Hubbry Logo
Dancing banDancing banMain
Open search
Dancing ban
Community hub
Dancing ban
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Dancing ban
Dancing ban
Dancing ban
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
German Public announcement banning dance and public entertainment events in 1914

Dancing bans are legal or religious prohibitions against dancing, which have been applied at various times in various jurisdictions around the world. This article deals with general bans on recreational and artistic dancing, as opposed to bans on erotic forms of dancing such as lap dancing and topless dancing, which have been more common.

[edit]

Tanzverbot is the German term for "dancing ban". In Germany and Switzerland, dancing on some holidays is banned by most state or canton governments. These occasions are certain Christian and secular holidays aimed at mourning or contemplation, such as Good Friday, All Saints' Day (from its association with All Souls' Day practices) or memorial days like Volkstrauertag. The German and Swiss dancing bans prohibit public parties, but not dancing in one's private residence.

Until 1999, an ordinance in Pound, Virginia required that dance hall permits not be granted "to anyone who is not a proper person, nor to a person who is not a person of good moral character". After community opposition to granting him a permit, a lawsuit by William Elam, owner of the Golden Pine restaurant, resulted in the ordinance being struck down as unconstitutionally vague and infringing on free expression protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. A replacement ordinance drafted more narrowly prompted a 2001 lawsuit from Elam, though the restaurant later went out of business after revocation of its alcohol license.[1][2]

Since 1926, the New York City Cabaret Law prohibited dancing in all spaces open to the public that sold food and/or drink with the exception of those who obtain a cabaret license. This law was still enforced until it was repealed in 2017.

Between 1985 and 2002, a Seattle, Washington law called the Teen Dance Ordinance enacted strict legal requirements for those wishing to have dancing by youth under the age of 21, effectively banning events that would feature young people dancing.

Historic bans

[edit]

From the 1830s to 1950s, play parties became popular in the United States of America as a means to circumvent restrictions on dancing.

The events of the 1984 film Footloose were inspired by a dancing ban in the heavily Southern Baptist town of Elmore City, Oklahoma, which lasted until 1980.

Finland banned dancing in December 1939 following the outbreak of Winter War, with the ban lasting until the signing of the Moscow Armistice in 1944 that ended Finnish participation in World War II. Dancing in restaurants continued to be banned until 1948. Finnish people were organising secret dances that in turn were raided by the police, with at least 2 people dying during the raids.[3]

COVID-19 public health measures

[edit]

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the Australian jurisdictions prohibited, among other things, dancing[4] as part of a suite of public health measures designed to prevent close contact between potential spreaders of the virus.

Religious bans

[edit]

Christianity

[edit]

A few Christian groups believe that dancing is either inherently sinful or that certain forms of dancing could lead to sinful thoughts or activities, and thus proscribe it either in general or during religious services, particularly in the Anabaptist (chiefly Conservative Anabaptist and Old Order Anabaptist denominations) and Methodist (chiefly denominations belonging to the conservative holiness movement) traditions.[5][6]

The Church of the Nazarene, a Methodist denomination originating in the Holiness Movement, recommends against "All forms of dancing that detract from spiritual growth and break down proper moral inhibitions and reserve."[7]

A 19th-century Catholic theologian similarly teaches:[8]

There are balls which are gravely licentious, either on account of immodest dances or of the costumes and dresses introduced at them. In these no one should take part. Even modest dances are rarely without danger, and a Christian should not frequent them from choice and of his own free will.[8]

Many Christian churches determine doctrine locally and may be non-denominational, and these vary on their stances on social dancing.

In contrast, some strains of Charismatic Christianity practice rituals in which the Holy Spirit is believed to cause spontaneous dancing, among other behaviors.

It is a common misconception that Mormonism has banned dancing, when in fact it has advocated dance and participated in recreational dancing since it was organized in 1830. Founder Joseph Smith hosted dances in his home, and dancing continues as an integral part of youth and adult activities in the Church.[9] Currently and in the past leaders in the largest denomination of Mormonism have looked down on dancing that includes any full-body contact, is suggestive of any sexual behavior, and/or has same-sex romantic overtones.[10][11]

Islam

[edit]

In Islam, extreme Salafists and Wahhabis consider dancing in general to be haram (forbidden).[12] Conservative Islamic and Orthodox Jewish traditions prohibit contact between men and women in public (especially those not married to each other), and thus in these societies men and women either dance separately or not at all.

