Amar Ramasar (Jigger in CAROUSEL) suspended from NYCB over "inappropriate communications"

[AC126748]

Posted: 8/28/18 at 6:22pm

Just published in the New York Times: three principal ballet dancers with the New York City Ballet, including Amar Ramasar (Jigger in the current Broadway revival of Carousel), have been suspended after an internal investigation “determined that each man had violated the norms of conduct that New York City Ballet expects from its employees.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/28/arts/dance/in-city-ballet-shake-up-one-dancer-out-and-two-suspended.html?action=click&contentCollection=dance&region=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=sectionfront

[TheSassySam]

Posted: 8/28/18 at 6:32pm

Oh man, I hope they didn't fired for having something like Grindr. 

[Princeton2]

Posted: 8/28/18 at 6:44pm

the article reads like these were personal messages and not of a harrasing nature. seems to be dangerous territory that you can be suspended for private messages

[Elegance101]

Posted: 8/28/18 at 6:55pm

Princeton2 said: "the article reads like these were personal messages and not of a harrasing nature. seems to be dangerous territory that you can be suspended for private messages"

Did it say not of a harassing nature? Can’t thoroughly read it right now, and I’m not suggesting anything, but why would the person report them otherwise?

[JSquared2]

Posted: 8/28/18 at 6:56pm

I look forward to the upcoming NYCB production of The Crucible.

 

 

[Wick3]

Posted: 8/28/18 at 7:58pm

The article stated that the NYCB "received a letter alleging inappropriate communications made via personal text and email by three members of the company" and that the letter did not come from another member of NYCB. 

It's quite vague. Sounds interesting that one letter targeted these three men. 

[TotallyEffed]

Posted: 8/28/18 at 8:24pm

I don’t understand. If they want to send each other texts and emails what’s the problem?

[Sauja]

Posted: 8/28/18 at 8:36pm

If they’ve all been found to have acted inappropriately, can we not suggest that there’s no merit to whatever complaint there was since we don’t know the content or context of the complaint? This assumption that men who are disciplined are all part of some witch hunt is upsetting. We do not know the quality or content or context of what was shared. How can we make any judgment whatsoever?

[SomethingPeculiar]

Posted: 8/28/18 at 8:42pm

Could "inappropriate" behavior mean they were badmouthing NYCB or its executives in texts/emails? (Which is a lot different than the other types of misconduct that have been called out recently)

[Wick3]

Posted: 8/28/18 at 8:48pm

<<edited by BWW staff>>

lol but in the article it stated "The letter did not come from someone in the company." so can't be from a colleague.

Updated On: 8/29/18 at 08:48 PM

[BJR]

Posted: 8/28/18 at 8:57pm

There's nowhere near enough information to know, but likely it is sexual in nature given the off the record quotes from people in the company feeling these matters are being handled with extra sensitivity.

Whether there were unsolicited pics or possibly harassment or such, who knows beyond the company found it to be a liability.

[starcatchers]

Posted: 8/28/18 at 11:07pm

I don’t follow the other two on instagram, but many of Ramasar’s fellow company members (including his girlfriend) seem to be backing him.

[jimmycurry01]

Posted: 8/28/18 at 11:43pm

"Inappropriate communications" can mean a great many things. To assume anything about this without having any real information is irresponsible. To assume the communication was sexual in nature when you have no evidence to corroborate such an assumption, and then spread that assumption around like wild fire, is not only irresponsible, but possibly slanderous. Why not wait until you have more information before grabbing your torch and pitchfork? Later, if it proves the situation really does merit the angry mob, I will happily support your endeavours. Until then; wait, watch, and see.

[Elegance101]

Posted: 8/29/18 at 12:31am

Sauja said: "If they’ve all been found to have acted inappropriately, can we not suggest that there’s no merit to whatever complaint there was since we don’t know the content or context of the complaint? This assumption that men who are disciplined are all part of some witch hunt is upsetting. We do not know the quality or content or context of what was shared. How can we make any judgment whatsoever?"

Agreed. The article says "inappropriate."

[AC126748]

Posted: 8/29/18 at 8:05am

One of the dancers has already resigned from the company. The NYCB is the most prestigious ballet company in America, and one of the most prestigious in the world. You don't just walk away from a job like that if you think there's any hope that you'll be reinstated. The facts haven't been made public, but the internal investigation clearly found that there was credible evidence to suspend Ramasar and the others. 

[ScottyDoesn'tKnow2]

Posted: 8/29/18 at 9:21am

I think it's quite telling that the wording of the article gives no real information other than one dancer already resigning and the other two are suspended without pay until 2019 and the content was "inappropriate communications made via personal text and email" which were "personal in nature" and the company had determined that they "violated the norms of conduct that New York City Ballet expects from its employees." And yet people are so ready to make a judgment about how this a witch hunt or make a determination that nothing inappropriate went on and this is an overreaction. None of us know anything, but I would think if it was just innocent communication then the NYCB wouldn't have acted in the way that it did, they most likely wouldn't have been reported, and one dancer would not have resigned. Anyway, if it was no big deal, then at least wait for a follow-up piece that provides more details that says as such. I don't even know if the inappropriate behavior is sexual in nature.

