The "yes" ethos

[Gadget]

Hang on just one wee minute, mate!

Are you saying that I, and other people who occasionally turn down the offer of a dance, are "selfish people who have a lazy and arrogant attitude"? No matter the reason for our refusal?

Nope. Unless you are against the whole principle of innocent before being proven guilty. Every example stated so far are one-off's: Just because you make one or two choices that are against the ethos, does that make you against the ethos as a whole?
I have been dancing a long time. I suppose I must have been refused on a number of occasions. I specifically remember one occasion of being turned down by yourself at a party night; you even explained why (bad back and really wanted to take it easy... but you danced with others that evening.) However, at the time I thought I was one of the more 'gentle' and smoother leads that showed respect for their partners and seldom did any dips/drops: It humbled me quite a bit and it made me look a lot closer at my own dancing and how I could implement "control" without using so much "force".
Since then I was very delicate dancing with you, only recently taking off the cotton wool and increasing definition.
(...you have also given me some of the nicest compliments since that refusal )

I don't like arrogant hotshot types who refuse to dance with anyone who's not deemed 'good enough' for them, either. But to automatically claim that everyone who ever turn people down for a dance has this attitude, is a bit rich.

Not claiming that either; but in refusing no matter the reason, you go against one of the main social rules of the club you belong to. You may be bleeding from the eyes with a broken arm and just had a car run over your foot or just decided that your finger nail is far more interesting than the person asking you to dance. Both go against the flow. Homicide, murder, accidental killing; the poor guy is still dead no matter the events surrounding it. In an environment where you expect everyone to say "yes", someone saying "no" to you makes you feel excluded from the gang; shunned by your peers; rejected and unwanted.
If you are feel more comfortable making someone feel like that than you would be dancing with them, I don’t think you should just be saying "no": I think you should be explaining exactly why you are saying no and trying to fix it or directing them towards someone who could. Or you shouldn't be there in the first place.

Yes, I do think that if I pay to go to a freestyle I should be able to chose who I want to dance with, and to what tracks, and when I want to have a break! Like I've stated earlier - dancing is meant to be fun ~...~ not a pleasant experience, so why on earth should I feel guilty about turning such people down?

Why should you feel guilty? Because they are a dancer and part of the same gang, because they have approached you to dance, because putting yourself before others is morally wrong. I'm not saying you should be wracked with remorse; you may only feel a small microsecond twinge of guilt for some people. You may feel more guilty about not doing anything about it; after all, they are part of your gang - they represent you. You have now inflicted them onto another member of your gang... isn't that worth another twinge of guilt?

As I've said before, these refusals are in the minority; they do not affect the over all ethos of accepting every dance offer. They are so rare that everyone who refuses is tarred with the same brush; going against the flow = arrogant.

I do believe in being respectful to people, and doing our best to make everyone feel welcome. But I do defend my right to say no every now and again, too! Does this mean I should not be welcome to any more freestyles, because I "don't really feel like helping your fellow gang members", so I should stay at home?

Everyone has the right to say "no". Just as they have the right to say "yes, but don't dip me or force me through any moves." You ask your partner to dance, not command them: it's an offer. I expect it to be accepted because that's the default response - there must be a reason for it being declined.
As a lead, I take responsibility for my partner on the dance floor. When I offer a dance, that's part of what I am offering. As a follower, when they accept a dance they are putting their trust in the lead. If a follower feels that cannot put trust in the lead, then it would be a very difficult dance. I think that the potential justification for followers is greater than that of leads. (although I suppose the situation may arise that a lead thinks that they cannot accept responsibility for their partner)

If you don't feel like dancing, why go dancing? If you know you are more than likely to get hurt, why do it? Stay at home and do the ironing, watch endless repeats of east-enders, participate in long-winded forum discussions, ...

It's meant to be fun, not an obligation to please everyone else at the expense of your own safety and enjoyment!

It's not an obligation; it's social etiquette for the dance form you enjoy.