In contrast, Sufism encourages dancing, for example Sufi whirling and dancing to celebrate Mela Chiraghan. This has resulted in conflict in areas influenced by the Taliban.[13]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Dancing ban

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Dancing bans are legal prohibitions on dancing imposed by governments, religious authorities, or local communities, primarily to uphold standards, prevent perceived social vices, or address practical exigencies such as wartime resource conservation and safety. These measures have recurred across history and regions, often sparking resistance when viewed as infringing on personal liberties, with circumventions like structured play parties emerging in restrictive American Protestant settings from the to to evade outright dancing taboos. Prominent examples include the 1898 ordinance in , which forbade public dancing on moral grounds to curb rowdiness until its repeal in 1980 amid student-led challenges, later inspiring the 1984 film . In Europe, enacted a nationwide dancing ban in December 1939 at the Winter War's onset, extending intermittently until 1944 to bolster national focus and mitigate nightlife-related crimes, though it inadvertently fueled illicit gatherings. Similarly, Sweden's post-World War II regulations requiring permits for venue dancing—effectively limiting the practice—persisted until legislative reforms proposed in 2023 aimed at easing bureaucratic controls. Bans on specific dances, such as the 19th-century papal condemnation of the for its intimacy or prohibitions against and for indecency, highlight recurring tensions between evolving social norms and elite-driven decency campaigns. These prohibitions underscore causal links between dancing and heightened risks of disorder or in certain contexts, yet empirical critiques often note their limited , as underground persistence or policy reversals demonstrate adaptive over imposed restrictions. Controversies frequently center on disparities and cultural suppression, with wartime edicts like Germany's curtailments of public amusements—including dance events—to prioritize mobilization efforts exemplifying utilitarian trade-offs.

Historical Bans in Western Societies

In 17th-century , the Puritan-dominated enacted restrictions targeting public dancing as part of broader efforts to suppress perceived immorality. In 1644, an banned dancing, labeling it a "Heathenish vanity, generally abused to and wickedness," with the practice remaining prohibited until the Restoration of Charles II in 1660. Under Oliver Cromwell's (1649–1658), authorities further curtailed recreational activities, closing theaters, suppressing public music, and frowning upon "pointless enjoyment" including folk dances associated with holidays and ales. These measures reflected legal enforcement against communal festivities like ales and Morris dancing, which involved rhythmic group movements. In colonial , passed a law in 1646 prohibiting dancing and gaming in ordinaries (public houses or taverns) to prevent disturbances and moral lapses. While outright bans on private or mixed-sex dancing were not universally legislated, Puritan authorities regulated public venues strictly, with ministers like decrying "profane and promiscuous dances" in 1684 as gateways to sin, influencing local enforcement. Dancing persisted in elite society but faced opposition in stricter New England settlements, where courts occasionally fined participants in unsanctioned gatherings. By the 19th and early 20th centuries, localized legal bans emerged in the United States amid temperance and moral reform movements. In , dancing was forbidden in public spaces starting in 1898 on grounds of promoting vice, remaining in effect until challenged in the 1980s. enacted a 1925 ordinance banning public dancing on Sundays to uphold Sabbath observance. New York City's 1926 Cabaret Law required licenses for venues permitting dancing, effectively restricting unlicensed public dance amid Prohibition-era concerns over speakeasies and disorder, with the measure lasting until 2017. In , periodic legal restrictions persisted into the modern era, often tied to holidays. German states enforced bans on public dancing during Easter weekend and under national law, limiting it to private settings to maintain , a practice rooted in 19th-century regulations. required permits for public dancing year-round, viewing unregulated movement as prone to chaos, with enforcement dating to early 20th-century venue laws. Swiss cantons like similarly prohibited dancing on religious holidays until voter-approved repeal in 2025, reflecting longstanding state-level codes.

