England MWSD Community, there is one weekend a year that dances collect data. This method, although it has problems, is probable good at seeng long term trends. Rich Sbardella On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 12:51 PM, Ron Blechner via Callers < callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > No, I

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

What if we made a Google doc with more vague categories where dances could self-report their attendance? Something like, a column for the state where the dance is located, a column for 2015 average attendance, all done in ranges of 1-50, 51-100, etc, and another column for 2017 attendance, with

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

For attendance, what I would love to see is dances making their attendance numbers fully public. Something like a googledocs spreadsheet that anyone can view where you put in attendance numbers. (I've advocated for this, internally to BIDA, for years (unsuccessfully). We do have a sheet like

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

My husband keeps attendance records for our weekly dance in Seattle, and has done so for ~16 years. What sort of info do you seek? Just an overall trend, or numbers, or something else? -Amy On Jan 30, 2017 10:07 AM, "Linda Leslie via Callers" < callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > It may be

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

It may be that the Organizers’ List for Shared Weight may have this kind of data. Linda On Jan 30, 2017, at 12:51 PM, Ron Blechner via Callers wrote: > No, I haven't seen statistical analysis of this. Maybe it's worthwhile for > this to be polled out to

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

No, I haven't seen statistical analysis of this. Maybe it's worthwhile for this to be polled out to various dances. Best regards, Ron On Jan 30, 2017 10:54 AM, "Donna Hunt" wrote: Just getting back to this thread, lots to catch up on. Jeff and Ron: You both seem like the

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

Jeff Kaufman wrote: > The gender free dances are split into explicitly LGBTQ ones and ones that are > gender free but not explicitly LGBTQ. I trust that the series in the second category are careful to mention their gender-free policy when (if) they invite new-to-the-series callers to come. No

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

a Hunt via Callers Sent: Monday, January 30, 2017 10:55 AM To: j...@alum.swarthmore.edu; contra...@gmail.com Cc: callers@lists.sharedweight.net Subject: Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies" Just getting back to this thread, lots to catch up on. Jeff an

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 10:54 AM, Donna Hunt wrote: > Is there any data > that reflects where in the country the LGBTQ gender-free dances are and > where the communities that use gender-free terminology are? The gender free dances are split into explicitly LGBTQ ones and

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

ers@lists.sharedweight.net> To: Ron Blechner <contra...@gmail.com> Cc: callers <callers@lists.sharedweight.net> Sent: Fri, Jan 27, 2017 2:26 pm Subject: Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies" On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 1:44 PM, Ron Blechner <contra...@gmail.com&

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

*applause* On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 9:37 PM, Jacob or Nancy Bloom via Callers < callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > I'll echo this viewpoint. I value the opportunity to go different places > and learn different ways of doing things. I feel that much more is lost in > uniformity than is

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

I'll echo this viewpoint. I value the opportunity to go different places and learn different ways of doing things. I feel that much more is lost in uniformity than is gained. Jacob On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 9:03 PM, Chet Gray via Callers < callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > In regards to

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

anges at > different dance locations. Augh my head hurts just thinking about it. > > Donna > > > > > > -Original Message- > From: Ron Blechner via Callers <callers@lists.sharedweight.net> > To: Barbara Groh <babsg...@gmail.com> > Cc: callers &l

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

Michael, is there any real reason to maintain the conflation that a male person ends a swing on the left and a female person ends a swing on the right? I see none. Nobody is proposing "funny terms for people when [...] we already have perfectly good terms". There aren't *any* terms for people.

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

On Fri, 2017-01-27 at 09:04 -0500, Angela DeCarlis via Callers wrote: And many people are fine with things the way they are! I get that, and that's great for you, but why on earth wouldn't you change things if it meant being more inclusive, more just? I understand that from your perspective we

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 1:44 PM, Ron Blechner wrote: > > If that's the case, one would assume there are also plenty of traditional > venue dancers who don't care either way. To that effect, genderfree roles > are not as scary as some have claimed. Sure, I think that's

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

Hi Jeff, Some points: "You're classifying everyone who attends a dance with gender-free calling as having wanting it to be gender free, but I'm sure some are attending in spite of it being gender free, and many more don't care either way." If that's the case, one would assume there are also

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

aybe we should all >>>> rethink this. >>>> >>>> -Original Message- >>>> From: Donna Hunt via Callers <callers@lists.sharedweight.net> >>>> To: contraron <contra...@gmail.com>; babsgroh <babsg...@gmail.com> &g

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 11:40 AM, Ron Blechner via Callers wrote: > To answer your question, though, about how many dancers want genderfree > terms, at least ten dances are genderfree, and I bet we can poll those > dances and find out how many active dancers they

