> On Mar 28, 2018, at 8:56 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.
I would never suggest that these discussion not take place. But at some point,
the discussion must end with action either being taken - or not. This
particular discussion has been going on for many years, with very little new
information, with both sides feeling more polarized, and there being no to
little movement in the community at large. We’re beating a dead horse. At
what point does this become more divisive than cohesive? How is renewing this
discussion by rehashing things that have been said over and over again on both
sides of the issue being helpful more than harmful?
Call it a walk around. Call it a gypsy. Call larks/ravens. Call gents/ladies.
Call the moves as you see fit. But let’s stop the constant arguing about it
that has become tiresome and divisive. Minds really aren’t being changed after
years of rehashing the same points.
And with that, I will no longer rehash MY point!
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