Bans in Non-Western and Colonial Contexts

In colonies in , such as , colonial authorities imposed bans on indigenous dances perceived as culturally subversive or morally lax. King enacted legislation in the early 16th century prohibiting the batuku dance, a traditional Cape Verdean form involving rhythmic clapping, singing, and hip movements, alongside the funaná style, which featured and guitar accompaniment; these prohibitions stemmed from efforts to suppress expressions deemed "too n" and incompatible with European Christian norms. Enforcement persisted through the colonial period, with dancers facing arrests or fines, reflecting broader strategies to erode local cultural practices in favor of imposed hierarchies. Similar suppressions occurred in other colonies, where European powers curtailed communal dances to disrupt social cohesion and facilitate administrative control, though explicit legal bans varied by territory. In non-Western , Japan implemented restrictions on dancing amid modernization pressures. In June 1925, police authorities curtailed "social dances" at public venues due to apprehensions over the moral corruption of youth by Western-influenced ballroom styles, limiting operations to specific hours and requiring permits; this reflected nativist concerns about cultural dilution during the Taishō era's social upheavals. These measures, enforced until the post-World War II occupation lifted them, prioritized social order over imported leisure forms, illustrating how non-Western governments adapted European moral panics to local contexts without religious framing. Colonial bans extended to indigenous practices in settler contexts, such as the of Indian Offenses enacted in 1883, which criminalized Native American ceremonial dances like the Sun Dance and as threats to assimilation and ; violators faced imprisonment or loss of rations, with the policy rooted in federal efforts to dismantle tribal structures. Though unevenly applied until formal repeal in , these prohibitions persisted through executive orders and agent enforcement, underscoring causal links between dance suppression and colonial resource extraction by eroding communal resistance. In Canada, amendments to the from 1884 to 1951 similarly outlawed potlatches and sun dances, with penalties including jail terms, as part of parallel assimilationist agendas. At the onset of in , German local authorities enacted immediate prohibitions on public amusements, encompassing dancing, to redirect societal focus toward and preserve public order amid the national crisis. Such measures, exemplified by a municipal decree in Uetersen prohibiting öffentliche Lustbarkeiten (public entertainments), reflected broader wartime patterns where recreational gatherings were curtailed to prevent distractions from the and potential unrest. During , imposed a nationwide dancing ban starting in December 1939, shortly after the Soviet invasion triggering the , which persisted through the until its lifting in December 1944, with restaurant dancing restricted until 1948. The policy aimed to uphold moral standards, particularly by curbing perceived threats to women's chastity and loyalty to frontline soldiers, viewing public dancing as incompatible with wartime sacrifice and societal stability. Enforcement involved police raids, resulting in thousands of prosecutions—predominantly young women aged 15 to 20—fines, and occasional prison terms, including at least two fatalities during interventions, though dance instruction in schools remained permitted. In , public dancing faced prohibition under a pre-surrender law extended by the collaborationist regime, framing it as frivolous amid occupation and conflict, with the ban enduring until after liberation in 1945 when suppressed dancing resumed vigorously. Similar temporary curbs occurred in occupied , where Nazi authorities restricted jazz-influenced dances to suppress cultural dissent, though outright bans varied by region and were often tied to broader controls on public assembly during crises. These wartime restrictions typically lapsed post-hostilities, distinguishing them from enduring moral or religious prohibitions, as governments invoked them pragmatically to conserve resources, monitor populations, and sustain collective resolve against existential threats.

Contemporary Public Health and Regulatory Measures

In response to the pandemic, several jurisdictions enacted temporary prohibitions on recreational dancing in public venues as a non-pharmaceutical intervention to mitigate viral transmission risks associated with physical exertion, close proximity, and increased from breathing and shouting. These measures targeted nightclubs, weddings, and events where dancing could facilitate superspreader scenarios, with authorities citing evidence from epidemiological models showing heightened infection rates in enclosed, high-density settings involving rhythmic movement. In , from September 2020, regulations under the Health Protection (, Restrictions) (No. 4) Regulations prohibited in hospitality venues, with fines up to £1,000 imposed on premises allowing it, except for limited exemptions like couples' first at weddings; this complemented caps on music volume at 85 decibels to reduce vocalization. Similarly, Italy's August 2020 decree banned outright in discotheques and outdoor areas amid a case resurgence, framing it as essential to enforce in environments prone to crowding. In the United States, Ohio's November 2020 health order, signed by the Department of Health, restricted mass gatherings by banning dancing at events including weddings—permitting only ceremonial first dances—to curb linked infections, as daily cases exceeded 7,000 statewide. Australia's reinstated such prohibitions in January 2022 during the wave, barring dancing and singing in pubs, clubs, and festivals for fully vaccinated attendees, with Premier justifying it as a targeted response to hospital strain despite prior reopenings. These restrictions, typically lasting weeks to months, were lifted as rates rose and case burdens eased—e.g., England's "Freedom Day" on July 19, 2021, ended dance curbs alongside other mandates—reflecting a precautionary approach prioritizing over empirical long-term efficacy data on dancing-specific transmission. Post-pandemic, no widespread bans persist, though some locales retain venue licensing tied to crowd safety protocols informed by COVID lessons.

