Hi,
I teach "not duck butt but not pelvic thrust", ie, a neutral pelvis instead of sticking out your butt.
Funny that the ad I'm seeing at the bottom of this page is for a "posture correcting" device. It looks like a cut-under-the-bust costume vest made of white ace bandages. I wonder how it would look sequined and with bedlah?
Did she/he give some kind of context as to why she/he thinks it is incorrect?
Generally I would say that feet under hips, soft knee, gently tucked pelvis, good overall upper body carriage, i.e. relaxed shoulders, rib cage not sunken... is the posture I use and teach as a spring board for a dynamic activity...
:shok:
I read that Bhuz thread - what's with flat foot mayas being evil! And whatever that tick-tock hips thing is? (?Soheir Zaki down hips? - we call them chonks which is so inelegant I can barely bring myself to write it..).
We've been learning a dance that has a section of just those moves - OMG am I trashing my spine here? Nothing hurts. The down hips move with a neutral pelvis on me doesn't seem to do much to my spine at all, it stays pointing straight down. I think if my pelvis is at all tilted back it turns into a bit of a tail wag which does feel like it might mess with the lower spine, same for mayas.
Aargh, flippin' internet-induced paranoia.
Yes, dance puts wear and tear on our bodies. But, if there are ways of doing what we want to do that reduce or mitigate wear and tear on our bodies, shouldn't we be open to learning about this?