February 23, 2016

"But lives can get ruined when there’s a rush to judgment before all the facts come out. Look what happened at UVA, Duke etc."

"Of course any sane person is against rape and sexual assault but everybody who is commenting is doing so without knowledge or facts. They are getting behind an allegation only — motivated by money. I didn’t rape Kesha and I have never had sex with her. Kesha and I were friends for many years and she was like my little sister."

Said Dr. Luke —  Lukasz Gottwald — the big record producer. (I realize I am familiar with him, because, though I'd forgotten his name, I read the 2013 New Yorker article "The Doctor Is In/A technique for producing No. 1 songs" (2013)).

I'd been ignoring the news story about Kesha trying to get out of her contract, but I happened to read "Dr. Luke, the ‘Beatles of our generation,’ fires back at Kesha" — maybe "Beatles" is a way to get my attention — and I'm realizing for the first time that it's a rape accusation that's the basis of Kesha's effort.

There's also "Taylor Swift donates $250,000 to Kesha to help in lawsuit against allegedly abusive record producer":
Kesha herself also has expressed gratitude for the moral support — from Lady Gaga and Kelly Clarkson, among many others — she’s gotten for her case against Dr. Luke, a.k.a. Lukasz Gottwald. In a civil suit, she accused the producer, whom she has worked with since she was 17, of drugging and raping her as well as slighting her appearance, contributing to her bulimia; Dr. Luke, meanwhile, has filed a countersuit and denies everything. His lawyer said: “As set forth in the complaint that we have filed on behalf of Dr. Luke, Kesha and her mother are engaged in a campaign of publishing outrageous and untrue statements about Dr. Luke to third parties, including scurrilous and false statements of purported physical and mental abuse of Kesha. These are allegations that Kesha and [her mother] Pebe have themselves admitted are false.”
The judge sided with Dr. Luke:
On Friday, New York Supreme Court Justice Shirley Kornreich sided with Dr. Luke and Sony at Kesha's hearing, telling the singer's legal team, "You're asking the court to decimate a contract that was heavily negotiated and typical for the industry." Kesha's lawyer Mark Geragos asked for an injunction because, as he told the judge, the career of a pop star is often brief, and Kesha's career could be "irreparably harmed" if she did not return to recording music.

"There has been no showing of irreparable harm. She's being given opportunity to record," Judge Kornreich said in denying the injunction. Kesha will have to record six more albums under Kemosabe Records, Dr. Luke's Sony imprint, according to the New York Daily News.
This is a lot of bad publicity for both of them. I wonder how things got so bad that it all went public. Assuming Kesha is not going to win in a court of law, can the publicity skew so well in her favor that she wins in the court of public opinion? At the moment, Kesha seems to be acquiring a feminist-hero reputation. Lady Gaga wrote: "I am in awe of your bravery." Lorde wrote: "Standing with Kesha through this traumatic, deeply unfair time." Demi Lovato wrote that she was "Ready for self-proclaimed feminists to start speaking out or taking action for women's rights." And:
"Frustrating to see women come forward with their past only to be shot down, not believed and disrespected for their bravery in taking action. Happens way too often. I'm ready for women to be taken just as seriously as men. Someone tell me why anyone would ever feel brave enough to come forward if they are most likely to be ignored or called a liar?"
It's a sad, grisly business, whoever is telling the truth. 

35 comments:

Bill Peschel said...

"Someone tell me why anyone would ever feel brave enough to come forward if they are most likely to be ignored or called a liar?"

Um, because you still need, I hope, a standard of proof before you convict someone in this country?

You're right: It is a sad business. But we have to go with what we hear before judging.

As an aside, I would think that if this producer did this to Keisha, he most likely did this with other women under contract. This is not something that would have been done under cover; bosses never realize his workers know things and gossip about them. Have we heard anything from them?

richlb said...

The rape allegations don't come out until 10 years later, when it's convenient to help her case to get out of her contract. I read an article yesterday that surmised "here is why women won't come forward with sexual assault allegations" that completely missed the fact that they were basing that point on someone who, in fact, did not come forward with sexual assault allegations. None of this story is good.

And where are the high profile celebs set to work with this producer who could stand behind Kesha instead.

Expat(ish) said...

Didn't George Michael crater his career by refusing to record albums under a contract - went something like a decade without an album?

Not to minimize the accusation of rape, but I don't get how people can't work together whilst making literal bags of money.

-XC

traditionalguy said...

It's the War on lying Women. To the victor go the spoils.

damikesc said...