Religious Prohibitions

Prohibitions in Christianity

Early Christian leaders, including Augustine of Hippo, cautioned against dancing, associating it with pagan rituals and moral laxity, advising that no devout Christian should participate. Medieval church councils and saints, such as those compiling florilegia of condemnations, frequently decried social dancing as akin to "madness" or originating from demonic influences, leading to its exclusion from religious rituals by the 13th century in Catholic practice. In Protestant traditions, particularly among , prohibitions were more stringent and enforced legally in colonial settings. Puritan ministers in published An Arrow Against Profane and Promiscuous Dancing in 1684, decrying mixed-sex dancing as a gateway to immorality and fornication. In , such views translated into arrests, as seen in 1772 when Abiel Wilson was prosecuted for dancing in . This opposition stemmed from equating with , prompting bans on public festivities including celebrations under Puritan-influenced parliaments in 1644 . Catholic teachings have distinguished between forms of , permitting religious or variants while condemning those promoting sensuality, such as masked balls or immodest attire, without a universal ban on dancing itself. Liturgical dancing remains prohibited in Western Catholic Masses, viewed as performative rather than participatory . Some traditionalist Catholic sources extend cautions to embrace-involving dances like the , citing risks to . Biblical references provide no explicit prohibition on all dancing; positive instances include Miriam's celebratory dance after the Red Sea crossing (Exodus 15:20) and David's before the Ark (2 Samuel 6:14). However, prohibitions in Christian thought often invoke New Testament principles against lustful thoughts (Matthew 5:28) or actions drawing undue attention to the body (1 Corinthians 7:1-3), interpreting secular or intimate dancing as preludes to fornication. Certain Protestant denominations, including some Presbyterian and Churches of Christ groups, have codified such views, with 1937 Presbyterian manuals condemning dance for fostering late nights and health risks alongside moral perils. These stances persist variably among evangelicals, where dance is often discouraged to avoid perceived sexual stimulation, though not uniformly banned across denominations.

Prohibitions in Islam

In Islamic , dancing is not explicitly prohibited in the , which instead emphasizes modesty, avoidance of lewdness, and prevention of actions leading to (fornication) through verses such as Surah An-Nur 24:30-31, instructing believers to lower their gazes and guard chastity. Prohibitions derive primarily from s and scholarly interpretations associating dancing with potential moral corruption, effeminacy in men, or arousal of base desires. For instance, a narrated by describes the Prophet Muhammad observing Abyssinians performing spear dances in the but advising her to watch from behind a curtain, interpreted by many scholars as permitting passive observation under strict conditions but discouraging active participation, especially by women or in mixed settings. Orthodox scholars across major schools of thought—Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi'i, and Hanbali—predominantly deem dancing haram (forbidden) when it involves free mixing of unrelated men and women, provocative movements, or musical accompaniment, viewing it as a gateway to fitnah (temptation) and imitation of pre-Islamic or non-Muslim practices. Imam Al-Ghazali (d. 1111 CE) condemned dancing as leading to immorality, while Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 1328 CE) rejected it outright, even in non-mixed contexts, due to its association with frivolity and deviation from solemn worship. Shia scholars similarly prohibit public or mixed dancing, with Iran's post-1979 codifying it as a punishable by fines, , or flogging under laws enforcing haya (). Enforcement has varied historically and geographically. During the (750-1258 CE), while private entertainment including dance existed in courts, public displays were curtailed under stricter rulers to align with religious norms. In contemporary theocracies, Afghanistan's regime banned all forms of dancing from 1996-2001 and reinstated prohibitions after 2021, citing hadith-based aversion to idle amusements. maintained a de facto ban on public dancing until partial relaxations in 2017-2019 under Vision 2030, though conservative fatwas persist against it as bid'ah (innovation). Exceptions exist in limited forms: same-gender dancing without lewdness may be tolerated by some jurists, as in women's private celebrations, and Sufi practices like the whirling of Mevlevi dervishes (originating in 13th-century ) are defended as spiritual (remembrance of ) rather than , though condemned as heretical by Salafi and Wahhabi scholars. Scholarly disagreement underscores interpretive flexibility, with permissive views (e.g., certain Shafi'i opinions allowing modest movement) outweighed by prohibitive consensus in authoritative councils, prioritizing causal links between dancing and societal moral decay over cultural expressions.

