He Won't Be Fired — Page 3

SporkGoddess said: "Why? What is it that you are advocating at this point?

Again, that the production understands people's concerns but is taking extra steps to ensure that Amar's presence is not upsetting to the women in the production and that they know something will be done if he pulls anything with them. If they feel that is being met with their standard sexual harassment trainings, then make that explicit. Personally, I would also want them to take steps beyond just offering sexual harassment training, which is expected and standard at workplaces and doesn't exactly prove that a workplace will be safe for women.

I also really want a statement from Amar. Iknow he is limited in what he can say right now. But, as I've said a bazillion times in these discussions, maybe then don't cast him until the court case is over.

Part of the reason I'm so bothered about this productionis because they have done such a TERRIBLE job responding to the outrage. This is just another example of that."

Well, it's not about you and what you want, is it? This man has made an error in judgment - ONE error, for which he has apologized to the person involved. ONE incident. Go have a problem with Chase Finlay, who is the real villain here, if you must have a villain.

Could this be part of the reason that the show has such a long preview at over 2 months? Maybe they wanted a buffering period between “ opening “ and the official reviews being released, hoping that outrage would die down by the time the critics made their final evaluation.

Updated On: 2/14/20 at 05:08 PM

Luminaire2 said: "What has he done to make it up to Alexandra who has to always know that he stared at her photos without her consent? That he likely utilized those photos to do you know what in private. It’s gross, and he’s done nothing to make it right for her."



Enough of that talk. Stop it.

"Bravo" to "West Side Story" for standing by Amar. BRAVO

Updated On: 2/14/20 at 06:22 PM

Luminaire2 said: "What has he done to make it up to Alexandra who has to always know that he stared at her photos without her consent? That he likely utilized those photos to do you know what in private. It’s gross, and he’s done nothing to make it right for her."

Everything you say may be true, but I ask as I asked in the post the response to which you responded to: what is it that you are advocating? On whose behalf are you entitled to speak (other than your own, as can be manifested by protesting, boycotting and so on)?

sinister teashop said: "I didn't realize that Alexandra Waterbury has been actively involved in these protests in front of the theater. Although I agree with manyof the points brought up here thatcomplicate the issue, Waterbury's involvement and the weight it gives to these demonstrations seems to have gotten lost in many of the responses here."

Again, clarity would be nice. No one here is suggesting that what he did was ok. I don't think anyone here questions the right to protest. But there are two very important points being overlooked by the protesters.

First, they are asking the production to do something illegal: fire someone without cause. [I wonder how many here and in the protests would like to be fired without cause. And yes, it is without cause, because the law says so. Don't like the law? Lobby to get it changed, but the producers cannot change the laws. And this brings us to the second point, and that is highlighted by a quote in the linked piece: “Legality does not equal morality.” That is a true statement but a dangerously slippery slope. Gays have been fired because of "morality." Jews have been fired because of "morality." (among many others.) How many of you and those on the sidewalk have actually thought this through? I say again what I have said several times before. Think.

HogansHero said: "sinister teashop said: "I didn't realize that Alexandra Waterbury has been actively involved in these protests in front of the theater. Although I agree with manyof the points brought up here thatcomplicate the issue, Waterbury's involvement and the weight it gives to these demonstrations seems to have gotten lost in many of the responses here."

Again, clarity would be nice. No one here is suggesting that what he did was ok. I don't think anyone here questions the right to protest. But there are two very important points being overlooked by the protesters.

First, they are asking the production to do something illegal: fire someone without cause. [I wonder how many here and in the protests would like to be fired without cause. And yes, it is without cause, because the law says so. Don't like the law? Lobby to get it changed, but the producers cannot change the laws. And this brings us to the second point, and that is highlighted by a quote in the linked piece:“Legality does not equal morality.” That is a true statement but a dangerously slippery slope. Gays have been fired because of "morality." Jews have been fired because of "morality." (among many others.) How many of you and those on the sidewalk have actually thought this through? I say again what I have said several times before. Think."

This has to be one of the most well thought out and astute responses addressing this issue. So much the voice of reason amongst all the misguided noise that makes up much of this thread.

burymeincalamine said: "Amar has "resigned" from City Ballet, per the NYT article that featured statements with Alexa Maxwell. He will never dance there again. He wasn't wanted.West Side Story producers, take note."

This article?

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/31/arts/dance/amar-ramasar-west-side-story.html

Did you read it? Chase Finlay "resigned," and Amar "regained his job."

Luminaire2 said: "bk said: "SporkGoddess said: "Why? What is it that you are advocating at this point?

Again, that the production understands people's concerns but is taking extra steps to ensure that Amar's presence is not upsetting to the women in the production and that they know something will be done if he pulls anything with them. If they feel that is being met with their standard sexual harassment trainings, then make that explicit. Personally, I would also want them to take steps beyond just offering sexual harassment training, which is expected and standard at workplaces and doesn't exactly prove that a workplace will be safe for women.

I also really want a statement from Amar. Iknow he is limited in what he can say right now. But, as I've said a bazillion times in these discussions, maybe then don't cast him until the court case is over.

Part of the reason I'm so bothered about this productionis because they have done such a TERRIBLE job responding to the outrage. This is just another example of that."

Well, it's not about you and what you want, is it? This man has made an error in judgment - ONE error, for which he has apologized to the person involved. ONE incident. Go have a problem with Chase Finlay, who is the real villain here, if you must have a villain. "

They are both villains. Amar paid for Alexandra’s photos by sending his own stash. A transaction was made. He saw a persons girlfriend, a colleague, and girl he knows private body areas, and he paid to see it.


What has he done to make it up to Alexandra who has to always know that he stared at her photos without her consent? That he likely utilized those photos to do you know what in private. It’s gross, and he’s done nothing to make it right for her."

Is one photo a "stash?" No. As to the rest of your disgusting suppositions, they are just that - your own mind imagining stuff that you have no knowledge of ("That he likely utilized those photos to do you know what in private." - I mean, really).

sinister teashop said: "I think Alexandra Waterbury is a rather courageous young woman."



And I think Amar Ramasar is a rather courageous young man.

dramamama611 said: "<<edited by BWW staff>>

Again: no one thinks what he did was good, right, or admirable. We're just saying that people can/do learn from their mistakes, and deserve second chances.

I wouldnt judge any employer that considered his prior actions as part of the decision making. But people need to be able to work."

THIS.

Updated On: 2/15/20 at 08:51 AM

CT2NYC said: "I'm just wondering at what point Amar has grounds to file a lawsuit of his own. Being falsely labeled a workplace sex offender in an effort to get youfired from your job seems pretty criminal to me."

He can sue for libel, slander, tortious interference, or whatever, and whether he has grounds or not. Regardless, none of those things are criminal.