Anyway, I do think there is some merit to people in the company providing support. However, from past experience and research in other cases where similar things happened, it's not unusual at all for friends and colleagues to jump to the defenses only for real stuff to come out and some realize just because nothing inappropriate happened to THEM doesn't mean it didn't happen to others. Some will still be defensive as some were still defending Larry Nassar in US Gymnastics until very late in the game and were part of the mob lynching the women gymnasts who came out. Again, I'm not saying this particular situation is sexual in nature the way it was for US Gymnastics, but it's not unusual for friends/colleagues to come out with aggressive defenses even if they really have no idea what happened. It happens all of the time.

Updated On: 8/29/18 at 09:21 AM

[rjm516]

Posted: 8/29/18 at 9:44am

I just want to ask you all to take a breath and a look at how rapidly the responses itching to support the men flooded in, how the typical responses of "but his girlfriend and friends support him" were made, how fast people jump to defend the men and assume the complainant is lying. Especially with yesterday's news about Louis CK returning to the stage and getting a standing ovation, just take a g-d breath AND LOOK. I bet the same people have at one time said "but why didn't they come forward earlier". 

[starcatchers]

Posted: 8/29/18 at 10:36am

rjm516 said: "I just want to ask you all to take a breath and a look at how rapidly the responses itching to support the men flooded in, how the typical responses of "but his girlfriend and friends support him" were made, how fast people jump to defend the men and assume the complainant is lying. Especially with yesterday's news about Louis CK returning to the stage and getting a standing ovation, just take a g-d breath AND LOOK. I bet the same people have at one time said "but why didn't they come forward earlier"."

 

Woah. I absolutely never said that the complainant was lying. I’m simply stating an observation that in his particular case I saw an almost immediate response to his defense. I actually agree with ScottyDoesntKnow that the actions taken and the fact that one has already resigned is quite telling. 

[SueBee06]

Posted: 8/29/18 at 3:23pm

rjm516 said: "I just want to ask you all to take a breath and a look at how rapidly the responses itching to support the men flooded in, how the typical responses of "but his girlfriend and friends support him" were made, how fast people jump to defend the men and assume the complainant is lying. Especially with yesterday's news about Louis CK returning to the stage and getting a standing ovation, just take a g-d breath AND LOOK. I bet the same people have at one time said "but why didn't they come forward earlier"."

Thank you for saying that. I was reading the thread and was shocked at the response (although I really shouldn't be by now). FWIW, suspensions without pay for a whole year makes me think whatever happened was serious.   

[natashalost]

Posted: 8/29/18 at 3:40pm

If the terrible acting and mediocre singing hadn't already done him in, Amar Ramasar can kiss any kind of future on Broadway goodbye. 

Updated On: 8/29/18 at 03:40 PM

[OnBroadway4]

Posted: 8/29/18 at 3:41pm

Two simple statements:

We don't have enough information.

Innocent until proven guilty.

Both side on here are absolutely right. Yes, many jumped to the defense of the dancers. because the information is so vague and doesn't really tell us much. However, others quickly jumped to the defense of the NYCB stating well if someone resigned and others are suspended it's for not for nothing. And I say, well you're both right. If they were suspended, it's for a reason. However, we don't know what those reasons may be and just because they were suspended does not make them guilty. Things need to be investiagted and determined. Plus, we don't know the nature of these suspensions or what exactly happened. We are all working on assumptions, so technically no one is wrong and no one is right.

[EllieRose2]

Posted: 8/29/18 at 4:16pm

Innocent until proven guilty does not apply.  They screwed up, and one ran away like a child and didn't even say anything, and the other two were suspended this season. This isn't a legal matter or a court of law.  Their punishments were already doled out.  It's done.  

[AC126748]

Posted: 8/29/18 at 4:34pm

We don't have enough information.

No. Information hasn't been released to the public. There's a difference.

[Dave28282]

Posted: 8/29/18 at 4:47pm

I really wonder between which people these "inappropriate communications" were.

I mean, if it were communications of bad-mouthing one of the producers/directors to a third party, I can imagine that's not professional.

The other way around, if one of the directors/producers is being indiscrete about private encounters or anything private on personal apps, possibly sexual in nature, that indiscretion is unprofessional too.

I have seen people being fired from shows before, with the reason being somebody in charge losing face. Which can turn very ugly. In the 2 cases I have witnessed it actually had to do with sexual nature.

[JSquared2]

Posted: 8/29/18 at 5:19pm

EllieRose2 said: "Innocent until proven guilty does not apply. They screwed up, and one ran away like a child and didn't even say anything, and the other two were suspended this season.This isn't a legal matter or a court of law. Their punishments were already doled out. It's done."

 

That is an idiotic statement.  Please note that I am calling the STATEMENT idiotic, and not saying that you. EllieRose2, personally are an idiot for saying it (since that would be against the rules and I would never do anything like that)!