It's important that dances trying different terms compare notes. It's not a bad idea to try different terms on different nights, too.
We can afford to be picky, but I feel that some consensus should be reached. Consensus will: - make it easier for traveling dancers and callers - give more weight behind genderfree terms on contra, aiding it to spread more easily Genderfree organizers who agree about the consensus ought to agree on a time frame for a general consensus. In dance, Ron Blechner On Apr 1, 2015 11:21 AM, "JoLaine Jones-Pokorney via Callers" < [email protected]> wrote: > Luke, thanks for this update! Our dance had an "Advanced Dance" on Sunday > that was called using "Larks" and "Ravens." Almost everything you said > about your dance applied to ours as well. I did encounter several people > who tried dancing the other role who hadn't tried it before. I think the > idea of having a gender-free dance invites people to consider it when they > wouldn't normally. One of the reasons I wanted to promote a gender-free > dance in our area is to help people overcome the idea that "you only dance > with someone of your own gender if there aren't enough of the other." When > looking for a dance partner, why rule out half the population! > JoLaine > > > > On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 11:11 AM, Luke Donforth via Callers < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Hello all, >> >> Last week, at our regular monthly dance for the Mad Robin Callers >> Collective, we tried Ports and Starboards instead of Gents and Ladies (the >> usual language for our dance). The MRCC dance is called by a collection of >> callers who work together ahead of time on a program for the evening. MRCC >> callers are interested in developing and honing their craft as dance >> facilitators. >> >> We had over a hundred dancers, a slightly bigger than average turn-out >> for us. A majority (60~70%) of whom knew the evening was going to be called >> gender free (we'd announced it at prior dances, on our flyer, and via our >> e-mail list). >> >> We had a handful of dancers who explicitly came to our dance because we >> were using gender free language. We had one caller explicitly come out >> because we were using gender free language. >> >> We did not have anyone say they were avoiding our dance because of gender >> free language, but I acknowledge they might not have let us know. >> >> All six of our callers were able to make the transition to Ports and >> Starboards, and didn't have any prompting slips on mic. The callers were >> able to keep clear in their head which word went with which roll (ports on >> the left after a swing, starboards on the right). >> >> Starboards was not an easy word to say, but it did not seem to create >> confusion with stars; possibly because stars are prompted as left hand >> star, right hands across star, etc; whereas starboards was used with star >> coming first in the call, starboards chain, etc. >> >> At least one dancer had an initial confusion about port/starboard being >> in reference to direction currently facing, as opposed to a property of the >> room (which would be more in line with how it's used on boats). >> >> A few dancers who have danced to armbands/barearms terminology did say >> that they preferred ports/startboards. I did not hear anyone advocate a >> preference for armbands/barearms. >> >> Using different terminology for the roles did cause some added difficulty >> on the floor. Not everyone was immediately able to identify themselves and >> where they needed to be/what they should be doing. It also meant that our >> experienced dancers were not as able to help guide new dancers on the >> floor, both because they themselves were less confident, and they were less >> certain of their assumptions of the role of the neighbor coming at them. >> (We did not use any sort of marker for the different roles. Not out of >> deliberately eschewing them, but didn't get that part put together.) I >> think the average skill level of our dance as ports/starboards dancers was >> below the average skill level of our dance as gents/ladies dancers; but it >> would not be an insurmountable barrier to fully swap over. >> >> The use of gender free language did not cause a large amount of folks >> dancing a role different than their apparent traditional role. We had folks >> swap (even mid-dance), but that happens at our dance anyway. It may have >> upped it slightly, but it may have depressed it slightly as folks lost the >> comfort of thinking 'I'm a man dancing the women's role' (or such) and had >> to translate 'I'm usually a port currently dancing as a starboard'. That >> effect would go away with long term familiarity, but we're certainly not >> there yet. >> >> We are not planning on fully swapping over our terms permanently. Next >> month, we'll return to using gents & ladies as our terms. However, we (the >> callers and the dancers) are entertaining thoughts of having a dance in the >> evening called gender free, possibly exploring the different label options, >> and/or possibly developing a catalog of dances that don't require gender >> differentiation (no neighbor swings, gents allemands, ladies chains, etc). >> >> Personally, I'm happy that we brought a few folks out to the dance that >> wouldn't have come otherwise. Maybe they'll come back even if we use >> gendered language in the future. Maybe they'll start a gender free dance. I >> think there were also some on-the-floor discussions of gender and role and >> identity, and I have no report of any of those being negative experiences. >> For our community, I'd call it a success. >> >> Happy Dancing, >> Luke Donforth >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Callers mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >> >> > > > -- > JoLaine Jones-Pokorney > > "We are as gods and might as well get good at it!" > - Stewart Brand > > _______________________________________________ > 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
