(Ah, to clarify, by "offered a dance to split them from their partner" I'm talking about the phenomenon that Louise mentioned, where a queer couple (or heck, even same-gender friends!) are offered dances by people to slot them into opposite-gender couples.)
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 11:56 AM, Maia McCormick <maia....@gmail.com> wrote: > While Jeffrey makes a compelling point, I want to chime in with another > thought: *that not having these discussions is just as divisive (if not > more so) than having them*, just in ways that are harder for some sides > of the community to see. While people make (very valid) claims that long > discussions about terminology, altering words to singing squares, etc. are > alienating some more established members of the community, to *not* have > these discussions is to alienate many other folks, particularly people our > dance scene has done less well by in the past -- young people, people of > color, queer people, trans people... the list goes on. > > And if it doesn't look to you like these people are being alienated, that > might be because the alienation started so early that they just never came > back to another contra dance, after they heard the caller using language > that made them deeply uncomfortable, or were "offered" a dance to split > them from their partner, or looked out on the crowd and didn't see anyone > who looked like them. > > So yes, having these discussions may make some folks uncomfortable, and I > want to strive to minimize this discomfort; at the same time, many are made > deeply uncomfortable by the status quo, often it ways it's hard to see > (because often the response to this kind of discomfort is to leave the > community and not come back--so we have a pronounced sample bias). To > dismiss these conversations because they're divisive or uncomfortable is to > prioritize the unity and comfort of one group (the established contra > scene) over another (all those who might have been contradancers, were the > community more welcoming to them), and that doesn't sit right with me. > > Cheers, > Maia > > On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 11:43 AM, Jeffrey Spero via Callers < > callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > >> >> He’s right… and she’s right. How can they both be right? >> >> Well… they ARE both right. There is no clear cut answer on this. People >> who feel strongly on one side or the other may like to think there is a >> clear cut answer, but if one thing seems clear to me by the amount of back >> and forth on this subject it’s that there are differing valid opinions. >> >> In the meantime, while we argue endlessly about whether to gypsy, >> walk-around, face-to-face, vis-a-vis, spiral, gyre, turn by the eyes, >> whimsy, kipsy, tipsy, shmipsy - or just avoid the move altogether, we lose >> why many came to contra dancing in the first place. Contradances were a >> place where people would come to actually get away from all of the >> controversies of life. It was a place where people from differing stripes >> with differing beliefs (OK, maybe I’m being idealistic here - let’s not kid >> ourselves, it’s mostly liberal whites!) can come together and leave the >> real world issues behind and just dance and be friendly. And now? These >> controversies have made their presence known on the dance floor. And it’s >> not just gypsies or no gypsies. It’s also questions of role identification >> (men/women, ladies/gents, larks/ravens, jets/rubies) and whether people >> should boycott dance weekends that gender balance. >> >> Please don’t misunderstand me… I have very little fight in this game. >> I’m moving to the point where I couldn’t care less about what we call moves >> or people. I’m just tired of the endless discussions that go nowhere >> except to continue to divide people and make the dance community cohesive. >> Maybe I’ve become an old fart who just wishes we could have the dance >> community we had decades ago that wasn’t so fraught with divisiveness. Or >> maybe there’s something to what I have written here. Maybe the decline in >> attendance at dances across the country has less to do with terminology - >> and more to do with people not wanting to be a part of yet another >> community that is becoming polarized. Do I have a solution? Nope. And >> neither does anyone else, or else it would have been solved by now. So >> maybe we should just cool it for awhile and see if maybe tolerance for >> personal preferences might help make the community less contentious. Can we >> just get back to dancing for the pure joy of it? >> >> My two cents. >> _______________________________________________ >> List Name: Callers mailing list >> List Address: Callers@lists.sharedweight.net >> Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/ >> > >
_______________________________________________ List Name: Callers mailing list List Address: Callers@lists.sharedweight.net Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/