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

ove >> from venue to venue where the terms change, makes my head hurt as well. >> There is an old saying "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!" Maybe we should >> all rethink this. >> >> -Original Message- >> From: Donna Hunt via Callers <callers@lists.shared

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

quot; Maybe we should >> all rethink this. >> >> -----Original Message- >> From: Donna Hunt via Callers <callers@lists.sharedweight.net> >> To: contraron <contra...@gmail.com>; babsgroh <babsg...@gmail.com> >> Cc: callers <callers@lists.sh

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

>>> don't have any relationship to the moves is confusing enough to me, who >>> understands the process. Throw all this at new dancers who move from venue >>> to venue where the terms change, makes my head hurt as well. There is an >>> old saying "If

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

it ain't broke, don't fix it!" Maybe we should >> all rethink this. >> >> -Original Message----- >> From: Donna Hunt via Callers <callers@lists.sharedweight.net> >> To: contraron <contra...@gmail.com>; babsgroh <babsg...@gmail.com> >&g

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

babsgroh <babsg...@gmail.com> > Cc: callers <callers@lists.sharedweight.net> > Sent: Thu, Jan 26, 2017 12:37 pm > Subject: Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies" > > I'm sad to hear that so many groups are using different role terms and >

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

for, and that role term changes at > different dance locations. Augh my head hurts just thinking about it. > > Donna > > > > > > -Original Message- > From: Ron Blechner via Callers <callers@lists.sharedweight.net> > To: Barbara Groh <babsg...@gmail.com> >

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

Cc: callers <callers@lists.sharedweight.net> Sent: Thu, Jan 26, 2017 3:37 am Subject: Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies" Let's please not presume to speak for the feelings of marginalized groups? Not thinking something is a problem because it doesn't affe

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

Thanks Ron for this point. A bit of history. In the ‘70s Carl Wittman created a non-gendered method for English Country Dancing while in Oregon. It is currently used by several organizations, Heather and Rose in Oregon which he was part of, Sun Assembly in North Carolina - where Carl moved

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

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

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

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

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

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

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

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

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

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

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

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

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

Cara, Further reading: http://contradances.tumblr.com/post/132380206885/lead-and-follow-as-styles-not-roles-in-contra Best, Ron Blechner On Jan 18, 2017 11:03 PM, "Cara Sawyer via Callers" < callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > Hi everyone again, > Angela, Jeff thank you. > I appreciate

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

Hi everyone again, Angela, Jeff thank you. I appreciate knowing the emotional attachment many had to the history of these calling terms. I had no clue. From where I was coming from, it was more of a logistical question for my calling aspirations, trying to figure out what is easiest for the

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

Yes, Cara, definitely a history! Thank you for inquiring. Another argument I've heard against Lead/Follow is that if we change the role known up to now only as "Gents" to "Leads," and likewise "Ladies" to "Follows," we could unwittingly be reinforcing the cultural notion that only men can be

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

Hi Cara! There is definitely a history! Many dancers don't like lead/follow as terms because they either don't think contra has a lead/follow dynamic or they don't want to encourage lead/follow dancing. Some dance series, primarily ones with younger dancers, do use those terms, but there are

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

East coast GF English, to the extent it does anything specific, does left up/right down. West coast does right up/left down. http://lcfd.org/gf-ecd-calling-conventions.html (I think it’s a really good idea, btw, to avoid the jet = penis analogy.

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

Agreed with Jeff totally, on both points. I teach role swap workshops periodically, and palm direction is the single best indicator of role there is. Ties, bands, pins, etc aren't nearly as versatile or useful, especially when you intend to switch roles mid-dance. Because of that, I'm pretty

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

I really like the current up/down system for (a) remembering which role I'm dancing (b) signaling which role to others On Jan 18, 2017 11:49 AM, "Bob Morgan via Callers" < callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > Angela reminded me of a point I've been thinking about for a while. Why > not

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

Angela reminded me of a point I've been thinking about for a while. Why not right palm up, left palm down? This would be symmetrical and role neutral. Bob On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 4:40 PM, Angela DeCarlis via Callers < callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > When I called at PICD (the

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

When I called at PICD (the Portland ME dance), I really enjoyed using Jets and Rubies. One silly thing I enjoyed any the terms during the beginners' lesson was coaching palm direction based on the terms: "Jets' palms face up, towards the sky; Rubies' palms face down, towards the ground." And yes,

[Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

Not that Portland, the other Portland. ;-) http://bangordailynews.com/2017/01/09/news/portland/contra-dancing-takes-a-gender-neutral-spin-in-portland/ I personally would prefer to settle on "larks" and "ravens" because that seems to have more traction -- but it doesn't matter as long as we get