Frustrating to see women come forward with their past only to be shot down, not believed and disrespected for their bravery in taking action. Happens way too often. I'm ready for women to be taken just as seriously as men. Someone tell me why anyone would ever feel brave enough to come forward if they are most likely to be ignored or called a liar?

Do these women REALLY want due process done away with? Are they not thinking at all here?

Sony is allowing her to work with somebody else. They worked together for several years after the alleged rape. She isn't backing up her case too well.

Rick said...

I'm ready for women to be taken just as seriously as men.

The first thing you learn in Women's Studies is to simply assert men pass whatever standard a woman failed as evidence of a double standard. The first thing you learn when you leave Women's Studies is that no one else believes this.

Bob Ellison said...

"You're not like most people." That goes for you, Professor, and most of the commenters here.

Most people are ignorant liars.

Pop-music stars and their producers, like politicians, tend to be a few standard deviations from normal. They act strangely.

Michael K said...

"Kesha's lawyer Mark Geragos "

Oh, Oh. She's toast. When did Geragos ever win case ?

Robert Cook said...

"Not to minimize the accusation of rape, but I don't get how people can't work together whilst making literal bags of money."

The music industry is, and always has been, a very dirty business, (in the early days, legendarily mobbed up). One cannot always know the degree and kind of financial, legal, or other coercion is exerted by managers or record companies on their artists, or the degree to which the riches produced by the artists flows in greater abundance to everyone else than to the artists.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

As a feminist, I will need to know Dr. Luke's political affiliations before I can determine who is telling the truth.

n.n said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Bruce Hayden said...

I thought that this was going to be about the upcoming 10th anniversary of the Duke Lacrosse team bogus rape charges: Ten Years Later, the Duke Lacrosse Case Still Reverberates. Which may be seen as the start of bogus campus "War on Women", and all the bogus rape charges that followed.

n.n said...

But was it rape-rape?

Presumption of guilt. Presumption of virtue. The progressive liberal orthodoxy has a traditional legacy steeped in pro-choice doctrine.

CarlF said...

I don't get how people can't work together whilst making literal bags of money.

I represent a company that works with artists. Generally, they pick up the artists because, although talented artists, they do not know anything about the business side of making money.

My client puts a business plan together and they and the artist starts making money. Often thereafter, the artists concludes, or is convinced by "friends", that he could do it himself and is just wasting money paying my client. Suddenly, the artist finds all kinds of things wrong and eventually they split. The subsequent history of the artists on their own is not encouraging from a monetary perspective.

Peter said...

Can't we just decide that a man denying an accusation like this is prima facie evidence of his guilt (and if he doesn't then of course he must be guilty)? What could possibly go wrong with accepting the "women never lie about such things" standard of proof?

Well, OK, so it's possible he did it, but, serious accusations cry out for accusers to produce serious evidence to support the accusations, and, accusations must be brought forth in a timely manner because evidence, memories, and witnesses inevitably fade with the passage of time.


And at a minimum perhaps all could admit that due process must never be abridged no matter what the accusations, or who is making them or who is accused?

SGT Ted said...

The fact of the matter is that women will tell the most outrageous lies about men raping them in order to get what they want. They get to play the victim and receive sympathy.

Curious George said...

"SGT Ted said...
The fact of the matter is that women will tell the most outrageous lies about men raping them in order to get what they want. They get to play the victim and receive sympathy."

Case in point the accuser of Patrick Kane of the Chicago Blackhawks. Chick said he raped her. Turns out she had the DNA of two dudes in her...neither Patrick Kane. But first he had to endure months of attacks in the press.

Char Char Binks said...

There's a fine line between a man using his position of power and authority to seduce or coerce an attractive woman into having sex with him in the pursuit of her dream of fame and fortune, and a woman using her attractiveness to sleep her way to the top. That is to say, they're exactly the same.

Char Char Binks said...

Demi said:

"I'm ready for women to be taken just as seriously as men." Oh, I think they are. Don't you think this kind of thing happens to male actors and singers all the time? I understand Bob Dylan had to wear knee pads for the first five years of his career.

Beach Brutus said...

I wonder if Taylor Swift has to pay a gift tax on the $236,000 portion of her donation that exceeds the $14,000 annual gift tax exclusion? Unless Keisha has set up a 501(c) organization for her lawsuit (would it qualify?), it seems the tax man might be be calling. I defer to any tax specialist out there.

Big Mike said...

Who is Kesha?

fivewheels said...

We will take women seriously when they stop believing that they should not be held accountable to fulfill their legal contracts just because they cry. Like your parents said (if you had parents, it must be said these days): Act like an adult, and you will be treated like an adult.

