Jump to content
This Site Uses Cookies. If You Want to Disable Cookies, Please See Your Browser Documentation. ×

Pique Arabesque

Senior Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Pique Arabesque

  1. Waterbury's documents were certainly prepared with a lot of care, and at no point did Waterbury present herself as a dancer or employee of NYCB in order to shake them down. She said that she was Finlay's ex-girlfriend, who accidentally stumbled upon communications between men in the company in the course of checking her email. The law is often behind the times when it comes to sex crimes. Even if it doesn't meet the definition of revenge porn (and I'm not sure about that), Finlay's actions still are a grievous violation of privacy. I cannot say what Waterbury plans to do re criminal char
  2. The media accounts of Waterbury that I have seen all make it clear that she was a SAB student, not a member of NYCB. I also never thought that Longhitano was an NYCB employee - most reports have described him as a "donor." Waterbury was in her late teens when she began dating Finlay, but is now in her early twenties. I am not familiar with NYCB's denial of any other assault allegations. Frankly, whatever "mistakes" may have occurred in her legal documents are minor, likely unintentional, and easily corrected. Fixating on this is grasping at straws and seems like a convenient way of smeari
  3. Agree. And I would put Robbins in the genius category (particularly as someone who choreographed iconic works for ballet, musical theater, and film, and had a larger pop culture impact than Balanchine). And though most new works will not stay in the rep, it is important to keep those creative gears turning. What makes NYCB unique is that it's a choreographer's company that is at the forefront of creating ballets that are subsequently disseminated around the world. It's not just a repository for Balanchine/Robbins works.
  4. There is quite a bit of support for Waterbury, but there is also backlash that centers the concerns of the accused men. I think that most people agree that Finlay messed up, but there is a pernicious idea that Ramasar and Catazaro have been unfairly caught up in Waterbury's grievance against her ex, when in fact they are grown men who were active participants in the reprehensible communications. Ramsar could have elected not to participate in the nude sharing, and Catazaro could have told Finlay that his behavior was gross. While termination might seem severe to those who are used to dismissin
  5. Unless one is an NYCB insider - and we are not able to discuss inside information here - no one can determine what specific piece of information led to the firings. Management could have felt that the communications were more damaging than initially anticipated, causing the suspension to turn into a termination. Calling the firings 'illegitimate' without insight into management's decision process is a step too far. (Also, referring to Waterbury's few interviews as a "blitz" also seems cynical). I found Reichlen's statement to be very generic and harmless. It simply emphasized NYCB's empha
  6. It is not the responsibility of victims - and even the general public - to redeem abusers. And as others have said, the #MeToo movement is very young. However, there have been many countless instances where the rape/misconduct allegations didn't stick in the courts or the public imaginary, and the accused was allowed to go on with his life and reputation unscathed - Kobe Bryant and R Kelly immediately come to mind. Also, Marv Albert was convicted of misdemeanor assault and battery. He was fired from NBC, but brought back less than 2 years later. He currently commentates on TNT. For all of the
  7. I don't think that the opinions of female dancers were the sole justification for the firing, though I am glad that the interim team is listening to their dancers. I imagine the texts/images were the deciding factors in the firings. There is also a difference between working with someone who you have a personality conflict with vs working with someone who has been accused of wrongdoing. The strength of the Ramasar/Catazaro case vs Waterbury's is also relative. There is also a tension between communications covered by privacy laws and acceptable behavior for NYCB dancers. And with the ubi
  8. The union is just doing its job in appealing the firings, but the dancers are certainly entitled to their feelings, especially as the union's job is also to ensure a safe workplace for those still employed by NYCB. I would not want to be in a workplace where men made rape jokes about my colleagues. These dancers might also be concerned that their nude images might be circulating. I was more disturbed by the group of dancers who took a smiling photo with Ramasar at Carousel shortly after his firing and the individuals who seem to think that Ramasar and Catazaro are the real victims in this
  9. It was his problem. You are a survivor. If there are a large number of abusers in an environment and leadership is looking the other way, then there is a culture of abuse. Glad he has recovered, though. I think that some of the backlash to Waterbury, broadly speaking, comes from the fact that it is making others reckon with their trauma. People are upset that she is publically asking for accountability instead of staying silent/minimizing the severity of the behavior like previous generations of survivors. Also as Finlay's partner - who accompanied him to official NYCB events - she h
