Blues, UCP, Sinful, Sensual... What are they & how do they differ?

[bigdjiver]

Well what evidence do you have for this? Have you ever seen any actual repetition of these moves outside the classes other than in a completely consensual context?...

I saw a guy who had just come back from one of these classes demonstrate, without prior informed consent, one of these moves on the teacher, sticking his hand into her bum crack to spin her. From the expression on her face I guessed that it was entirely unwelcome. She let it ride, but her boyfriend seemed to be seething, and I know I was.

I still do not know if this was a finely judged perv, or just a reckless lack of sensibility. My guess was perv. I have not seen this guy since. I suspect he may have been dealt with later.

[ChrisA]

I believe that it is better to recognise and solve a problem when it is a small one or an impending one rather than wait until it has grown.

Hmm. So this teaching of so-called 'porn moves'.

- It takes place only at specific workshops and weekenders.
- Lots of people like it - at the weekenders.
- It appears that no one actually repeats any of the material in general freestyle
- You can offer no actual evidence that it's responsible for any harm at all
- You concede that the problem is small, or even impending

... and yet you want to ban it.

Admittedly, if you move to calling it an impending problem rather than an actual one, it will be much harder to argue against you, but if you want to get something banned, it is for you to provide evidence that it's harmful, not for the rest of us to provide evidence that it isn't just because you think it is.

I think it's about time you stopped trying to be the moral guardian for the MJ world. I don't doubt that you mean well, but I don't want your guardianship, thanks all the same

[ChrisA]

She let it ride, but her boyfriend seemed to be seething, and I know I was.

So the victim, and her boyfriend just let it ride?

And some people are suggesting that it's the teaching of this stuff that gives pervs licence to act?

[Gadget]

As long as you warn me before I start to sound like Gadget.

No chance of that - don't worry.
<hr>
This thread seems to have degraded into what's wrong with teaching some moves and not where the line is drawn between UCP, Blues, Sensual and Sinfull.

The person performing the moves has as much an impact as the moves themselves; an arm jive can be made to be steamy with one partner and with another it could give you the creeps.
If we take these extremes out of the equation and look at the moves, "Simulated Foreplay" is the sensual side of the dancing. "Simulated Sex" is the sleasy/sinful side.

Is there a place for the 'sinful' in MJ? In social modern jive, no; I don't think so. However I have seen little/no evidence that there is any willingness for it to move to the social floor.
Socially, holding hands is considered normal in public; your normal dance is no more 'volatile' than that. Kissing equates to the sensual side; again socially acceptable in public. It is not unknown to see people getting a bit steamier in public; old ladies may tut, but there is no moral outrage. Until we see/accept people stripping and groping each other in public as socially acceptable, we won't see it on the dance floor. The dance floor is still a morally 'public' place where we expect the social rules of our society to be upheld. Yes, it can be personal. Yes, it can be close. But it should always be consensual and never be invasive.

These are general social skills that apply to life in general, it's not just limited to the dance floor - Or do they? Are you a different person on the dance floor than off it? Would you accept breaches of social etiquette here where you would not off the floor?


As an aside, {IMHO} blues dancing is generally done to slower music; smoother music - actions are deliberate and lingering. Any "simulated sex" within blues is almost "making looorve" - I could see it being a performance piece in the Fringe. I think that this is so far removed from what we see taught and know of as MJ that it would not have any detrimental effect on the general dancing populous.

[Andy McGregor]

I think it's about time you stopped trying to be the moral guardian for the MJ world. I don't doubt that you mean well, but I don't want your guardianship, thanks all the same

Just about any Forumite except ChrisA should have been the one to make this statement. Anybody who's been on the forum and read ChrisA's posts will have recognised a campaigner for decency and the identifcation and banning of pervs. I think he's right in the campaign But doesn't it sound like hypocrisy when he asks someone else to stop trying to be a moral guardian - maybe he'd like to be the only one

.. or maybe there are variations of moral guardian and I'm the wrong variant

[El Salsero Gringo]

My motivation on this front is not moral, it's more to do with putting women off dancing.

{snip}
But doesn't it sound like hypocrisy when he asks someone else to stop trying to be a moral guardian - maybe he'd like to be the only one
.. or maybe there are variations of moral guardian and I'm the wrong variant

I'm confused Andy. Is this a morals issue, or a putting-women-off-dancing issue?

[Andy McGregor]

I'm confused Andy. Is this a morals issue, or a putting-women-off-dancing issue?

Can't it be both

Besides, ChrisA has accused me of trying to be the moral guardian of the forum - I haven't asked for or accepted that particular chalice

And, El S G makes it sound like the two are mutually exclusive. Can't he envisage that something immoral would put some women (and men) off dancing?

