Ages

[Michelle V]

annie wrote :
> > I've tapped into a couple of the local trans newsletters and let
> > people know about DLV, but it is still the older crowd that responds.
>
> One "reason" for older people at TG events, one which I've heard since the
> 1970s and always assumed to be at least partially true, is that older folks have more
> disposable income and more free time, so they are the ones who are most likely to
> have the means to attend.
>
> What this does not explain is the "upward creep" in average age that our
> event has seen since about 2010 or so.

That's easy. Recession hit gen-x and millennial gurls hard and they have much harder time affording it.

[External Poster]

This posting is from: Melissa Reed
----------

I think it takes time to afford a wardrobe, wigs all the girly stuff one
needs.

Then it takes time to become the person you really are.

I come to diva with my wife and we do a few events, but we do a lot of
things on our own, you can have fun in Vegas no matter what what age you
are.

I think you are doing fine, and look forward to next time


----------
(This posting was entered by Melissa Reed, an external user of MyDLV.)

[External Poster]

This posting is from: JoAnn
----------

Yes, Dionne, what you state I feel has great merit.... and the need for
an effective Diva Leadership Succession Plan.

I say, with a sincere commitment, we need to get several of your
suggestions to be a reality for next year.

Organizational [infrastructure] needs to target membership on
committees, asked of our attendees to serve on assignments, and
solicitations of prior attendees to join in organization conversations
will expand inclusiveness for those names you mention and others we
should be including....

A great sag-way into 2017...

Thanks so much for sharing your thoughts... JoAnn


----------
(This posting was entered by JoAnn, an external user of MyDLV.)

[External Poster]

This posting is from: annie
----------

Some of the questions that we need to answer are along the line of if we
have a need (or desire) to attract more younger attendees, and if so,
what do we need to adjust in order to better attract the younger folks?

Two opinions have been voiced in the last few days regarding the first
question above:

> Frankly I like it the way it is and I am not the slightest bit
> interested in being in competition with any convention or
> conference to try to beat their attendance numbers.

.. and ...

> I'm fine with the age range the way it is. Of course I'm still
> younger than your average but not for long.

I have yet to hear anything along the line of "yes, we should actively
pursue more younger attendees" or words to that effect.

(That's a HINT! Speak up, please! And please elaborate.) :)

Where I personally stand is that I want to make our event available and
welcoming to all who identify with our theme, with no age barriers other
than our recently-modified minimum age of 21.

If we are to tweak things to better appeal to younger attendees, I do
not want this to be at the expense of our long-time loyal attendees,
many of whom have been with us for over a decade.

> Could this mean in the long run that the older ones among us stop
> going to DLV due to loud rock bands Rap music taking over

I do not envision, and I certainly do not want to see the intentional
"pushing out" of activities which remain popular. We've always had
multi-track options, and if someone wants to coordinate a rap show, then
all the better. There can be other options on the schedule as well.
. . . . . . . . . .

Now, let's discuss some of the recently-raised talking points ...

> I honestly heard one criticism of DLV as, its that older group
> that only goes out to expensive sit-down dinners every night.

I admit that there is some truth to this. Our dining activities in
recent years have most definitely been skewing toward the higher end,
price wise that is.

Ya know why that is? It's because that's what our volunteers have been
planning! Since our workforce is comprised of volunteers, meaning that
they do what they want and they don't do what they don't want, it's very
difficult to plan lower-end dining activities if nobody wants to
coordinate them.

This suggestion came to us in feedback:

+Perhaps the nightly dinners could be set up for a certain interest
+or age group, as opposed to the preference for food type or location.

I would be very interested in hearing some examples (general or very
specific) as to what dining venues would be more of interest to the
lower age groups.

If we look at the age distribution at our dining activities, we do find
that Nora's Cuisine, Guy Fieri's, Hash House a Go-Go, Hofbrauhaus,
Ricardo's, Bahama Breeze and Off The Strip all had age ranges lower than
our overall average.

And yes, Morton's, Center Cut, and Ruth's Chris all had age ranges
higher than our overall average.
. . . . . . . . . .

> My suggestions start by creating new two openings at the Board
> level for < 45 yrs.

Some clarifications here and some opinions about what really goes on at
the "Board" level. By "Board" I assume you mean either the PM Team
and/or the Admin. Committee.

As one who currently serves in both of the above groups, I can say very
confidently that very little in the way of key binding decisions happen
in those groups.

The Project Management Team is basically tasked with keeping things
moving and keeping efforts coordinated.

The Admin Committee does mostly behind-the-scenes work, which is very
streaky (very irregular workload) and when it happens it often consists
of things that nobody else would care to do.

Over the past 15 years or so, all of our key decisions have always been
made by the Volunteer Group ("ORG") and the highest level of authority
in DLV is the ORG members who currently have voting status.

Our overall strategy and culture are under the control of the ORG group.

Anyone in ORG is able and encouraged to bring up and discuss about any
items which have to do with the way we run our event. In cases where we
don't have a consensus on something, we vote on it.

So, if we're going to be doing any tweaks to better serve those of
younger ages, ORG is where that effort has to be started.