Rule number one of Modern Jive: don't hurt your partner.
Rule number two: have fun.

The "never refuse" rule comes after these. Almost at the same level as the "must step back on the right foot" rule

[Little Monkey]

I don't think there's any point in trying to argue with you, Gadget. We have different points of view on this obviously, and just have to agree to disagree...

The only thing I'd like to comment on, is:

If you know you are more than likely to get hurt, why do it? Stay at home and do the ironing, watch endless repeats of east-enders, participate in long-winded forum discussions, ...

So are you actually saying that I should either dance with everyone, even if I think there's a big chance of them hurting me, or stay at home? Are you saying that anyone with injuries/disabilities are not 'welcome in the gang' unless they are happy to be hurt on the dance floor??

I find this extremely shocking - and not remotely welcoming. Because I have a disability I am not allowed to live a full life, but should stay at home? Thanks.

[dep]

Nope. Unless you are against the whole principle of innocent before being proven guilty. Every example stated so far are one-off's: Just because you make one or two choices that are against the ethos, does that make you against the ethos as a whole?
I have been dancing a long time. I suppose I must have been refused on a number of occasions. I specifically remember one occasion of being turned down by yourself at a party night; you even explained why (bad back and really wanted to take it easy... but you danced with others that evening.) However, at the time I thought I was one of the more 'gentle' and smoother leads that showed respect for their partners and seldom did any dips/drops: It humbled me quite a bit and it made me look a lot closer at my own dancing and how I could implement "control" without using so much "force".
Since then I was very delicate dancing with you, only recently taking off the cotton wool and increasing definition.
(...you have also given me some of the nicest compliments since that refusal )



Not claiming that either; but in refusing no matter the reason, you go against one of the main social rules of the club you belong to. You may be bleeding from the eyes with a broken arm and just had a car run over your foot or just decided that your finger nail is far more interesting than the person asking you to dance. Both go against the flow. Homicide, murder, accidental killing; the poor guy is still dead no matter the events surrounding it. In an environment where you expect everyone to say "yes", someone saying "no" to you makes you feel excluded from the gang; shunned by your peers; rejected and unwanted.
If you are feel more comfortable making someone feel like that than you would be dancing with them, I don’t think you should just be saying "no": I think you should be explaining exactly why you are saying no and trying to fix it or directing them towards someone who could. Or you shouldn't be there in the first place.

Why should you feel guilty? Because they are a dancer and part of the same gang, because they have approached you to dance, because putting yourself before others is morally wrong. I'm not saying you should be wracked with remorse; you may only feel a small microsecond twinge of guilt for some people. You may feel more guilty about not doing anything about it; after all, they are part of your gang - they represent you. You have now inflicted them onto another member of your gang... isn't that worth another twinge of guilt?

As I've said before, these refusals are in the minority; they do not affect the over all ethos of accepting every dance offer. They are so rare that everyone who refuses is tarred with the same brush; going against the flow = arrogant.



Everyone has the right to say "no". Just as they have the right to say "yes, but don't dip me or force me through any moves." You ask your partner to dance, not command them: it's an offer. I expect it to be accepted because that's the default response - there must be a reason for it being declined.
As a lead, I take responsibility for my partner on the dance floor. When I offer a dance, that's part of what I am offering. As a follower, when they accept a dance they are putting their trust in the lead. If a follower feels that cannot put trust in the lead, then it would be a very difficult dance. I think that the potential justification for followers is greater than that of leads. (although I suppose the situation may arise that a lead thinks that they cannot accept responsibility for their partner)

If you don't feel like dancing, why go dancing? If you know you are more than likely to get hurt, why do it? Stay at home and do the ironing, watch endless repeats of east-enders, participate in long-winded forum discussions, ...

It's not an obligation; it's social etiquette for the dance form you enjoy.

Rule number one of Modern Jive: don't hurt your partner.
Rule number two: have fun.

I don't learn quickly enough.
Rule number three: respect all.

[Lory]

Rule number three: respect all.

