Re: [Callers] Shadow Swing Disclaimers?

[Eric Black via Callers]

Wow.  ISTM [It Seems To Me] that this is far more responsibility for 
controlling social interpersonal interactions than the programmer and/or caller 
at the mic should have to worry about, even though we do worry about such 
things.

Sorry I don’t have opportunity to participate on this email list more often.  
That Pesky Day Job [PDJ] and all…

Short response: Don’t point out shadow partner interaction; the dancers need to 
be adult about it, no one listens to the Caller anyway, let alone anything said 
while they’re still lining up.

Longer response:

I really REALLY don’t think that there should be any announcement calling 
attention to the fact that the next dance has interaction with someone other 
than your chosen partner.   What, are we supposed to say “This is a duple 
improper single progression with a shadow who is the same active or inactive 
role one place below [or above] where you line up”?  

Or should we say “Thank this partner, and ask another partner for the next 
dance. As you line up, if there is someone at the dance here tonight with whom 
you don’t want to dance, please make sure that they are in a different longways 
set than you, or that if they are in the same long set as you that they are not 
in an adjacent hands-four from you either up or down as you line up for the 
dance.”

Are we dance choreographers supposed to create dance sequences that don’t have 
any “serious” interaction with the shadow partner, just in case the dancers 
happen to line up such that someone on the floor has an “Ex” as a shadow 
partner?  Or someone who hasn’t showered recently enough?

We already have the problem of MUC rejection of any dance that doesn’t include 
both partner swing and neighbor swing; this seems to be an injection of a 
problem of a potential swing with a neighbor some dancers might not want to 
swing with, yet such swings are still required.
 
I’m confused…



Yes, I understand the many reasons for not having serious shadow interactions, 
but I am proud that every local dance community where I’ve been a member, from 
NH/Boston to CA/SF, has understood that interpersonal conflicts will happen, 
and yet social interactions are required. They understand how to make everyone 
work together. Family schisms are inevitable.  Personal hygiene issues may 
arise.
 
I hope that everyone eventually can live the philosophy on Jeremiah’s T-shirt: 
“Dance With Who’s Comin’ Atcha!"

Even long-time couples break up.  It’s painful to the people involved and also 
to everyone surrounding.   We’re all Community here.  Our Community is larger 
and more long-lived than the simple “nuclear family” of two parents and 2.3 
children.  That means we get to “enjoy” many various kinds of family ties, both 
genetic and non-genetic.  The Community connection carries us all through this 
specific break-up episode. The Dance entertains us and it heals us and it 
strengthens The Community.

I say this with a VERY PERSONAL involvement in this community support.

Yes, we DO see what’s going on. Yes, we DO love both of you, even if you’ve 
split apart, and even if there is a court restraining order about you both 
showing up at our dance on the same night (that’s a different discussion, and 
yes, it does happen).

If there’s a personal hygiene problem, sometimes it simply can not be helped.  
I myself could change shirts whenever the band changes tunes and it still would 
not be often enough. In such a case, please enjoy fresh pheromones; fresh sweat 
can be enjoyable sweat.  If it’s stale sweat, then by all means tell the person 
that a shower with soap would make him/her a more enjoyable dance partner. 
That’s a quiet face-to-face conversation.

BUT please dance for several seconds, smile, and move on.
 
All that aside, any swing can be changed to an allemande right once or twice 
(to taste), or an elbow swing, or a do-si-do, or a gypsy (with varying amounts 
of eye contact, again to taste).  Experienced dancers, especially a split 
dancer couple who encounter each other in line, will do whatever they feel 
comfortable with. What a GREAT opportunity to swap roles with your partner, 
given a little look-ahead!  (“Oh! that’s my Ex ahead; let’s swap!” or just take 
hands with the palm-up signal that you’re taking the “Gent” role next time)   
Painless and fun.
 
Never mind that experienced dancers often rewrite the dance to change a 
non-swing dance move into a swing, even in the middle of a hey; it’s just as 
easy to go the other direction, to reduce interaction.  That’s what dancers do. 
Just Be In The Right Place At The Right Time.

We always say that a neighbor interaction is “just one time through the tune, 
just 30 seconds”.  Well, a shadow interaction is generally at most one 8-count 
thing; 4 seconds repeated every once in a while as wonderful music plays.  
Maybe double that for some dances, so then about 8 seconds out of every half 
minute or so.
 
It seems to me that we as social animals should be able to deal 

Re: [Callers] Amy dances

[Amy Wimmer via Callers]

Well, this is fun! I've been collecting these, myself. Maybe some day
there'll be one written for me that I can add to the list.

-Amy Wimmer



> On Sep 8, 2015, at 10:43 PM, James Saxe via Callers 
>  wrote:
>
> Michael Dyck's contra dance index
>
> http://www.ibiblio.org/contradance/index/by_title.html
>
> lists the following
>
> Amy Absconds (Ted Hodapp)
> Amy Asked for a Gypsy (Charley Harvey)
> Amy J, My Love (Peter Stix)
> Amy's Harmonium (Cary Ravitz)
> Dancing with Amy (Bill Olson)
> Gypsy for Amy (Linda Leslie)
>
> with references to sources, including online sources for most.
> It also lists various dances written by people named Amy.
>
> --Jim
>
>> On Sep 8, 2015, at 10:08 PM, Andrea Nettleton via Callers 
>>  wrote:
>>
>> Hi friends,
>> I'm calling at my home dance this weekend, and my good friend Amy let me 
>> know it's her birthday.  I want to call some dances with Amy in the title to 
>> honor her.  Could you please share any Amy titled dances with me?  Include 
>> instructions if you have them, so I don't have to hunt around.
>> Amy and I thank you,
>> Andrea N.
>> Atlanta
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>> ___
>> Callers mailing list
>> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>
> ___
> Callers mailing list
> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net

Re: [Callers] Amy dances

[Mark Hillegonds via Callers]

If an English Country Dance is a possibility, then Colin Hume (
www.colinhume.com) has a wonderful, flowy dance named Amy.
On Sep 9, 2015 9:44 AM, "Amy Wimmer via Callers" <
callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:

> Well, this is fun! I've been collecting these, myself. Maybe some day
> there'll be one written for me that I can add to the list.
>
> -Amy Wimmer
>
>
>
> > On Sep 8, 2015, at 10:43 PM, James Saxe via Callers <
> callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
> >
> > Michael Dyck's contra dance index
> >
> > http://www.ibiblio.org/contradance/index/by_title.html
> >
> > lists the following
> >
> > Amy Absconds (Ted Hodapp)
> > Amy Asked for a Gypsy (Charley Harvey)
> > Amy J, My Love (Peter Stix)
> > Amy's Harmonium (Cary Ravitz)
> > Dancing with Amy (Bill Olson)
> > Gypsy for Amy (Linda Leslie)
> >
> > with references to sources, including online sources for most.
> > It also lists various dances written by people named Amy.
> >
> > --Jim
> >
> >> On Sep 8, 2015, at 10:08 PM, Andrea Nettleton via Callers <
> callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi friends,
> >> I'm calling at my home dance this weekend, and my good friend Amy let
> me know it's her birthday.  I want to call some dances with Amy in the
> title to honor her.  Could you please share any Amy titled dances with me?
> Include instructions if you have them, so I don't have to hunt around.
> >> Amy and I thank you,
> >> Andrea N.
> >> Atlanta
> >>
> >>
> >> Sent from my iPad
> >> ___
> >> Callers mailing list
> >> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
> >> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
> >
> > ___
> > Callers mailing list
> > Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
> > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
> ___
> Callers mailing list
> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>

[Callers] Creating a safe dance space (was Shadow Swing Disclaimers)

[Ron Blechner via Callers]

Erik,

I'm alarmed at reading your reply in the shadow swing thread.

I have seen, as a dancer, caller, and organizer, at a variety of dances,
far too many incidents of inappropriate behavior. I refuse to simply wash
my hands and say "oh, it's not the caller's place to worry about this." A
caller is the MC, the coordinator, and often from the stage we can see
everything happening in the room. It absolutely is our paid job to help
create a safe dance space.

I want to focus on what seems to be the crux of your statement from the
shadow swing email:

" that interpersonal conflicts will happen, and yet social interactions are
required. They understand how to make everyone work together. Family
schisms are inevitable."

How many "conflicts" does it take before we take responsibility and address
inappropriate behavior at a dance? I have seen many occasions where *one*
conflict means a dancer who is new never returns, or an experienced dancer
never returns, or they wind up having to spend every night avoiding *that
creepy dude*. I know first hand what having a *single* bad experience can
mean for a dancer.

So if we leave these as "inevitable", then the people we lose aren't the
people doing the inappropriate behavior - no, those jerks stay, stubbornly
- we lose the nicer people who were victimized, harassed, made
uncomfortable.

Is that the kind of dance environment you want to promote?

I don't believe so.

Instead, asking questions, as Maia did, about things a caller can do to
create a safe dance space, is essential to long term community building.
This doesn't mean we are "dance police" or do anything extraordinary. But
it does mean that we should be considerate to dancers and not write off
their bad experiences as things that they need to merely tolerate and "be
an adult" as you put it.

Sincerely,
Ron Blechner

[Callers] Problem dancers / Crying Wolf

[Lindsay Morris via Callers]

Chris Weiler's Positive Solutions

on dealing with problem dancers, and the CDU Policy

are thoughtful and useful documents.

We have a different problem here.

One woman often complains to board members about men she sees as creepers
or sexual predators. She reports their misbehavior on behalf of their
victims. The victims don't initiate these reports.*

Many others *don't* see these men as creepy or inappropriate.  Recently one
of the "victims" clarified that her discomfort with the man was a year ago
and she'd long ago dealt with it to her satisfaction.  The man in question
had heard only rumors that some nameless woman was unhappy about some
nameless thing he'd done.

This woman also publicly asked that young women who feel harassed should
talk to her about it.  We feel that's the Board's job, not hers.

It seems that this woman is fishing for - or even inventing -
"naughty-dancer" problems.

When a married man gets accused of being a sexual predator, his wife has to
wonder if it's true. This adds to any marital tensions they may already
have.  So, while this woman is not actually punching anybody in the face,
it seems to me that she's committing violence.

How should we handle this?

   - I think we need a "No proxy complaints" policy - i.e., the victim has
   to speak up (and then our process will usually fix simple miscommunication
   issues).
   - We need to clearly identify board members, so genuine victims know who
   to talk to.

But does anybody have other ideas about preventing one person's issues from
 poisoning the atmosphere of a mostly friendly dance?


* I know, victims often have a hard time stepping up and complaining, so
advocacy may be a good thing.  But that's a different discussion.  In these
situations, there's no victim; there's no predator; there's just an
accusation with little to back it up.

Re: [Callers] Shadow Swing Disclaimers?

[Lindsay Morris via Callers]

I'm with Eric on this one. Nicely stated.


Lindsay Morris
CEO, TSMworks
Tel. 1-859-539-9900
lind...@tsmworks.com

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 9:39 AM, Eric Black via Callers <
callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:

> Wow.  ISTM [It Seems To Me] that this is far more responsibility for
> controlling social interpersonal interactions than the programmer and/or
> caller at the mic should have to worry about, even though we do worry about
> such things.
>
> Sorry I don’t have opportunity to participate on this email list more
> often.  That Pesky Day Job [PDJ] and all…
>
> Short response: Don’t point out shadow partner interaction; the dancers
> need to be adult about it, no one listens to the Caller anyway, let alone
> anything said while they’re still lining up.
>
> Longer response:
>
> I really REALLY don’t think that there should be any announcement calling
> attention to the fact that the next dance has interaction with someone
> other than your chosen partner.   What, are we supposed to say “This is a
> duple improper single progression with a shadow who is the same active or
> inactive role one place below [or above] where you line up”?
>
> Or should we say “Thank this partner, and ask another partner for the next
> dance. As you line up, if there is someone at the dance here tonight with
> whom you don’t want to dance, please make sure that they are in a different
> longways set than you, or that if they are in the same long set as you that
> they are not in an adjacent hands-four from you either up or down as you
> line up for the dance.”
>
> Are we dance choreographers supposed to create dance sequences that don’t
> have any “serious” interaction with the shadow partner, just in case the
> dancers happen to line up such that someone on the floor has an “Ex” as a
> shadow partner?  Or someone who hasn’t showered recently enough?
>
> We already have the problem of MUC rejection of any dance that doesn’t
> include both partner swing and neighbor swing; this seems to be an
> injection of a problem of a potential swing with a neighbor some dancers
> might not want to swing with, yet such swings are still required.
>
> I’m confused…
>
> 
>
> Yes, I understand the many reasons for not having serious shadow
> interactions, but I am proud that every local dance community where I’ve
> been a member, from NH/Boston to CA/SF, has understood that interpersonal
> conflicts will happen, and yet social interactions are required. They
> understand how to make everyone work together. Family schisms are
> inevitable.  Personal hygiene issues may arise.
>
> I hope that everyone eventually can live the philosophy on Jeremiah’s
> T-shirt: “Dance With Who’s Comin’ Atcha!"
>
> Even long-time couples break up.  It’s painful to the people involved and
> also to everyone surrounding.   We’re all Community here.  Our Community is
> larger and more long-lived than the simple “nuclear family” of two parents
> and 2.3 children.  That means we get to “enjoy” many various kinds of
> family ties, both genetic and non-genetic.  The Community connection
> carries us all through this specific break-up episode. The Dance entertains
> us and it heals us and it strengthens The Community.
>
> I say this with a VERY PERSONAL involvement in this community support.
>
> Yes, we DO see what’s going on. Yes, we DO love both of you, even if
> you’ve split apart, and even if there is a court restraining order about
> you both showing up at our dance on the same night (that’s a different
> discussion, and yes, it does happen).
>
> If there’s a personal hygiene problem, sometimes it simply can not be
> helped.  I myself could change shirts whenever the band changes tunes and
> it still would not be often enough. In such a case, please enjoy fresh
> pheromones; fresh sweat can be enjoyable sweat.  If it’s stale sweat, then
> by all means tell the person that a shower with soap would make him/her a
> more enjoyable dance partner. That’s a quiet face-to-face conversation.
>
> BUT please dance for several seconds, smile, and move on.
>
> All that aside, any swing can be changed to an allemande right once or
> twice (to taste), or an elbow swing, or a do-si-do, or a gypsy (with
> varying amounts of eye contact, again to taste).  Experienced dancers,
> especially a split dancer couple who encounter each other in line, will do
> whatever they feel comfortable with. What a GREAT opportunity to swap roles
> with your partner, given a little look-ahead!  (“Oh! that’s my Ex ahead;
> let’s swap!” or just take hands with the palm-up signal that you’re taking
> the “Gent” role next time)   Painless and fun.
>
> Never mind that experienced dancers often rewrite the dance to change a
> non-swing dance move into a swing, even in the middle of a hey; it’s just
> as easy to go the other direction, to reduce interaction.  That’s what
> dancers do. Just Be In The Right Place At The Right Time.
>
> We always say that a neighbor interaction is “just one ti

