aurora

Same--I am interested in that and in the Ratmansky, and the tickets were reasonable enough that those 2 are enough to make it worthwhile to me.

Thanks for sharing that. It really is a very thoughtful piece. Well worth taking the time to read. And yes Misty is there at the very end, as the popularity she enjoys goes straight to his major point of the power and importance of representation in the arts.

I see no reason why either of them should regret anything they said in the materials above. And any new leadership that took issue with it would be way out of line to do so. As other people have also pointed out, I think this is a misreading of her statement on the new leaders. She's not taking sides (I don't see why we should assume there are sides to take: Team Wendy Vs Team Jon!). She is, as an avowed and vocal feminist, saying that she is "thrilled...to have such a strong woman, Wendy Whelan, as part of the new era." [emphasis mine] She tags #jonathonstafford in her post, which would be an odd thing indeed to do if she wanted this to be read as an insult to him. She is simply saying she's happy a woman is part of the team leading the NYCB forward, which is neither an unexpected or peculiar reaction to the news.

I'd guess that will be their fate. It will surely take a bit for them to eliminate his full lengths though. They are popular, so they'd probably need to be replaced with other versions, which will require time and money.

Agreed, though ABT usually only acknowledges principals, which she was not.

What is the indication that she was unhappy with her situation? Do we have any official information about why she is no longer at Miami besides the (unconfirmed but public) suggestion she was fired for objecting to a guest artist of questionable character?

Also from ABT: Stephanie Williams and Lauren Post Other names of note include Brooklyn Mack and Siobhan Burke. It is easy to miss people though, after all as of now (1:43 eastern time, saturday) it has some 3,836 likes!

The article is clear that certain dancers "own" opening nights of specific ballets. Hyltin gets R+J. And apparently Bouder *was* cast for opening night of SB as per usual until it was changed "last minute." Seeing that as an affront says virtually nothing about Hyltin's abilities. Since Bouder was still cast, and therefore it wasn't a reflection on her ability to do the role, the fact she takes it as an intentional slap in the face and retaliation seems totally reasonable to me. I would as well in her shoes. I don't take Bouder's comment to be a slighting of Hyltin. What she said about her own response to Martins vs Hyltin's is accurate--and I'm sure Hyltin is happy to own that she supported Martins, just as Bouder is happy to own her views.

I can certainly understand that feeling. After I quit ballet (and I was not a professional) going to the ballet hurt so much that I found I couldn't for several years. I can't imagine the profound feeling of loss after spending basically your entire life as a dancer. It would certainly be an adjustment! I'm glad she does come now though.

Someone certainly is--they were deleted back to early 2017 a few min ago, now they are deleted back to nov 2016. The bio is now quite odd as well... It is in Turkish and seems to indicate "Rich" hacked it. Rich is also now the only person Polunin's account follows.

I think he only removed the one about slapping fat people.

Many dancers have a lack of formal education, but don't have his problems with saying the wrong thing. It just isn't much of an excuse, or even a viable explanation (I don't think you were trying to excuse his behavior). He's 29 and moved to the UK at 13. He is old enough to know better, and if he doesn't understand the world outside of a soviet perspective, well that says very little for him as he's been exposed to it for most of his life.

Interestingly though, if you click on her, it says no productions this season

I don't think its fair to say this situation is the same with regards to those men. Lendorf has made it clear ABT is his priority, he's been out due to injury and has seemingly (social media etc) been very involved in the company nonetheless. Simkin and Hallberg are cutting back their involvement for various reasons, but they are long time company members--in Hallberg's case coming up through the company and still being very involved in company initiatives (promoting young male dancers and choreographers). The only person to whom it does apply is Bolle--but he is leaving after this season so no longer an issue.

Many others see it differently. She did not, with one exception, name any other women. The people who brought the other women into it are the 3 men in question. It is their responsibility that any of this is happening, it is not Waterbury's to keep what they did to her and others quiet.

The solution to that is not to give anyone the password. He did. There is still no reason for some of the insinuations.

Lots of misogynists use that sort of language. See Lindsey Graham's "Slut Whore Drunk" comment . Not saying it isn't Longhitano, I have no idea (nor does anyone else here) just pointing out that this language is in no way specific to him.

It has only been a year... How fast do you think redemption should happen? They get a few months vacation and boom! all is good again?

The problem is not her, but the men who behaved disgustingly towards her and towards the women in the company (and the ABT dancers discussed as well). And just because other women haven't spoken up doesn't mean they don't have a problem with it. The hashtag #WhyIDidntReport is clear evidence of the many reasons women do not come forward.

Also "there is nothing any school or company can do that will stop consenting adults, or minors, from having sex" is a ridiculous argument. Of course there isn't. And no law is going to stop all robberies, murders or rapes either (people are still going to do all those things!), but that doesn't mean we say OH WELL! and not have or enforce these laws.

Um. what? It is not intrinsic. It is pervasive but your argument seems to be therefore that no change is needed or wanted.

Destroyed overall, perhaps no. But it doesn't negate the fact he tried to, simply because she married someone who wasn't him. The fact she was able to find other, lesser, work, doesn't change the fact his behavior towards her was wrong.

It is relevant to the hypothetical : "Many dancers at NYCB have been students at Columbia. If one of those dancers dated a Columbia professor who mistreated her in the same manner as Finlay allegedly mistreated Waterbury, that dancer would have a case against him, but she wouldn't have standing to sue Columbia, and try to bolster her claim by citing alleged defects in their policy on student-instructor relations." You didn't say have won a case. You said she would have no standing to sue Columbia. And considering there are similar cases (no not identical, but no two cases will ever be precisely the same) in the courts at this moment, it is incorrect to say she "wouldn't have standing to sue Columbia." Which were your exact words.

Are you sure about that? https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2018/04/27/former-george-washington-student-sues-school-alleging-botched-sexual-assault-case/?utm_term=.cc4d93b9ed8e https://www.nyunews.com/2018/08/26/news-ronell-reitman-sexual-assault-lawsuit/

why would it be difficult? Why not fix it? Dating has gone on between company members and SAB students for ages it is true, one of my relatives dated a company member when they were 18 and at SAB and the company member was 28 in the 1990s. That doesn't mean it is a good idea.