If I 'know' for sure, someone's going to give me an unpleasant experience, then I'm afraid, 'self respect' comes first!

[Astro]

I don't think there's any point in trying to argue with you, Gadget. We have different points of view on this obviously, and just have to agree to disagree...

Yeah, "It's different for girls"

So are you actually saying that I should either dance with everyone, even if I think there's a big chance of them hurting me, or stay at home? Are you saying that anyone with injuries/disabilities are not 'welcome in the gang' unless they are happy to be hurt on the dance floor??

And who says haven't picked these injuries up at Ceroc?

I find this extremely shocking - and not remotely welcoming. Because I have a disability I am not allowed to live a full life, but should stay at home? Thanks.

It's against the Disability Descrimination Act.

If I 'know' for sure, someone's going to give me an unpleasant experience, then I'm afraid, 'self respect' comes first!

Yeah, I used to be a martyr, but I'm alright now.

[pmjd]

Not claiming that either; but in refusing no matter the reason, you go against one of the main social rules of the club you belong to. You may be bleeding from the eyes with a broken arm and just had a car run over your foot or just decided that your finger nail is far more interesting than the person asking you to dance. Both go against the flow. Homicide, murder, accidental killing; the poor guy is still dead no matter the events surrounding it. In an environment where you expect everyone to say "yes", someone saying "no" to you makes you feel excluded from the gang; shunned by your peers; rejected and unwanted.
If you are feel more comfortable making someone feel like that than you would be dancing with them, I don’t think you should just be saying "no": I think you should be explaining exactly why you are saying no and trying to fix it or directing them towards someone who could. Or you shouldn't be there in the first place.

What exactly are you trying to say here? That no matter what physical state your in you should always accept a dance request?

As I've said before, these refusals are in the minority; they do not affect the over all ethos of accepting every dance offer. They are so rare that everyone who refuses is tarred with the same brush; going against the flow = arrogant.

Oh well that's me told as I had to refuse a couple of people last night because both my knees started to inflame and I needed to rest them. Funnily enough both people sympathised and I was able to get one person for a dance later when my knees had calmed down a bit, even though I must have been an arrogant and not nice person to refuse in the first place

If you don't feel like dancing, why go dancing? If you know you are more than likely to get hurt, why do it? Stay at home and do the ironing, watch endless repeats of east-enders, participate in long-winded forum discussions, ...

It's not an obligation; it's social etiquette for the dance form you enjoy.

If it's not an obligation why are you treating it like one? Dancing is a physical activity and there will always be the risk of getting hurt, I think that's understood and accepted by most folk.

As a rule I always accept a dance request but every rule has it's exceptions, most people understand those exceptions

[David Franklin]

Nope. Unless you are against the whole principle of innocent before being proven guilty. Every example stated so far are one-off's: Just because you make one or two choices that are against the ethos, does that make you against the ethos as a whole?

Looking at the post in the thread that set the agenda:

The debate on men dancing with men has made me question the “always say yes to a dance” ethos of MJ.

the answer is obviously "yes, even one or two choices do make LM against the ethos". Because she doesn't always say yes to a dance.

But even if that's not the "ethos" you had in mind, and even if I were to be so ludicrously extreme as to decide "I'm only going to dance with the best follow in the room - no-one else", I fail to see any way in which you could reasonably deduce that my attitude is:

I've paid to be entertained - now entertain me. If you want me to dance with you, then ask and I'll look you up and down to see if you are worthy. I've paid my money, I will dance where on the dance floor I like, how I like and with whom I like.

Funnily enough, "I've paid my money, I will dance where on the dance floor I like, how I like and with whom I like" seems far more appropriate an accusation to level at the people who get outraged when someone turns them down.

In an environment where you expect everyone to say "yes", someone saying "no" to you makes you feel excluded from the gang; shunned by your peers; rejected and unwanted.

Yes, that is a problem that many of us observe with the "always say yes" ethos.