Re: [Callers] Creating a safe dance space (was Shadow Swing Disclaimers)

[Perry Shafran via Callers]

I think the real crux of the issue is this.  How far are we willing to go to 
create a safe dance space?  The problem is, if you are going to say "if you are 
uncomfortable with your shadow, feel free to move", that could cause a whole 
new realm of problems for dancers.  How would you feel if, after someone 
identified you as their shadow, they moved to another line?  If given this 
option, I foresee people moving for all sorts of reasons that I identified in 
my previous email (too fat, too old, too new, etc), and none of them were 
related to creepers.  

The caller is there to help build community.  How is it building community of 
you suggest "if you don't want to dance with someone, then move"?  You are 
basically inviting people to refuse to interact with people for ANY reason - 
creeper or otherwise.  I have never, in 15 years of dancing, heard a caller 
suggest avoiding dancing with any person.  

Building community means that everyone is welcome and treated like they are 
welcome.  Even society's outcasts.  Of course we should ALL be on alert for 
people who behave inappropriately, but I think we are beginning to move away 
from a shared sense of community to promoting dancing with only people you are 
the most comfortable with.  Which basically means cliques. 

It is a risk to dance with brand new people who come to your dance.  You know 
NOTHING about a person who comes to your dance.  Suggesting that you may wish 
to avoid this person because that person might be creepy - or might not be - 
really seems harmful to community building.
Please note that I am not saying ignore creepers.  If there is a problem 
dancer, the community needs to deal with that person and get that person out of 
the community if necessary.  But if interactions with people might somehow 
become harmful and we wish to ward off all potential problems, then don't call 
dances with shadow swings, and maybe we ought not to call dances with neighbor 
swings.  Then you could never have to swing any person not of your choosing.  
Perry
  From: Ron Blechner via Callers 
 To: Eric Black  
Cc: callers  
 Sent: Wednesday, September 9, 2015 10:01 AM
 Subject: [Callers] Creating a safe dance space (was Shadow Swing Disclaimers)
   
Erik,I'm alarmed at reading your reply in the shadow swing thread.I have seen, 
as a dancer, caller, and organizer, at a variety of dances, far too many 
incidents of inappropriate behavior. I refuse to simply wash my hands and say 
"oh, it's not the caller's place to worry about this." A caller is the MC, the 
coordinator, and often from the stage we can see everything happening in the 
room. It absolutely is our paid job to help create a safe dance space.I want to 
focus on what seems to be the crux of your statement from the shadow swing 
email:" that interpersonal conflicts will happen, and yet social interactions 
are required. They understand how to make everyone work together. Family 
schisms are inevitable."How many "conflicts" does it take before we take 
responsibility and address inappropriate behavior at a dance? I have seen many 
occasions where *one* conflict means a dancer who is new never returns, or an 
experienced dancer never returns, or they wind up having to spend every night 
avoiding *that creepy dude*. I know first hand what having a *single* bad 
experience can mean for a dancer.So if we leave these as "inevitable", then the 
people we lose aren't the people doing the inappropriate behavior - no, those 
jerks stay, stubbornly - we lose the nicer people who were victimized, 
harassed, made uncomfortable.Is that the kind of dance environment you want to 
promote?I don't believe so.Instead, asking questions, as Maia did, about things 
a caller can do to create a safe dance space, is essential to long term 
community building. This doesn't mean we are "dance police" or do anything 
extraordinary. But it does mean that we should be considerate to dancers and 
not write off their bad experiences as things that they need to merely tolerate 
and "be an adult" as you put it.Sincerely,
Ron Blechner
___
Callers mailing list
Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net

Re: [Callers] Problem dancers / Crying Wolf

[Ron Blechner via Callers]

Hi Lindsay,

I realize this is a tricky topic, so apologies in advance if my brevity
comes off as bruskness.

These two suggestions work for Amherst Contra.

As a proxy complaint comes in, a board member would seek out the source.
Anonymous complaints are permitted, and a high level of ensuring that we
ask open-ended questions, and not leading questions.

We also wear board member buttons at dances and make regular announcements
about us being available for any reason. Usually 4-7 members of our board
attend any dance.

You might speak privately to Will Loving, our lead organizer, if you're
interested in more specifics.

I would also caution about making such definitive statements as "just an
accusation". In my experience, where there's smoke, there's fire. For every
accusation, there's five people who are too uncomfortable to speak up.

That said, I have seen the success of proactive addressing of issues. The
biggest benefit is simple:

Address it early when it's small, and not a huge deal. Maybe it's a simple
misunderstanding. Maybe the person needed a clear boundary drawn. But wait
until there's a pile of complaints, and you've already lost dancers and the
resolution will need to be more severe for the offender.

Best regards,
Ron Blechner
On Sep 9, 2015 10:08 AM, "Lindsay Morris via Callers" <
callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:

> Chris Weiler's Positive Solutions
> 
> on dealing with problem dancers, and the CDU Policy
> 
> are thoughtful and useful documents.
>
> We have a different problem here.
>
> One woman often complains to board members about men she sees as creepers
> or sexual predators. She reports their misbehavior on behalf of their
> victims. The victims don't initiate these reports.*
>
> Many others *don't* see these men as creepy or inappropriate.  Recently
> one of the "victims" clarified that her discomfort with the man was a year
> ago and she'd long ago dealt with it to her satisfaction.  The man in
> question had heard only rumors that some nameless woman was unhappy about
> some nameless thing he'd done.
>
> This woman also publicly asked that young women who feel harassed should
> talk to her about it.  We feel that's the Board's job, not hers.
>
> It seems that this woman is fishing for - or even inventing -
> "naughty-dancer" problems.
>
> When a married man gets accused of being a sexual predator, his wife has
> to wonder if it's true. This adds to any marital tensions they may already
> have.  So, while this woman is not actually punching anybody in the face,
> it seems to me that she's committing violence.
>
> How should we handle this?
>
>- I think we need a "No proxy complaints" policy - i.e., the victim
>has to speak up (and then our process will usually fix simple
>miscommunication issues).
>- We need to clearly identify board members, so genuine victims know
>who to talk to.
>
> But does anybody have other ideas about preventing one person's issues
> from  poisoning the atmosphere of a mostly friendly dance?
>
> 
> * I know, victims often have a hard time stepping up and complaining, so
> advocacy may be a good thing.  But that's a different discussion.  In these
> situations, there's no victim; there's no predator; there's just an
> accusation with little to back it up.
>
> ___
> Callers mailing list
> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>
>

Re: [Callers] Problem dancers / Crying Wolf

[Lindsay Morris via Callers]

Appreciate that.  Don't think the "where there's smoke there's fire" issue
applies here, though.  It would if there were several *different* women
complaining about one man...


Lindsay Morris
CEO, TSMworks
Tel. 1-859-539-9900
lind...@tsmworks.com

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Ron Blechner  wrote:

> Hi Lindsay,
>
> I realize this is a tricky topic, so apologies in advance if my brevity
> comes off as bruskness.
>
> These two suggestions work for Amherst Contra.
>
> As a proxy complaint comes in, a board member would seek out the source.
> Anonymous complaints are permitted, and a high level of ensuring that we
> ask open-ended questions, and not leading questions.
>
> We also wear board member buttons at dances and make regular announcements
> about us being available for any reason. Usually 4-7 members of our board
> attend any dance.
>
> You might speak privately to Will Loving, our lead organizer, if you're
> interested in more specifics.
>
> I would also caution about making such definitive statements as "just an
> accusation". In my experience, where there's smoke, there's fire. For every
> accusation, there's five people who are too uncomfortable to speak up.
>
> That said, I have seen the success of proactive addressing of issues. The
> biggest benefit is simple:
>
> Address it early when it's small, and not a huge deal. Maybe it's a simple
> misunderstanding. Maybe the person needed a clear boundary drawn. But wait
> until there's a pile of complaints, and you've already lost dancers and the
> resolution will need to be more severe for the offender.
>
> Best regards,
> Ron Blechner
> On Sep 9, 2015 10:08 AM, "Lindsay Morris via Callers" <
> callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>
>> Chris Weiler's Positive Solutions
>> 
>> on dealing with problem dancers, and the CDU Policy
>> 
>> are thoughtful and useful documents.
>>
>> We have a different problem here.
>>
>> One woman often complains to board members about men she sees as creepers
>> or sexual predators. She reports their misbehavior on behalf of their
>> victims. The victims don't initiate these reports.*
>>
>> Many others *don't* see these men as creepy or inappropriate.  Recently
>> one of the "victims" clarified that her discomfort with the man was a year
>> ago and she'd long ago dealt with it to her satisfaction.  The man in
>> question had heard only rumors that some nameless woman was unhappy about
>> some nameless thing he'd done.
>>
>> This woman also publicly asked that young women who feel harassed should
>> talk to her about it.  We feel that's the Board's job, not hers.
>>
>> It seems that this woman is fishing for - or even inventing -
>> "naughty-dancer" problems.
>>
>> When a married man gets accused of being a sexual predator, his wife has
>> to wonder if it's true. This adds to any marital tensions they may already
>> have.  So, while this woman is not actually punching anybody in the face,
>> it seems to me that she's committing violence.
>>
>> How should we handle this?
>>
>>- I think we need a "No proxy complaints" policy - i.e., the victim
>>has to speak up (and then our process will usually fix simple
>>miscommunication issues).
>>- We need to clearly identify board members, so genuine victims know
>>who to talk to.
>>
>> But does anybody have other ideas about preventing one person's issues
>> from  poisoning the atmosphere of a mostly friendly dance?
>>
>> 
>> * I know, victims often have a hard time stepping up and complaining, so
>> advocacy may be a good thing.  But that's a different discussion.  In these
>> situations, there's no victim; there's no predator; there's just an
>> accusation with little to back it up.
>>
>> ___
>> Callers mailing list
>> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>>
>>

Re: [Callers] Creating a safe dance space (was Shadow Swing Disclaimers)

[Ron Blechner via Callers]

Hi Perry,

" The problem is, if you are going to say "if you are uncomfortable with
your shadow, feel free to move","

That wasn't my suggestion in the shadow swing thread. Thus this really
belongs on the other thread, not here.

Can we keep to topic, please? I specifically created a new thread to avoid
rehashing.

