What is tango doing wrong: #3 - men & women

[itwillhappen]

Ah, I see. This is the axiom I disagree with.

I believe that competition can be many things, some of them positive.

Well, that's one way to look at it.

I define competition and (romantic) partnership as opposite ends of a scale. 100% selfishness versus 100% togetherness, with many intermediate stages possible.

In game theory, it's the distinction between aiming to maximize your own payoff (or even the difference or just have it less negative than the other person) and at least aiming for the sum of both payoffs (or even weight the other higher) .

So if my girlfriend were to say she wanted to attend a workshop alone just so she could dance better than me, that would raise serious questions. Among them would be whether I did something wrong. Implicit criticism, then.

 

[opendoor]

I believe that competition can be many things, some of them positive.

I see it the same way as itwillhappen: competition is based on extrinsic factors, romantic love on intrinsic ones. Moreover, the latter has at most two parties, while competition has at least three, one of which defines the normative standards.

 

[Bailango]

, romantic love on intrinsic ones. Moreover, the latter has at most two parties,

Not for those that are polyamorous and I am sure polyamory gives rise to some competition

 

[opendoor]

True, I've often heard that polyamory is never balanced and that one person always has to suffer.

 

[fiesta0618]

In game theory, it's the distinction between aiming to maximize your own payoff (or even the difference or just have it less negative than the other person) and at least aiming for the sum of both payoffs (or even weight the other higher) .

I like your analysis!

The reason that I'm still not finding it convincing is that it seems to be working off of the assumption (and opendoor agrees) that competition is essentially always zero-sum. I find it rarely so. In fact, the reason I engage in competition in so many things is that I think it is a quite reliable route to the last outcome you mention: the greatest total sum of payoffs, even if I personally don't get the biggest win.

Or, to put it in more real life terms. Competition can be an effort for two or more people with mutual interests to push one another to become the best version of themselves. It doesn't really matter who wins or loses in situations like this, because the simple act of engaging in the effort makes both parties better.

 

[itwillhappen]

I like your analysis!

The reason that I'm still not finding it convincing is that it seems to be working off of the assumption (and opendoor agrees) that competition is essentially always zero-sum.

This is a misunderstanding. Of course, even in a competitive situation, two people can achieve a positive payoff, for example learning to dance better. For two sports buddies, i.e., two tangueros standing next to each other, this might work well without damaging the relationship.

For a romantic couple, moreover within the current roles of follower and leader, I would expect a serious damage to the relationship itself. Quite often one partner will be dissatisfied with an limited artificial conflict and will react by escalating the conflict.

And a romantic relationship is exclusively about personal perception, not facts!
Let's consider this statement:

There were no guys in that small scene that I had any desire to dance with. But the women were GOOD! So, after the women realized in practicas that I’m trying hard to learn to lead, all of a sudden they treat me differently.

In fact, the description contains no criticism whatsoever. Hopefully, it's clear to everyone that the guys have made no commitment, no contract, no promise to trigger any kind of desire in an arbitrary woman by their dancing. @Miradamiranda also acts in a solution-oriented and independent manner.

Nevertheless, could one of the tangueros addressed here perhaps perceive the comment as criticism? Will they welcome the competition and grow by that? And would they be happy if a romantic partner phrased it that way?

 

[fiesta0618]

And a romantic relationship is exclusively about personal perception, not facts!
Let's consider this statement:
...
In fact, the description contains no criticism whatsoever. Hopefully, it's clear to everyone that the guys have made no commitment, no contract, no promise to trigger any kind of desire in an arbitrary woman by their dancing. @Miradamiranda also acts in a solution-oriented and independent manner.

Yes, Miranda's story is a clear example, and an entirely familiar situation.

But those are strangers. Or, at most, distant acquaintances. Misunderstandings and questioning of motives are only natural in that scenario. I would expect so much more and better communication and understanding from two people who have decided to enter a romantic relationship.

Basically, if I'm going to be super blunt about it, I would say that if this sort of mutually supportive competition causes problems in a romantic relationship, that's a bad relationship with terrible foundational problems. The fault here is not the fact of competition itself, or for anything having to do with dance.

Which I don't expect should be a surprising or novel claim. I think it has been discussed on this forum that dancing with a significant other can often be personally and politically challenging. Not because dance itself is a fraught activity, but because it exposes every weakness in the underlying relationship. To a lesser extent, I think (mild forms of) competition have the same characteristic.

 

[opendoor]

..dancing with a significant other can often be personally and politically challenging. Not because dance itself is a fraught activity, but because it exposes every weakness in the underlying relationship. To a lesser extent, I think (mild forms of) competition have the same characteristic.

I've read these sentences several times, but I didn't really understand it. The translation bot didn't provide any clarity either. Therefore, I think the lack of understanding is due to our different experiences, not to language peculiarities.