  10. People should treat all electronic and internet communications as if they might be discovered. In this era of metadata, there is no real privacy anymore. One should not type anything 'privately' that they feel unprepared to defend in a public forum. To answer your question, I have found that law is often behind developments in technology. (There also might be a generational gap here in these discussions of privacy). We can split hairs about what it means to be "underage" (shades of R Kelly there!), but over 18 makes you an adult in every US jurisdiction, and over 21 means you can drink le
  11. They ceased to be thoughts once they were communicated in the group chat. I have heard that some apprenticeships can be offered at 17, but most company members are 18 and up. Though it is still not legal to drink alcohol between the ages of 18-20, you are still an adult. "Underage" specifically connotes someone who is under 18. Jokes about non-consensual sex are not funny and reflect poorly on the character of those making the joke. Employers care about that. (Also, if the butt of the joke is that the corps woman found Finlay and Catazaro irresistibly attractive, then she would, in f
  12. While many American arts institutions are in a precarious state, NYCB is not one of them. Catazaro embarrassed himself. And Finlay and Catazaro are Millenials. They, more than anyone, should understand that no print or electronic communications - even a group chat that is not put on public-facing social media - are really private. This is not about 'thought crime,' either. If they had that conversation in Finlay's apartment, we might not be having this conversation. This is not fascism. Certain aspects of the illicit behavior were allegedly covered up by the organization, whic
  13. Circulating nude images (some of which were taken without the subject's consent) and engaging in degrading talk are examples of disrespect towards colleagues. Regardless of how superficially polite they may have been in the studio, it is clear that they thought of some of their female colleagues as chattel. And just because Bouder hasn't gone through the extra effort to delete old photos doesn't mean that she approves of their behavior. As I have illustrated, bad behavior outside the workplace occasionally has consequences within the workplace. If these men had exercised better judgment, they
  14. I don't think that McKenzie is sadistic enough to promote Lane with the with the intent of humiliating her.
  15. You should see Copeland in the La Scala production of R&J with Bolle. It's fantastic.
  16. Catazaro's language was more than crude, though. According to the amended complaint, he and Finlay engaged in an extended back and forth where they fantasized about raping a corps member (Finlay specifically used the language "give her no choice"). I don't know if NYCB has any character/behavior clauses in their dancer contracts, but conversations like that would probably fall under that umbrella. An NYCB job is an enormous privilege - not a right - and I imagine that dancers are expected to elevate themselves beyond "street corner" talk. And this is not unprecedented - a few years ago, severa
  17. If anyone embarrassed Maxwell, it was Ramasar, who sent her nude photo to his friends. It would be a shame to punish whistleblowers for attempting to hold institutions and the people in them accountable. SAB and NYCB are in the lawsuit because they are alleged to have turned the other cheek to their male dancers'/patrons' bad behavior. Longhitano's drunken rant and Finlay's DC party (and showing up to rehearsals drunk) all occurred on the clock and were allegedly swept under the rug. Historically, Balanchine's attempt to force Farrell's hand in marriage, Martins' dalliances with then-underage
  18. RIP, Mr. Mitchell. My heart sunk when I read this news today. I hope he did not pass on poor terms with DTH. He may have just preferred to stay out of the limelight. Calling him "unreliable" seems a little harsh. His interviews were always illuminating for me and created a vivid picture of what it was like to be an early Balanchine dancer.
  19. The fetishization of the "barely legal" woman (aka she's old enough so I won't go to jail, but young enough to manipulate) is a very common trope.
  20. I agree with this. There should be strict no-fraternization policy between SAB and NYCB, even if the SAB dancer is 18+. Merson's assertions have provoked mixed reactions from the broader ballet community (mod note: I am not talking about this board, in particular). There are survivors of sexual harassment/assault who see themselves in Waterbury and understand that false sexual misconduct claims are very, very rare. There are others who think this is a tempest in a teapot and are more interested in defending the accused and the institution than demonstrating accountability. The fa
  21. He probably knew about the feature, but just didn't care. Or didn't think that *those* texts would pop up. I don't see any reason to suspect that she was snooping around.
  22. Good for those men! However, if senior management allows the Finlays to flourish, then it does become a company issue.
  23. According to the NYT, Catazaro has said that he didn't share images of Waterbury, but took part in "communications" that were not intended to "harm or embarrass." That language is deliberately ambiguous but implies that the communications were NSFW and might open him up to some scrutiny. I will let the courts sort out the specifics of Waterbury's claim. I used the "iceberg" language because it contains multiple damning accusations that extend beyond Finlay and Waterbury. SAB is not the NYCB, but it is under the NYCB umbrella. While there might not be a legal duty for Catazaro to interv
  • Create New...