Things to consider when naming stuff.

[MEA CULPA: In my haste to write, I made commentary about fan dancing that, in retrospect, is not supported by the article or the facts. I feel crappy about it, I've pulled that section, and I submit my humble apologies to the readers who might have thought I've gone bloody mad.]

This news item came across my "raqs"/"bellydance" feed, and managed to pack so many bits of sterotyping in that it was painful to read.  Worse, the stereotypes came (so far as I can tell) not from the dligent report, but from the dancer interviewed:

A fifth-century favorite form of entertainment will be performed as Kisa Dance presents “Welcome to My Harem” on Saturday, July 12, in Memorial Park.
Kisa Dance, featuring 20 Kisa Girls with veils, will open with a dance to an opera in the free program at 7 p.m. at the band shell. The two-hour show features Egyptian, Spanish, cabaret, sword, zill and tribal dances, many set to popular music.
“There’s even a fan dance,” Carol La Bau said.

[...]

According to La Bau, traditionally, the belly dances were performed by Arab Islamic women, primarily for their own amusement and exercise, and were largely ignored by men. But outsiders viewed the dances and learned them, and when they traveled from Persia to Egypt after the fifth century, they continued to perform them. Belly dancing became public entertainment, often performed by Gypsies. The dance soon grew to be a favorite of Western performers.

Mmm.   Let's just tackle words and phrases:

Harem:  No, just no.  Harems are, in reality, places where women are cooped up and protected from the real world.  The only reason women dance there, is because they can't dance anywhere ese. This is a horrible model to emulate.

Fifth-Century Entertainment: Why do I have the horrible suspection that she's trying to talk about the Ghawazee? Does she realize that Persians aren't Arabs?  Is she saying these "outside observers" learned them in "Arabia", ended up in Persia, then moved to Egypt?  Verra confusing.

OK, guys. Let's tighten up this stuff. We already struggle with error-ridden commentary, no need to fuel the fire ourselves, right?