Competition is an important trait of my personality. But it's a kind of inherent relativization of one's own abilities. Competitions in dance sport, on the other hand, are extrinsically motivated. I experienced this twice. In the 1980s, my ex-wife drove me to BR-standard competitions. I participated out of necessity, finding everything horrible and even repulsive. In 2016, in my tango career, I participated in a preliminary round for the Tango Mundial at BsAs in Rome. I had no will to win, unlike my dance partner at the time and our (female) trainer. We didn't do badly, but I found it unnecessary. I broke up with my dance partner, just like I broke up with my (ex)wife after my BR episode. I always compare myself when I'm on the dance floor. But I don't need judges for that.

 

[fiesta0618]

I've read these sentences several times, but I didn't really understand it. The translation bot didn't provide any clarity either. Therefore, I think the lack of understanding is due to our different experiences, not to language peculiarities.

I can elaborate/clarify.

Partner dance is an intensely personal activity, where personality compatibility matters. For someone you only connect with through social dancing, this is not terribly difficult--the pair can present their most easily palatable face, and ignore any lingering incompatible traits of their partner for the duration of the dance. For someone you interact with more regularly, this is a bit more challenging, because the time spent together results in a familiarity where it is difficult to present only the facets of yourself that are acceptable to your partner. Because of this, it seems logical that the best possible dance partner would be someone you are already personally close to and have already found deep compatibility. Spouses and significant others seem like they ought to be the very best choices.

But that turns out to be almost exactly inverted from how things play out in reality. Partner dance has quite specific requirements for each role to work well--requirements massively different from the roles (most) people play in everyday life. So when we dance regularly with a SO, we need to negotiate two totally distinct sets of rules for how the relationship works; one for the floor, and one for everywhere else. That requires a significant amount of self-awareness and interpersonal negotiation...and even more importantly, the ability to sharply compartmentalize the two domains.

Most people aren't prepared to do that. Certainly not when dance (or the personal relationship) is relatively new to them. So when things go wrong on the dance floor, you see significant bleed-over from issues in the personal relationship (e.g: "The stupid way you execute that step even when I correct you is sooooo obviously connected to the way you refuse to listen to me about how to feed the baby properly!"). It manifests outwardly as a rocky dance relationship, but the problem isn't actually the dance.

We see a lot of examples of this in our dance studio. One popular element of our business is helping folks design, practice, and perform a First Dance for their wedding. And as terrible as it is to say, you really can tell which marriages are going to be difficult just by observing how the couple relate to one another as dancers. Reiterating and restating what I said in the short statement you quoted: dance partnership can and will expose every point of personal friction, even ones thought to be carefully hidden.

*********

On the other hand, the reverse direction seems to work just fine. Selecting a personal partner from the set of one's highly-compatible dance partners is no less successful than the usual run of relationship-finding. The worst incompatibilities and insecurities are clearly on display from the very beginning!

 

[opendoor]

..Most people aren't prepared to do that..

Yes, that applies to my first dance partner, who was also my wife. However, in the second example, I was more advanced in dealing with women (iykwim)...

 

[itwillhappen]

But that turns out to be almost exactly inverted from how things play out in reality. Partner dance has quite specific requirements for each role to work well--requirements massively different from the roles (most) people play in everyday life. So when we dance regularly with a SO, we need to negotiate two totally distinct sets of rules for how the relationship works; one for the floor, and one for everywhere else. That requires a significant amount of self-awareness and interpersonal negotiation...and even more importantly, the ability to sharply compartmentalize the two domains.

Well, yes, one characteristic of a healthy relationship is that you talk about and negotiate things. So if you want kind of competition in your relationship, you can and should express it as a desire and justify it, like this:
"I would like to dance better than you, because..."
And what exactly would your justification be?!

I think it has been discussed on this forum that dancing with a significant other can often be personally and politically challenging. Not because dance itself is a fraught activity, but because it exposes every weakness in the underlying relationship. To a lesser extent, I think (mild forms of) competition have the same characteristic.

My girlfriend was very hesitant about it in the beginning – from personal experience of possible effects. And I wouldn't overdo the term "romantic relationship".

Couples therapists are familiar with the term "emotional infidelity", meaning infidelity in thoughts or manifested in chats. (If so, one doesn't assign blame, but rather analyzes what the person is missing in the relationship.)
Thus, even an intimately danced tanda could be classified as infidelity. My partner and I now have an explicit agreement that we will tolerate this "infidelity for 12 minutes" because we're not missing anything, and under the condition that everyone leaves the emotional connection shortly after the tanda. So, comments like "why are you dancing with such an ecstatic expression?" are not an option, nor is the attempt to suppress this face expression.

 

[fiesta0618]

So if you want kind of competition in your relationship, you can and should express it as a desire and justify it, like this:
"I would like to dance better than you, because..."
And what exactly would your justification be?!

But this is still zero-sum thinking--success in the contest defined as "the other person ending up worse," so that there is no mutual-win outcome possible.