Prohibitions in Other Religions and Indigenous Traditions

In , mixed dancing between men and women is prohibited to safeguard against physical contact and immodesty, drawing from the biblical command in :6, "None of you shall approach to any that is near of kin to him, to uncover their nakedness," as interpreted by authorities like the Hida and . This restriction persists rigorously in most Orthodox communities, though some permit non-contact forms in modern contexts. Additionally, rabbinic decree forbids , thigh-slapping, and dancing on and Yom Tov, based on the Mishna in Beitza 36b, to prevent activities resembling labor or necessitating musical instrument repairs, which violate observance; Sefardi poskim generally enforce this strictly, even for celebratory mitzvot. Buddhist precepts discourage dancing as a distraction from and detachment, particularly under the observed by lay practitioners on days (typically four times monthly), which explicitly require abstention from "dancing, singing, music, and shows" to avoid sensory indulgence leading to attachment and suffering. The portrays dancing as akin to "madness" or frivolous excess, with advising in the Sigalovada Sutta to cease such activities for spiritual progress, a view echoed in monastic rules prohibiting that fosters craving. While not an absolute ban for householders, traditions emphasize moderation, and excessive engagement is seen as unskillful, potentially hindering enlightenment; variants may tolerate cultural dances if not hedonistic. In , no canonical texts impose a blanket prohibition on dancing, which features prominently in sacred forms like , rooted in the as a path to divine expression; however, certain ascetic or reformist strains, such as those influencing the 19th-century anti-nautch movement, critiqued eroticized temple performances by devadasis as morally lax, leading to colonial-era bans rather than inherent religious doctrine. Similarly, the Anand Marga sect faced a 2004 Indian injunction against public dances deemed disruptive, but this reflects legal rather than scriptural interdiction. Indigenous traditions worldwide typically integrate dancing as a vital element for communal bonding, healing, and , with internal prohibitions rare and context-specific—such as taboos against performing sacred dances outside ceremonial purity or by unauthorized individuals—rather than wholesale bans; external impositions by colonizers, like the U.S. Religious Crimes Code of 1883 outlawing Sun Dances and Dances to suppress cultural resistance, or Canada's provisions from 1876 curtailing potlatches and dances, highlight coercive assimilation over endogenous restrictions. In some groups, potlatch-related dances carried social penalties for misuse, enforcing reciprocity, but these served regulatory functions within thriving performative traditions.

Rationales for Bans

Moral and Social Order Justifications

Moral justifications for dancing bans have historically emphasized the activity's capacity to erode personal virtue and incite sexual immorality, particularly through mixed-gender interactions that lower inhibitions and promote lust. In , argued in his 1684 pamphlet An Arrow Against Profane and Promiscuous Dancing that such dancing violates the Seventh Commandment by encouraging undue familiarity between sexes, fostering pride in appearance, and emulating heathen practices, all of which threaten the godly moral order of the colony as a "." Similarly, contended that dancing distracts from spiritual duties, cultivates vanity, and defiles the body as the temple of the Holy Ghost, drawing on biblical precedents to link it causally to broader sins like . These arguments posit a direct causal chain: physical proximity and rhythmic movements in dancing kindle passions that, absent restraint, lead to and familial breakdown, undermining the essential for individual and collective righteousness. Antidance proponents extended this to violations of multiple commandments, including , viewing dancing as a profane that prioritizes carnal desires over . Social order rationales framed bans as safeguards against chaos arising from vice-fueled disorder, positing that public dancing disrupts gender separations, promotes , and erodes hierarchical by allowing unrestrained mingling across classes and sexes. Jacob Ide, writing in 1818, described balls as generators of "undesirable feelings" that foster societal and contradict disciplined community life, while B.M. Palmer in 1849 deemed social dancing incompatible with Christian profession, arguing it unravels the ethical cohesion needed for stable governance and productivity. By suppressing such practices, bans were seen to preserve familial structures and , preventing the cascade of associated ills like drunkenness and that destabilize social hierarchies.