If nobody takes the initiative, nothing will happen!

> I would nominate Vivian Chen, Megan Grey and Stacy James, as examples.

Two of the above are members of ORG, and one has voting status. However,
it's really up to them (or anyone else who wishes to see those efforts
happen) to speak up and get things going.

We'll be starting up the ORG discussions in July with the addition of
the new volunteers and yes, one item that's on the slate for discussion
is the follow-up of these discussions here regarding attendee age.

And, if anyone wants to get involved and have a say in all of this, our
Call For Volunteers is still open. Just reply to this item and say "I
Volunteer" or words to that effect. :) We'll get you added.

Now nothing prevents us from forming additional committees or task
forces, but the volunteer principle and the priority principle are still
in play. Those individuals need to volunteer to serve in such a
capacity.
. . . . .

> Our SO attendees are so important to who we are. We need to
> include them in the mix. Give them a voice by adding a SO Rep
> to the Board.

I count five SOs currently on the ORG roster and three of these have
voting status. One of these is a genetic male SO. Our SO contingent is
very well represented and has been since the very early DLV days.

Same as above. If measures are to be taken to increase SO involvement,
they or somebody else who sees this as a priority needs to step forward
and take action.

This has been brought up several times in ORG in recent years but no
real action has been seen.

One reason given for this was along the line of that in recent years,
the SOs no longer fit the stereotypical mold of the years-ago "Spice"
type SO. It's been my observation that most of our current SOs would
rather participate as part of the group in general, rather than hang
around with other SOs.

Which leads us to the next point ...

> One new activity idea to come out of this might be an all SO
> luncheon. This needs to be led from the top.

We used to do this in years gone by. This started about 2000 or so and
continued until about 2011 or so.

IIRC we had a few of them which were quite well attended, but most
tended to be small groups with only a fraction of the in-town SOs
participating. I remember that one at Crown and Anchor turned out very
well and another at maybe Claim Jumper (??? help me out here ???) but in
recent years there has not appeared to be that much in the way of
interest.

These kind of morphed from "SO only" affairs to "SOs and partners"
things and then to "SOs and partners with all welcome" types of things.

All it takes to get these started again, in any form, is for someone to
volunteer to do them.

It was also reported to me by a SO some years ago that she was very
surprised (shocked might be a better term) :) :) that we had such an
eclectic mix of SOs, such as male SOs, TG-TG couples, etc.

Another point I clearly remember, made by one SO some years ago, was
that often times SO gatherings (like those which occur in support
groups) tend to be real downers, and this particular SO did not want to
see anything like that at DLV.
. . . . .

> I really enjoyed meeting Gurls from across the pond. I suggest we
> include a Foreign Relations Rep on the Board.

Question here, to all. Do we have a need or a desire to attract more
foreign and overseas attendees to our event?

Even if the answer to that is no, could we be doing a better job in
serving those who come from other lands to our event?

We've had overseas attendees with us since 1998. One of our more active
volunteers throughout our history comes from overseas and did quite a
bit to help us through some very rough times in the early 2000s.

Looking quickly at the ORG roster, I immediately recognize four as
non-US residents.

We can certainly bring up the topic of international relations when we
start up the ORG group again in July.
. . . . .

> That's easy. Recession hit gen-x and millennial gurls hard and they
> have much harder time affording it.

Interesting theory. I don't know. The "knee" of the age curve seems to
hit in 2012, about four years after the Great Recession started, so I
really can't tell.

> I think it takes time to afford a wardrobe, wigs all the girly
> stuff one needs.

Yes, those of lower age tend to have less disposable income, but one
observation I've had for some time regarding the younger (20-40) TGs I
know is that most of them are very casual, often time leaning toward
androgyny in dress and less likely to desire fancy (and expensive)
garments.

Comments on any of this, gang? :)


----------
(This posting was entered by annie, an external user of MyDLV.)

[External Poster]

This posting is from: Shannon
----------

I don't totally get what you're going for as an end result but I've been
following this because we had some of the same discussions in our
support group a while ago. We're seeing younger girls who come once and
do not join. Mostly older girls (I'm 49) as the core members.

We talked about having special events that younger girls would like but
no one seems to know what that would be. We talked about more outdoor
thngs like hiking and volleyball but nothing got any support.

Interesting is that I'm grouped with the younger Diva girls. The times I
went to Diva I always felt average in age.

The one special event we try to do each month is supper at a friendly
restaurant and we always invite the younger girls but they never show
up. Same thng with the bar after meetings. It's all older girls.

One thing definitely, the younger girls do not dress up. They dress very
gender neutral and usually wear no makeup. They don't have the urge to
dress up or to go out and do things dressed, like lots of the girls that
go to Diva do.

Diva is very expensive. Very expensive. Last time I went to Diva I was
there the whole week and I took $3000.00 out of savings and hardly had
any left at the end. Younger girls can't afford it. The younger girls I
know are either in school or if they are lucky they work a low pay job
like telemarketing or restaurant. Many are on unemployment or some kind
of assistance. Or worse, sex work to survive. No way they can afford
Diva.