Thanks,
Ron
On Sep 9, 2015 10:28 AM, "Perry Shafran via Callers" <
callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:

> I think the real crux of the issue is this.  How far are we willing to go
> to create a safe dance space?  The problem is, if you are going to say "if
> you are uncomfortable with your shadow, feel free to move", that could
> cause a whole new realm of problems for dancers.  How would you feel if,
> after someone identified you as their shadow, they moved to another line?
> If given this option, I foresee people moving for all sorts of reasons that
> I identified in my previous email (too fat, too old, too new, etc), and
> none of them were related to creepers.
>
> The caller is there to help build community.  How is it building community
> of you suggest "if you don't want to dance with someone, then move"?  You
> are basically inviting people to refuse to interact with people for ANY
> reason - creeper or otherwise.  I have never, in 15 years of dancing, heard
> a caller suggest avoiding dancing with any person.
>
> Building community means that everyone is welcome and treated like they
> are welcome.  Even society's outcasts.  Of course we should ALL be on alert
> for people who behave inappropriately, but I think we are beginning to move
> away from a shared sense of community to promoting dancing with only people
> you are the most comfortable with.  Which basically means cliques.
>
> It is a risk to dance with brand new people who come to your dance.  You
> know NOTHING about a person who comes to your dance.  Suggesting that you
> may wish to avoid this person because that person might be creepy - or
> might not be - really seems harmful to community building.
>
> Please note that I am not saying ignore creepers.  If there is a problem
> dancer, the community needs to deal with that person and get that person
> out of the community if necessary.  But if interactions with people might
> somehow become harmful and we wish to ward off all potential problems, then
> don't call dances with shadow swings, and maybe we ought not to call dances
> with neighbor swings.  Then you could never have to swing any person not of
> your choosing.
>
> Perry
>
> --
> *From:* Ron Blechner via Callers 
> *To:* Eric Black 
> *Cc:* callers 
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 9, 2015 10:01 AM
> *Subject:* [Callers] Creating a safe dance space (was Shadow Swing
> Disclaimers)
>
> Erik,
> I'm alarmed at reading your reply in the shadow swing thread.
> I have seen, as a dancer, caller, and organizer, at a variety of dances,
> far too many incidents of inappropriate behavior. I refuse to simply wash
> my hands and say "oh, it's not the caller's place to worry about this." A
> caller is the MC, the coordinator, and often from the stage we can see
> everything happening in the room. It absolutely is our paid job to help
> create a safe dance space.
> I want to focus on what seems to be the crux of your statement from the
> shadow swing email:
> " that interpersonal conflicts will happen, and yet social interactions
> are required. They understand how to make everyone work together. Family
> schisms are inevitable."
> How many "conflicts" does it take before we take responsibility and
> address inappropriate behavior at a dance? I have seen many occasions where
> *one* conflict means a dancer who is new never returns, or an experienced
> dancer never returns, or they wind up having to spend every night avoiding
> *that creepy dude*. I know first hand what having a *single* bad experience
> can mean for a dancer.
> So if we leave these as "inevitable", then the people we lose aren't the
> people doing the inappropriate behavior - no, those jerks stay, stubbornly
> - we lose the nicer people who were victimized, harassed, made
> uncomfortable.
> Is that the kind of dance environment you want to promote?
> I don't believe so.
> Instead, asking questions, as Maia did, about things a caller can do to
> create a safe dance space, is essential to long term community building.
> This doesn't mean we are "dance police" or do anything extraordinary. But
> it does mean that we should be considerate to dancers and not write off
> their bad experiences as things that they need to merely tolerate and "be
> an adult" as you put it.
> Sincerely,
> Ron Blechner
>
> ___
> Callers mailing list
> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>
>
>
> ___
> Callers mailing list
> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedw

Re: [Callers] Problem dancers / Crying Wolf

[Ron Blechner via Callers]

Maybe. Maybe not. My point was that we should be very, very careful about
making a definitive statement about something being "just an accusation",
especially when in your example, there was a second problem - even if it
was a year earlier.
On Sep 9, 2015 10:39 AM, "Lindsay Morris via Callers" <
callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:

> Appreciate that.  Don't think the "where there's smoke there's fire" issue
> applies here, though.  It would if there were several *different* women
> complaining about one man...
>
> 
> Lindsay Morris
> CEO, TSMworks
> Tel. 1-859-539-9900
> lind...@tsmworks.com
>
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Ron Blechner  wrote:
>
>> Hi Lindsay,
>>
>> I realize this is a tricky topic, so apologies in advance if my brevity
>> comes off as bruskness.
>>
>> These two suggestions work for Amherst Contra.
>>
>> As a proxy complaint comes in, a board member would seek out the source.
>> Anonymous complaints are permitted, and a high level of ensuring that we
>> ask open-ended questions, and not leading questions.
>>
>> We also wear board member buttons at dances and make regular
>> announcements about us being available for any reason. Usually 4-7 members
>> of our board attend any dance.
>>
>> You might speak privately to Will Loving, our lead organizer, if you're
>> interested in more specifics.
>>
>> I would also caution about making such definitive statements as "just an
>> accusation". In my experience, where there's smoke, there's fire. For every
>> accusation, there's five people who are too uncomfortable to speak up.
>>
>> That said, I have seen the success of proactive addressing of issues. The
>> biggest benefit is simple:
>>
>> Address it early when it's small, and not a huge deal. Maybe it's a
>> simple misunderstanding. Maybe the person needed a clear boundary drawn.
>> But wait until there's a pile of complaints, and you've already lost
>> dancers and the resolution will need to be more severe for the offender.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Ron Blechner
>> On Sep 9, 2015 10:08 AM, "Lindsay Morris via Callers" <
>> callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Chris Weiler's Positive Solutions
>>> 
>>> on dealing with problem dancers, and the CDU Policy
>>> 
>>> are thoughtful and useful documents.
>>>
>>> We have a different problem here.
>>>
>>> One woman often complains to board members about men she sees as
>>> creepers or sexual predators. She reports their misbehavior on behalf of
>>> their victims. The victims don't initiate these reports.*
>>>
>>> Many others *don't* see these men as creepy or inappropriate.  Recently
>>> one of the "victims" clarified that her discomfort with the man was a year
>>> ago and she'd long ago dealt with it to her satisfaction.  The man in
>>> question had heard only rumors that some nameless woman was unhappy about
>>> some nameless thing he'd done.
>>>
>>> This woman also publicly asked that young women who feel harassed should
>>> talk to her about it.  We feel that's the Board's job, not hers.
>>>
>>> It seems that this woman is fishing for - or even inventing -
>>> "naughty-dancer" problems.
>>>
>>> When a married man gets accused of being a sexual predator, his wife has
>>> to wonder if it's true. This adds to any marital tensions they may already
>>> have.  So, while this woman is not actually punching anybody in the face,
>>> it seems to me that she's committing violence.
>>>
>>> How should we handle this?
>>>
>>>- I think we need a "No proxy complaints" policy - i.e., the victim
>>>has to speak up (and then our process will usually fix simple
>>>miscommunication issues).
>>>- We need to clearly identify board members, so genuine victims know
>>>who to talk to.
>>>
>>> But does anybody have other ideas about preventing one person's issues
>>> from  poisoning the atmosphere of a mostly friendly dance?
>>>
>>> 
>>> * I know, victims often have a hard time stepping up and complaining, so
>>> advocacy may be a good thing.  But that's a different discussion.  In these
>>> situations, there's no victim; there's no predator; there's just an
>>> accusation with little to back it up.
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Callers mailing list
>>> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
>>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>>>
>>>
>
> ___
> Callers mailing list
> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>
>

Re: [Callers] Shadow Swing Disclaimers?

[Martha Wild via Callers]

Hear, hear, Eric! My sentiments exactly. 

And for a slightly different perspective:  I danced a shadow dance at Glen Echo 
some years back, and after swinging my shadow a few times, we both suddenly 
realized we knew each other from way back (my how we change)! Every swing was 
an opportunity to catch up a bit more and a bit more as we continued the dance 
- it was wonderful! So good things can happen, too.

Martha

On Sep 9, 2015, at 6:39 AM, Eric Black via Callers wrote:

> Wow.  ISTM [It Seems To Me] that this is far more responsibility for 
> controlling social interpersonal interactions than the programmer and/or 
> caller at the mic should have to worry about, even though we do worry about 
> such things.
> 
> Sorry I don’t have opportunity to participate on this email list more often.  
> That Pesky Day Job [PDJ] and all…
> 
> Short response: Don’t point out shadow partner interaction; the dancers need 
> to be adult about it, no one listens to the Caller anyway, let alone anything 
> said while they’re still lining up.
> 
> Longer response:
> 
> I really REALLY don’t think that there should be any announcement calling 
> attention to the fact that the next dance has interaction with someone other 
> than your chosen partner.   What, are we supposed to say “This is a duple 
> improper single progression with a shadow who is the same active or inactive 
> role one place below [or above] where you line up”?  
> 
> Or should we say “Thank this partner, and ask another partner for the next 
> dance. As you line up, if there is someone at the dance here tonight with 
> whom you don’t want to dance, please make sure that they are in a different 
> longways set than you, or that if they are in the same long set as you that 
> they are not in an adjacent hands-four from you either up or down as you line 
> up for the dance.”
> 
> Are we dance choreographers supposed to create dance sequences that don’t 
> have any “serious” interaction with the shadow partner, just in case the 
> dancers happen to line up such that someone on the floor has an “Ex” as a 
> shadow partner?  Or someone who hasn’t showered recently enough?
> 
> We already have the problem of MUC rejection of any dance that doesn’t 
> include both partner swing and neighbor swing; this seems to be an injection 
> of a problem of a potential swing with a neighbor some dancers might not want 
> to swing with, yet such swings are still required.
>  
> I’m confused…
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, I understand the many reasons for not having serious shadow 
> interactions, but I am proud that every local dance community where I’ve been 
> a member, from NH/Boston to CA/SF, has understood that interpersonal 
> conflicts will happen, and yet social interactions are required. They 
> understand how to make everyone work together. Family schisms are inevitable. 
>  Personal hygiene issues may arise.
>  
> I hope that everyone eventually can live the philosophy on Jeremiah’s 
> T-shirt: “Dance With Who’s Comin’ Atcha!"
> 
> Even long-time couples break up.  It’s painful to the people involved and 
> also to everyone surrounding.   We’re all Community here.  Our Community is 
> larger and more long-lived than the simple “nuclear family” of two parents 
> and 2.3 children.  That means we get to “enjoy” many various kinds of family 
> ties, both genetic and non-genetic.  The Community connection carries us all 
> through this specific break-up episode. The Dance entertains us and it heals 
> us and it strengthens The Community.
> 
> I say this with a VERY PERSONAL involvement in this community support.
> 
> Yes, we DO see what’s going on. Yes, we DO love both of you, even if you’ve 
> split apart, and even if there is a court restraining order about you both 
> showing up at our dance on the same night (that’s a different discussion, and 
> yes, it does happen).
> 
> If there’s a personal hygiene problem, sometimes it simply can not be helped. 
>  I myself could change shirts whenever the band changes tunes and it still 
> would not be often enough. In such a case, please enjoy fresh pheromones; 
> fresh sweat can be enjoyable sweat.  If it’s stale sweat, then by all means 
> tell the person that a shower with soap would make him/her a more enjoyable 
> dance partner. That’s a quiet face-to-face conversation.
> 
> BUT please dance for several seconds, smile, and move on.
>  
> All that aside, any swing can be changed to an allemande right once or twice 
> (to taste), or an elbow swing, or a do-si-do, or a gypsy (with varying 
> amounts of eye contact, again to taste).  Experienced dancers, especially a 
> split dancer couple who encounter each other in line, will do whatever they 
> feel comfortable with. What a GREAT opportunity to swap roles with your 
> partner, given a little look-ahead!  (“Oh! that’s my Ex ahead; let’s swap!” 
> or just take hands with the palm-up signal that you’re taking the “Gent” role 
> next time)   Painless and fun.
>  
> Never mind that experi

Re: [Callers] Shadow Swing Disclaimers?

[Ron Blechner via Callers]

I've had the experience where my shadow was a creeper. And another time
they were an awful swing. They were both awful experiences.

But Maia asked specifically this thread not be about the merits of shadow
swings or not, but instead about disclaimers.
On Sep 9, 2015 11:54 AM, "Martha Wild via Callers" <
callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:

> Hear, hear, Eric! My sentiments exactly.
>
> And for a slightly different perspective:  I danced a shadow dance at Glen
> Echo some years back, and after swinging my shadow a few times, we both
> suddenly realized we knew each other from way back (my how we change)!
> Every swing was an opportunity to catch up a bit more and a bit more as we
> continued the dance - it was wonderful! So good things can happen, too.
>
> Martha
>
> On Sep 9, 2015, at 6:39 AM, Eric Black via Callers wrote:
>
> Wow.  ISTM [It Seems To Me] that this is far more responsibility for
> controlling social interpersonal interactions than the programmer and/or
> caller at the mic should have to worry about, even though we do worry about
> such things.
>
> Sorry I don’t have opportunity to participate on this email list more
> often.  That Pesky Day Job [PDJ] and all…
>
> Short response: Don’t point out shadow partner interaction; the dancers
> need to be adult about it, no one listens to the Caller anyway, let alone
> anything said while they’re still lining up.
>
> Longer response:
>
> I really REALLY don’t think that there should be any announcement calling
> attention to the fact that the next dance has interaction with someone
> other than your chosen partner.   What, are we supposed to say “This is a
> duple improper single progression with a shadow who is the same active or
> inactive role one place below [or above] where you line up”?
>
> Or should we say “Thank this partner, and ask another partner for the next
> dance. As you line up, if there is someone at the dance here tonight with
> whom you don’t want to dance, please make sure that they are in a different
> longways set than you, or that if they are in the same long set as you that
> they are not in an adjacent hands-four from you either up or down as you
> line up for the dance.”
>
> Are we dance choreographers supposed to create dance sequences that don’t
> have any “serious” interaction with the shadow partner, just in case the
> dancers happen to line up such that someone on the floor has an “Ex” as a
> shadow partner?  Or someone who hasn’t showered recently enough?
>
> We already have the problem of MUC rejection of any dance that doesn’t
> include both partner swing and neighbor swing; this seems to be an
> injection of a problem of a potential swing with a neighbor some dancers
> might not want to swing with, yet such swings are still required.
>
> I’m confused…
>
> 
>
> Yes, I understand the many reasons for not having serious shadow
> interactions, but I am proud that every local dance community where I’ve
> been a member, from NH/Boston to CA/SF, has understood that interpersonal
> conflicts will happen, and yet social interactions are required. They
> understand how to make everyone work together. Family schisms are
> inevitable.  Personal hygiene issues may arise.
>
> I hope that everyone eventually can live the philosophy on Jeremiah’s
> T-shirt: “Dance With Who’s Comin’ Atcha!"
>
> Even long-time couples break up.  It’s painful to the people involved and
> also to everyone surrounding.   We’re all Community here.  Our Community is
> larger and more long-lived than the simple “nuclear family” of two parents
> and 2.3 children.  That means we get to “enjoy” many various kinds of
> family ties, both genetic and non-genetic.  The Community connection
> carries us all through this specific break-up episode. The Dance entertains
> us and it heals us and it strengthens The Community.
>
> I say this with a VERY PERSONAL involvement in this community support.
>
> Yes, we DO see what’s going on. Yes, we DO love both of you, even if
> you’ve split apart, and even if there is a court restraining order about
> you both showing up at our dance on the same night (that’s a different
> discussion, and yes, it does happen).
>
> If there’s a personal hygiene problem, sometimes it simply can not be
> helped.  I myself could change shirts whenever the band changes tunes and
> it still would not be often enough. In such a case, please enjoy fresh
> pheromones; fresh sweat can be enjoyable sweat.  If it’s stale sweat, then
> by all means tell the person that a shower with soap would make him/her a
> more enjoyable dance partner. That’s a quiet face-to-face conversation.
>
> BUT please dance for several seconds, smile, and move on.
>
> All that aside, any swing can be changed to an allemande right once or
> twice (to taste), or an elbow swing, or a do-si-do, or a gypsy (with
> varying amounts of eye contact, again to taste).  Experienced dancers,
> especially a split dancer couple who encounter each other in line, will do
> whatever they 

[Callers] counterclockwise momentum?

