Clearing the Air with the WEST SIDE STORY Controversy and Debunking Dumb Comments

If you’ve been following the Amar Ramasar-West Side Story controversy, then the past 24 hours have been quite something. We’ve seen every big theatre publication pick up the story and even others such as the New York Times and Deadline. We’ve also seen NYCB dancer and girlfriend of Amar Ramasar, Alexa Maxwell, release a statement defending him and speaking her truth. We’ve also seen producer Scott Rudin double down on his support for Mr. Ramasar. One website published a humorous and somewhat libelous quiz. And we’ve seen the second of the planned protests outside the Broadway Theatre at which the group grew in size than the previous week(about 12 at the first, roughly 40 at the second).

So yeah, it’s been quite a day.

Many of the articles written yesterday were dismissive of the protests, going as far as to proclaim they would have no real impact and mention the financial success of the show. This is how the Broadway publicity machine works by the way. Big-time producers encourage publications to attack/dismiss/disqualify an issue so that they’re given continued access to their shows and stars. It’s an age-old play from the David Merrick playbook.

But with the added attention, there were a lot of inaccuracies being thrown around about what was actually happening and, frankly, a lot of dumb comments. So I thought it was time to clear the record and correct some opinions. I did the same thing back in 2015, when James Barbour was cast in Phantom of the Opera and I’m somewhat sad I have to do this again. But let’s begin.

Reaction to Alexa Maxwell’s statement

I spoke to Alex Maxwell yesterday after she sent me a statement clarifying her position on the controversy. She insisted she wasn’t a victim and that she had forgiven him for sending nude photos of her without her knowledge or consent. She also made sure to mention a conversation with Alexandra Waterbury, who is suing Mr. Ramasar and others involved, that she told Ms. Maxwell about the potential monetary award from joining the lawsuit. The statement was also sent to other publications and many on one side of the issue used it as the smoking gun to disqualify the outrage and clear Mr. Ramasar of any wrongdoing. In truth, her statement did none of that.

Let me be clear, Ms. Maxwell has every right to speak her truth. Anyone involved with issues like these has the right to speak out and be heard. I applaud her doing so because I’m sure it wasn’t easy and many of us wouldn’t have had the strength to do.

She also has every right to forgive Mr. Ramasar for his wrongdoing. What was said between them and the path to forgiveness they went through is strictly between them and not our business to dissect or judge. I’ve read a lot of comments about Ms. Maxwell’s mindset and I think that’s incredibly unfair. She seems to be confident and at peace with her decision to forgive and move on and I’m not going to condemn her, or anyone, for doing so.

But while Ms. Maxwell’s statement insists that she does not consider herself a victim, it doesn’t clear Mr. Ramasar of wrongdoing. While she has forgiven him for what he did, it doesn’t change the fact that he did it. He did share multiple photos with Chase Finlay and received nude photos of Ms. Waterbury. He did make sexually explicit comments about NYCB dancers and requested that Mr. Finlay send me more photos of Ms. Waterbury. According to court documents, on May 21, 2018, Mr. Ramasar texted Mr. Finlay, “I love you! Send me more of the photos/videos!! :) ”. Mr. Finlay responded with another nude photo of Ms. Waterbury and a short video of her performing a sexual act. It should be noted that, at no time, did Ms. Waterbury know she was being recorded or photographed by Mr. Findlay. This is what Mr. Ramasar did and Ms. Maxwell’s statement doesn’t change that.

In my opinion, Ms. Maxwell’s inclusion of the monetary award was a misstep and looks tacked on. It looks like an attempt to discredit Ms. Waterbury and make this entire issue look nothing more than a money grab. When I spoke to Ms. Waterbury, she was very forthcoming about mentioning a potential monetary reward. Lawsuits like these can result in termination of employment, retaliation, and blacklisting from the industry altogether. Ms. Waterbury wanted the other victims to know that a potential financial award couldn’t lessen the financial blow if they were retaliated against for speaking out. That’s a very real discussion that takes place with cases like these.

