Amar Ramasar (Jigger in CAROUSEL) suspended from NYCB over "inappropriate communications"- Page 3

[newintown]

Posted: 9/6/18 at 10:13am

AC126748 "LOL, yeah, you should totally be allowed to fantasize about raping your colleagues with impunity, so long as you do it through technology."

I wasn't aware that fantasies were now regulated by law. Are all thoughts now subject to legal action?

[singer234]

Posted: 9/6/18 at 10:16am

They were not thoughts, they were written words, and yes, they arguably can be subject to legal action.

[dramamama611]

Posted: 9/6/18 at 10:23am

Pigs.  They should all lose their jobs.....interesting that she is also suing the ballet company.

 

Good for her.

[ScottyDoesn'tKnow2]

Posted: 9/6/18 at 10:23am

Are you people only selectively reading and missing the part about where they secretly filmed a student at the NYCB and shared images and footage of a sexual nature to other members/employees of the company, to a pimp, and to a donor of the company? Are they not able to understand how those sorts of actions are harmful to the environment of a professional company that employs women who may also have been subject to these dancers' predatory behavior? How about the supposed lack of action taken by NYCB to curb that behavior and instead fostered an environment that made some dancers feel invincible so they could continue to harass and violate female dancers? Are they projecting their own fears and misconstruing what happened here? Have they also done something similar to this like filming people without their consent and bragging about it and sharing that footage with their friends thinking it's all good because it's only for a few laughs (and if they are gay, then it's all good because we're all men?) and now feel under attack?

This is beyond sexual fantasies in a private conversation that ONLY stayed in that chat among those parties. It was continued behavior that actually manifested itself into activities that harmed other people in the company and now the company itself AND it spread and expanded beyond that private chat.

Updated On: 9/6/18 at 10:23 AM

[AC126748]

Posted: 9/6/18 at 10:32am

newintown said: "AC126748"LOL, yeah, you should totally be allowed to fantasize about raping your colleagues with impunity, so long as you do it through technology."

I wasn't aware that fantasies were now regulated by law. Are all thoughts now subject to legal action?"

Straw man much?

We're not talking about private thoughts -- we're talking about words that were verbalized and tangibly put into writing -- not to mention someone sharing non-consensual photos of a sexual nature.

And I'd be hard-pressed to think of a company whose sexual harassment policy lets rape speech about colleagues slide because it's not technically illegal. The First Amendment doesn't mean a right to keep your private employment no matter what you say or do.

Updated On: 9/6/18 at 10:32 AM

[rjm516]

Posted: 9/6/18 at 10:33am

The thing I don't understand is that every news article is naming Amar and Zachary as the supporting characters on the text chain with Chase, and yet  no one has named the donor. Why is this guy anonymous - they are quoting whole texts he sent on the text chain, but no one is sharing his name? Is he that powerful? (I mean considering how big the Kochs are in the NYCB, i imagine so.) Other arts organizations should know who this big time patron is, he probably donates to lots of arts.

Updated On: 9/6/18 at 10:33 AM

[dramamama611]

Posted: 9/6/18 at 10:56am

Chase Finlay - it was in the articles I read. Like this one.

[Lot666]

Posted: 9/6/18 at 11:00am

The Distinctive Baritone said: "I didn't know there were so many straight male ballet dancers!"

I have to admit that I had the same reaction when reading this story. And I'm gay.

[newintown]

Posted: 9/6/18 at 11:03am

AC126748 wrote "Straw man much?"

Do feel free to blame others for your choice of words, but you did write sarcastically "...you should totally be allowed to fantasize about raping your colleagues with impunity..."

I merely responded to your words. It's unfortunate that you choose not to own them, but that's the state of American discourse today, dictated by our president, I suppose.

Also - fantasies (and discussing fantasies with sympathetic individuals) are not illegal, as proven by the distasteful case of Gilberto Valle. (I'm just discussing fantasies here, not acting on them, nor secretly filming sex acts with your partner and sharing them). We may, as individuals, find these fantasies abhorrent, and choose to have nothing to do with their owners.

What interests me in this thread and many like it, is how so many people who would go to their grave screaming about how hugely compassionate they are, would prefer to not just remove these people from their livelihoods, but seem to actually wish, down deep, to stone them, to destroy them completely, rather than work with them to find some sort of rehabilitation and healing. It doesn't surprise me, but it does interest me, much as the behavior of lemmings interests me.

