Dance Articles > Australian Dance Champions ejected from Nationals for wearing Freedom to Dance sash

Discussion in 'Dance Articles' started by Alskling, Dec 11, 2011.

  1. randomaeiou

    randomaeiou Member

    I agree. I believe that the reason for this is with power comes responsibility - there are, broadly speaking, two types of leaders. Those who seek leadership, and those who have the responsibility of it thrust upon them by others.

    The ones who seek leadership tend to focus on acquiring power/privilege through leadership, and view the responsibility of such positions as a "necessary evil" or "comes with the territory". Unfortunately, in many "democratic" systems, people have to put themselves forward to run for leadership, the act of which in itself selects for this group of people.

    In contrast, those who have leadership thrust upon them by others ("organic") generally have been viewed as capable by those doing the electing, and tend focus on the responsibilities of the position, rather than the accompanying power and privilege.

    IMHO, the reluctant leaders often make the best ones, because they tend to be reluctant as they realize the awesome responsibilities of leadership, and are therefore reluctant to assume these responsibilities lightly. The ones who SEEK leadership, frequently do so for reasons that do not necessarily coincide or align with fulfilling responsibilities to the led.
  2. fascination

    fascination Site Moderator Staff Member

    re DL; not everywhere all the time...authentic legitimate authority can arise in a variety of ways...
  3. DL

    DL Well-Known Member

    Let me make my point another way: Complaining about the dark is easier than lighting a candle.
  4. fascination

    fascination Site Moderator Staff Member

    sure...but people can decide whether or not to follow a star or a street lamp and which is the most authentic form of light...and GE is not the authority on legitimate lighting if you get my yes, sometimes a light is lit...whether or not people choose to follow it, it a matter of conscience and of how well they recognize the source as being a good one or not...shrug..and not every time that one follows one conscience can one hope for an immediate positive fact, in the short run, the opposite is almost always true...the paradox being that that is generally the only way real transformational shifts ever occur...
  5. TinyDancer109

    TinyDancer109 Well-Known Member

    Agreed. OWS is one example that comes to mind.

    Agreed. I hope dance members begin to move toward this understanding so they can dance at any competition they wish.
  6. danceronice

    danceronice Well-Known Member

    Well, first a majority would need to agree on what, exactly, the problem is.
  7. Beto

    Beto Active Member

  8. toothlesstiger

    toothlesstiger Well-Known Member

    How much choice do most of the dancers really have in this matter? If their country is dominated by one organization or the other? Seems like they would have a choice to compete, or not compete, and that's about it.
  9. Lioness

    Lioness Well-Known Member

    That's about all the choice there is in Australia...

    I know a couple of dancers boycotted the Aussies by choice, but don't personally know of any who were kicked out.
  10. Aura

    Aura Active Member

    This is heart-breaking. I don't know much about the politics of dancing, but it seems ridiculous that this couple was ejected for showing support for banned dancers. It seemed like an expression of visual solidarity, not something to intentionally upset.
  11. sambanada

    sambanada Active Member

    I agree. Dancers are not property of any organization.
  12. mindputtee

    mindputtee Well-Known Member

    I think what the event organizer, Margaret Lonsdale, said is pretty important. She thinks that the dancers "are getting involved in matters that don't concern them". I think that's blatantly false. Which competitions you can attend without being suspended from an organization (and its competitions) concerns any and all dancers. Organizations have no right to say you can't attend their competition because you went to someone else's. It's childish and petty.
  13. Larinda McRaven

    Larinda McRaven Site Moderator Staff Member

    Do we know the "matters" that she is talking about??
  14. SDsalsaguy

    SDsalsaguy Administrator Staff Member

    I don't, and I certainly accept that there could be multiple agendas concerned... but would have to agree with mindputtee's point about the absurdity of claiming that what events competitors are allowed to attend = "matters that don't concern them."
  15. fascination

    fascination Site Moderator Staff Member

  16. IsaacAltman

    IsaacAltman Member

    I do believe they are taking the proper route at this point by getting legal council. I also believe that things have progressively gotten out of hand because the competitiors have allowed it to happen over a long period of time. There is no solidarity. Maybe if everyone would support Independent organizations who allow you to dance wherever and drop out of the so called mainsteam organizations, then change would surely happen. But what are the chances of that happening? Look at it like an ugly divorce. Mom and Dad (WDC and WDSF) split and the kids (competitors) are the pawns. When are the kids going to say enough is enough. They love both parents, but because of the arguments and putting them in the middle, their love is turning to hate. Who really can turn these parents around is the kids. Think about it....
  17. toothlesstiger

    toothlesstiger Well-Known Member

    It's gotten to the point now that one organization is looking like a petty dictator completely of touch with reality, however noble their goals may have been at the beginning of this road.
  18. Larinda McRaven

    Larinda McRaven Site Moderator Staff Member

    I think what she was trying to say is there are things going on that the dancers simply don't see. And taking a stand, noble as it is, against a force that you only think you understand is kinda crazy.

    Yes they were upset their friends were disqualified. Yes they stood up for their friends... but do they even REALLY know who and what they were standing up to? They are dipping their toe in a sea but have no idea what is in the water but what they see floating on top.
  19. Alskling

    Alskling Member

    That doesn't work for me as an explanation, nor do I think it's fair to insinuate that the couple involved didn't know precisely what they were standing up for. You have no more idea what they do or do not know than I do.

    An allegedly democratic organization should be an open book to its members. If there are things going on that impact the members, they should be told. All this hinting around that things are involved that we don't understand and shouldn't bother our pretty little heads about is infuriating and insulting.

    And furthermore, even if this woman is in possession of some deep knowledge that no one else has, she--and only she, if the news reports are accurate--is responsible for ordering the removal of this couple by SIX security guards for the crime of wearing yellow. To me, there can be no excuse for this kind of thuggish, dictatorial behavior.
  20. DL

    DL Well-Known Member

    I've been wondering similar things.

Share This Page