Furthermore, Ms. Waterbury and her attorney confirmed that this has never been about a big-money payout. She turned down a $100,000 offer to not go forward with the lawsuit and the initial offer to the defendants in the suit was for them to simply pay the legal fees and publicly apologize. So Ms. Maxwell’s mention of the money somewhat mars her otherwise effective statement.

I don’t want the show to close

Let me be very clear about one thing, even though I’m against Mr. Ramasar being in this show, I’m not calling for a boycott nor am I wanting the show to close. I do not think that the dozens of other people involved in the show should be punished. They weren’t responsible for him being cast and I know at least one of them who isn’t happy about it. Over a dozen members of this cast are making their Broadway debuts, I don’t want their opportunities to be squandered. I’m only looking for one pink slip to be handed out.

Amar Ramasar has had every opportunity to make this right

I don’t know who is advising Mr. Ramasar through this ordeal, but he’s got the wrong people around him. When all of this broke, he could have apologized by saying the words “I’m sorry”. He didn’t. He could have publicly made efforts to become more educated on sexual harassment. He didn’t. He could have joined or led causes to put an end to practices like these within the industry. He didn’t.

There were a multitude of things that Amar Ramasar could have done that would have shown contrition, compassion and demonstrated a real interest in improving. He didn’t do any of that except to Ms. Maxwell.

Amar Ramasar is not a “rapist” or “sex offender” or “pedophile”

We can certainly have a lot of opinions when it comes to Amar Ramasar. But stating that he is a “rapist” or “sex offender” or “pedophile” is incorrect and for publications to do so is libelous.

The Broadway Beat, a website known for publishing satirical news stories, posted a darkly humorous survey titled “Which “West Side Story” Cast Member Are You? One of the Normal Ones, or the Sex Offender?”. While the post makes a strong point, it does incorrectly label Mr. Ramasar as a sex offender, which he isn’t. Zach Raffio, the founder of the site and author of the piece, tried to clear this up with the following statement:

“Amar Ramasar is not legally a sex offender as he was not convicted of a crime and does not reside on the sex offender registry. So, in both the headline and body of this piece, we are using the term "sex offender" solely as a concise, synonymical term for "person who has committed multiple acts of sexual harassment" and not via the legal definition.”

Even with the editor’s note, referring to Mr. Ramasar is still if not borderline, explicitly libelous and could get Mr. Raffio and his site in some legal hot water if Mr. Ramasar’s attorneys decided to take action.

Mr. Ramasar was never charged with a crime. Mainly because no one pressed charges and there wasn’t a law on the books to charge him with. If this occurred today, it might be a different story. He could be charged with Unlawful Publication of Sexual Images which is a class A misdemeanor offense, punishable by up to one year in jail and require guilty parties to register as sex offenders. But even that would be hard to prosecute Mr. Ramasar with.

As I stated in an earlier column,

“The law is framed to criminalize “revenge porn,” which defines spreading non-consensual pornography as a form of harassment, meaning that the defendant has to act with “the intent to cause harm” to fall under the new law’s purview. Given the nature of the texts, Ramasar wasn’t doing that, which is what many critics of the law are saying. The Cyber Civil Rights Initiative’s research has shown that about 80 percent of non-consensual pornography actually gets shared as impersonal entertainment, and by strangers rather a vengeful ex. Also, the fact that the images were shared over text rather than posted online would throw a wrench into any prosecution.”

So the legality with this issue is complicated but what isn’t is stating that Mr. Ramamsar is a criminal guilty of certain sexual offenses. He’s not. Did he engage in distasteful practices that fall under the definition of sexual harassment? Absolutely. Did he deserve to be fired from his position at the NYCB? Yes. Did his union go to bat for him to get him reinstated? Yes.