Updated On: 9/6/18 at 11:03 AM

[Elegance101]

Posted: 9/6/18 at 11:03am

It must be so hard going to work with Ramasar now. I know Carousel closes in 10 days, but are some form of repercussions possible?

I feel for this girl. She is only 20 years old and having to face this. She has my full support and I hope these men face serious consequences.

[mariel9]

Posted: 9/6/18 at 11:16am

[Y]oudidwrite sarcastically "...you should totally be allowed to fantasize about raping your colleagues with impunity..."

I merely responded to your words. It's unfortunate that you choose not to own them, but that's the state of American discourse today, dictated by our president, I suppose."

Hmmm, so you left out the rest of the sentence, ". . . so long as you do it through technology." AC126748 obviously wasn't talking about fantasies that stayed in someone's brain. Maybe go away for awhile and consider why you want to misrepresent someone's words to defend abusive men.

[newintown]

Posted: 9/6/18 at 11:18am

"Hmmm, so you left out the rest of the sentence, ". . . so long as you do it through technology." AC126748 obviously wasn't talking about fantasies that stayed in someone's brain. Maybe go away for awhile and consider why you want to misrepresent someone's words to defend abusive men."

As pointed out above, fantasies, even shared ones, aren't illegal. Perhaps you should go away for awhile and muse on that?

[robskynyc]

Posted: 9/6/18 at 11:22am

ok. i didnt know the whole thing had to do with sexual stuff being filmed without peoples knowledge, etc. I can undeerstand now why they are reacting this way, it makes sense. My comment was based assuming the messages werent outright threatening anyone/doing anything illegal.

[Kad]

Posted: 9/6/18 at 11:25am

newintown said: ""Hmmm, so you left out the rest of the sentence, ". . . so long as you do it through technology." AC126748 obviously wasn't talking about fantasies that stayed in someone's brain. Maybe go away for awhile and consider why you want to misrepresent someone's words to defend abusive men."

As pointed out above, fantasies, even shared ones, aren't illegal. Perhaps you should go away for awhile and muse on that?"

And most workplaces would agree that talking with your colleagues about how you fantasize about raping someone is sexual harassment, unprofessional conduct, and just cause grounds for termination if you were to be discovered. Doesn't matter if it's illegal. And these dancers were foolish enough to do it in a way that left an inarguable written record.

 

Updated On: 9/6/18 at 11:25 AM

[AC126748]

Posted: 9/6/18 at 11:26am

newintown said: "What interests me in this thread and many like it, is how so many people who would go to their grave screaming about how hugely compassionate they are, would prefer to not just remove these people from their livelihoods, but seem to actually wish, down deep, to stone them, to destroy them completely, rather than work with them to find some sort of rehabilitation and healing. It doesn't surprise me, but it does interest me, much as the behavior of lemmings interests me."

I will never apologize for reserving my compassion, first and foremost, for those who were victimized and not the victimizers. End of story.

[ScottyDoesn'tKnow2]

Posted: 9/6/18 at 11:31am

newintown said: "What interests me in this thread and many like it, is how so many people who would go to their grave screaming about how hugely compassionate they are, would prefer to not just remove these people from their livelihoods, but seem to actually wish, down deep, to stone them, to destroy them completely, rather than work with them to find some sort of rehabilitation and healing. It doesn't surprise me, but it does interest me."

Restorative justice is actually a pretty hot topic in some legal circles. However, for people to even be open about it, the perpetrators have to not hide, not play victim, take actual responsibility for their actions and truly understand the harm that they caused to the victims and other people in the community. Also part of the healing process is dealing with initial anger and then letting people get over that initial anger (or even rage) so they can be mentally and emotionally open to forgiveness. You can't just bring it up when none of that has even occurred or there is no acknowledgement of the pain that they have caused or why their attitudes are actually problematic to a macro issue of attitudes towards women or other vulnerable people.

Anyway, my observation is that it seems some people bring that up only when it comes to sexual assault with female victims. Nobody brings up restorative justice models to other sorts of major crimes. I think it sort of goes to how seriously (or not) some people see sexual assault and acknowledge (or undermine) the damage that is inflicted not just to specific victims but to the types of people who are much more likely to be victims of sexual assault.