[Lindsey Dono via Callers]

Hi Callers,
There are a number of dances that have significant clockwise momentum; I try to 
label such dances so I don't call them back to back. However, I'd like to 
identify a collection of dances with the *least* clockwise movement (beyond 
swinging in the other direction). 
Which moves are CCW? I realize that this depends somewhat on how the move is 
danced.
 Have you IDed any dances as particularly good to call after a very clockwise 
one?
Thanks!Lindsey

Re: [Callers] Shadow Swing Disclaimers?

[Eric Black via Callers]

Interesting.  I’ve received multiple direct emails from people saying variously 
that:

  - my comment was off-topic because Maia requested responses to be about 
whether to announce it or not
and not about the merits or not of shadow swings

  - my comment misses the point because some people have had (or fear they 
might have) an unpleasant
shadow interaction, so the Caller needs to accommodate that fear

I repeat.  Wow.  Perhaps I was a little too subtle in what I wrote.

But no one listens to the Caller anyway…

To state it more clearly:  I think it is a mistake to announce something like 
"the next dance has a shadow swing,
and your shadow is the person in the next hands-4 facing you (or in the hands-4 
behind you looking at your back),
so check them out and if it’s someone you don’t want to encounter for 4 seconds 
each time through the music,
ask the other couple in your hands-4 if they would agree to circle left 1/2 
before the dance starts”.

Doing so would broadcast an entirely incorrect and inappropriate message about 
the dance community.

In my experience, people who don’t want to encounter another individual as a 
shadow, or even as a neighbor,
tend to take care to line up in a different set from their Ex, or that 
“creeper”, even if there is no shadow in the
particular dance.

If there’s only 1 set, that’s a problem, eh?  If there is a creeper in each 
set, that’s a problem also.  Again, that’s
something the community needs to treat, and there’s really nothing the caller 
that evening can do even
with the power of the bully pulpit.

The most the caller can do in such cases is exert  a gentle nudge on the side 
of that asteroid, and perhaps over
time, given enough nudges, the asteroid’s path will change.

Maybe say things like “contra dancers are very courteous and friendly people” 
will, over time, encourage people
to live up to that description.  Sometimes saying “swing with your shadow in 
such a way that they’ll look forward
to coming back to you next time through the music” also might, over time, 
instill a more positive image to exhibit.

As much as callers might like to think that they guide and even control the 
dance community, it just ain’t so.
All we can do is suggest.  And as has been said before, no one listens to the 
Caller.

-Eric



On Sep 9, 2015, at 6:39 AM, Eric Black via Callers 
 wrote:
> Wow.  ISTM [It Seems To Me] that this is far more responsibility for 
> controlling social interpersonal interactions than the programmer and/or 
> caller at the mic should have to worry about, even though we do worry about 
> such things.
> 
> Sorry I don’t have opportunity to participate on this email list more often.  
> That Pesky Day Job [PDJ] and all…
> 
> Short response: Don’t point out shadow partner interaction; the dancers need 
> to be adult about it, no one listens to the Caller anyway, let alone anything 
> said while they’re still lining up.
> 

Re: [Callers] Fw: Shadow Swing Disclaimers?

[Aahz Maruch via Callers]

On Tue, Sep 08, 2015, Michael Fuerst via Callers wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 8, 2015 1:53 PM, Luke Donforth  
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Michael Fuerst via Callers 
>>  wrote:
>>>
>>> Asking about how to appropriately do dances with shadow swings seems
>>> like asking how men can appropriately grope women during a dance.
>>
>> I again think your attempt to inject levity into a conversation have
>> come across as crass and inappropriate.  Asking about shadow swings
>> on a list for calling is pertinent; joking about men groping women
>> dancers isn't.
>
> Your assessment is inaccurate. This is not a matter where levity is
> acceptable. Creating a situation which could force someone into close,
> almost intimate proximity with a person perceived as emotionally or
> physically threatening is inappropriate. A lesser problem is that one
> can get a shadow who one considers personable, but very unpleasant
> for swinging (for example, due to either height difference, or a body
> position or weight distribution which unnecessarily strains one's own
> body).

Well, I share Luke's assessment.  The phrasing you used to compare shadow
swings and groping implies either levity or a disregard of the difference
between groping and a shadow swing.  Regardless of the seriousness with
which you view "forcing" a shadow swing, it is clear that many other
people disagree, and your comparison is not appropriate, especially given
Maia's original request to AVOID any discussion of whether shadow swings
are appropriate.
-- 
Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6http://rule6.info/
  <*>   <*>   <*>
Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html

Re: [Callers] Fw: Shadow Swing Disclaimers?

[Michael Fuerst via Callers]

Aahz wrote:  "Regardless of the seriousness with which you view "forcing" a 
shadow swing, it is clear that many other people disagree, "A better assessment 
is that a vocal and, in the opinion of many, insensitive minority disagree.

Shadow swings are insurmountably problemsome,  because they can force one to 
repeatedly swing with somewhat they either (1)  find physically or emotionally 
threatening,  or,  (2) because of size or style  physically uncomfortable to 
swing with.        The absurdity of Maia's request to avoid discussion of the 
shadow swings' appropriateness  equals the absurdity of asking when groping 
might be appropriate. Michael Fuerst      802 N Broadway      Urbana IL 61801   
   217 239 5844

[Callers] Fwd: Fw: Shadow Swing Disclaimers?

[Andrea Nettleton via Callers]

> 
> Maia,
> Did we give you what you needed?  If so, could you let us know and put a stop 
> to the thread?  Callers are now more busy calling one another out for getting 
> off topic or being inappropriate than generating new answers.  
> Summary of suggestions, as best I remember:
> 1) don't call the dance
> 2) call the dance with the disclaimer farther in advance than the teach.
> 3) call the dance with a substitute choreography, not mentioning the 
> possibility of a swing.
> 4) call the dance and at that place in the dance say: with your shadow either 
> swing or (substitute move) and end x-ly (probably traded places either facing 
> across or with one person facing across ready to do the next move (if the 
> substitute was an allemande 1.5)).  
> 
> While some advocated for disclaimers, many felt it is bad for the community 
> to imply from the mic that people might be uncivil. Others objected that some 
> might take the disclaimer as license to avoid dancers for any number of 
> reasons, some being petty prejudices rather than a sense of real danger.  
> Overall there were more voices against disclaimer and for offering an 
> alternative movement should you feel this was the right dance for the moment. 
>  
> 
> Correct me if I'm wrong.  Could we leave this alone unless someone has a 
> truly new idea for Maia?
> 
> Thanks,
> Andrea
> 
> Sent from my iOnlypretendtomultitask
> 
>>> On Sep 9, 2015, at 3:08 PM, Aahz Maruch via Callers 
>>>  wrote:
>>> 
 On Tue, Sep 08, 2015, Michael Fuerst via Callers wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 8, 2015 1:53 PM, Luke Donforth 
>  wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Michael Fuerst via Callers 
>  wrote:
> 
> Asking about how to appropriately do dances with shadow swings seems
> like asking how men can appropriately grope women during a dance.
 
 I again think your attempt to inject levity into a conversation have
 come across as crass and inappropriate.  Asking about shadow swings
 on a list for calling is pertinent; joking about men groping women
 dancers isn't.
>>> 
>>> Your assessment is inaccurate. This is not a matter where levity is
>>> acceptable. Creating a situation which could force someone into close,
>>> almost intimate proximity with a person perceived as emotionally or
>>> physically threatening is inappropriate. A lesser problem is that one
>>> can get a shadow who one considers personable, but very unpleasant
>>> for swinging (for example, due to either height difference, or a body
>>> position or weight distribution which unnecessarily strains one's own
>>> body).
>> 
>> Well, I share Luke's assessment.  The phrasing you used to compare shadow
>> swings and groping implies either levity or a disregard of the difference
>> between groping and a shadow swing.  Regardless of the seriousness with
>> which you view "forcing" a shadow swing, it is clear that many other
>> people disagree, and your comparison is not appropriate, especially given
>> Maia's original request to AVOID any discussion of whether shadow swings
>> are appropriate.
>> -- 
>> Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6http://rule6.info/
>> <*>   <*>   <*>
>> Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html
>> ___
>> Callers mailing list
>> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net

Re: [Callers] Problem dancers / Crying Wolf

[Martha Wild via Callers]

Yeah, we had a guy at one dance complain bitterly that other men were being 
creepy with his girlfriend. But when I spoke with her, she said there was no 
problem, they'd done no more than gypsy and swing her and occasionally speak to 
her with advice on the dance. The more I spoke with the two of them the more I 
wanted to yell at the woman - run fast, very fast, as far away from this 
control freak as you can But I suppose it was not my place to warn her 
right in front of him. No surprise they never returned. 

Martha


On Sep 9, 2015, at 7:39 AM, Lindsay Morris via Callers wrote:

> Appreciate that.  Don't think the "where there's smoke there's fire" issue 
> applies here, though.  It would if there were several different women 
> complaining about one man...
> 
> 
> Lindsay Morris
> CEO, TSMworks
> Tel. 1-859-539-9900
> lind...@tsmworks.com
> 
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Ron Blechner  wrote:
> Hi Lindsay,
> 
> I realize this is a tricky topic, so apologies in advance if my brevity comes 
> off as bruskness.
> 
> These two suggestions work for Amherst Contra.
> 
> As a proxy complaint comes in, a board member would seek out the source. 
> Anonymous complaints are permitted, and a high level of ensuring that we ask 
> open-ended questions, and not leading questions.
> 
> We also wear board member buttons at dances and make regular announcements 
> about us being available for any reason. Usually 4-7 members of our board 
> attend any dance.
> 
> You might speak privately to Will Loving, our lead organizer, if you're 
> interested in more specifics.
> 
> I would also caution about making such definitive statements as "just an 
> accusation". In my experience, where there's smoke, there's fire. For every 
> accusation, there's five people who are too uncomfortable to speak up.
> 
> That said, I have seen the success of proactive addressing of issues. The 
> biggest benefit is simple:
> 
> Address it early when it's small, and not a huge deal. Maybe it's a simple 
> misunderstanding. Maybe the person needed a clear boundary drawn. But wait 
> until there's a pile of complaints, and you've already lost dancers and the 
> resolution will need to be more severe for the offender.
> 
> Best regards,
> Ron Blechner
> 
> On Sep 9, 2015 10:08 AM, "Lindsay Morris via Callers" 
>  wrote:
> Chris Weiler's Positive Solutions on dealing with problem dancers, and the 
> CDU Policy are thoughtful and useful documents.
> 
> We have a different problem here.
> 
> One woman often complains to board members about men she sees as creepers or 
> sexual predators. She reports their misbehavior on behalf of their victims. 
> The victims don't initiate these reports.* 
> 
> Many others don't see these men as creepy or inappropriate.  Recently one of 
> the "victims" clarified that her discomfort with the man was a year ago and 
> she'd long ago dealt with it to her satisfaction.  The man in question had 
> heard only rumors that some nameless woman was unhappy about some nameless 
> thing he'd done.
> 
> This woman also publicly asked that young women who feel harassed should talk 
> to her about it.  We feel that's the Board's job, not hers.
> 
> It seems that this woman is fishing for - or even inventing - 
> "naughty-dancer" problems. 
> 
> When a married man gets accused of being a sexual predator, his wife has to 
> wonder if it's true. This adds to any marital tensions they may already have. 
>  So, while this woman is not actually punching anybody in the face, it seems 
> to me that she's committing violence. 
> 
> How should we handle this?
> I think we need a "No proxy complaints" policy - i.e., the victim has to 
> speak up (and then our process will usually fix simple miscommunication 
> issues).
> We need to clearly identify board members, so genuine victims know who to 
> talk to.
> But does anybody have other ideas about preventing one person's issues from  
> poisoning the atmosphere of a mostly friendly dance?
> 
> 
> * I know, victims often have a hard time stepping up and complaining, so 
> advocacy may be a good thing.  But that's a different discussion.  In these 
> situations, there's no victim; there's no predator; there's just an 
> accusation with little to back it up.  
> 
> ___
> Callers mailing list
> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
> 
> 
> ___
> Callers mailing list
> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net

Re: [Callers] Problem dancers / Crying Wolf

[Ron Blechner via Callers]

Harassment is real. It's widespread, and pretending it isn't hurts people
and keeps people away from our dances.