Sorry I can't give you all any suggestions. I think it's combination of
expense and no urge to dress up that keeps the younger girls away.


----------
(This posting was entered by Shannon, an external user of MyDLV.)

[annie]

> I don't totally get what you're going for as an end result

We're just trying to brainstorm around the topic of ages, specifically the "greying" of our attendee base over the last several years and the comments we've been getting that younger attendees are in the minority.

"Do we have a need or desire for more younger attendees?" and "How can we tweak things to better serve younger attendees?" are the two Big Burning Questions I would like to hear answers to.

> Interesting is that I'm grouped with the younger Diva girls. The times I
> went to Diva I always felt average in age.

That age of 50 for the re-run of the survey data was somewhat arbitrary. It's a nice round number and roughly corresponds to the first quartile. I do think it gave us some valid data to discuss and work on.

> One thing definitely, the younger girls do not dress up. They dress very
> gender neutral and usually wear no makeup.

My observation, for the most part, is quite similar.

> They don't have the urge to dress up or to go out and do things dressed,
> like lots of the girls that go to Diva do.

I might generalize this stating that the younger folks do not show as much of a need for "organized opportunities to dress" as those of the boomer generation did and still do.

> Diva is very expensive. Very expensive.

In all of my now 20 years of doing DLV, this is the first time I recall hearing this remark!

> Last time I went to Diva I was there the whole week and I took
> $3000.00 out of savings and hardly had any left at the end.

As Gina said, this number sounded very high to me too, and when I read this I pulled up the "total cost of ownership" numbers from the recent year's surveys, and the $3000 figure is actually in line with what was reported this year.

That number was running in the $1900-ish range for a few years and then jumped to $2800-ish this year, an increase I mainly attributed to far more overseas attendees this year than in recent years.

However, I must admit that DLV is not as affordable for the middle-class attendee as it used to be. In recent years we've particularly been hearing complaints about the cost of meals at the venues we've selected.

Since the Great Recession eased off, the cost of LV hotel rooms has risen sharply, compounded by such things as that stupid "Resort Fee" and (fasten yer seat belts!) the impending parking fees at many Strip resorts, which appear to be of some significance!

> Younger girls can't afford it.

The two factors that have always come up when discussing the relative lack of younger people at TG (and other) events are the fact that those early in their careers have less disposable income and less available time off.

I think we can add to that list the diminishing need for organized opportunities to dress.

> Or worse, sex work to survive.

That is very sad! It's one thing that many of us in the TG community are not aware of, and if we are we do not do much about it. One local (to me) counselor who has worked with the homeless community has told me that those we see at DLV and other TG events make up the very very tip of the iceberg, so to speak, and that many members of the TG community are below the poverty line or worse!

Sorry to end this on a downer.

[Michelle V]

Also the internet. More getting together online and less getting together real world. Young gurls are glued to their phone's for chat and text.

[External Poster]

This posting is from: Vera Delmar
----------

We may have to come to the realization the Diva Las Vegas is only an
older ladies event since the younger T-gals aren't interested in
dressing up nor can afford the trip and expenses incurred by those
attending. Their world is quite different from our world although we
have common concerns.

Vera


----------
(This posting was entered by Vera Delmar, an external user of MyDLV.)

[External Poster]

This posting is from: Vera Delmar
----------

> "Do we have a need or desire for more younger attendees?"

> "How can we tweak things to better serve younger attendees?"

1. No
2. Nothing

I vote for keeping it as is.

Let the younger ones conform to what Diva has been and not Diva conform
to cater to the younger crowd. Eventually the grey folks will stop
coming for various reasons i.e. health, death, etc.

In the meantime the younger ladies are learning how Diva operates and ,
they can keep it going or let it fall by the way side....which probably
won't happen because after all we are the best TG event. Right?

P.S. The Wild Side event seems the correct fit for the younger gals, and
these older gals that still want to be young and get wild. I like to get
wild but I'll get wild with an older crowd.

Vera


----------
(This posting was entered by Vera Delmar, an external user of MyDLV.)

[annie]

> Also the internet.

> More getting together online and less getting together real world.

I find this observation almost kind of ironic. I don't know if you and many of the others are really aware of this, but DLV was actually started by those who began friendships on line and finally decided to try to get together in real life.

I remember that the conversations that led toward the first gathering, the first DLV back in May of 1997 started in the fall of 1996. Many don't even realize this but there was quite an active on line community back then, and many TG folks were involved in it.

No, it wasn't the oh-so-trendy social media that we see today but we had active gender-oriented conferences on Usenet and Fidonet and there were several very popular (some of them for pay) sites and BBS's for the TG community such as TG Forum.

What brought the original DLVers together was Internet Relay Chat, which I might describe as "Chat rooms long before the term 'room' was thought of." IRC was around in the late 1980s but the TG community seemed to discover it around 1992 or so. I can distinctly remember Ginger and Michelle (LOL, "one of the other Michelles", the one from NZ) being on line on that particular IRC channel. I know there are others I am not thinking of.