[Tango-L] He played her like a violin

[Keith]

TFH,

You're too sensitive; my comments were not directed at you at all - I promise. 

My comments were prompted by a previous post which included a comment by a man while watching a couple dance .... 

"that's great! he is playing her like a fine violin......." 

While obviously meant as a comment of admiration, it gives no credit to the woman for the beauty of the dance - other than as a 
compliant object that the man is using. Of course, I'm not a woman, but if I heard the expression directed at my wife while she 
were dancing, I would definitely take offence. My wife is a wonderful dancer and has been for more than 30 years. She's certainly 
not an object that somebody plays with. 

As for my comment ....

"Think of her in that way and it's only a short step to treating her in the same way". 
 
You say ... 

"But, I do hear that women have to deal with men who are way overboard to the point of not listening to them, being brutes, 
demanding that they follow, throwing them around, etc."   

This is exactly what I'm talking about. These are men who treat the woman as an object, rather than as an equal partner in a 
beautiful dance. So why not - shame on them? 

Keith, HK


On Sat Dec 22 22:39 , Tango For Her  sent:

>You know, I wrote a private note to Astrid because she deserved to hear from me.  I tried to clarify and I think she deserves 
that.  I made it a private letter, because I surely wasn't looking for any public acclaim in anything I said.  
>   
>  But, sometimes I read these posts with wonder about some of the comments.  
>   
>  Let's look at what Keith wrote:
>   
>  There are some things more important [than] Tango and one of them is how 
>men think about and talk about women in general. 
>   
>  I agree 100%.  Seems he's on to something here.
>   
>  Referring to a woman as an object, even indirectly, is unacceptable. 
>   
>  100%?  Really? Not even an object of beauty?  Not even just for a moment?  Okay, I see that if a guy does this as a way of 
life, then, he's headed for problems.
>   
>  Think of her in that way and it's only a short step to treating her in the same way. 
>   
>  Everything is a short step to something!  Let's rewrite that so that it has more weight: "Think of her in that way, as a way of 
life, and it's only a short step to treating her in the same way."  Ah.  Okay, now we can agree.  Let's get back on track here ...
>   
>  If men do that while dancing Tango - shame on you. 
>
>  Ooooooh!   A complete left turn.  Oh well.  Everything written before that sentence doesn't support it.  No relation.  No 
foundation.  Sorry!  
>   
>  I take that "shame on you" as directed right at me.  Hmmm.  My dance grew by leaps and bounds during those exercises.   Some 
women thank me.  So, I thought I would pass that fruitful exercise along.  
>   
>  Astrid didn't appreciate it.  I accept Astrid's point of view.  It's a real life situation for her.  
>   
>  I thought Carol's post, too, was insiteful.  I think of a woman as an object once in a while:  An object of beauty, a brush on 
the dance floor.  That isn't very often and it surely isn't a way of being for me!  So, I am okay with thinking like that, once in 
a while, to learn from it in tango.   But, I do hear that women have to deal with men who are way overboard to the point of not 
listening to them, being brutes, demanding that they follow, throwing them around, etc.  So, again, Astrid and Carol's posts are 
insiteful to me.
>   
>  But, Keith!  Written a little differently, I agree with everything ... until that last line just sits there, unrelated, and 
says shame on me, the original writer on this thread.  Did you really mean to slam me even when I state that I used it to learn?  
I can see how my choice of words was a little off and offended some women.  I am sorry for that.  But, Keith, it doesn't make 
sense to get slammed when your whole argument doesn't even describe me!  
>   
>  Women who know me on the dance floor, know that I am kind, I listen during the dance, I most definitely hear the conversation 
that is going on, etc.  You, probably, could call me, and plenty of others, anti-brutes!  lol  I struck an emotion in Carol and 
Astrid that I can, and SHOULD, accept.  But, Keith, I have no clue why you wrote what you did.  
>   
>  Let's see. Along that same way of reasoning:
>   
>  Some people are malicious when they drive.
>  Malicious drivers get upset when they drive.
>  Malicious drivers show that they are upset when they drive.
>  Some people die because of malicious drivers.  
>  So, if I get upset, at home, shame on me.
>  Got it!
>