Tango and Gender Issues

Part One

A reader commented, "I have enjoyed reading your other thoughts so much, that I am very sad to read about your view of gender roles in tango. In my view, tango, as with any art, is a subjective and living thing. The ability to reassign roles to me is a progression. It affirms that the art can and does live and breathe in our contemporary world, which, for most of us anyway, rejects misogyny, rejects homophobia, and encourages empathy. The art will continue to be shaped by those who choose it and I agree completely that there is so much that can only be considered bastardization. But the exchanging of gender roles, the influence of LGBT, this represents the beauty of the art, not at all some kind of a decay. It shows that it lives in our time of changing gender roles and progress in human rights and understanding. And, in wonderful irony, reflects tango revisiting its roots (see The Alienation of Tango)."

I appreciate the comment but disagree with the commentator, and would like to explain my view on this issue more clearly because, in my opinion, gender roles is among the most important issues in tango. Tango will not be the same dance if gender roles are changed or reversed (see The Gender Roles in Tango).

I don't think the influence of LGBT and the transformation of gender roles can be simply seen as progress. Trend and progress cannot always be used synonymously. Although feminism and homosexuality are widely accepted in many Western societies at present, blindly following the trend may have unintended consequences. That tango is at odds with this trend may be a blessing to the Western world because through tango it is easy to understand how men and women can live together in peace and harmony, at least for most people. This doesn’t mean that some people may not have their own choice and that most people should not accept them. But some people should understand that their choice must not be the choice of all people. It is simply not true to say that those who do not make the same choice as they do are all misogynic and homophobic, and those who do not dance tango the same way as they do are all anti-progression.

The central matter being discussed concerns the purpose of sex. Individuals who hold the belief that sex is solely for pleasure argue that a person can engage in sexual activities with any consenting partner, regardless of their gender. From the perspective of liberalism and individualism, this is viewed as a matter of personal freedom; therefore, they advocate for society to not only acknowledge this as a right but also establish legal frameworks that enable individuals to freely adopt this lifestyle.

On the other hand, people who perceive sex as a responsibility associated with procreation and raising the next generation maintain that the aforementioned perspective and lifestyle are not beneficial for society and humanity as a whole. They argue that individualism is a flawed ideology because humans are not autonomous entities but rather interconnected and interdependent social beings. The pursuit of unrestricted personal freedom at the expense of society is ultimately detrimental to individuals themselves. The way we approach tango is not merely a matter of experimenting and exploring new things. It is about choosing a way to dance that aligns with our values and way of life (see Tango and Individualism).

Part Two

Although humans possess intelligence that allows them to intervene and manipulate nature, their short-sightedness hinders their ability to comprehend the long-term effects of their actions due to their limited lifespan. Modern humans lack recollection of events that occurred tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, or even millions of years ago. Monogamy, the practice of marrying one pair of non-blood-related man and woman, serves as a eugenic mechanism that benefits humanity's best interests. This institution is resulted from millions of years of human evolution, shaped by numerous positive and negative reproductive experiences. However, modern society has forgotten the validity of this institution, and alternative forms of marriage have become fashionable. But, no matter how smart humans are, what is of nature is still the soundest, most proper and most fit outcome, as it has undergone an extensive process of evolution, perfected little by little through natural selection in the millions of years of making. Human interventions, in contrast, tend to be revolutionary and experimental, often leading to catastrophic consequences.

Modern contraceptive technology is an example of such human interventions. Contraception changes human sexual behavior from that for reproduction to that for pleasure. Once this breach is made, a series of ramifications follow. Contraception leads to sexual freedom, which leads to the spread of pleasure-oriented sexual behaviors including homosexuality, which leads to the alienation of traditional marriage, which leads to the disintegration of monogamous families, which leads to the decay of the family-centered value system - a process that has already begun in Europe and North America. One ant hole could cause the entire dyke to collapse. If sex is just for pleasure, then there is no reason to ban homosexuality. If the ban on homosexuality is lifted, then why not that on bisexuality, transgender sexuality, group sex, incest, pedophilia, sodomy, adultery, prostitution, and every other form of pleasure-oriented sex? In many Western societies, legislations have been passed to allow same-sex marriage, which changes marriage from that between a man and a woman for reproduction to that between gays or lesbians for sexual pleasure. If sexual pleasure is a good reason for marriage, then why should marriage be limited to non-consanguineous adults? Why brother and sister, brother and brother, sister and sister, father and daughter, father and son, mother and daughter, mother and son, and other close relatives should not form a sexual relationship for the same reason? And why should marriage be limited to two persons? Why polygamy, polyandry and group marriage are outlawed? In fact, why is marriage even necessary at all if it is not for the reproduction and the best interests of the next generation? As long as procreation and children are not involved, a person choose to have sex with whom and with how many people is a personal affair. Following this logic, those who advocate sexual freedom claim that sex is a natural right that should not be limited to a monogamous relationship between a man and a woman. Such claims undermine the institution of marriage built upon millions of years of human reproductive practices.

