[Tango-L] Lead an invitation that can be ignored or faught

[Alexis Cousein]

Trini y Sean (PATangoS) wrote:
> --- On Tue, 9/23/08, Alexis Cousein <al at sgi.com> wrote:
> 
>> Whether "resist" is an appropriate word is a matter of semantics. And I disagree that it's totally unkosher for her to "force room" or "take over", at least if you understand the context (i.e. don't take the words
>> as if they came from a military dictionary).
> 
> Trini, here.  I think we're thinking along the same lines, but the choice of words is 
 > extremely important because it is difficult for women to understand how to express
 > themselves within the context of the man's marca.

Agreed. And as I said, it's easier to feel than to describe.

> And it's important for men to understand that they shouldn't be wusses, either.

Yes. It's hard for a follower to respond to a lead that isn't crystal clear - if you'll
forgive me bringing up the conversation again, it's really hard to say something 
meaningful in return when someone jsut mumbled something to you. As a leader,
you do *have* to know what you're doing, and have to propose it unambiguously.

> So, if a man is going to take an action that may collide us into another couple,
> I can suggest that we stay where we are or suggest a slower timing or something else that
> will avoid a collision.  However, from a strength point alone, he could overcome this proposal 
> and we'd go crash.  So what makes him decide to listen when I do suggest a stop?  
> The fact that such a proposal from me is out of the ordinary. 

These proposals and suggestions come in all shades and strengths. It's
not an on/off proposition, and I'm sure many followers suggest without
even realising it (but if the leader maintains a good connection, *he*'ll
know).


 > If the first man alters his lead to encourage me to close more quickly,
> then I'm likely not going to resist.  Why?  Because it's also my responsibility 
> to make the dance enjoyable for him, as well, and to give him the chance to 
> give me his best dance. 

And because you understand that it still makes sense; if he'd try to
encourage you to do things that don't make sense or jar with the music,
consciously or inconsciously, your response would be different.

It's still something subtly negotiated between partners, and one of the
reasons the first dance with a stranger often isn't the most enjoyable
one of the tanda.

But we are in agreement - the follower must at times adapt to the whims
of his leader. You can't constantly fight to impose your view
of things or you're not going to enjoy yourself.

But I'd like to point out that what's good for the goose is also
good for the gander: it's not going to be pleasant for the follower
if you as a leader impose *your* views on timing etc. too much and
without any regard for subtle hints coming your way.

It's also cutting yourself off from new experiences: if you insist all your
followers bend to your will and preferences, you'll never experience the
joy of the unexpected.

> I've encountered too many women, who have this idea they can modify the 
> dance at will...

You're in a coalition government during the tanda, so you can't have
it your way without negotiating and convincing the other side. It's
bad thinking, just like thinking that you must submit to the will of the
other just because you're the follower.

That holds for both leader and follower.

> I find that more men are willing to work on their musicality than
> women and the results show.  Could be our regional differences.
> 
I'm sure that plays a part. Also, our pet peeves are probably different, so
we're bound to notice different things.