It has been brought to my attention that in my summary I have neglected to include a number of significant events, including:

-Various seemingly weak attempts to reanimate a clearly thread that were successful despite multiple invocations of Godwin's Law. -dormouse's skillful landing of his Blues Qualifications Plane on an aircraft carrier to unilaterally announce "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED. FINIS." And most importantly, -Beckto's unfulfilled campaign promises of providing blues dancing (or possibly even "blues dancing") despite our petition well exceeding the required 20 pages of posts.

I fully apologize for my egregious oversight. But hey... who else had massive oversight that led to great embarrassment? HITLER IN THE AFRICAN THEATER!!!!!

Quoted from "Marcelo"
No it doesn't. That's a HUGE reach. I'm very literal with what I say. In fact I said, and you can quote me:

Quoted from "Marcelo"
No one is dismissing Damon's knowledge or dance ability.

An opinion that concerns how we feel or what we think concerning our own experiences is something we can disagree with without dismissing one's knowledge. When we make statements on things outside of our personal experience, that is where we enter into the point of things being right or wrong. When we do this we step past just a difference of opinion, but we imply that our experience is more relevant or that our ability to analyze and extrapolate is superior.

So you may be completely honest that you aren't intending to dismiss my knowledge... but there it is anyway.

Quote
And with regards to whether or not my statement that my mind is open to change "rings true" (as if I care enough about this to lie to you about my position), I would say that my position is like Shana's - I can accept all the things you say about the dance and still believe that what I'm talking about actually exists. That doesn't mean I'm closed minded. On the contrary, if I were closed minded I'd be all "no, all I see is X, therefore X is all that exists." and I haven't done that at all.

Not precisely, but your statements could be interpreted as a way of saying that without being held to it. By continuing the 'what I saw is representative,' talk and refusing to address any of the questioning about what "Representative" means to you, and if humping is representative of any of the other genres in which you can see people doing it dance venues, and your statements that humping is blues does kind of read that way.

Quote

Quoted from "dormouse"
I said things that showed I questioned your judgment and experience, but I never SAID I questioned you judgment or experience. Sorry, I'm not playing that game.

Really? Because you said all these things:

Quoted from "dormouse"
Yet, you and several others seem to believe that their very limited experience trumps that of those who have been doing this for years (and in some cases decades). Now experience is not the end all be all of deciding who is right, but when the blues dancers point out things to be considered, rather than objectivity, it is met with dismissal, "that is not what I've seen, done etc." Lack of judgment and critical thinking ends any chance of a civil conversation.

Here you're directly saying I have a lack of judgment here. And a lack of critical thinking, which is based on my lack of experience.

You misread my statement. I am saying that YOU have said things that, while not using the specific words, mean the same thing. If I say George Bush is intellectually below average, and is unable to accomplish the tasks of president without causing problems, I am saying he is a stupid [bleep!] up, just not with those words. I'm saying that you are saying that you never questioned my judgment, but the words you use and the position you take, does in fact call into question my judgment. Since my judgment is based on my experience and knowledge, you are calling them into question.

Quote
Again, here you are directly attacking my/our lack of knowledge and our ingorance, going so far as to call it a "verifiable truth." If that isn't direct, I don't know what is.

Oh, I've been very clear that I don't think you know what you are talking about when it comes to blues dancing. This is relevant because as I said earlier you are applying your statements not to just what you have seen but to the entire community and dance genre. Until you illustrate how your statements about humping being representative of blues dancing and blues dancers are true, I will continue to do so. You have yet to provide any basis for these statements. I have asked repeatedly what representative means to you. What humping means to you. What Blues dancing means to you. You haven't answered yet... and when I provided my own definitions, you did not seek to refute them. So I have nothing to go on but those.