But contrary to this liberal view, marriage is not an inherent right but a privilege granted to non-consanguineous adults of the opposite sexes exclusively, for it is related to the reproduction and upbringing of the next generation, hence the well-being of society as a whole. Various offbeat sexual relationships are contrary to the best interests of the species, therefore are prohibited by law - first by natural law in the prehistoric period for at least tens of thousands of years, followed by statute in the historical period for at least thousands of years. Societies that did not comply with this law have been eliminated in the natural selection process. Now, by means of contraception humans can enjoy the pleasure of non-consequential sex, open-minded people therefore start to advocate the lift of the ban. In the US, the LGBT and gay rights movement is surging. So far, sixteen states have passed same-sex marriage legislations. Homosexuality, bisexuality, adultery, sodomy and incest, which have never ceased to exist but previously were done in the closet, now start to enjoy some legitimacy and popularity thanks to these legislations. When such liberal ideas become the generally accepted norms, sexual freedom, the alienation of marriage, the destruction of the human eugenic institution, the disintegration of traditional families, the decline in quantity and quality of the population, and the replacement of the population by another population that complies with natural law are bound to happen. Such moral decay on a biblical scale is now occurring again in societies embracing liberalism, individualism and feminism. Modern Westerners have completely forgotten the lessons in human history that societies and civilizations withered because of this.

Part Three

While homosexuals are entitled to their basic human rights including the freedom to choose their sexual partners, we must recognize that widespread adoption of homosexuality could potentially harm the ability of a population to reproduce. Marriage equality, i.e., treating heterosexual relationship and homosexual relationship equally, thus blurring the distinctions between the two, is not a good idea in my opinion. It is another serious human intervention against nature. As mentioned above, marriage is a eugenic institution resulted from millions of years of human reproductive practices. It is a privilege that is granted exclusively to non-blood-related adult men and women for procreation. For the best interests of the human species, this privilege must be protected by law. Failure to do so can have serious repercussions.

The notion of "marriage equality" implies that gender and bloodline are irrelevant in forming a sexual partnership, that marriage does not have to be limited to a man and a woman, that every human person is entitled to have sex with anyone including those of the same gender and family, that it is ethical to have same-sex or bi-sex relationships with more than one sexual partner, that marriage is not a eugenic institution but only a lifestyle, that sex is only for pleasure with no social responsibilities attached, that procreation and upbringing of the next generation is not the function of marriage, that the healthy growth of children does not depend on the presence and joint efforts of both father and mother, that the welfare incentives intended to encourage marriage between the opposite sexes for procreation should also be extended to same-sex partnerships, and that individual rights, personal freedom, self-indulgence and self-interest are the only thing that matters. Can you imagine how these false ideas, if sponsored by the state, enforced by law, enhanced by politically motivated media coverages, TV shows, movies, popular literature, school education and workplace regulations etc. could influence the young minds and impact the future of humanity?

We know that introducing alien species may endanger native species, marketing genetically modified food may result in the reduction of natural food supply, promoting tango Nuevo may inhibit traditional tango, taking affirmative action may cause reversed discrimination, etc. Instances of this kind are too numerous to mention. It's human nature to be drawn to the new and abandon the old. People rush to follow what is fashionable and despise what is traditional. Those who question the new trend are blamed down, as if what has been proven is obsolete and not good anymore, but what is experimental is instead the cutting edge and progressive. If monogamy marriage as the eugenic institution were not protected, the disintegration of traditional families, the rise of same-sex marriage, gay families and single parent families, the reversed discrimination, and the decline in population quantity and quality would become inevitable.

More significantly, failure to protect traditional marriage will undermine the family-centered value system on which human civilization is built. The inherent, natural, interdependent, mutually supportive, complementary, and cooperative relationship between the opposite sexes is the cornerstone of all human relationships. From this relationship comes children, families, societies, and the subsequent moral and political systems that form the basis of civilization. In other words, it is through the most intimate reproductive relationship that people learn to love, trust, cooperate, and get along with each other. The decline of the family will have a disruptive impact on society because the weakening of family ties will exacerbate the spread of individualism with an emphasis on personal freedom, independence and self-interest while denying the interdependence and the need for cooperation and compromise among people (see Tango and Family Values). Feminism as a replica of individualism on gender issues opposes the interdependence of the two sexes, advocates women’s independence, encourages women to emancipate from family, to fight for their own rights, to be strong and aggressive like men, to compete with men, and not to be outdone by men, etc. Such radical propositions can only intensify the antagonism and confrontation between the two sexes and are not conducive to social harmony (see Tango and the Interdependence between the Sexes). The way to improve the relationship, as tango attests, is to be friendly, acceptant, kind, respectful, cooperative, agreeable, yielding, loving and accommodating to each other rather than being rejective, resentful, hostile, confrontational, aggressive, and uncompromising to each other. The recent government shutdown caused by refusing to make concessions serves as an alarming example of the impairment of such extremist ideologies (see The Lessons of Tango).

