Continued from above. Posted by jofjonesboro 3/21/2011 9:23:00 PM
I questioned the commitment of your friend because she made a claim which I know with metaphysical certainty to be false.
You take up a lot of space writing about projecting views and making presumptions.
Then you use this language in response to my request for the names of the competitions at which you worked.
Amused by the implication of bogus statistics
The suggestion of bogus statistics is your inference and not my implication. You're not exactly free of presumption yourself.
I wanted to see the names to determine if they were all NDCA events and they are (I checked). Therefore, all of your statistical arguments are based on a biased sample. The NDCA is the number one promoter of pro/am in the world (their website says so). It cannot be meaningful to use an analysis of participation at their events alone to make comparative judgments about pro/am and amateur dancing.
We're discussing whether or not pro-am competition dancing has value and merit.
No, that is what you are discussing. I am disputing the assertion that pro/am is superior to amateur partnerships as a method of training student dancers.
My use of the word "pushed" is based on my own experiences and observations in addition to those related to me by many other amateur dancers over the years.
Putting kids into ballroom is no different than putting them in ballet, karate, gymnastics, or any other physical skill-based activity.
Yes, ballroom is different because, as I noted above, it is a COUPLES activity; your other examples are all studies for individuals. Martial arts or ballet students may train together but they are not partners. While there is some dancing together in ballet, there are no analogous lead-follow roles in anything that you mentioned. A ballerina can train and perform by herself as much as she wants.
Children who want to pursue ballet can simply go find teachers and begin to learn. Prospective ballroom students can start taking lessons but will not actually be ballroom dancers until they find partners.
There is also a huge difference in the costs of these activities.
. . . you also impose your viewpoint on the adult pro-am competitors by suggesting that they are not willing participants, that they are being pushed, tricked, or duped into competing. Nobody could possibly do that willingly, . . .
When newcomers enter a ballroom dance studio, they bring excitement, anticipation, eagerness, and complete ignorance of the world into which theyre stepping. They yearn to dance but all that they really know is, in all likelihood, what theyve seen on TV or in a movie (which is almost always some type of competition). With no experience on which to base qualitative judgment, they will believe whatever they're told. They can easily be led - or misled - in almost any direction that a dance professional wishes to take them. In this situation, they are virtually children. Why else do so many experienced dancers refer to them as babies?
Your implcation that I'm insulting their intelligence may be based more on your own experience than on anything that I've written.
. . . I have some unsuspecting pro-am students whose bank accounts need to be bled...