Health, Safety, and Practical Concerns

Historical fires in dance halls and nightclubs have underscored significant safety risks associated with crowded dancing environments, prompting regulatory responses that restricted or prohibited such activities in non-compliant venues. The 1942 Cocoanut Grove nightclub fire in Boston, where 492 people died due to flammable decorations, revolving doors that jammed, and insufficient exits, led to nationwide adoption of stricter building codes emphasizing panic hardware on doors and improved egress paths in assembly occupancies. Similarly, the 1940 Rhythm Club fire in Natchez, Mississippi, killed 209 in a wooden dance hall with inadequate ventilation and exits, contributing to enhanced fire safety standards for public entertainment spaces. These incidents demonstrated how rapid fire spread in confined, densely packed areas with moving participants exacerbates casualties, resulting in licensing requirements that often deterred informal or unregulated dancing gatherings. Injury risks from vigorous or crowd-based dancing styles have also justified targeted prohibitions. Following a 1986 concert by the Dead Kennedys at the , where 23 students were injured—including one with a broken ankle—authorities banned "slam dancing" to mitigate physical harm from and collisions in mosh pits. Empirical data on dance-related injuries indicate high incidence rates, with professional dancers experiencing overuse injuries like stress fractures from repetitive motions exceeding five hours daily, though public bans focus more on collective hazards in uncontrolled settings. Public health rationales for dancing bans emphasize disease transmission in close-proximity, high-exertion gatherings. During epidemics, such as the 1918 influenza pandemic, many U.S. cities imposed temporary prohibitions on public dances alongside other assemblies to curb respiratory spread, as evidenced by heightened ventilatory volumes and aerosol generation from synchronized movements. Contemporary analyses of COVID-19 risks in dance settings confirm elevated infection potential from prolonged proximity and shared air, reinforcing historical precedents for such measures. Practical concerns include enforcement challenges and secondary disturbances from dancing events. In , a longstanding ban addressed issues like excessive noise and disorderly conduct post-event, particularly when alcohol was involved, straining local resources for . Some ordinances, such as Fort Smith's 1953 dancing , invoked broad public welfare clauses citing risks to safety and order, though these often intertwined with rationales. Overall, these factors prioritize verifiable hazards over unrestricted access, with regulations adapting to from past incidents.

Criticisms and Challenges

Arguments from Individual Liberty and Cultural Expression

Advocates for individual liberty contend that dancing bans exemplify governmental or institutional overreach into consensual, victimless conduct, contravening foundational principles of personal autonomy. John Stuart Mill's harm principle, outlined in (1859), posits that coercive interference with individual actions is justifiable solely to avert harm to non-consenting others; dancing, as a private or social recreation without inherent victimization, falls outside this threshold, rendering prohibitions arbitrary moral impositions rather than necessary safeguards. This reasoning underscores bans as paternalistic, prioritizing subjective ethical judgments—often rooted in religious or puritanical doctrines—over of societal detriment, with no data linking unregulated dancing to measurable harms like increased crime or disorder in permissive contexts. Legal challenges in liberal jurisdictions reinforce this view by framing dancing as protected under freedoms of expression and association, though courts have applied varying scrutiny. In the U.S., while recreational social dancing has not consistently qualified as intimate or expressive association warranting strict protection—as in City of Dallas v. Stanglin (1990), upholding age restrictions in dance halls—total prohibitions invite broader scrutiny for curtailing recreational liberties without compelling state interests. Analogous First Amendment precedents on expressive conduct, such as those affirming marginal safeguards for non-obscene dance forms, bolster arguments that outright bans exceed regulatory bounds, especially when motivated by moral disapproval rather than neutral public welfare concerns. From the standpoint of cultural expression, dancing prohibitions are assailed for eroding intangible heritage and communal identity, transforming state or religious edicts into tools of homogenization. Historical U.S. policies, including the Religious Crimes Code of 1883, explicitly outlawed Native American dances and ceremonies like the Sun Dance, prompting indigenous resistors to decry them as violations of religious liberty and assaults on traditions vital for storytelling, healing, and social cohesion; Santee leader Edward Blacksmith lobbied in the late , asserting that such restrictions denied rations-irrelevant cultural imperatives central to tribal survival. Canada's , amended in to prohibit "dances, shows, or feasts" under penalty, similarly suppressed potlatches and other gatherings, fostering arguments that these measures constituted cultural suppression by dismantling embodied practices that encode and values across generations. Critics maintain that such interventions, whether colonial or theocratic, prioritize uniformity over diversity, ignoring dance's empirically observed roles in fostering resilience, , and non-verbal communication indispensable to human societies. In the , numerous local dancing prohibitions, often tied to temperance movements and concerns over during alcohol consumption, were repealed in the late as industries advocated for economic viability and cultural normalization. For example, in 1994, the city of Trumann, , ended a 21-year-old ordinance banning dancing in venues serving alcohol, reflecting a broader trend where municipalities either formally repealed such rules or ceased enforcement by the to accommodate growing demands. A landmark case occurred in New York City, where the 1926 Cabaret Law—enacted amid Prohibition-era efforts to curb vice by requiring special licenses for dancing in establishments—prohibited dancing in unlicensed bars and restaurants, affecting over 80% of the city under later zoning codes. Legal and advocacy challenges, led by groups like the Brooklyn Night Market and small business owners, argued the law created unequal barriers, disproportionately impacting minority and immigrant-owned venues through selective enforcement and high compliance costs. These efforts culminated in the City Council's 2017 repeal of the core cabaret provisions, followed by the full elimination of residual zoning bans on dancing in commercial spaces in June 2024, enabling freer operation of nightlife spots without prior regulatory hurdles. In Sweden, a dance permit system originating in 1919 public order laws—intended to prevent moral disorder and alcohol-related disturbances—required venues to obtain government approval for organized dancing, with violations punishable by fines. Despite a unanimous 2016 parliamentary vote to abolish the requirement, bureaucratic inertia kept it in legal force and sporadically enforced until Justice Minister Gunnar Strömmer proposed its final removal in November 2022, citing its obsolescence; the parliament approved the repeal in March 2023, allowing spontaneous and licensed dancing without prior permits and aligning with public sentiment that viewed the rule as an outdated relic. Societal shifts toward repealing dancing bans have paralleled , the commercialization of leisure, and emphasis on individual freedoms over collective moral oversight, particularly from the mid-20th century onward. In Western contexts, the rise of youth-oriented , including rock 'n' roll and in the –, eroded religious and puritanical resistances, fostering underground circumventions like U.S. "play parties" from the 1830s to that substituted singing for banned dances. These changes, driven by empirical observations of harmless social benefits and economic gains from entertainment districts, diminished the causal link once posited between dancing and societal decay, prioritizing over precautionary rationales.

