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

#21
I would add though, that often, the best leaders occur organically---not democratically.
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.
 

fascination

Site Moderator
Staff member
#24
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 drift...so 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 outcome...in 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...
 

TinyDancer109

Well-Known Member
#25
Merely rebelling against the status quo is just as silly and pointless, IMO, as the status quo itself may seem.
Agreed. OWS is one example that comes to mind.

It's not enough to say that things should change, because that doesn't guarantee change for the better. The only way to improve matters is to fully understand the problem, advocate for a solution, convince sufficiently many like-minded folk to agree, and collectively choose a leader who will do the legwork to make the solution a reality.
Agreed. I hope dance members begin to move toward this understanding so they can dance at any competition they wish.
 

toothlesstiger

Well-Known Member
#28
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.
 

Lioness

Well-Known Member
#29
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.
 

Aura

Active Member
#30
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.
 

mindputtee

Well-Known Member
#32
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.
 

SDsalsaguy

Administrator
Staff member
#34
Do we know the "matters" that she is talking about??
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."
 
#36
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....
 

toothlesstiger

Well-Known Member
#37
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.
 

Larinda McRaven

Site Moderator
Staff member
#38
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."
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.
 
#39
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.
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.
 

DL

Well-Known Member
#40
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.
I've been wondering similar things.
 

Dance Ads