Things I have personally witnessed, and when subsequently asked the dancer
whether anything was unusual, they confirmed:

One dancer has a habit of grabbing hip *just* at the butt-line. One of the
young women was 15.

Another dancer intentionally threw a quarter on the ground in front of a
young 20-something lady. I watched in horror as she bent over and picked it
up as he leered.

One dancer did a frontways dip to a 20-something lady which included
torso-torso frontal contact. No permission was asked.

Another dancer came in drunk / high and was dancing wild.

Another dancer has a habit of intentionally shoulder-checked men who have
called him out on his creepiness.

Another dancer was swinging way too close. Turns out he was following a
minor around and asking completely inappropriate questions.

And I have more of these stories. Seriously, the list goes on and on.

I've been dancing far fewer years than many on this list, and danced at
many different dances - this isn't limited to one dance community. And
these are just the stories I've verified.
So are all of your eyes closed?

So... Yeah. I absolutely think that we should keep our eyes open. I think
we should calmly and privately inquire when we think we see inappropriate
behavior. We should be absolutely receptive that sometimes behavior is seen
and a victim is too afraid to step forward on their own.

And we should stop with such flippant and potentially dangerous phrases
like "crying wolf" or that people need to just grow up and "act like an
adult" because bad stuff happens.
On Sep 9, 2015 4:04 PM, "Martha Wild via Callers" <
callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:

> Yeah, we had a guy at one dance complain bitterly that other men were
> being creepy with his girlfriend. But when I spoke with her, she said there
> was no problem, they'd done no more than gypsy and swing her and
> occasionally speak to her with advice on the dance. The more I spoke with
> the two of them the more I wanted to yell at the woman - run fast, very
> fast, as far away from this control freak as you can But I suppose it
> was not my place to warn her right in front of him. No surprise they never
> returned.
>
> Martha
>
>
> On Sep 9, 2015, at 7:39 AM, Lindsay Morris via Callers wrote:
>
> Appreciate that.  Don't think the "where there's smoke there's fire" issue
> applies here, though.  It would if there were several *different* women
> complaining about one man...
>
> 
> Lindsay Morris
> CEO, TSMworks
> Tel. 1-859-539-9900
> lind...@tsmworks.com
>
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Ron Blechner  wrote:
>
>> Hi Lindsay,
>>
>> I realize this is a tricky topic, so apologies in advance if my brevity
>> comes off as bruskness.
>>
>> These two suggestions work for Amherst Contra.
>>
>> As a proxy complaint comes in, a board member would seek out the source.
>> Anonymous complaints are permitted, and a high level of ensuring that we
>> ask open-ended questions, and not leading questions.
>>
>> We also wear board member buttons at dances and make regular
>> announcements about us being available for any reason. Usually 4-7 members
>> of our board attend any dance.
>>
>> You might speak privately to Will Loving, our lead organizer, if you're
>> interested in more specifics.
>>
>> I would also caution about making such definitive statements as "just an
>> accusation". In my experience, where there's smoke, there's fire. For every
>> accusation, there's five people who are too uncomfortable to speak up.
>>
>> That said, I have seen the success of proactive addressing of issues. The
>> biggest benefit is simple:
>>
>> Address it early when it's small, and not a huge deal. Maybe it's a
>> simple misunderstanding. Maybe the person needed a clear boundary drawn.
>> But wait until there's a pile of complaints, and you've already lost
>> dancers and the resolution will need to be more severe for the offender.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Ron Blechner
>> On Sep 9, 2015 10:08 AM, "Lindsay Morris via Callers" <
>> callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Chris Weiler's Positive Solutions
>>> 
>>> on dealing with problem dancers, and the CDU Policy
>>> 
>>> are thoughtful and useful documents.
>>>
>>> We have a different problem here.
>>>
>>> One woman often complains to board members about men she sees as
>>> creepers or sexual predators. She reports their misbehavior on behalf of
>>> their victims. The victims don't initiate these reports.*
>>>
>>> Many others *don't* see these men as creepy or inappropriate.  Recently
>>> one of the "victims" clarified that her discomfort with the man was a year
>>> ago and she'd long ago dealt with it to her satisfaction.  Th

Re: [Callers] Shadow Swing Disclaimers?

[Richard Fischer via Callers]

Here's a suggestion I don't think I've seen in this discussion. If you want to 
call a dance with a shadow swing, how about save it for time when you can have 
several shorter sets, and remind couples they can join other sets when they 
reach the top or the bottom, to get an opportunity to dance with a bigger 
variety of people. (And of course remind dancers they may have the surprise of 
a new shadow.)

Richard

On Sep 8, 2015, at 11:06 AM, Maia McCormick via Callers wrote:

> Hey all,
> 
> First, a disclaimer: Some people on this listserv thing shadow swings are 
> problematic. Some don't see any issue with them. This is NOT the conversation 
> I want to have in this thread; I ask that you respond to the question I'm 
> asking and do not debate my premise--at least not in this particular thread. 
> This should help keep this thread on track and hopefully reduce excess noise 
> and go-nowhere discussions on this listserv. Thanks!
> 
> Anyway, the actual question I wanted to ask (whew!)--
> 
> There do exist some really fabulous shadow-swing dances that I would love to 
> be able to call, as long as I could do so without putting anyone in an 
> uncomfortable position. Do folks have ideas for ways to mitigate the 
> potential harms of shadow swing dances? I was considering, at the beginning 
> of the dance, having dancers identify their shadow and mentioning, "this will 
> be a shadow swing dance, so if you need to make any changes, do so now" (or 
> something like that)--haven't gotten the wording down-pat, but the idea is 
> giving dancers advance warning of a shadow swing so they can move (thereby 
> changing their shadow) if they need to. Any thoughts on this method? 
> Suggestions of others?
> 
> Cheers.
> Maia
> ___
> Callers mailing list
> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net

Re: [Callers] Problem dancers / Crying Wolf

[Lindsay Morris via Callers]

Well, I don't want to fan the flames in this normally cordial and helpful
community.
However, I'm here, and seeing what I'm seeing, and asking for perspective.


Lindsay Morris
CEO, TSMworks
Tel. 1-859-539-9900
lind...@tsmworks.com

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 4:44 PM, Ron Blechner via Callers <
callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:

> Harassment is real. It's widespread, and pretending it isn't hurts people
> and keeps people away from our dances.
>
> Things I have personally witnessed, and when subsequently asked the dancer
> whether anything was unusual, they confirmed:
>
> One dancer has a habit of grabbing hip *just* at the butt-line. One of the
> young women was 15.
>
> Another dancer intentionally threw a quarter on the ground in front of a
> young 20-something lady. I watched in horror as she bent over and picked it
> up as he leered.
>
> One dancer did a frontways dip to a 20-something lady which included
> torso-torso frontal contact. No permission was asked.
>
> Another dancer came in drunk / high and was dancing wild.
>
> Another dancer has a habit of intentionally shoulder-checked men who have
> called him out on his creepiness.
>
> Another dancer was swinging way too close. Turns out he was following a
> minor around and asking completely inappropriate questions.
>
> And I have more of these stories. Seriously, the list goes on and on.
>
> I've been dancing far fewer years than many on this list, and danced at
> many different dances - this isn't limited to one dance community. And
> these are just the stories I've verified.
> So are all of your eyes closed?
>
> So... Yeah. I absolutely think that we should keep our eyes open. I think
> we should calmly and privately inquire when we think we see inappropriate
> behavior. We should be absolutely receptive that sometimes behavior is seen
> and a victim is too afraid to step forward on their own.
>
> And we should stop with such flippant and potentially dangerous phrases
> like "crying wolf" or that people need to just grow up and "act like an
> adult" because bad stuff happens.
> On Sep 9, 2015 4:04 PM, "Martha Wild via Callers" <
> callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>
>> Yeah, we had a guy at one dance complain bitterly that other men were
>> being creepy with his girlfriend. But when I spoke with her, she said there
>> was no problem, they'd done no more than gypsy and swing her and
>> occasionally speak to her with advice on the dance. The more I spoke with
>> the two of them the more I wanted to yell at the woman - run fast, very
>> fast, as far away from this control freak as you can But I suppose it
>> was not my place to warn her right in front of him. No surprise they never
>> returned.
>>
>> Martha
>>
>>
>> On Sep 9, 2015, at 7:39 AM, Lindsay Morris via Callers wrote:
>>
>> Appreciate that.  Don't think the "where there's smoke there's fire"
>> issue applies here, though.  It would if there were several *different*
>> women complaining about one man...
>>
>> 
>> Lindsay Morris
>> CEO, TSMworks
>> Tel. 1-859-539-9900
>> lind...@tsmworks.com
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Ron Blechner 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Lindsay,
>>>
>>> I realize this is a tricky topic, so apologies in advance if my brevity
>>> comes off as bruskness.
>>>
>>> These two suggestions work for Amherst Contra.
>>>
>>> As a proxy complaint comes in, a board member would seek out the source.
>>> Anonymous complaints are permitted, and a high level of ensuring that we
>>> ask open-ended questions, and not leading questions.
>>>
>>> We also wear board member buttons at dances and make regular
>>> announcements about us being available for any reason. Usually 4-7 members
>>> of our board attend any dance.
>>>
>>> You might speak privately to Will Loving, our lead organizer, if you're
>>> interested in more specifics.
>>>
>>> I would also caution about making such definitive statements as "just an
>>> accusation". In my experience, where there's smoke, there's fire. For every
>>> accusation, there's five people who are too uncomfortable to speak up.
>>>
>>> That said, I have seen the success of proactive addressing of issues.
>>> The biggest benefit is simple:
>>>
>>> Address it early when it's small, and not a huge deal. Maybe it's a
>>> simple misunderstanding. Maybe the person needed a clear boundary drawn.
>>> But wait until there's a pile of complaints, and you've already lost
>>> dancers and the resolution will need to be more severe for the offender.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Ron Blechner
>>> On Sep 9, 2015 10:08 AM, "Lindsay Morris via Callers" <
>>> callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>>>
 Chris Weiler's Positive Solutions
 
 on dealing with problem dancers, and the CDU Policy
 
 are thoughtful and use

Re: [Callers] Problem dancers / Crying Wolf

[Alan Winston via Callers]

Here's the thing:

 - There really is harassment, creepy behavior, etc.
 - There really are cases where third parties see those  things and 
they aren't actually there in the eyes of the perceived victim


 So organizers have to keep their eyes open and review things on a case 
by case basis.  Because one organizer has seen unjustified third-party 
charges of harrassment doesn't mean this particular case is one of 
those; because another organizer can multiply real examples of 
unacceptable behavior doesn't mean this particular case is one of them.


It doesn't, in my view, help discourse to tell people who have real 
experiences on one side or the other of that that they're not taking the 
situation seriously enough / taking the situation too seriously and, 
implicitly, that your experiences trump their experiences.


-- Alan



On 9/9/15 1:44 PM, Ron Blechner via Callers wrote:


Harassment is real. It's widespread, and pretending it isn't hurts 
people and keeps people away from our dances.


Things I have personally witnessed, and when subsequently asked the 
dancer whether anything was unusual, they confirmed:


One dancer has a habit of grabbing hip *just* at the butt-line. One of 
the young women was 15.


Another dancer intentionally threw a quarter on the ground in front of 
a young 20-something lady. I watched in horror as she bent over and 
picked it up as he leered.


One dancer did a frontways dip to a 20-something lady which included 
torso-torso frontal contact. No permission was asked.


Another dancer came in drunk / high and was dancing wild.

Another dancer has a habit of intentionally shoulder-checked men who 
have called him out on his creepiness.


Another dancer was swinging way too close. Turns out he was following 
a minor around and asking completely inappropriate questions.


And I have more of these stories. Seriously, the list goes on and on.

I've been dancing far fewer years than many on this list, and danced 
at many different dances - this isn't limited to one dance community. 
And these are just the stories I've verified.

So are all of your eyes closed?

So... Yeah. I absolutely think that we should keep our eyes open. I 
think we should calmly and privately inquire when we think we see 
inappropriate behavior. We should be absolutely receptive that 
sometimes behavior is seen and a victim is too afraid to step forward 
on their own.


And we should stop with such flippant and potentially dangerous 
phrases like "crying wolf" or that people need to just grow up and 
"act like an adult" because bad stuff happens.


