Alexandra Waterbury Instagram Post — Page 3

I am very much against cancel culture and viewing this sort of thing from a black and white framework. I'm not telling people to boycott the production. I'm saying that I personally would boycott it for this reason and explaining why some of us are angry about this casting. It basically says that casting this man is more important than minimizing the discomfort of women. I concede that he may not have apologized because of the ongoing legal situation, but maybe that's another reason for him to lay low until this is over.

Again, he's in the public eye. And this sort of behavior impacts all women as a whole, even if it doesn't affect us personally. Men sharing nude photos of women, unless explicitly and affirmatively consensual, is NOT okay. And what if someone Amar had shared the photo with had posted it to the internet? From what I've seen in discussions about this (not this thread specifically), people seem more upset that she took the photo than that Amar shared it.

“ . I concede that he may not have apologized because of the ongoing legal situation, but maybe that's another reason for him to lay low until this is over.“

Isn’t that precisely what he’s doing by not commenting, setting his social media settings to private, and just showing up to work and doing his job? Or do you mean he shouldn’t be working? How long should somebody accused of viewing and sharing pornographic material be banned from working?

SporkGoddess said: "My understanding of the facts is that the nude photos sent by Amar Ramasar were consentually taken by not consentually distributed."

This is actually quite ambiguous. I re-read Ramasar's instagram post, and he never said that he sent the photos with his girlfriend's consent. Waterbury's amended complaint alleges that his girlfriend did not consent because Ramasar texted something along the lines of his girlfriend getting pissed (paragraph 97). The text itself is unclear if it's referring to getting pissed that he sent her photos or getting pissed that he's receiving photos of other women.

Waterbury's original complaint however does add some context, but the sentence structure is so bad it reads like Finlay sent the "she might get pissed" text instead of Ramasar. The original complaint states that Finlay and Ramasar exchanged several photos of ballet members (which I took to mean more than one NYCB dancer). Ramasar then texts the "[my girlfriend] might get pissed" text, to which Finlay offers to share with both Ramasar and his girlfriend. There's no indication that Finlay sent anything to Ramasar's girlfriend.

The amended complaint removes this context. The amended complaint now also specifically says the pictures exchanged were of a corps member and Waterbury. We know this corps member is Ramasar's girlfriend. As far as the amended complaint goes, Ramasar only received photos of Waterbury and not other NYCB dancers, and Ramasar only sent photos of his girlfriend and not other NYCB dancers.

We don't know if Ramasar told his girlfriend that he received photos of Waterbury or if he obtained her consent before he sent photos of her. If the original complaint is to be believed, one could infer that Ramasar and his girlfriend has a kind of relationship where Finlay felt comfortable enough to make that kind of offer. It's also possible that Finlay's offer was a joke, but the original complaint treats it unironically.

As far as publicly available information goes, this is what we have to go on to judge if Ramasar's girlfriend consented to having her photos sent or not. The fact that his girlfriend stands by him isn't proof that the photos he disseminated were sent with her consent. Similarly, we have no strong evidence that his girlfriend did not consent to her photos being sent to Finlay. What is clear is that Waterbury did not consent to Finlay sending her photos to Ramasar.

How about the general public realising that if they are stupid enough to allow someone to take nude pictures of them or are willing to send nude pictures of themselves to other people this stuff is going to happen...

Impossible2 said: "How about the general public realising that if they are stupid enough to allow someone to take nude pictures of them or are willing to send nude pictures of themselves to other people this stuff is going to happen..."

Victim blaming. Adorable. But.....nope. You have absolutely no clue what actually happened in this case. Nothing at all. Then again, your're another man inserting himself in a conversation even though you know zero about what actually happened.

XX

In the articles I read in the New York Times, all the women refused to dance with him at NYCB, which is part of the reason he was fired. There were concerns when he came back, as well. And if you are referring to Sara, they broke up.

I don’t know how they feel nor is it right for anyone to assume how they feel, but I imagine that a guy with a lot to lose, everything to prove, and who just went through counseling on how to act in a professional and inclusive environment is probably acting very professional."

You would think that. However, going through counseling just to get your job back doesn't necessarily mean he learned a thing except how to be more careful. That frat boy mentality doesn't leave men like him. He's on his best good boy behavior at this new job though!

If only he had respected women his whole life instead of just starting that last May......

LuPita2 said: "He has made a young women mortified and humiliated."

So "mortified and humiliated" that she has taken to social media to talk about it? So "mortified and humiliated" that she traveled cross-country to talk about it at a Forum?

No one. That is why I said what I said which was "doesn't necessarily mean he learned a thing".