Part Four

Gay rights movement, feminism and individualism have an undeniable influence on tango. Feminism disapproves the surrender and obedience of women to men in tango, advocates that the woman should maintain her independence, that the man should propose instead of taking the lead, that the woman may choose how, when or whether to accept his proposal, that the woman is free to express herself and initiate her own steps, that the man must respect her autonomy, and that the woman may also lead the man or another woman, etc. Some authors write books to advertise this kind of ideas. Like-minded teachers also promote such ideas through their teachings, and students naively mistaking radicalism for progress blindly follow the trend, causing the alienation of tango and changing it from a dance in which the two sexes collaborate to achieve oneness and harmony, to a dance in which the two sexes are alienated and antagonistic, focusing only on personal performances.

I believe most people are not extremists. But living in a society that “rejects misogyny, rejects homophobia, and encourages empathy” few people can be completely immune to this kind of brainwashing. We often see beginners stick to the attitude that they have acquired over a long period of time, think of oneself as an independent individual rather than being in relationships with others, regard oneself not as part of the whole, and think of others as rivals, etc. Most people, after going through a period of learning, will gradually overcome such self-centered mindset and adopt a cooperative attitude consistent with tango. But there are people who cannot overcome individualistic mentality even after years of learning. Students of the contemporary age need to know that learning tango is adopting a new set of values different from the values of the world. The world is about competition and winning. Tango is about cooperation and harmony. The world believes that balance is gained through strength and power. Tango believes that balance is achieved through collaboration and accommodation. Tango is not about personal autonomy, independence, individual liberty and self-interest, but achieving unity, harmony and win-win results through cooperation (see The Freedom in Tango). The principles of tango such as surrender, obedience, yielding, agreement, collaboration, accommodation, complement and love, not only help the two partners to dance in unison, but also provide universal values for people to live together in peace and harmony.

Whenever cooperation is involved, division of labor is necessary. For example, in families men usually do more physically demanding tasks and women do more light chores. Such natural division of labor is based on the physiologies of the two sexes, not at all some form of discrimination. In tango, the man leads the woman and the woman beautifies the dance, which, too, is a natural division of labor based on the biological characteristics of the two sexes, not at all some form of gender inequality. Do you think it looks natural for a woman to lead a man and for him to embellish the dance? When you see a gal leads a guy, and the guy wriggles his body and twists his ass, pretending to be feminine, do you think that looks beautiful? You have seen couples of the same sex dancing wherein there is only femininity and no masculinity, or only masculinity and no femininity, do you think that is appealing? Tango is governed by the law of dance, not ideologies. I need not to repeat what has been dwelt upon in my other articles on gender roles. Please click the links if you haven't read them: The Gender Roles in Tango, Femininity and Feminism in Tango (I), Femininity and Feminism in Tango (II), Tango and Gender Equality, The Gender Expression in Tango, The Chivalty of the Milongueros, Tango and Gender Interdependence. I believe those who are not driven by narrow-minded and extremist ideologies will not find such division of labor discriminative against women. Male chauvinists use the division of labor between sexes as an evidence of male superiority and female inferiority, which is absurd. Feminists in turn want to abolish or reverse gender roles, which is equally ridiculous.

I believe tango is a good thing for the Western world. Real social progress is not radical, but rational, moderate, gradual and peaceful as nature is. Nature in its norm is not revolutionary but evolutionary, leading to coexistence, balance and harmony, the recognition of the connections of various things and the abandonment of radical ideologies like individualism, feminism, egocentrism and power politics, to communal interests rather than self-interest, integration rather than segregation, adaptation rather than antagonism, moderation rather than extremism, compromise rather than obstinacy, love rather than hatred, and peace rather than war. In other words, nature is in opposition to the extremist Western tendency against nature. Tango embodies the principles on how the two sexes as a unity of opposites can get alone with each other by the very nature of their being - mutual attraction, interdepencence, complement, accommodation, collaboration and love, which are the reasons of its popularity. Tango helps people understand the harm of hostility and the benefit of cooperation. It provides useful lessons for us to live together in peace and harmony, thus is conducive to true human progress (see The Spirit of Tango).