On Sep 9, 2015 4:04 PM, "Martha Wild via Callers" 
> wrote:


Yeah, we had a guy at one dance complain bitterly that other men
were being creepy with his girlfriend. But when I spoke with her,
she said there was no problem, they'd done no more than gypsy and
swing her and occasionally speak to her with advice on the dance.
The more I spoke with the two of them the more I wanted to yell at
the woman - run fast, very fast, as far away from this control
freak as you can But I suppose it was not my place to warn her
right in front of him. No surprise they never returned.

Martha


On Sep 9, 2015, at 7:39 AM, Lindsay Morris via Callers wrote:


Appreciate that.  Don't think the "where there's smoke there's
fire" issue applies here, though.  It would if there were several
*different* women complaining about one man...


Lindsay Morris
CEO, TSMworks
Tel. 1-859-539-9900 
lind...@tsmworks.com 

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Ron Blechner
mailto:contra...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Hi Lindsay,

I realize this is a tricky topic, so apologies in advance if
my brevity comes off as bruskness.

These two suggestions work for Amherst Contra.

As a proxy complaint comes in, a board member would seek out
the source. Anonymous complaints are permitted, and a high
level of ensuring that we ask open-ended questions, and not
leading questions.

We also wear board member buttons at dances and make regular
announcements about us being available for any reason.
Usually 4-7 members of our board attend any dance.

You might speak privately to Will Loving, our lead organizer,
if you're interested in more specifics.

I would also caution about making such definitive statements
as "just an accusation". In my experience, where there's
smoke, there's fire. For every accusation, there's five
people who are too uncomfortable to speak up.

That said, I have seen the success of proactive addressing of
issues. The biggest benefit is simple:

Address it early when it's small, and not a huge deal. Maybe
it's a simple misunderstanding. Maybe the person needed a
cl

[Callers] Solutions for callers for dealing with problem dancers

[Perry Shafran via Callers]

OK, I think we have talked at each other for awhile now, arguing whether or not 
harassment is rampant at our dances.  I think it would be nice if we could now 
discuss solutions we as CALLERS (remember, this is a callers' list, not an 
organizers' list) can and should do with respect to this.  If anyone has any 
ideas, some positive solutions, I am open and receptive to hearing them.  

Perry

Re: [Callers] Shadow Swing Disclaimers?

[Eric Black via Callers]

I like that.  A related tactic is to swap roles with your partner (thereby 
swapping shadows).  And you get to dance both roles, which makes you a better 
and more enjoyable dancer.

-Eric


On Sep 9, 2015, at 1:45 PM, Richard Fischer via Callers 
 wrote:

> Here's a suggestion I don't think I've seen in this discussion. If you want 
> to call a dance with a shadow swing, how about save it for time when you can 
> have several shorter sets, and remind couples they can join other sets when 
> they reach the top or the bottom, to get an opportunity to dance with a 
> bigger variety of people. (And of course remind dancers they may have the 
> surprise of a new shadow.)
> 
> Richard
> 

Re: [Callers] Shadow Swing Disclaimers?

[Michael Fuerst via Callers]

Richard:   Your suggestion is subterfuge to rationalize the caller's doing 
something (calling a shadow swing dance) that should never be done. Michael 
Fuerst      802 N Broadway      Urbana IL 61801  217 239 5844 


 On Wednesday, September 9, 2015 3:45 PM, Richard Fischer via Callers 
 wrote:
   

 Here's a suggestion I don't think I've seen in this discussion. If you want to 
call a dance with a shadow swing, how about save it for time when you can have 
several shorter sets, and remind couples they can join other sets when they 
reach the top or the bottom, to get an opportunity to dance with a bigger 
variety of people. (And of course remind dancers they may have the surprise of 
a new shadow.)
Richard
On Sep 8, 2015, at 11:06 AM, Maia McCormick via Callers wrote:

Hey all,
First, a disclaimer: Some people on this listserv thing shadow swings are 
problematic. Some don't see any issue with them. This is NOT the conversation I 
want to have in this thread; I ask that you respond to the question I'm asking 
and do not debate my premise--at least not in this particular thread. This 
should help keep this thread on track and hopefully reduce excess noise and 
go-nowhere discussions on this listserv. Thanks!
Anyway, the actual question I wanted to ask (whew!)--
There do exist some really fabulous shadow-swing dances that I would love to be 
able to call, as long as I could do so without putting anyone in an 
uncomfortable position. Do folks have ideas for ways to mitigate the potential 
harms of shadow swing dances? I was considering, at the beginning of the dance, 
having dancers identify their shadow and mentioning, "this will be a shadow 
swing dance, so if you need to make any changes, do so now" (or something like 
that)--haven't gotten the wording down-pat, but the idea is giving dancers 
advance warning of a shadow swing so they can move (thereby changing their 
shadow) if they need to. Any thoughts on this method? Suggestions of others?
Cheers.Maia___
Callers mailing list
Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net



___
Callers mailing list
Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net

Re: [Callers] Shadow Swing Disclaimers?

[Kalia Kliban via Callers]

On 9/9/2015 2:13 PM, Michael Fuerst via Callers wrote:

Richard:   Your suggestion is subterfuge to rationalize the caller's
doing something (calling a shadow swing dance) that should never be done.
Michael Fuerst  802 N Broadway  Urbana IL 61801  217 239 5844


Never, Michael?  That seems pretty dogmatic.

Kalia

Re: [Callers] Shadow Swing Disclaimers?

[Michael Fuerst via Callers]

Eric:    Not all dancers enjoy dancing or skilled enough to dance both roles.   
Dancers should not have to resort to such subterfuge to avoid unpleasantness 
perpetrated by an insensitive caller. Michael Fuerst      802 N Broadway      
Urbana IL 61801  217 239 5844
 


 On Wednesday, September 9, 2015 4:12 PM, Eric Black via Callers 
 wrote:
   

 I like that.  A related tactic is to swap roles with your partner (thereby 
swapping shadows).  And you get to dance both roles, which makes you a better 
and more enjoyable dancer.

-Eric


On Sep 9, 2015, at 1:45 PM, Richard Fischer via Callers 
 wrote:

> Here's a suggestion I don't think I've seen in this discussion. If you want 
> to call a dance with a shadow swing, how about save it for time when you can 
> have several shorter sets, and remind couples they can join other sets when 
> they reach the top or the bottom, to get an opportunity to dance with a 
> bigger variety of people. (And of course remind dancers they may have the 
> surprise of a new shadow.)
> 
> Richard
> 

___
Callers mailing list
Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net

Re: [Callers] counterclockwise momentum?

[Chris Page via Callers]

Here's a starter list of counterclockwise moves:

Circle right
Allemande left
Star left
Seesaw
Star promenade when the center person has left hands
Gypsy left
Counterclockwise roll away
Rory o' More spin to the left
Swat the flea

Also pretty much:
Ladies chain
Right and left through
Promenade
Hey (passing right in the center)
Contra corners

For half the dancers:
Orbit
Square through
Crosstrails through
Half figure eight
California twirl/star through

-Chris Page
San Diego


On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 10:33 AM, Lindsey Dono via Callers <
callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:

> Hi Callers,
>
> There are a number of dances that have significant clockwise momentum; I
> try to label such dances so I don't call them back to back. However, I'd
> like to identify a collection of dances with the *least* clockwise movement
> (beyond swinging in the other direction).
>
> Which moves are CCW? I realize that this depends somewhat on how the move
> is danced.
>
>  Have you IDed any dances as particularly good to call after a very
> clockwise one?
>
> Thanks!
> Lindsey
>
> ___
> Callers mailing list
> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>
>

[Callers] shadow swings

[Dave Merrill via Callers]

My only observation to add to the shadow swing melee is that while not
completely closed to them, i'm cognizant of the several reasons they are a
less than optimal choice. Given these drawbacks of the figure, i would not
use a shadow swing in a situation with very long sets. If the choreography
of the dance is so awesome i feel a need to use it, and the end effects
aren't prohibitive, i'd consider running it in a situation with short sets
(much as i'd use for a 1s active dance). Why? Because if anyone feels the
need to escape their shadow, they can get to an end of the set and either
jump out or rumble into another set sooner. I think this offers dancers the
best chance to fix a potential issue without singling anyone out or
creating a dynamic on the floor more awkward than the choice of a shadow
swing dance (albeit an exceptional one!) already did.

Re: [Callers] Shadow Swing Disclaimers?

[Richard Fischer via Callers]

You know, just a few minutes ago Alan posted a very reasonable call for 
civility on this list. He specifically mentioned not assuming "that your 
experiences trump their experiences."  I've seen prominent callers call dances 
with shadow swings, and I've seen people enjoy them. Some callers may want to 
use them, some may not. And if we're trying to be civil, let's not see the 
worst in others. ("Your suggestion is a subterfuge to rationalize...")

Richard


On Sep 9, 2015, at 5:13 PM, Michael Fuerst wrote:

> Richard:   Your suggestion is subterfuge to rationalize the caller's doing 
> something (calling a shadow swing dance) that should never be done.
>  
> Michael Fuerst  802 N Broadway  Urbana IL 61801  217 239 5844
> 
> 
> 
> On Wednesday, September 9, 2015 3:45 PM, Richard Fischer via Callers 
>  wrote:
> 
> 
> Here's a suggestion I don't think I've seen in this discussion. If you want 
> to call a dance with a shadow swing, how about save it for time when you can 
> have several shorter sets, and remind couples they can join other sets when 
> they reach the top or the bottom, to get an opportunity to dance with a 
> bigger variety of people. (And of course remind dancers they may have the 
> surprise of a new shadow.)
> 
> Richard
> 
> On Sep 8, 2015, at 11:06 AM, Maia McCormick via Callers wrote:
> 
>> Hey all,
>> 
>> First, a disclaimer: Some people on this listserv thing shadow swings are 
>> problematic. Some don't see any issue with them. This is NOT the 
>> conversation I want to have in this thread; I ask that you respond to the 
>> question I'm asking and do not debate my premise--at least not in this 
>> particular thread. This should help keep this thread on track and hopefully 
>> reduce excess noise and go-nowhere discussions on this listserv. Thanks!
>> 
>> Anyway, the actual question I wanted to ask (whew!)--
>> 
>> There do exist some really fabulous shadow-swing dances that I would love to 
>> be able to call, as long as I could do so without putting anyone in an 
>> uncomfortable position. Do folks have ideas for ways to mitigate the 
>> potential harms of shadow swing dances? I was considering, at the beginning 
>> of the dance, having dancers identify their shadow and mentioning, "this 
>> will be a shadow swing dance, so if you need to make any changes, do so now" 
>> (or something like that)--haven't gotten the wording down-pat, but the idea 
>> is giving dancers advance warning of a shadow swing so they can move 
>> (thereby changing their shadow) if they need to. Any thoughts on this 
>> method? Suggestions of others?
>> 
>> Cheers.
>> Maia
>> ___
>> Callers mailing list
>> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
> 
> 
> ___
> Callers mailing list
> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
> 
> 

Re: [Callers] Shadow Swing Disclaimers?

[Andrea Nettleton via Callers]

Richard,
My bad.  That was suggested (by Luke D?), as a triplet-esque solution, whereby 
smaller sets, run shorter, limited the potential for problems.

If the problem is dancers who are new, or easily confused, short sets can 
increase the confusion as you get turned around that much faster, with fewer 
dancers in the middle to reinforce the pattern of the dance.  If the problem is 
a very uncomfortable swing or strong aversion to the shadow, I personally would 
prefer a long set, but alternate choreography to the swing, suggested by the 
caller. 
I definitely think that a shadow becomes an anchor, so suggesting line swapping 
will remove what, for some, will make a confusing dance doable at all.  If I 
were calling, that is one thing I wouldn't choose.

Thanks for the new/missing from summary suggestion.
Andrea

Sent from my iOnlypretendtomultitask

> On Sep 9, 2015, at 4:45 PM, Richard Fischer via Callers 
>  wrote:
> 
> Here's a suggestion I don't think I've seen in this discussion. If you want 
> to call a dance with a shadow swing, how about save it for time when you can 
> have several shorter sets, and remind couples they can join other sets when 
> they reach the top or the bottom, to get an opportunity to dance with a 
> bigger variety of people. (And of course remind dancers they may have the 
> surprise of a new shadow.)
> 
> Richard
> 
>> On Sep 8, 2015, at 11:06 AM, Maia McCormick via Callers wrote:
>> 
>> Hey all,
>> 
>> First, a disclaimer: Some people on this listserv thing shadow swings are 
>> problematic. Some don't see any issue with them. This is NOT the 
>> conversation I want to have in this thread; I ask that you respond to the 
>> question I'm asking and do not debate my premise--at least not in this 
>> particular thread. This should help keep this thread on track and hopefully 
>> reduce excess noise and go-nowhere discussions on this listserv. Thanks!
>> 
>> Anyway, the actual question I wanted to ask (whew!)--
>> 
>> There do exist some really fabulous shadow-swing dances that I would love to 
>> be able to call, as long as I could do so without putting anyone in an 
>> uncomfortable position. Do folks have ideas for ways to mitigate the 
>> potential harms of shadow swing dances? I was considering, at the beginning 
>> of the dance, having dancers identify their shadow and mentioning, "this 
>> will be a shadow swing dance, so if you need to make any changes, do so now" 
>> (or something like that)--haven't gotten the wording down-pat, but the idea 
>> is giving dancers advance warning of a shadow swing so they can move 
>> (thereby changing their shadow) if they need to. Any thoughts on this 
>> method? Suggestions of others?
>> 
>> Cheers.
>> Maia
>> ___
>> Callers mailing list
>> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
> 
> ___
> Callers mailing list
> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net

Re: [Callers] shadow swings

[Michael Fuerst via Callers]

David:    Really, would you ever call a dance with a shadow swing?    
None of our most respected caller (those who are invited as the featured caller 
at various weekends)   never (or darned close to never).I don't ever  recall 
attending a weekend  when the featured caller used a shadow swing. Michael 
Fuerst      802 N Broadway      Urbana IL 61801  217 239 5844 


 On Wednesday, September 9, 2015 4:18 PM, Dave Merrill via Callers 
 wrote:
   

 My only observation to add to the shadow swing melee is that while not 
completely closed to them, i'm cognizant of the several reasons they are a less 
than optimal choice. Given these drawbacks of the figure, i would not use a 
shadow swing in a situation with very long sets. If the choreography of the 
dance is so awesome i feel a need to use it, and the end effects aren't 
prohibitive, i'd consider running it in a situation with short sets (much as 
i'd use for a 1s active dance). Why? Because if anyone feels the need to escape 
their shadow, they can get to an end of the set and either jump out or rumble 
into another set sooner. I think this offers dancers the best chance to fix a 
potential issue without singling anyone out or creating a dynamic on the floor 
more awkward than the choice of a shadow swing dance (albeit an exceptional 
one!) already did. 