Everyone has the right to say "no". Just as they have the right to say "yes, but don't dip me or force me through any moves." You ask your partner to dance, not command them: it's an offer.

It's obviously an offer with multiple strings attached, given that you require explanations if someone turns you down, you watch them to see if they dance with other people, and then you moan about it months if not years later. Looking from here, it does look awfully like a command, to be honest.

If you don't feel like dancing, why go dancing? If you know you are more than likely to get hurt, why do it?

Don't blame the victim.

[Agente Secreto]

I don't think there's any point in trying to argue with you, Gadget. We have different points of view on this obviously, and just have to agree to disagree...

I'm with LM. I'm trying hard to see some sense in Gadget's posts - and failing. It's clear I'll never reach the levels of dance martyrdom that membership of Gadget's worldwide MJ community demands. I thought that my time of self-sacrifice reached its zenith when I was a serving military officer - but clearly I was wrong and dancing demands a whole new level of commitment. I'm not sure I'm up to it, maybe I should just get on with my ironing

[NZ Monkey]

Why should you feel guilty? Because they are a dancer and part of the same gang, because they have approached you to dance, because putting yourself before others is morally wrong. I'm not saying you should be wracked with remorse; you may only feel a small microsecond twinge of guilt for some people. You may feel more guilty about not doing anything about it; after all, they are part of your gang - they represent you. You have now inflicted them onto another member of your gang... isn't that worth another twinge of guilt?

Emphasis mine.

What absolute bollox. If I've turned somebody down then it's for a good reason. How personally they choose to take that is entirely up to them as long as I haven't gone out of my way to make them feel inferior, and this isn't something many people are in the habit of doing. I am not responsible for pandering to somebody elses insecurities. As an adult, it's my responsibility to look after myself - nobody elses.

As I've said before, these refusals are in the minority; they do not affect the over all ethos of accepting every dance offer. They are so rare that everyone who refuses is tarred with the same brush; going against the flow = arrogant.

Yet they clearly do affect the ethos, as you're saying "no" to someone. This is the problem with expecting everyone to say "yes".

As for arrogance being equivalent to going against the flow, I simply cannot see how you reach that conclusion. It is quite possible to be arrogant yet go with the flow, by accepting every dance and spending the whole time explaining to your partner why what they're doing is wrong. You can be the most considerate dancer on the dance floor and give your partner the Best Dance Ever by doing nothing but dips and drops if that's what she likes, despite the disapproving gaze of all and sundry.

Everyone has the right to say "no". Just as they have the right to say "yes, but don't dip me or force me through any moves." You ask your partner to dance, not command them: it's an offer. I expect it to be accepted because that's the default response - there must be a reason for it being declined.

I'd suggest changing your expectation. It's nice when people say yes, but it's presumptuous to assume they will. If the "default" answer is always yes then I'm afraid the request is much closer to a command than a real question.

Of course there is always a reason for you being refused, but the refuser is under no obligation to explain why to you. If it's because you're not good enough then do you really want to hear it? Regardless of what that says about the person you asked, wouldn't it be kinder of the refuser to make some excuse?

If you don't feel like dancing, why go dancing? If you know you are more than likely to get hurt, why do it? Stay at home and do the ironing, watch endless repeats of east-enders, participate in long-winded forum discussions, ...

If you feel like going dancing, and know who you can trust to dance with without having something aggravated why would you stay at home?

It's not an obligation; it's social etiquette for the dance form you enjoy.

If the answer to a request should always be yes, then it's an obligation......

[Tiger Feet]

I'm with LM. I'm trying hard to see some sense in Gadget's posts - and failing.

I think you could try harder, or maybe I'm just reading them so, well, differently. I don't know if I have rose-tinted post-reading glasses on or something, but I just don't read Gadget's posts in these profoundly negative ways.