References

  1. https://nordics.info/show/artikel/the-dancing-ban-in-finland-during-world-war-ii
  2. https://www.merriam-webster.com/wordplay/your-grandparents-dirty-dancing-banned-dances-from-history
  3. https://www.vice.com/en/article/laws-against-dancing-nightlife-history-timeline/
  4. https://www.npr.org/2023/01/16/1149375138/sweden-to-end-a-decades-old-dance-ban
  5. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/jan/13/dancing-ban-france-wartime-schweitzer
  6. https://www.christiantoday.com/news/the-little-known-story-of-how-victorian-christians-re-invented-may-day
  7. https://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/stuart-england/life-in-england-under-oliver-cromwell/
  8. https://www.efdss.org/learning/resources/beginners-guides/47-british-folk-customs-may/3417-the-puritans
  9. https://www.colonialsociety.org/node/2030
  10. https://windsorhistoricalsociety.org/dancing-in-puritan-windsor-and-the-present/
  11. https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1006&context=thea_etds
  12. https://charleshstewart.com/blog/countries-that-banned-dance/
  13. https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/swiss-democracy/religious-holiday-dance-ban-lifted-by-swiss-canton/90081425
  14. https://face2faceafrica.com/article/batuku-the-famous-cape-verde-dance-banned-by-colonizers-for-being-too-african
  15. https://theafricanhistory.com/2773
  16. https://www.critical-stages.org/13/dances-of-africa-from-lived-experience-to-entertainment/
  17. https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2025/06/04/japan/history/dance-curfew-communist-purge-sato-funeral-aum-shinrikyo/
  18. https://nativephilanthropy.candid.org/events/religious-crimes-code-of-1883-bans-native-dances-ceremonies/
  19. https://www.dwherstories.com/timeline/inventing-the-crime-of-dancing
  20. https://oxfordre.com/religion/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780199340378.001.0001/acrefore-9780199340378-e-776
  21. https://www.facebook.com/groups/socialdistancepowwow/posts/1209534729457529/
  22. https://www.facebook.com/felifromgermany/posts/today-is-good-friday-or-karfreitag-in-germanthe-term-karfreitag-has-roots-in-old/1074550507816945/
  23. https://lifeonlalune.com/2016/05/09/8th-may-1945-end-of-a-war/
  24. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/24/world/europe/italy-dancing-ban-coronavirus.html
  25. https://www.route-fifty.com/management/2020/11/ohio-bans-dancing-weddings-curb-covid-19-spread/170078/
  26. https://djmag.com/news/english-pubs-face-1000-fines-allowing-dancing-or-playing-music-above-85-decibels-new-law-states
  27. https://www.forbes.com/sites/siladityaray/2022/01/07/no-singing-or-dancing-at-public-venues-australian-state-reinstates-pandemic-restrictions-as-omicron-upends-living-with-covid-approach/
  28. https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/i-want-dance-london-clubbers-cheer-end-covid-restrictions-2021-07-19/
  29. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-02-24/covid-restriction-on-dancing-eased-amid-adelaide-festival-season/13186450
  30. https://www.patheos.com/blogs/anxiousbench/2017/02/dance-church-history-complicated-footloose/
  31. https://amishcatholic.com/2020/05/17/a-florilegium-of-the-saints-on-dancing/
  32. https://sb.rfpa.org/the-christian-and-dancing-1/
  33. https://collections.americanantiquarian.org/dance/opposition.htm
  34. https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04618b.htm
  35. https://www.catholic.com/qa/no-ban-on-ballroom-dancing