___
Callers mailing list
Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net

Re: [Callers] Solutions for callers for dealing with problem dancers

[Amy Wimmer via Callers]

As a caller I try to include something in my beginners' sessions that tells
people how to quickly refuse a dance without giving a reason.

Seattle-area caller, LauraMé Smith often demonstrates how NOT to gypsy (so
that the other person is always trying to get away from you), and she does
it early in the evening, on the floor, with a chosen accomplice, and with
humor.

-Amy Wimmer



On Sep 9, 2015, at 2:08 PM, Perry Shafran via Callers <
callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:

OK, I think we have talked at each other for awhile now, arguing whether or
not harassment is rampant at our dances.  I think it would be nice if we
could now discuss solutions we as CALLERS (remember, this is a callers'
list, not an organizers' list) can and should do with respect to this.  If
anyone has any ideas, some positive solutions, I am open and receptive to
hearing them.

Perry

___
Callers mailing list
Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net

Re: [Callers] shadow swings

[Chris Page via Callers]

Sigh. See "Head of the Bed", written by Nils Fredland.

http://www.library.unh.edu/special/forms/rpdlw/syllabus2008.pdf#page=49b

-Chris Page
San Diego



On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 2:27 PM, Michael Fuerst via Callers <
callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:

> David:Really, would you ever call a dance with a shadow swing?
>
> None of our most respected caller (those who are invited as the featured
> caller at various weekends)   never (or darned close to never).
> I don't ever  recall attending a weekend  when the featured caller used a
> shadow swing.
>
> Michael Fuerst  802 N Broadway  Urbana IL 61801  217 239 5844
>
>
>
>

Re: [Callers] Shadow Swing Disclaimers?

[Michael Fuerst via Callers]

Andrea:   Alternate choreography to replace a shadow swing is  oxymoronic.    
The composer invoked the (morally questionable) shadow swing because it fit 
well into the dance's flow.    If one is disposed to substitute for the shadow 
swing, one should just discard  the dance, Michael Fuerst      802 N Broadway   
   Urbana IL 61801  217 239 5844

Re: [Callers] shadow swings

[Michael Fuerst via Callers]

Chris:  The indicates that someone in 2008 (Dave Eisenstadter) other than the 
composer (Nils Fredland)  not call this dance written in 2003.Everyone has 
become more aware since then.One wonders if Nils still calls this dance Michael 
Fuerst      802 N Broadway      Urbana IL 61801  217 239 5844 


 On Wednesday, September 9, 2015 4:38 PM, Chris Page  
wrote:
   

 Sigh. See "Head of the Bed", written by Nils Fredland.

http://www.library.unh.edu/special/forms/rpdlw/syllabus2008.pdf#page=49b

-Chris Page
San Diego



On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 2:27 PM, Michael Fuerst via Callers 
 wrote:

David:    Really, would you ever call a dance with a shadow swing?    
None of our most respected caller (those who are invited as the featured caller 
at various weekends)   never (or darned close to never).I don't ever  recall 
attending a weekend  when the featured caller used a shadow swing. Michael 
Fuerst      802 N Broadway      Urbana IL 61801  217 239 5844 

Re: [Callers] Shadow Swing Disclaimers?

[Ron Blechner via Callers]

You've never substituted a pass through dosido instead of a dosido pass
through? Or a gypsy/allemande/dosido change if you had too many of one in a
night?

Is it that you think dances written are sacrosanct, or that the shadow
swing is too key to a dance - and is different from more common moves as
I've mentioned?
On Sep 9, 2015 5:49 PM, "Michael Fuerst via Callers" <
callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:

> Andrea:   Alternate choreography to replace a shadow swing is  oxymoronic.
>The composer invoked the (morally questionable) shadow swing because it
> fit well into the dance's flow.If one is disposed to substitute for the
> shadow swing, one should just discard  the dance,
>
> Michael Fuerst  802 N Broadway  Urbana IL 61801  217 239 5844
>
> ___
> Callers mailing list
> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>
>

Re: [Callers] Shadow Swing Disclaimers?

[Michael Fuerst via Callers]

The substitution examples you gave are rarely critical to a dance's flow.   
Swings are more likely to be.     If a dance written with a shadow swing flows 
well with something else, the the dance should always be called with the 
something else.    Michael Fuerst      802 N Broadway      Urbana IL 61801  
217 239 5844

Re: [Callers] shadow swings

[Chris Page via Callers]

And yet, they're done. I know Carol Ormand writes and calls them. This
Saturday at the contra weekend I attended, a national caller called "Head
of the Bed."

Yes, we've heard your opinion. Avoiding shadow swings be perfect for you,
but it may not be for others. And I'd like to hear from the others, rather
than having you (or someone else) try and shut down the conversation by
repeatedly making absolute statements.

There is more than one correct point of view.

(Personally I almost never** use shadow swings, so I don't have much to
contribute to this particular conversation. But I enjoy listening to
others.)


-Chris Page
San Diego

** And yet I'm guilty of having written one, and called it at NEFFA. I've
got my own hypocrisy.



On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 3:02 PM, Michael Fuerst 
wrote:

> Chris:  The indicates that someone in 2008 (Dave Eisenstadter) other than
> the composer (Nils Fredland)  not call this dance written in 2003.
> Everyone has become more aware since then.
> One wonders if Nils still calls this dance
>
> Michael Fuerst  802 N Broadway  Urbana IL 61801  217 239 5844
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, September 9, 2015 4:38 PM, Chris Page 
> wrote:
>
>
> Sigh. See "Head of the Bed", written by Nils Fredland.
>
> http://www.library.unh.edu/special/forms/rpdlw/syllabus2008.pdf#page=49b
>
> -Chris Page
> San Diego
>
>

Re: [Callers] shadow swings

[April Blum via Callers]

I love Robert Cromartie's "Illegal in Most States" and whenever I call it at 
least one person comes up afterwards to say it was a wonderful dance.
April Blum On Sep 9, 2015 6:34 PM, Chris Page via Callers 
 wrote:
>
> And yet, they're done. I know Carol Ormand writes and calls them. This 
> Saturday at the contra weekend I attended, a national caller called "Head of 
> the Bed."
>
> Yes, we've heard your opinion. Avoiding shadow swings be perfect for you, but 
> it may not be for others. And I'd like to hear from the others, rather than 
> having you (or someone else) try and shut down the conversation by repeatedly 
> making absolute statements.
>
> There is more than one correct point of view.
>
> (Personally I almost never** use shadow swings, so I don't have much to 
> contribute to this particular conversation. But I enjoy listening to others.)
>
>
> -Chris Page
> San Diego
>
> ** And yet I'm guilty of having written one, and called it at NEFFA. I've got 
> my own hypocrisy.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 3:02 PM, Michael Fuerst  wrote:
>>
>> Chris:  The indicates that someone in 2008 (Dave Eisenstadter) other than 
>> the composer (Nils Fredland)  not call this dance written in 2003.
>> Everyone has become more aware since then.
>> One wonders if Nils still calls this dance
>>  
>> Michael Fuerst      802 N Broadway      Urbana IL 61801  217 239 5844
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wednesday, September 9, 2015 4:38 PM, Chris Page  
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Sigh. See "Head of the Bed", written by Nils Fredland.
>>
>> http://www.library.unh.edu/special/forms/rpdlw/syllabus2008.pdf#page=49b
>>
>> -Chris Page
>> San Diego
>>
>

Re: [Callers] Fwd: Fw: Shadow Swing Disclaimers?

[Bob Isaacs via Callers]

Hi All:
 
Thanks for the summary, Andrea.  I don't have much use for shadow swings, and 
I'm uneasy calling a dance that needs a disclaimer.  But one shadow swing I 
like is a "corner" swing in 4 facing 4s.  This means all swing a neighbor half 
the time, and a shadow the other half, about 7-8 times.  Here the caller can 
help avoid awkward shadow interactions (and the need for a disclaimer) by 
announcing "the next dance will be a 4 facing 4" as soon as possible, instead 
of forming contra lines and merging sets.  Folks can then shop around for a 
line of 4 they'll be comfortable with - 
 
Bob

 
> Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2015 15:55:34 -0400
> To: call...@sharedweight.net
> Subject: [Callers] Fwd:  Fw: Shadow Swing Disclaimers?
> From: callers@lists.sharedweight.net
> 
> 
> > 
> > Maia,
> > Did we give you what you needed?  If so, could you let us know and put a 
> > stop to the thread?  Callers are now more busy calling one another out for 
> > getting off topic or being inappropriate than generating new answers.  
> > Summary of suggestions, as best I remember:
> > 1) don't call the dance
> > 2) call the dance with the disclaimer farther in advance than the teach.
> > 3) call the dance with a substitute choreography, not mentioning the 
> > possibility of a swing.
> > 4) call the dance and at that place in the dance say: with your shadow 
> > either swing or (substitute move) and end x-ly (probably traded places 
> > either facing across or with one person facing across ready to do the next 
> > move (if the substitute was an allemande 1.5)).  
> > 
> > While some advocated for disclaimers, many felt it is bad for the community 
> > to imply from the mic that people might be uncivil. Others objected that 
> > some might take the disclaimer as license to avoid dancers for any number 
> > of reasons, some being petty prejudices rather than a sense of real danger. 
> >  Overall there were more voices against disclaimer and for offering an 
> > alternative movement should you feel this was the right dance for the 
> > moment.  
> > 
> > Correct me if I'm wrong.  Could we leave this alone unless someone has a 
> > truly new idea for Maia?
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Andrea
> > 
> > Sent from my iOnlypretendtomultitask
> > 
> >>> On Sep 9, 2015, at 3:08 PM, Aahz Maruch via Callers 
> >>>  wrote:
> >>> 
>  On Tue, Sep 08, 2015, Michael Fuerst via Callers wrote:
> > On Tuesday, September 8, 2015 1:53 PM, Luke Donforth 
> >  wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Michael Fuerst via Callers 
> >  wrote:
> > 
> > Asking about how to appropriately do dances with shadow swings seems
> > like asking how men can appropriately grope women during a dance.
>  
>  I again think your attempt to inject levity into a conversation have
>  come across as crass and inappropriate.  Asking about shadow swings
>  on a list for calling is pertinent; joking about men groping women
>  dancers isn't.
> >>> 
> >>> Your assessment is inaccurate. This is not a matter where levity is
> >>> acceptable. Creating a situation which could force someone into close,
> >>> almost intimate proximity with a person perceived as emotionally or
> >>> physically threatening is inappropriate. A lesser problem is that one
> >>> can get a shadow who one considers personable, but very unpleasant
> >>> for swinging (for example, due to either height difference, or a body
> >>> position or weight distribution which unnecessarily strains one's own
> >>> body).
> >> 
> >> Well, I share Luke's assessment.  The phrasing you used to compare shadow
> >> swings and groping implies either levity or a disregard of the difference
> >> between groping and a shadow swing.  Regardless of the seriousness with
> >> which you view "forcing" a shadow swing, it is clear that many other
> >> people disagree, and your comparison is not appropriate, especially given
> >> Maia's original request to AVOID any discussion of whether shadow swings
> >> are appropriate.
> >> -- 
> >> Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6
> >> http://rule6.info/
> >> <*>   <*>   <*>
> >> Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html
> >> ___
> >> Callers mailing list
> >> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
> >> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
> ___
> Callers mailing list
> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
  

Re: [Callers] counterclockwise momentum?

[Jack Mitchell via Callers]

I definitely try to identify them, and for the most part, there are very
few of them that I call (at least not that I call unmodified).  There are
exceptions, of course, but even there, I tend to run them short, and avoid
calling them early in the evening.  I'm not sure that a follow up dance can
really help matters all that much.  People who are particularly susceptible
to dizziness will probably sit out the next dance anyway, and people who
aren't probably won't really notice.  Now medleying a really clockwise
dance with a dance that could "unwind" the dancers might work.