It'd be awful if you turned up to a dance event as an absolute beginner to be faced with what seems like the cast of 'Mean Girls', who are accompanied by men who say 'thanks, but no thanks' when you pluck up the courage to ask them for a dance, with no further explanation. It would leave me feeling humiliated and uncomfortable. I certainly wouldn't feel like that if someone simply said they wanted to dance with their girlfriend or needed a break...I might be slightly disappointed, but only because I wanted the dance. I wouldn't huff and puff, but I'd hope that they might seek me out later...not because they 'owe' me anything, but because it would be nice and would make me feel welcome and encouraged. It's nice to make people feel included. I read Gadget's posts as being more about people who would rather not exit their own social circle, rather than those who fear for their safety or who see their own enjoyment of the night to be threatened by pestersome, pushy people.

I also don't see the discrimination on grounds of disability...if i was very worried that dancing would cause me permanent or severe damage, then I probably would stay at home. What kind of injuries are we talking about? How bad is it really? There are laws against GBH. What peril am I letting myself in for?

I think maybe Gadget is saying that it'd be nice if refusals weren't superficial - down to looks/ level/ body shape/ labels worn/ magazines subscribed to/ being part of no crowd or a different crowd/ a few unpopular opinions expressed on the forum/ assumptions made on appearance. Am I right or am I glossing over something? What am I missing?

Anyway, I'd like to feel confident that I'll be included and not made to feel inadequate, on the sidelines of an elitist gathering

[Martin]

I think the thing is that Gadget is talking of Guilt and morals, and taking a hard line.

I have standards, but I am not sure I have morals.
I refuse to be a victim and feel guilt.

My local venue is VERY friendly, it has a good atmosphere, and beginners are made very welcome. This comes from the top, as the teachers are compedent and social.

It is rare for anyone to say no, but it does sometimes happen (reason unimportant and does not need any explaination)

[Lory]

It'd be awful if you turned up to a dance event as an absolute beginner to be faced with what seems like the cast of 'Mean Girls', who are accompanied by men who say 'thanks, but no thanks'

I think you've gone to the other extreme now.

For me to say no, I'd pretty much have to have a good reason. Thankfully, I'm in good health...which means (for me), having never danced with someone before, isn't a good enough reason to refuse.

But, if I had a problematic back, which I knew, twisted the wrong way, would leave me in agony for the next week or so, I think I'd be inclined to stick with people who I know I could trust! And no, I wouldn't want to stay at home and do the ironing... I hate it at the best of times!

Three or four weeks back, I danced with a guy who hurt my hand quite badly. He was extremely rough throughout the whole dance and in the end, because of the pain caused by him twisting my fingers, I actually had to abandon the dance. It continued to hurt for at least two weeks after. So, I'm in no hurry to dance with this guy again and I'm afraid, I will have to decline.

At this moment in time, if he asked me again, I feel I would probably tell him the truth but in the heat of the moment, who knows?

[pmjd]

I think you could try harder, or maybe I'm just reading them so, well, differently.

I've tried but they seem to be a bit beyond me. The implication seems to be from his post that if you dare to refuse a dance, no matter what the reason, then you are being arrogant.

I have nothing against being refused if it's done for a reason rather than just "No", which happened to me before and it was very confidence knocking. However if someone needs a rest, change of clothes, drink etc. then fine I don't see the problem with saying no to a dance. The way Gadget's post is worded is that you are being evil, exclusive and arrogant to dare to say no, no matter the reason.

I think maybe Gadget is saying that it'd be nice if refusals weren't superficial - down to looks/ level/ body shape/ labels worn/ magazines subscribed to/ being part of no crowd or a different crowd/ a few unpopular opinions expressed on the forum/ assumptions made on appearance. Am I right or am I glossing over something? What am I missing?

Just read his post a different way I suppose but as NZ monkey highlighted it seems to come across and you should dance with someone no matter what and put yourself before all others like some kind of martyr.

[David Franklin]

I think you could try harder, or maybe I'm just reading them so, well, differently. I don't know if I have rose-tinted post-reading glasses on or something, but I just don't read Gadget's posts in these profoundly negative ways.

Bluntly, you're doing the same thing as Gadget.