[CJ]

As long as you warn me before I start to sound like Gadget.

Too late, mate.

[ChrisA]

But doesn't it sound like hypocrisy when he asks someone else to stop trying to be a moral guardian - maybe he'd like to be the only one

Let me explain the difference between my position and yours (as I perceive it):

You have defined a set of moves, which you believe should not be taught anywhere, to anyone, whether perv or not. This is what I mean by moral guardianship - making up other people's minds for them as to what constitutes the 'right direction' in which MJ should be taken.

My position on this is that you have no right to do this, since it is for other people, not you, to decide what they may do with other consenting adults.

Now I hope you're not intentionally misrepresenting my position when you refer to me as:

a campaigner for decency and the identifcation and banning of pervs.

I have no particular interest in decency per se. I'm quite happy to dance indecently, with people that I know are comfortable with that, and with me, and I don't care if other people do too if both partners are up for it. My objection is to people that abuse the vulnerability of people on the dance floor, by inflicting on them unwanted behaviour of any kind.

Now I certainly don't support any kind of public identification of these people, for all the reasons that we've heard endlessly about. And nor would I support banning them if the victims of their behaviour felt able to just not dance with them... the problem would rapidly become self-limiting since there wouldn't be the supply of fresh meat available, and the pervs would go elsewhere.

My objection to pervs has nothing at all to do with the morality or otherwise of certain activities on the dance floor - it's exactly the same as my objection to people that insist on doing unwanted drops, and has to do with forcing people to do something they don't want to do, which I object to in most guises.

My opinion is that it would be nice if the culture was different so that ladies found it easier to decline dances with pervs. I also think organisers that fail to act against pervs both lack courage, consequently lose business (since the few pervs that hang around almost certainly lose the venue more money than they contribute) and spoil the atmosphere for the rest of us.

But this is nothing to do with saying what consenting adults can and can't do together, as I say. So I see no hypocrisy

[CJ]

So I see no hypocrisy

Blinkers, anyone??

[Andy McGregor]

But this is nothing to do with saying what consenting adults can and can't do together,

As I've said, 'consenting' is the key. And as bigdjiver has reported. In at least one instance a man who'd been to one of these porn moves lessons performed them without the consent of his partner - maybe he thought he had consent or didn't need it.

[El Salsero Gringo]

Can't it be both

Besides, ChrisA has accused me of trying to be the moral guardian of the forum - I haven't asked for or accepted that particular chalice

I'm sure El S G has accused you of that in the past, too. Or at least, trying to be moral guardian of Modern Jive in general, if not just the Forum.

And, El S G makes it sound like the two are mutually exclusive. Can't he envisage that something immoral would put some women (and men) off dancing?

Certainly he can. I wonder though if Andy McGregor can't envisage that something immoral might actually attract some women (and men) to dancing?

[Andy McGregor]

Certainly he can. I wonder though if Andy McGregor can't envisage that something immoral might actually attract some women (and men) to dancing?

That's the thing that scares me most

[ChrisA]

As I've said, 'consenting' is the key. And as bigdjiver has reported. In at least one instance a man who'd been to one of these porn moves lessons performed them without the consent of his partner - maybe he thought he had consent or didn't need it.

Ok, maybe occasionally it happens.

But you could argue for the first move and basket to be banned on the same grounds.

I just don't see how you can go to a lesson where not doing the content with anyone you don't know and have obtained consent from is part of the introduction, and come away with the impression that it's Ok to do them with random people, without already being a perv.

And since the pervs make first moves and baskets sleazy, it's clearly nothing to do with the moves.

Why isn't this a no-brainer?

[ChrisA]

where not doing the content with anyone you don't know and have obtained consent from is part of the introduction

In fact, anyone who doesn't know that you don't do this sort of stuff without consent even without such an introduction is ****ing stupid, IMO.

The pervs know all too well, and do it anyway...

[El Salsero Gringo]

Why isn't this a no-brainer?

It is, Chris. Mr McGregor's only doing it to wind you up.

[CJ]

It is, Chris. Mr McGregor's only doing it to wind you up.

ESG,

I'm sure ChrisA appreciated your thoughfulness, but there's NO WAY that Chris would EVER let himself be wound up by such a post.

[Andy McGregor]

ESG,

I'm sure ChrisA appreciated your thoughfulness, but there's NO WAY that Chris would EVER let himself be wound up by such a post.

I don't know what you mean

[Gadget]

But you could argue for the first move and basket to be banned on the same grounds.

Well, they have already changed the comb so it's "less invasive" {one of the few bad things the collective have done IMHO}