Incorrectly labeling or exaggerating the issues surrounding Mr. Ramasar distorts the real problems and only gives strengths to the detractors trying to protect him and shut down the outrage. Which leads me to the next topic.

Let’s inform and correct some incorrect and stupid comments out there. These are actual quotes from social media postings related to this issue. All of which can be found on the Playbill article thread because…well, Playbill doesn’t moderate their comments.

“Amar Ramasar made a mistake a LONG TIME ago. Is grace and forgiveness even a concept today? Good God, let it go. Leave him alone. Get a life.”

This happened in May of 2018, less than two years ago. That should only be considered a “LONG TIME” if you’re an animal with a short lifespan.

“The blame should be made to the Actors' Equity Association, the producers and the director as well for even allowing him to be cast to begin with. If they are going to protest at the show itself, they should be protesting at the Actors' Equity Association office as well.”

There is a lot of blame to hand out, but Actor’s Equity isn’t a guilty party here. They can’t remove performers willy nilly out of productions, nor could they have stopped Mr. Ramasar from being cast. They could step in if complaints against him are filed within the production he’s in. I’m not usually one to defend AEA but they’re not responsible for Mr. Ramasar being in the show. Scott Rudin? Ivo Van Hove? Telsey + Company? You can blame them all you want.

“So some ballet dancers let their bfs take sexually explicit pictures of them, but then get upset when those pictures get shared? Um..Ok Perhaps don’t let your bf’s take pictures of you.”

Ms. Waterbury had no knowledge she was being photographed or recorded. Also, victim-blaming is the worst. So let’s not continue with those narratives okay?

“This is ludicrous. A person’s livelihood should not be taken away because s/he has made mistakes that hurt others. Who among us has not? And if there is no possibility of redemption, then why even continue in life?”

Not for nothing but in plenty of other industries, when gross violations occur, those responsible can be barred from working in such industries for the rest of their lives. Why should the entertainment industry be any different? Also, if Mr. Ramasar was barred from ever dancing professionally again, would that mean he wouldn’t be able to find a job in another sector entirely? Absolutely not. Could be sell insurance? Work at Starbucks? Teach dance? The answer is all of the above. I find it hilarious when people try to spread this false narrative that sexual misconduct perpetrators would be left to ruin if they were barred from the industry. Most of the time their accusers are and they do just fine.

“Geez, how among us hasn’t made a mistake, toss the first stone!”

When it comes to nude images of women that were taken without their knowledge and shared without their consent, I’ll heave boulders.

“Beware artist of color... they are coming after one the few jobs on Broadway that are out there for Latinos and Blacks... Its that one drop factor that I guess spoils the whole. Who knows the real story of what happened? I hate lynch mobs. The history of the entire entertainment world has many worst stories than this one being klan around. I suspect that the casting hatred goes deeper than one person.”

Mr. Ramasar and I are both Asian, racism has nothing to do with the issue at hand and to try to connect the two is attempting to distract and cheapens actual racism in the industry.

“I’m sorry but yes he made a bad decision but doesn’t make him a bad performer, but he should be punished for his actions but his punishment shouldn’t be to be banned from performing, athletes make bad decisions but I don’t see them getting banned from playing, so why should performers.”

No one is questioning the fact that Amar Ramasar is a talented dancer and this issue doesn’t make him any less talented than he was before. Also, I don’t know how much this person watches sports but athletes are banned all the time from various leagues for violations. Here’s a list of baseball players for example. Here’s one of football players. This is a weak attempt at “whataboutism”.

“Ask yourselves, “why wasn’t this an issue when he appeared in Carousel two season(s) ago?”

Because this all went down after he was already performing in Carousel. And it was definitely an issue.

“None of this matters when it is playing to max capacity since it opened and over 90 percent if its max gross. The show will be a hit financially regardless of the casting.”

And that’s exactly what the production team and the bigger theatrical publications such as Playbill and Theatermania want you to know.