I would feel bad about this comment if I believed there was almost any chance she really was raped or abused. I do not.

William said...

Both her accusation and his denial are equally plausible. As a sworn juror in the court of public opinion, I would await corroborative evidence before reaching a verdict. It speaks well for Kesha that Taylor Swift is in her corner. If Jennifer Lawrence should also stand beside her, this will become a slam dunk case. Does this man have a past record of frat membership or sympathy for Republican causes? That's the only absolutely convincing proof of guilt in cases like this.

The Godfather said...

"New York Supreme Court Justice Shirley Kornreich sided with Dr. Luke and Sony at Kesha's hearing, telling the singer's legal team, 'You're asking the court to decimate a contract that was heavily negotiated and typical for the industry.'" I'm shocked that a judge who graduated from NYU Phi Beta Kappa and from NYU Law School doesn't know that "decimate" means to kill one out ten, it doesn't mean "declare [the contract] void and unenforceable". Yes, I know that this word is frequently misused to mean destruction of a large part of something, but this is a particularly egregious misuse (my wife tells me that only lawyers use the word "egregious").

Char Char Binks said...

@The Godfather

Thanks for the language tip. Maybe now you can tell us what "literal" means.

coupe said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Fernandinande said...

The Godfather said...
I'm shocked that a judge who graduated from NYU Phi Beta Kappa and from NYU Law School doesn't know that "decimate" means to kill one out ten,


I hate to defend a judge, but

"Most people have a linguistic pet peeve or two, a useful complaint about language that they can sound off about to show other people that they know how to wield the English language. Most of these peeves tend to be rather irrational, a quality which should in no way diminish the enjoyment of the complainer. A classic example of this is the word decimate." (link ->"Kill, destroy, or remove a large proportion of")

Bill said...

Wasn't Lena Dunham quoted? I do so love it when Lena Dunham is quoted.

The Godfather said...

Yes, Ferdinande, the misuse of decimate is one of my pet peeves (I have others that are even more arcane). But even your wishy washy definition ("Kill, destroy, or remove a large proportion of") really doesn't apply to invalidating a contract.

Yes Char Char Binks (I love your nom de blog by the way) I can define "literal" -- it means it really happened as described. I prefer however "littoral" because it's less likely to be misused.

Rhythm and Balls said...

I'm ready for women to be taken just as seriously as men.

How is there any way to take her seriously when there's been no criminal charges filed within what must undoubtedly be a timeframe within the statute of limitations?

Eric said...

Do these women REALLY want due process done away with? Are they not thinking at all here?

No, they are not thinking. They are signaling the holding of correct beliefs. They will continue to not think until their sons or husbands or fathers are accused of a crime. Then they will be shocked to discover how many people are willing to lock the son/husband/father up without waiting for the allegation to be proven.

As I say every time this situation comes up - we should take these allegations seriously. So seriously, in fact, that rapists do hard time and women who lie about being raped do hard time.

Jupiter said...

Big Mike said...
"Who is Kesha?"

Yeah, I was wondering that same thing. So I googled her. It turns out she is a slutty-looking young woman with a sneer in her voice and no obvious talent. I suppose she is what they call a "white rapper", or maybe Wrapper? Oh, and she spells it Ke$ha.

Jim S. said...

Frustrating to see women come forward with their past only to be shot down, not believed and disrespected for their bravery in taking action. Happens way too often. I'm ready for women to be taken just as seriously as men. Someone tell me why anyone would ever feel brave enough to come forward if they are most likely to be ignored or called a liar?

Not to be provocative, but wouldn't a man who accused someone of sexual violence need to prove it in a court of law? Wouldn't requiring women to go through a similar process amount to being "taken just as seriously as men"? It sounds like this person wants women's claims to be accepted uncritically which is not something men get or should get. If she's simply referring to having their accusations be accepted by society as opposed to the courts, my impression is that women who make accusations of sexual violence are taken much more seriously than men are. Maybe I'm wrong.

openidname said...

Virtue-signalling is getting trickier all the time. Demi Lovato criticized Taylor Swift for using money to show her support for Kesha. She tweeted, "Take something to Capitol Hill or actually speak out about something and then I’ll be impressed."

We can only hope they'll all start devouring each other.

mikee said...

The rush to judgement at Duke does not matter. The Group of 88 still has not acknowledged that their condemnation of the Lacrosse team members was not just incorrect but so wrong as to be mind-bogglingly stupid.

Add to Alinsky's Rules for Radicals that Leftists don't apologize, ever.