 

Updated On: 9/6/18 at 11:31 AM

[newintown]

Posted: 9/6/18 at 11:35am

Kad wrote, "And most workplaces would agree that talking with your colleagues about how you fantasize about raping someone is sexual harassment, unprofessional conduct, and just cause grounds for termination if you were to be discovered. Doesn't matter if it's illegal."

Yes, I know; I specified above "sharing fantasies with sympathetic individuals." 

[HighFlyingAdored97]

Posted: 9/6/18 at 11:37am

Well, I always preferred the far more talented dancers at ABT and their superior productions, but this vile story is even more cause to not spend money on NYCB tickets for the foreseeable future.

[newintown]

Posted: 9/6/18 at 11:38am

AC126748 wrote "I will never apologize for reserving my compassion, first and foremost, for those who were victimized and not the victimizers."

That then inspires the question, "do you support the American penal system, its approach to punishment, and the death penalty? Or do you support a philosophy of rehabilitation over revenge/punishment?"

[newintown]

Posted: 9/6/18 at 11:40am

ScottyDoesn'tKnow2 wrote "Also part of the healing process is dealing with initial anger and then letting people get over that initial anger (or even rage) so they can be mentally and emotionally open to forgiveness. You can't just bring it up when none of that has even occurred or there is no acknowledgement of the pain that they have caused or why their attitudes are actually problematic to a macro issue of attitudes towards women or other vulnerable people."

I disagree with that statement, but I appreciate your thoughtfulness and the way you state it.

[BrodyFosse123]

Posted: 9/6/18 at 11:46am

Iconic fashion photographer Terry Richardson and Chase Finlay.

Dirty Bird avec Dirty Bird.

[AC126748]

Posted: 9/6/18 at 11:46am

newintown said: "AC126748wrote "I will never apologize for reserving my compassion, first and foremost, for those who were victimized and not the victimizers."

That then inspires the question, "do you support the Americanpenal system, its approach to punishment, and the death penalty? Or do you support a philosophy of rehabilitation over revenge/punishment?""

You continue to ignore or elide whatever doesn't serve your argument. No one is talking about the U.S. penal system. That's quite a different matter than whether several individuals should keep their prestigious, high-profile jobs after acting in a manner that violates their private employer's policies.

[newintown]

Posted: 9/6/18 at 11:53am

AC126748 wrote "You continue to ignore or elide whatever doesn't serve your argument."

I have ignored nothing here.

You seem to continue to avoid answering direct questions (another rhetorical device employed by our president and other leaders). I'm interested in your philosophy of rehabilitation versus retribution. Most Americans prefer the latter, as we are, generally, a bloodthirsty lot, reveling in tearing people into tiny bloody shreds once the mob has condoned it.

Updated On: 9/6/18 at 11:53 AM

[Kad]

Posted: 9/6/18 at 12:06pm

newintown said: "Kad wrote, "And most workplaces would agree that talking with your colleagues about how you fantasize about raping someone is sexual harassment, unprofessional conduct, and just cause grounds for termination if you were to be discovered. Doesn't matter if it's illegal."

Yes, I know; I specified above "sharing fantasies withsympathetic individuals.""

It doesn't matter if everyone Finlay texted is a card-carrying, dues-paying member of the Rape Fantasy Club of America. They were members or patrons of the company and talking about students and other members of said company and passing it around- hell, and they included recordings and photos of people taken and shared without their consent. This isn't a thought crime and this isn't two consenting adults acting out a fantasy without consequence to anyone else- this a tangible action that involved others, and one that happened to violate the policies of their place of employment.

Not sure why you're choosing this hill to equivocate on.

[newintown]

Posted: 9/6/18 at 12:18pm

Kad wrote "It doesn't matter if everyone Finlay texted is a card-carrying, dues-paying member of the Rape Fantasy Club of America."

Legally, it does, as I pointed out above in the grotesque case of Gilberto Valle.

Look, like the ACLU says, defending rights isn't the same thing as liking actions. And again, I'm only responding here to the initial statement that individuals shouldn't be "allowed" to engage in fantasies that others consider disgusting. I'm not talking about secretly photographing/filming sex with your partner and sharing those images with others. 

If merely discussing gross fantasies with your buds (either verbally or in writing) were illegal, every group of bros in every bar in America would find themselves incarcerated (and many women as well).