Tell me about it - I lost the will to live halfway through reading the post... but OK, stripped of most of the ranting, I think relevant parts are
I've read it three times now and I still don't understand it. And I make a living from trying to explain complex things in an understandable manner.Originally Posted by Franco / MaxBeat
But if I had to guess, I'd say he's sitting on the fence. Can someone explain it to us in a simple manner, answering the questions as ESG's put them?
What id like to know is when does gender balance ‘kick in’
e.g. 600 men places 600 women places
Do they wait for 500 women places sold and see they have only sold 250 men ? ooops
As women panic more and men get more laid back this ‘kicking in’ will happen earlier ??
I do recommend reading Franco's post on the thread I linked earlier. Regardless, here's a quick precis.
1. Balancing is done based on leader/follow roles, not gender or sex. Those who book tickets as leaders will be "expected" to lead in classes and freestyle. Similarly for followers.
2. Balancing is not intended to be exact, nor does it aim for a 50-50 split. There are ~100 extra tickets available for whichever role turns out to be more popular.
I hope that this sets ESG's mind at rest.
How would they enforce that? "Sorry Miss Batty we are out of follow tickets", "Oh, that's ok I can lead", "Right you are then one ticket coming up then".
Would you have the some blue/pink armbands on? If I decided to dance as a follower in freestyle for a dance would the gender police pull me off the dance floor and beat me up, in a dark room, with rubber truncheons?
Does seem a little strange - I don't think I'd ever be able to go to Franco's Camber (even if I wanted to) because I'd hate to feel like I had to be restricted to leading or following for the entire weekend. Especially if there were women over, I'd just spend the whole time feeling guilty for something, whether it was being there as a leader and still wanting to follow or being there as a follow and therefore keeping one other lady out of the place.Honestly Gary, how terribly un-PC. Yellow and Green armbands would be much more appropriate (can't have black and white cos that's racist, can't have red cos it's too much like pink, which in turn is too much of a gay icon colour, can't have orange cos that's Ceroc, can't have purple cos that suggests sexual frustration, can't have brown 'cos it would offend rehabilitated chocaholics).Originally Posted by kt
It may do his, but not mine.
That's just weird.
How on earth are they going to enforce that - wristbands? Are "leader" women going to be ejected if they dare to follow or vice versa?
And what's the point of a "balancing" policy which inherently aims for 100 more women at every event anyway? Why bother?
So, what you're really saying is, "Wristbands Are Evil"?
I've just had this funny vision...
All these lovely 'extra women' standing a round and S38 saunters casually over and asks one of them to dance and she replies, "Sorry, i'm only allowed to lead!"
Sorry Stewart
MODERATOR AT YOUR SERVICE
"If you're going to do something tonight, that you know you'll be sorry for in the morning, plan a lie in." Lorraine
MODERATOR AT YOUR SERVICE
"If you're going to do something tonight, that you know you'll be sorry for in the morning, plan a lie in." Lorraine
Colour-coded wristbands/armbands seem to be the way gender balancing is handled at many events, including Ceroc events. I'd expect jivetime to do the same thing with their role balancing.
It is irritating that this policy isn't on the jivetime website. I shouldn't really have to go to the Ceroc Scotland forum to get an idea of what their policy is.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks