All Corona related issues

[sbrnsmith]

More comps getting cancelled or going online- 3 days after announcing mandatory masks for all competitors, Holiday dance classic cancelled. One of the first comps of 2021- Snowball is going to be virtual. Meanwhile the virus shows no sign of slowing down. Today marks the highest daily number of cases since the pandemic began , at at least 82,600. It’s going to be awhile until we will be anything close to normal. There’s nothing magical about Jan 1,2021. Every time a comp is cancelled, there are all these comments from people who say next year will be bigger and better. At this point, I can’t see comps taking place with any kind of certainty until well beyond Spring 2021.
sorry to sound so negative. It’s been that kind of week. It’s going to be a tough winter.

 

[Warren J. Dew]

Support is always welcome but negative comments are not fair.

Insisting on everyone always agreeing with you is not a reasonable expectation.

 

[Warren J. Dew]

just like they're superfluous if you're attending an event in the Rose Garden, from what I hear.

Don't laugh. I'm constantly running into people who are saying "oh, it only spreads indoors." Half the people in the rose garden event had been working in a mask optional indoor environment without incident for months, and the instant they go to a fully distanced outdoor event, they come down with it.

On the plus side, this probably means ballroom competitions aren't really more dangerous than comparably crowded outdoor sporting events - if anyone ever listens to reason.

 

[Warren J. Dew]

As far as I know, much of Europe is still not allowing US travelers. Heck, Canada doesn't even want us visiting. And with our infection rates, I can't blame them one bit. Spring seems a bit wildly optimistic to me.

Europe has actually rocketed past the US in new cases per day for the past week or so. I guess this is the long anticipated fall wave. It looks like the fall wave is starting to hit the US too, though it's harder to see because different regions in the US were very much out of sync with respect to their first waves.

I had been hoping that travel would be reopened in time for Blackpool. There are apparently negotiations to reopen travel between the US and the UK, but they may be scotched by the fall wave, which I'd guess is likely to last a couple months at least.

For that matter, I'm not sure whether Blackpool thinks they're on or off for 2021.

 

[ProgressNotPerfection]

It’s been that kind of week.

I’m so sorry. It’s good to see you back! You haven’t posted in so long that I was worried about you - particularly in light of your job.

Thank you, and the others in your field of work, for what you do.

 

[ProgressNotPerfection]

As far as I know, much of Europe is still not allowing US travelers. Heck, Canada doesn't even want us visiting. And with our infection rates, I can't blame them one bit.

I wonder which countries - if any - a US citizen might be allowed to emigrate to these days, should she or he believe it advisable to do so while she or he still possesses the right to travel.

 

[ProgressNotPerfection]

Insisting on everyone always agreeing with you is not a reasonable expectation.

She has never insisted that everyone should always agree with her! And while I can’t speak for her, I am confident that is NOT her expectation! I have no idea how you could possibly have interpreted her statement so wrongly.

Her response to open_mind merely defended her very valid position. To me, open_mind’s post read like a criticism of Danceisjoy’s “choice” to pay attention to other people’s political beliefs. To me, it implied that if Danceisjoy would just stick her head in the sand and ignore other people’s political views, she’d be much happier and her life would be simpler. If that was, in fact, the intent of the post, then it was sending an extremely negative message to which a reply was warranted.

Danceisjoy’s reply was not a demand that everyone should agree with her. It was a straightforward statement that negative comments are unfair, which is true. Unless someone has shared the same life experiences, any criticism (whether overt or implied) of decisions made based on those life experiences, is not fair.

(Note: I don’t actually KNOW what open_mind’s intent was in that post, obviously. It might have been simply stating an opinion, and perhaps no criticism or negativity was intended. But that’s how it came across to me.)

 

[Danceisjoy]

She has never insisted that everyone should always agree with her! And while I can’t speak for her, I am confident that is NOT her expectation! I have no idea how you could possibly have interpreted her statement so wrongly.

Her response to open_mind merely defended her very valid position. To me, open_mind’s post read like a criticism of Danceisjoy’s “choice” to pay attention to other people’s political beliefs. To me, it implied that if Danceisjoy would just stick her head in the sand and ignore other people’s political views, she’d be much happier and her life would be simpler. If that was, in fact, the intent of the post, then it was sending an extremely negative message to which a reply was warranted.

Danceisjoy’s reply was not a demand that everyone should agree with her. It was a straightforward statement that negative comments are unfair, which is true. Unless someone has shared the same life experiences, any criticism (whether overt or implied) of decisions made based on those life experiences, is not fair.

(Note: I don’t actually KNOW what open_mind’s intent was in that post, obviously. It might have been simply stating an opinion, and perhaps no criticism or negativity was intended. But that’s how it came across to me.)

She has never insisted that everyone should always agree with her! And while I can’t speak for her, I am confident that is NOT her expectation! I have no idea how you could possibly have interpreted her statement so wrongly.

Her response to open_mind merely defended her very valid position. To me, open_mind’s post read like a criticism of Danceisjoy’s “choice” to pay attention to other people’s political beliefs. To me, it implied that if Danceisjoy would just stick her head in the sand and ignore other people’s political views, she’d be much happier and her life would be simpler. If that was, in fact, the intent of the post, then it was sending an extremely negative message to which a reply was warranted.

Danceisjoy’s reply was not a demand that everyone should agree with her. It was a straightforward statement that negative comments are unfair, which is true. Unless someone has shared the same life experiences, any criticism (whether overt or implied) of decisions made based on those life experiences, is not fair.

(Note: I don’t actually KNOW what open_mind’s intent was in that post, obviously. It might have been simply stating an opinion, and perhaps no criticism or negativity was intended. But that’s how it came across to me.)

She has never insisted that everyone should always agree with her! And while I can’t speak for her, I am confident that is NOT her expectation! I have no idea how you could possibly have interpreted her statement so wrongly.

Her response to open_mind merely defended her very valid position. To me, open_mind’s post read like a criticism of Danceisjoy’s “choice” to pay attention to other people’s political beliefs. To me, it implied that if Danceisjoy would just stick her head in the sand and ignore other people’s political views, she’d be much happier and her life would be simpler. If that was, in fact, the intent of the post, then it was sending an extremely negative message to which a reply was warranted.

Danceisjoy’s reply was not a demand that everyone should agree with her. It was a straightforward statement that negative comments are unfair, which is true. Unless someone has shared the same life experiences, any criticism (whether overt or implied) of decisions made based on those life experiences, is not fair.

(Note: I don’t actually KNOW what open_mind’s intent was in that post, obviously. It might have been simply stating an opinion, and perhaps no criticism or negativity was intended. But that’s how it came across to me.)

She has never insisted that everyone should always agree with her! And while I can’t speak for her, I am confident that is NOT her expectation! I have no idea how you could possibly have interpreted her statement so wrongly.

Her response to open_mind merely defended her very valid position. To me, open_mind’s post read like a criticism of Danceisjoy’s “choice” to pay attention to other people’s political beliefs. To me, it implied that if Danceisjoy would just stick her head in the sand and ignore other people’s political views, she’d be much happier and her life would be simpler. If that was, in fact, the intent of the post, then it was sending an extremely negative message to which a reply was warranted.

Danceisjoy’s reply was not a demand that everyone should agree with her. It was a straightforward statement that negative comments are unfair, which is true. Unless someone has shared the same life experiences, any criticism (whether overt or implied) of decisions made based on those life experiences, is not fair.

(Note: I don’t actually KNOW what open_mind’s intent was in that post, obviously. It might have been simply stating an opinion, and perhaps no criticism or negativity was intended. But that’s how it came across to me.)

Exactly. Again, I stated that hearing about different political viewpoints is not the issue. How political policies impact my life and my choices while dancing is something I live with. I don't mind valid disagreements. Simply put, if I stepped on my husband's toe and it began to bleed, I do not have the right to tell him he's not in pain. I can't make comments on his experience if I haven't lived it, even if I disagree.

 

[Warren J. Dew]

To me, open_mind’s post read like a criticism of Danceisjoy’s “choice” to pay attention to other people’s political beliefs.... Unless someone has shared the same life experiences, any criticism (whether overt or implied) of decisions made based on those life experiences, is not fair.

If you actually read open_mind's post, it's a statement of their own experiences and how they dealt with those experiences. You obviously haven't shared those experiences, so your criticism is exactly what you claim not to want. To me, your position comes across as "rules for thee, but not for me".

 

[Warren J. Dew]

Obviously telling people an instructor or student tested positive could be bad for business, but are there any legal implications here? For example, maybe the teacher feels it is a private matter. Or maybe a student would feel the studio was liable if they got sick after not being informed, or worse if they got sick and didn't know to social distance from their loved ones.

Typically business owners are liable not only for purposeful injury, but also for negligence. Whether failing to inform a student might constitute negligence is something the business owner might be better off consulting a lawyer about.

My personal opinion is, if the teacher is teaching, I don't see how his having covid could possibly be considered a private matter, since he might be infecting students. If the teacher is out of the studio quarantined, I can see how the reason for his being out of the studio might be considered private, but I'd want a doctor's assurance he was not yet infectious the last time he was in the studio.

Of course, my personal opinion is that it's less bad for the studio to say someone is in covid quarantine to avoid spread in the studio than to let people think it might be something much worse.

 

[Warren J. Dew]

But based on how public health officials are acting, giving up this degree of privacy appears to be a personal choice. (You can participate in contact tracing, and when they in turn notify potentially exposed people, they are not supposed to reveal who the infected contact was.)

The HIPAA rules for medical professionals - which probably includes public health officials here - don't apply to everyone. I don't think they apply to nonmedical employers, though this is something a business might want to consult a lawyer about. They do mean that in theory, a teacher who got covid would not necessarily tell the studio at all, so the studio might not be aware of the issue.

You're allowed to waive HIPAA privacy protections, so it would be better if people would just be open about whether they have covid.

 

[Greybeard]

The BBC had an article on how dance professionals are handling corona.

With the first Strictly Come Dancing live show on UK screens later, Nell Mackenzie looks at how professional ballroom dancers and coaches around the world are continuing to cope with the impact of pandemic restrictions.​

​

'It feels so good to be back dancing'

The world of ballroom dancing went online to cope with the pandemic restrictions, but what does the future hold?

www.bbc.com

 

[ProgressNotPerfection]

If you actually read open_mind's post, it's a statement of their own experiences and how they dealt with those experiences. You obviously haven't shared those experiences, so your criticism is exactly what you claim not to want. To me, your position comes across as "rules for thee, but not for me".

And similarly, if you actually read MY post, it includes an acknowledgement of that very fact. I said, “I don’t actually KNOW what open_mind’s intent was in that post, obviously. It might have been simply stating an opinion, and perhaps no criticism or negativity was intended. But that’s how it came across to me.” Presumably you can understand the difference...?

But mainly, I’m still baffled at how you interpreted anything said by Danceisjoy as her insisting that everyone must always agree with her. What specifically did she say to give you that idea?

 

[IndyLady]

I don't talk politics at the studio (unless I am 100% positive we're commiserating, not arguing, which has been 1-2 ppl). However, there is one other student there who makes pointed remarks now and again - yes, in conversation with me where there are no other participants. I'm pretty sure she knows my stances since we are FB friends and I've posted a couple times about such matters, and I am literally always masked unless I am taking a drink of water. So far I've just not responded or reacted, but given that she's not taking the hint, I'm starting to wonder if I need to say something when it happens again (what to say, I don't know. Just something that says, I don't agree with you and I don't wish to argue about this).

 

[Danceisjoy]

If you actually read open_mind's post, it's a statement of their own experiences and how they dealt with those experiences. You obviously haven't shared those experiences, so your criticism is exactly what you claim not to want. To me, your position comes across as "rules for thee, but not for me".

My intuition told me it was time to stop lurking on this forum for 5 years. The very nature of this topic signaled I was maybe free to share the impact of politics/policies as I felt safe to do so. I knew backlash could possibly be here but I knew kindness would be too.

My posts thus far have tied back into the topic thread. I appreciate those who have read my posts and the empathy received even though some will never live my experiences. I have never danced mentally ill, as an abuse survivor, a cancer survivor, battling life threatening illnesses, badly injured, or any hosts of events that can shape our dance lives. But I will offer my support, empathy and love despite any 'policies' and be totally open to hearing you.

How can I critique or offer negative comments about YOUR humanity?

Politics aside, I too wish to dance my authentic self. Dancing in fear or bottled up because of the consequences of politics/policies/ rules, feels terrible. This is my humanity.

I appreciate this thread and support because me being able to share a little... can go a long way in my self expression as a dancer. (again my attempt to address and respect this thread) So I say thank you and intuition now tells me it's probably time to lurk again.