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 1:34 PM Lindsey Dono via Callers <
callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:

> Hi Callers,
>
> There are a number of dances that have significant clockwise momentum; I
> try to label such dances so I don't call them back to back. However, I'd
> like to identify a collection of dances with the *least* clockwise movement
> (beyond swinging in the other direction).
>
> Which moves are CCW? I realize that this depends somewhat on how the move
> is danced.
>
>  Have you IDed any dances as particularly good to call after a very
> clockwise one?
>
> Thanks!
> Lindsey
> ___
> Callers mailing list
> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>
-- 
Jack Mitchell
Durham, NC

Re: [Callers] counterclockwise momentum?

[Don Veino via Callers]

Hi Lindsey,

In a quick scan of my active cards deck, here's the ones that seem to fit
the bill (note that, because of swings, pure CCW dances are scarce but
these have significant CCW motion):

Tranquility - Linda Leslie
Sweet Music - Amy Kahn
British Sorrow - Trad. (the big Circle Right being the main driver)
Truffles for Breakfast - Joy Greenwolfe
Raeden's Curls - Don Veino
Comfort Deluxe - Rick Mohr

Happy calling!
-Don

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 1:33 PM, Lindsey Dono via Callers <
callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:

> [...snip...]
>
>  Have you IDed any dances as particularly good to call after a very
> clockwise one?
>
> Thanks!
> Lindsey
>
> ___
> Callers mailing list
> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>
>

Re: [Callers] Solutions for callers for dealing with problem dancers

[Bob Isaacs via Callers]

Here's a good anti-creep tactic for beginner sessions.  Sorry to generalize, 
the usual suspect is an older unattached man who comes early and makes himself 
all too available to the prettiest new dancer.  Before you know it, he's 
running his own 1-on-1 workshop.  I let him go for a while, but when it appears 
the behavior is predatory I get them in a circle and teach them how to 
allemande.  Then I say "With this partner allemande R 1 1/2, then move on to 
the next and allemande L 1 1/2, then to the next and allemande R 1 1/2, etc." 
until creep and prey are far apart, and then " take this one as your new 
partner for some more."  This also breaks up those newbie couples who came 
joined at the hip.  Of course, at the same time they're learning a progression 
and how to adjust to each neighbor, so it's seems like real teaching.
 
This circle technique also works well to safely teach swings.  Now those 
"gentlemen" who forced me to learn this no longer come early when I'm calling - 
 
Bob

 
List-Post: callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2015 14:30:30 -0700
To: ps...@yahoo.com
CC: call...@sharedweight.net
Subject: Re: [Callers] Solutions for callers for dealing with problem dancers
From: callers@lists.sharedweight.net

As a caller I try to include something in my beginners' sessions that tells 
people how to quickly refuse a dance without giving a reason. 
Seattle-area caller, LauraMé Smith often demonstrates how NOT to gypsy (so that 
the other person is always trying to get away from you), and she does it early 
in the evening, on the floor, with a chosen accomplice, and with humor. 
-Amy Wimmer


On Sep 9, 2015, at 2:08 PM, Perry Shafran via Callers 
 wrote:

OK, I think we have talked at each other for awhile now, arguing whether or not 
harassment is rampant at our dances.  I think it would be nice if we could now 
discuss solutions we as CALLERS (remember, this is a callers' list, not an 
organizers' list) can and should do with respect to this.  If anyone has any 
ideas, some positive solutions, I am open and receptive to hearing them.  

Perry
___
Callers mailing list
Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net


___
Callers mailing list
Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net 
  

Re: [Callers] Problem dancers / Crying Wolf

[Yoyo Zhou via Callers]

Taking you at face value: if you have a systemic problem, you need a
policy. If you have a problem with one person, you need to come to
terms with that person. I'm not sure if it's just the board, or if
other dancers also have issues with her. But if you seek mediation,
take notes on your interactions so you have evidence to back yourself
up.


Now, I think the last thing you need is a policy requiring victims to
speak up. It's counterproductive to making a safe dance space.  (Let's
discuss that on the other thread.)

Let's say I'm new to your dance and I have a bad experience with
someone. What do I do? I might complain about it to my friends who
convinced me to come. I might just avoid that person. I might just go
home dissatisfied. One of the last things I might do is complain to
the management (and I might view that woman as an extension thereof),
because who knows if they'll just shrug it off and not take me
seriously?


Also, you wrote, "it seems to me that she's committing violence." No,
I disagree. This totally cheapens the meaning of "violence". What
words do you use for when punches are actually thrown? (It's happened
at a dance here.)

Yoyo Zhou

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 7:42 AM, Ron Blechner via Callers
 wrote:
> Maybe. Maybe not. My point was that we should be very, very careful about
> making a definitive statement about something being "just an accusation",
> especially when in your example, there was a second problem - even if it was
> a year earlier.
>
> On Sep 9, 2015 10:39 AM, "Lindsay Morris via Callers"
>  wrote:
>>
>> Appreciate that.  Don't think the "where there's smoke there's fire" issue
>> applies here, though.  It would if there were several different women
>> complaining about one man...
>>
>> 
>> Lindsay Morris
>> CEO, TSMworks
>> Tel. 1-859-539-9900
>> lind...@tsmworks.com
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Ron Blechner  wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Lindsay,
>>>
>>> I realize this is a tricky topic, so apologies in advance if my brevity
>>> comes off as bruskness.
>>>
>>> These two suggestions work for Amherst Contra.
>>>
>>> As a proxy complaint comes in, a board member would seek out the source.
>>> Anonymous complaints are permitted, and a high level of ensuring that we ask
>>> open-ended questions, and not leading questions.
>>>
>>> We also wear board member buttons at dances and make regular
>>> announcements about us being available for any reason. Usually 4-7 members
>>> of our board attend any dance.
>>>
>>> You might speak privately to Will Loving, our lead organizer, if you're
>>> interested in more specifics.
>>>
>>> I would also caution about making such definitive statements as "just an
>>> accusation". In my experience, where there's smoke, there's fire. For every
>>> accusation, there's five people who are too uncomfortable to speak up.
>>>
>>> That said, I have seen the success of proactive addressing of issues. The
>>> biggest benefit is simple:
>>>
>>> Address it early when it's small, and not a huge deal. Maybe it's a
>>> simple misunderstanding. Maybe the person needed a clear boundary drawn. But
>>> wait until there's a pile of complaints, and you've already lost dancers and
>>> the resolution will need to be more severe for the offender.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Ron Blechner
>>>
>>> On Sep 9, 2015 10:08 AM, "Lindsay Morris via Callers"
>>>  wrote:

 Chris Weiler's Positive Solutions on dealing with problem dancers, and
 the CDU Policy are thoughtful and useful documents.

 We have a different problem here.

 One woman often complains to board members about men she sees as
 creepers or sexual predators. She reports their misbehavior on behalf of
 their victims. The victims don't initiate these reports.*

 Many others don't see these men as creepy or inappropriate.  Recently
 one of the "victims" clarified that her discomfort with the man was a year
 ago and she'd long ago dealt with it to her satisfaction.  The man in
 question had heard only rumors that some nameless woman was unhappy about
 some nameless thing he'd done.

 This woman also publicly asked that young women who feel harassed should
 talk to her about it.  We feel that's the Board's job, not hers.

 It seems that this woman is fishing for - or even inventing -
 "naughty-dancer" problems.

 When a married man gets accused of being a sexual predator, his wife has
 to wonder if it's true. This adds to any marital tensions they may already
 have.  So, while this woman is not actually punching anybody in the face, 
 it
 seems to me that she's committing violence.

 How should we handle this?

 I think we need a "No proxy complaints" policy - i.e., the victim has to
 speak up (and then our process will usually fix simple miscommunication
 issues).
 We need to clearly identify board members, so genuine victims know who
 to talk to.

 But doe

[Callers] Rollaway sans sashay?

[Maia McCormick via Callers]

Recently there was some discussion of the difference between a "rollaway
with a half-sashay" and a plain ol' rollaway. Jim Saxe presented the dance Roll
Away  as an
example of a contra with a rollaway without a half-sashay. Can anyone else
name/post choreography for any CONTRAS (or 4-face-4s, I suppose... not
looking for squares at the moment, though) that include a rollaway *without* a
half-sashay?

Cheers,
Maia

Re: [Callers] shadow swings

[Tavi Merrill via Callers]

RPDLW tends to have a different set of expectations than most weekends, to
say the least.

Michael, thanks for putting me on the spot with the "really, would you
ever" question, a question that *could have been asked of anyone who
replied to Maia's stated query about others' thoughts on how to "mitigate
the **potential harms of shadow swing dances" without debating her premise,
and should have been asked of no one at all*.

My answer: Not all calling situations are main hall or regular series
dances; and there is, in the lifetime of a caller, a place for most every
dance, even Lady Walpole's - places like themed sessions in which all
participants are aware of potential shadow interactions. And i'm fully
aware that (as Cary so perfectly phrases it) "in this case the caller is
choosing your second partner," and of the attendant risks therein. Please
also see Luke Donforth's fantastic answer.

We're (hopefully) here to nurture each other as callers at various stages
of the journey. That doesn't include messages framed to invite the person
asked, and anyone who views their reply, to view their answer in comparison
against "our most respected callers."

Tavi
(whoops! fixed gmail settings)



On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 6:02 PM, Michael Fuerst 
wrote:

> Chris:  The indicates that someone in 2008 (Dave Eisenstadter) other than
> the composer (Nils Fredland)  not call this dance written in 2003.
> Everyone has become more aware since then.
> One wonders if Nils still calls this dance
>
> Michael Fuerst  802 N Broadway  Urbana IL 61801  217 239 5844
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, September 9, 2015 4:38 PM, Chris Page 
> wrote:
>
>
> Sigh. See "Head of the Bed", written by Nils Fredland.
>
> http://www.library.unh.edu/special/forms/rpdlw/syllabus2008.pdf#page=49b
>
> -Chris Page
> San Diego
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 2:27 PM, Michael Fuerst via Callers <
> callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>
> David:Really, would you ever call a dance with a shadow swing?
>
> None of our most respected caller (those who are invited as the featured
> caller at various weekends)   never (or darned close to never).
> I don't ever  recall attending a weekend  when the featured caller used a
> shadow swing.
>
> Michael Fuerst  802 N Broadway  Urbana IL 61801  217 239 5844
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [Callers] Rollaway sans sashay?

[Don Veino via Callers]

The dance I was alluding to in the other thread was Lisa Greenleaf's
"Secret Weapon" which, like a couple of my own compositions, uses a roll to
accomplish a ladies swap across a diagonal after a Ring Balance. If the
gents Half Sashay, they end up on the wrong side of the set for the next
moves. Yes, you could simply substitute a disconnected "Ladies Swap and
face back in" here but you'd lose some good stuff:

   1. the ability for the partner to assist (two minds to remember the
   move, improved timing/timeliness)
   2. fun connected dancing via good weight.

I called Secret Weapon this past Monday at the Scout House, making sure to
tell the Gents their job was to stay put and NOT sashay. That direct
instruction in the walk through worked great, I didn't have to remind them
while calling the dance.

-Don

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 8:15 PM, Maia McCormick via Callers <
callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:

> [...snip...]
>


> Can anyone else name/post choreography for any CONTRAS (or 4-face-4s, I
> suppose... not looking for squares at the moment, though) that include a
> rollaway *without* a half-sashay?
>
> Cheers,
> Maia
>
> ___
> Callers mailing list
> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>
>

Re: [Callers] Rollaway sans sashay?

[Perry Shafran via Callers]

I happen to know of one by Rachel Fifer, Gaye Fifer's daughter.  I don't recall 
the title offhand but I can check later on.  But the roll away is not along the 
line but in a ring.  You balance, and gents roll away a neighbor from their 
left hand to their right hand, but the gents stay in place.


Perry

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

From:"Maia McCormick via Callers" 
Date:Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 8:16 PM
Subject:[Callers] Rollaway sans sashay?

Recently there was some discussion of the difference between a "rollaway with a 
half-sashay" and a plain ol' rollaway. Jim Saxe presented the dance Roll Away 
as an example of a contra with a rollaway without a half-sashay. Can anyone 
else name/post choreography for any CONTRAS (or 4-face-4s, I suppose... not 
looking for squares at the moment, though) that include a rollaway without a 
half-sashay?


Cheers,

Maia

___
Callers mailing list
Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net

[Callers] Text size problem

[Michael Fuerst via Callers]

Two persons have lamented privately to me that my posts are reaching the group 
with almost unreadably small text.No where else I send email or post has 
reported this problem
Which, if any  of these lines better?
1. Garamond small
2.  Garamond medium3. Garamond large
4 Modern small5 Modern Medium6 Modern wide Michael Fuerst      802 N Broadway   
   Urbana IL 61801  217 239 5844

Re: [Callers] Text size problem

[Michael Fuerst via Callers]

One person suggested 2 and 5 (the medium fonts) were ok, another said only 3 
and 6 (the large fonts)
A third person suggested I try plain text, rather than HTML.
This message is in plain text. How does it look and compare to the options 
in my previous email?

Michael Fuerst  802 N Broadway  Urbana IL 61801  217 239 5844