Except men did dance with each other, according to at least two dance historians I've talked to. If there was an abundance of men at a dance, they were welcome to dance together, rare though that might be. If there were *no* women (see also gold rush towns), then they would certainly dance together, half in drag.
Additionally, we have already warped so many vintage conventions --see also racial diversity, the fact that we use speakers, dance instructors choosing the dancers rather than first lady, and the fact that sets tend to be four or five couples rather than ten or twelve-- that the "oh we must do it to be HISTORICALLY ACCURATE" just doesn't hold water with me.
I refuse to be patient or graceful with people who behave in manners that demean me as a human being. That being said, I also choose not to interact with them as much as possible, which is why you will probably never see me at a Newport.
no subject
Additionally, we have already warped so many vintage conventions --see also racial diversity, the fact that we use speakers, dance instructors choosing the dancers rather than first lady, and the fact that sets tend to be four or five couples rather than ten or twelve-- that the "oh we must do it to be HISTORICALLY ACCURATE" just doesn't hold water with me.
I refuse to be patient or graceful with people who behave in manners that demean me as a human being. That being said, I also choose not to interact with them as much as possible, which is why you will probably never see me at a Newport.
~Sor