People post saying "is it really such a good idea to have an ethos that you always have to say yes?", and you reply:

It'd be awful if you turned up to a dance event as an absolute beginner to be faced with what seems like the cast of 'Mean Girls', who are accompanied by men who say 'thanks, but no thanks' when you pluck up the courage to ask them for a dance, with no further explanation. It would leave me feeling humiliated and uncomfortable.

You're right. That would be awful. It would also be something that no-one here is suggesting. I believe this is known as a strawman argument.

I also don't see the discrimination on grounds of disability...if i was very worried that dancing would cause me permanent or severe damage, then I probably would stay at home. What kind of injuries are we talking about? How bad is it really?

Notably, there was the person who ended up with concussion and being unable to work for several months because of being thrown into an aerial.

I think maybe Gadget is saying that it'd be nice if refusals weren't superficial - down to looks/ level/ body shape/ labels worn/ magazines subscribed to/ being part of no crowd or a different crowd/ a few unpopular opinions expressed on the forum/ assumptions made on appearance. Am I right or am I glossing over something? What am I missing?

Possibly you missed it because of some selective quoting by Gadget. Here's what LM said:

dancing is meant to be fun, and I can guarantee you it's not fun to dance with someone who hurts me to such a degree that I can't dance for the rest of the night because the nerves are trapped in my back. This has in fact happened more than once! Equally, dancing with someone who stinks, or is sleazy (I've had men touching me in very inappropriate ways on the dance floor!) is not a pleasant experience, so why on earth should I feel guilty about turning such people down?

So, pretty clearly not about looks, level etc.

Of course, Gadget edited most of that out, leaving only:

dancing is meant to be fun ~...~ not a pleasant experience, so why on earth should I feel guilty about turning such people down?

before replying (emphasis mine)

Why should you feel guilty? Because they are a dancer and part of the same gang, because they have approached you to dance, because putting yourself before others is morally wrong.

I must confess that now I've noticed the edit Gadget made (which I hadn't before starting this post), I'm pretty disgusted.

[Agente Secreto]

I think you could try harder, or maybe I'm just reading them so, well, differently. I don't know if I have rose-tinted post-reading glasses on or something, but I just don't read Gadget's posts in these profoundly negative ways.

Trust me I've tried. Maybe its the tone of the posts. Regardless, I can't see any sense in the arguments being advanced in them.

I think maybe Gadget is saying that it'd be nice if refusals weren't superficial - down to looks/ level/ body shape/ labels worn/ magazines subscribed to/ being part of no crowd or a different crowd/ a few unpopular opinions expressed on the forum/ assumptions made on appearance. Am I right or am I glossing over something? What am I missing?

Look at the posts, Gadget is the person that suggested the superficiality angle. Everyone else has been careful to say that they sometimes decline but with reasons.

Anyway, I'd like to feel confident that I'll be included and not made to feel inadequate, on the sidelines of an elitist gathering

I dance at many venues, often on my own when I'm travelling on business and I've not felt this yet. I'm sure that there are some arrogant elitists out there but they are in a very small minority in MJ

[Tiger Feet]

Bluntly, you're doing the same thing as Gadget.

I'm not doing anything other than expressing my opinion...I haven't any experience to go on, so was also expressing something which scares me, ie the idea of being refused due to superficial reasons. The 'yes' ethos, to me, doesn't mean that I'll never be refused, but it gives me hope that I'll not be written off before I get started.

You're right. That would be awful. It would also be something that no-one here is suggesting. I believe this is known as a strawman argument.

I didn't suggest that anyone did say it. I'm laying out, as an absolute beginner, what my biggest fear would be without a 'yes' ethos.

Notably, there was the person who ended up with concussion and being unable to work for several months because of being thrown into an aerial.

So, I'll be trying to avoid that happening then. Thanks for letting me know of the risk.

Possibly you missed it because of some selective quoting by Gadget. Here's what LM said:

I haven't looked at the thread as any sort of personal argument and I'm not arguing with anyone. I'm saying I read the posts differently.