  36. https://www.catholic.com/qa/is-liturgical-dancing-permitted-at-mass
  37. https://www.traditioninaction.org/Cultural/C085_Dan.htm
  38. https://www.gotquestions.org/Christian-dance.html
  39. https://gbntv.org/the-truth-about-dancing/
  40. https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1067&context=thea_etds
  41. https://islamqa.info/en/answers/9290
  42. https://www.facebook.com/groups/1272540949815834/posts/1613001579103101/
  43. https://dancemagazine.com/dance-in-iran/
  44. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Islamic-arts/Dance-and-theatre
  45. https://www.alislam.org/book/quest-of-curious-muslim/why-is-dancing-forbidden-in-islam/
  46. https://thewayofsalafiyyah.com/2017/02/04/sayings-of-the-scholars-of-islaam-condemning-the-soofi-raqsdancing/
  47. https://aboutislam.net/counseling/ask-the-scholar/morals-manners/dancing-allowed-not/
  48. https://www.christiancentury.org/article/2012-08/are-muslims-allowed-dance-depends-who-you-ask
  49. https://schechter.edu/is-mixed-dancing-really-forbidden-at-weddings/
  50. https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/mixed-dancing-in-judaism/
  51. https://outorah.org/p/27230/
  52. https://ph.yhb.org.il/en/01-22-18/
  53. https://www.ou.org/holidays/files/Shiur-231-Dancing-and-Clapping-on-Shabbat-and-Yom-Tov.pdf
  54. https://www.buddhisma2z.com/content.php?id=93
  55. https://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?t=44127
  56. https://studenttheses.universiteitleiden.nl/access/item%253A2711225/view
  57. https://tidsskrift.dk/nnjlsr/article/download/111057/160142/227205
  58. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/3501706.stm
  59. https://indigenousdance.ca/en/renewal/prohibitions/
  60. https://www.ictinc.ca/blog/the-potlatch-ban-abolishment-of-first-nations-ceremonies
  61. https://commonplace.online/article/an-arrow-against-profane/
  62. https://www.loc.gov/collections/dance-instruction-manuals-from-1490-to-1920/articles-and-essays/western-social-dance-an-overview-of-the-collection/antidance-literature/
  63. https://www.history.com/articles/the-tragic-story-of-americas-deadliest-nightclub-fire
  64. https://www.firerescue1.com/safety/past-disasters-drive-advances-in-fire-safety
  65. https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/sports-injuries/common-dance-injuries-and-prevention-tips
  66. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8242892/
  67. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/24/arts/dance/safety-protocols-dance-coronavirus.html
  68. https://www.startribune.com/forgotten-duluth-dancing-ban-up-for-repeal/600118703
  69. https://www.yahoo.com/news/why-dancing-sundays-used-banned-213215001.html
  70. https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/nude-dancing/
  71. https://you.stonybrook.edu/undergraduatehistoryjournal/2022/09/28/we-dont-want-your-rations-we-want-this-dance-native-american-dance-and-the-battleground-for-native-identity/
  72. https://www.npr.org/2017/11/04/561942585/what-new-york-city-has-in-common-with-footloose
  73. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/30/nyregion/new-york-cabaret-law-repeal.html
  74. https://www.6sqft.com/new-york-city-officially-lifts-dancing-ban/
  75. https://www.thelocal.se/20221116/sweden-could-finally-scrap-its-historic-ban-on-spontaneous-dancing
  76. https://www.thelocal.se/20230313/watch-that-scene-an-end-to-swedens-ridiculed-dance-permit-rule
  77. https://apnews.com/article/sweden-government-e0542960cfe612350af6051ef878396d
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.