My interest in competing in most of the things I do has nothing at all to do with a desire to be better than people. When I am trying to briefly summarize my character to others, one of the things I say frequently is, "I absolutely love competing, but I don't care at all about winning."

*******

So, yeah, I suppose that means you're right. I definitely wouldn't want that kind of competition in any relationship. I fully agree with you it would be damaging.

And this also clarifies why I have been shocked by your earlier assertions. Because I consider that approach to competition toxic and damaging even to the individual who thinks that way, not just those they see as rivals. And I forgot that it's actually a pretty normal mindset.

 

[pianistamediano]

My interest in competing in most of the things I do has nothing at all to do with a desire to be better than people. When I am trying to briefly summarize my character to others, one of the things I say frequently is, "I absolutely love competing, but I don't care at all about winning."

I'll ask the obvious question then — would you still compete even if you had little to no chance of winning/placing high? (Just to give a random example, entering a competition where, while ostensibly open to all, the participants are highly skilled and professional in all but name?)

Additionally, competing necessitates the presence of other people; you have no desire to be better than people, so perhaps rephrasing your interest as self-improvement or something along the lines of that might be better instead.

Granted, it's just nice to have like-minded people around you when you're pursuing your own interests, but why competition instead of, say, a group practice session? Is it the pressure/intensity that you seek too, which can't be attained in normal practice?

 

[fiesta0618]

I'll ask the obvious question then — would you still compete even if you had little to no chance of winning/placing high? (Just to give a random example, entering a competition where, while ostensibly open to all, the participants are highly skilled and professional in all but name?)

Yes. I do this frequently, and have my whole life. Some examples:

• When I was in middle school, the only way I could compete in Track & Field was to join the high school team. My middle school only offered other sports like baseball. So I ran with the big kids and finished dead last. One of my enduring running memories is the first race where I was only second to last.
• In my second running season, I wasn't last every time. In fact, I just barely hit the qualifying standard to participate in the league championship. I didn't know it until years later, but my coach had approached my parents and asked if it would damage my psyche to run in the big race and lose. My parents, knowing me well, said that, on the contrary, it would damage my psyche to know I had earned the right to compete and had not been permitted. So I ran in the championship race, finished last, and was ecstatic because I had run my fastest time to date.
• I have been a competitive tabletop gamer at various times in my life, in various games. One time in college, I was at a big gaming convention, had some time to kill, and noticed that a semipro "Modern Masters" event in a game I was currently into was starting in ten minutes. I walked up and entered, interested to see what it would be like to play against guys who were *actually* good at it. I was proud to win one game out of seven, and got my teeth kicked in for the other six.
• My competitive dance style, Ballroom, offers subdivided skill levels in competition, and you can enter more than one level if you want to. I always offer my partners to dance in the level above in addition to our natural one (they usually, but not always, decline). And I refuse to "dance down" in the level below, even though that is permitted, too.

Granted, it's just nice to have like-minded people around you when you're pursuing your own interests, but why competition instead of, say, a group practice session? Is it the pressure/intensity that you seek too, which can't be attained in normal practice?

Yes, your last sentence exactly. I am self-motivated enough to strive my hardest even when nothing is on the table and nobody is watching, but most folks aren't like that. Another anecdote:

One of my close friends is a professional poker player. I love games in general, and many of my friends do as well, but I never played poker for some reason. He offered to run a teaching game for us, handling the role of dealer and offering advice to everyone on strategies. We liked the idea, and set it up. The strange thing was, he insisted that there had to be a buy-in, instead of just playing for meaningless chips. Not large--just $10--but not zero. When I asked why, he said "Fiesta, I know you personally may not need stakes in order to take this seriously, but a bunch of the other guys will."

As I observed the betting play out that evening, I could see that he was right. A player would start going off in a silly direction, but then catch themselves as they understood that they did actually stand to lose (50 cents) if they made a stupid play.

But it wasn't about the money. All of these guys have pretty good jobs, so $10 is nothing to them. It was about the visible stakes keeping people focused, which kept the game interesting and honestly played. That is the best thing competition offers, I think.

 

[ProgressNotPerfection]

why competition instead of, say, a group practice session? Is it the pressure/intensity that you seek too, which can't be attained in normal practice?

For me, an official competition setting generates a level of energy and excitement that cannot be replicated elsewhere, and my dancing reflects that energy and excitement. I love the spotlight (even when there isn’t an actual spotlight) and I love performing. In a group social, and in lessons, and even in local studio events that are supposed to have a “performance” vibe, I don’t feel that same energy.

Like @fiesta0618, when I compete, I don’t feel like I’m competing against the other dancers on the floor at the same time. For me, I am always competing against myself, trying to dance better than I did last time. But nonetheless, in order to get the best dancing out of myself, I need other competing couples on the floor.

I don’t fully understand this, but my personal experience has convinced me it’s true.