[David Franklin]

I'm not doing anything other than expressing my opinion...I haven't any experience to go on, so was also expressing something which scares me, ie the idea of being refused due to superficial reasons. The 'yes' ethos, to me, doesn't mean that I'll never be refused, but it gives me hope that I'll not be written off before I get started.

I didn't suggest that anyone did say it. I'm laying out, as an absolute beginner, what my biggest fear would be without a 'yes' ethos.

My apologies: for some reason I felt like I'd seen your user name around for ages, so I didn't realise you were a beginner. Once you've been dancing a while, you'll find it really is very unusual to be refused for superficial reasons (I admit there are notable exceptions, but they are notable specifically because they are so outside the norm).

The vast majority of people who argue against "never say no" are saying "I want to be able to say no to people who hurt me, or try to feel me up".

[Little Monkey]

I also don't see the discrimination on grounds of disability...if i was very worried that dancing would cause me permanent or severe damage, then I probably would stay at home. What kind of injuries are we talking about? How bad is it really?

Well, Gadget knows perfectly well that I suffer from a permanent back injury, but wants me to feel guilty for occasionally refusing dances to protect myself from further injury/pain. He even stated (as a reply to my post):

If you don't feel like dancing, why go dancing? If you know you are more than likely to get hurt, why do it? Stay at home and do the ironing, watch endless repeats of east-enders, participate in long-winded forum discussions, ...

And also said (when I asked why I should feel guilty about trying to protect myself from further injury):

Why should you feel guilty? Because they are a dancer and part of the same gang, because they have approached you to dance, because putting yourself before others is morally wrong.

I suffer from degenerative disc disease with disc herniating and arthritis of the lower spine, resulting in sciatica. At times I can be almost pain free, but sometimes the condition gets worse, and I have to be very careful not to do anything wrong, which might cause the nerves to get trapped. In the worst case scenario this can result in me being unable to walk for several days, or even move my leg(s), and absolutely excruciating pain in my back, hip, leg(s) and foot/feet.

The only way to manage this condition, is by exercising. Dancing is good for me, as long as I'm a bit careful. I love dancing, but I do reserve the right to sometimes decline a dance (in as nice a way as possible, and normally with an explanation!) to protect myself.

I am actually really upset about some of the things Gadget said in his reply to me. It makes me wonder if there's lots of other people out there who also think I am a selfish person with a lazy and arrogant attitude. Obviously Gadget thinks I am a horrible person, so I wonder why he ever wants to dance with me?

[frodo]

...Yet they clearly do affect the ethos, as you're saying "no" to someone. This is the problem with expecting everyone to say "yes"....

They would only affect the ethos if there is enough of them, to make them unexceptional.


As dancers get significantly better than average (and so less typical) their opinion on the matter often changes. Mostly dancing with better dancers their experience is very different.

So as they become less typical, the one size ethos no longer serves them well.


That doesn't however necessarily invalidate the general "always say yes" ethos for the majority.


I think there was a similar thread, where Amir said something along the lines of you shouldn't have to dance with everyone, but Amir's experience is too far removed from the average dancer to be have wide applicability.

To a lesser degree this may be the case for many of the posters to this thread.

[Agente Secreto]

I'm not doing anything other than expressing my opinion...I haven't any experience to go on, so was also expressing something which scares me, ie the idea of being refused due to superficial reasons. The 'yes' ethos, to me, doesn't mean that I'll never be refused, but it gives me hope that I'll not be written off before I get started.

Tiger Feet. Many of us have not been dancing that long so it is important to realise that the worry about being written off is still fresh in many of our minds so we would not inflict that on others.

The MJ scene (I'm not going to call it a community) is generally a welcoming place where dancers of all abilities happily co-exist. Gadget's experiences are clearly different than mine - I've not yet suffered from the kind of elitism and off-hand behaviour that Gadget's posts suggest. I've been dancing 2 years now so I'd think I'd have found some evidence by now if this kind of thing was prevalent.