Now if you only meant to say this is what you saw at a particular time and place and is representative of what gives blues dancing and blues dancers a bad rep, then I have no problem with that. There is a difference in the statement this is representative of blues dancing and representative of what gives blues dancing a bad name. I certainly don't deny that there are people doing inappropriate things on the floor at some blues dances, and I don't deny that some hook-up parties claim to be 'blues' house-parties. I don't remember anyone on this thread saying otherwise, and if I implied that I apologize. I think we have been more or less consistent with the statement that humping is not blues, is not representative (both by the definitions supplied) of the genre or the community. Whether it is representative of a given scene has not been disputed, because no specific scene has been pointed out.

Quoted from "MCQ & CHRIS"

Quoted from "tornredcarpet"
. . . . despite multiple invocations of Godwin's Law[/u].

Godwin's Law: As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one. Good use.

Don't forget the important rules of discussion concerning Godwin's Law. Most notably, if you invoke Godwin's Law, YOU LOSE.

Quoted from "redbean"
Nazi

YOU LOSE.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=axt2U7AeFZo

Dancing starts at 1:30, interesting breaks start at 2:12. Would this be "humpy" or "thrusty" stylin? :dunno:

Quoted from "arlette"
http://youtube.com/watch?v=axt2U7AeFZo Dancing starts at 1:30, interesting breaks start at 2:12. Would this be "humpy" or "thrusty" stylin? :dunno:

Wow, those blues dancers really are disgusting. You've finally converted me. :disguise:

First of all: :oops:

Secondly, that's 8 years ago!

Thirdly, relevance??!?

Times certainly have changed ... I'm not sure if for the better or the worse in some instances. Does anyone laugh at this kind of thing anymore?

Quoted from "OpeningMinds"
Times certainly have changed ... I'm not sure if for the better or the worse in some instances. Does anyone laugh at this kind of thing anymore?

I just did. Jayne's in on the joke, you know.

Like I said, context.

Quoted from "Atalanta"

Quoted from "swinginstyle"
Seriously, though, if Deor didn't do that, he wouldn't be Deor.

Shana, et al: This is a great example of how something can be funny and appropriate in one context and incredibly, awfully, horribly wrong in another. If you dance with D, you should know what you're signing up for. AND I will say that he's pretty good about knowing who he should NOT be stoopid with. He is/was a teacher for a long time and he's utterly respectful of boundaries, including unstated and uncertain ones.

Oh, definitely.

Unfortunately, most of the people I knew who fell in love with that move for a few months back then were NOT able to make these distinctions (unlike Deor), and their partners ended up the victim of the joke rather than being in on it. It's so important for everyone to be in on it. If they aren't, most people watching are going to be every bit as uncomfortable as the second party. As you said, Atalanta, context.

:lol:

I think you hit the nail on the head when you say "what are they trying."

I have issues with just about any brand of swing that goes perverted, whether it's a male blues dancer justifying rubbying his lap in some unexpecting female's hoohoo as a height complication. A balboa dancer intentionally trying to hit the "speed bumps" on an inside turn or a lindy hopper who's dance consists of 3 to 5 minutes staring at his follows chest, triple the creepiness if she's only a kid!

The bottom-line is we covet what we see and for that main reason you'll always have some who ardently support it (and for keeping it clean), some whacked out by it and others just wanting to cop a cheap feel.

I really doesn't matter how you promote it, be it provocative, sensual but not sexual, or other. You'll always run in to some clowns and some dances more than other. What they are trying indeed.

Now about those westies and international ballroom dancers wearing next to nothing... (I kid! I kid!)

sure, but now you some have some of those same lindy hoppers in the nat'l blue scene teaching. Hence some of the attitudes are retained. Vote 'em out, right?

Quoted from "tommyd76"
That is kind of our point. Much of the attitude of people towards the dance is based off of what lindy hoppers did to each other in backrooms 8 years ago.. and called it blues dancing... that is changing much like Big Bad Voodoo Daddies gave way to more vintage swing.

That's what happens when Lindy Hoppers smoke marijuana. They start listening to blues music, which leads to wild piano playing, hysteria, dry-humping, and death.

touche. ;)