Internet asks to #FreeKesha After Judge Rules She Must Continue to Work with Alleged Rapist

Singer, songwriter and rapper Kesha broke down in tears in a courthouse today after a judge ruled that she would not be let of her 6 contract record deal with Sony.

Kesha had asked to be let out of her contract because of claims that her, and one of Sony’s top earning music producers, Dr Luke (Luke Gottwald) had drugged and raped her at age 18. And that his emotional abuse continued long after.

Kesha claims that she fears for her safety and has asked to nullify her contract with the record company. Sony Records claims that they will allow her to work with another producer but Kesha is afraid the record company won’t promote her music because Gottwald is one of their top earners and is more valuable to the company than the singer.

Six albums is a lot of work and technically can span the entire life of an artist. If the allegations are true that means this woman has just received a life sentence along side her abuser.

My advice? Take a note from John Cage’s famous 4’33 and ride that contract out in one long track. Meanwhile the rest of us should rage against the system that values the dollar over women’s rights and safety.

Here are some comments from twitter:

Amy Roth

Amy Roth

Amy Davis Roth (aka Surly Amy) is a multimedia artist who resides in Los Angeles, California. She makes Surly-Ramics She is the fearless leader of Mad Art Lab and cohost of Makers' Hustle Podcast Support her on Patreon. Follow her on twitter: @SurlyAmy or on Google+.

Previous post

Quickies: First woman to win Canada's top science award, credit scores, and learning the periodic table

Next post

Global Quickies: Victim-Blaming, Black Magic, Child Marriage


  1. February 20, 2016 at 1:00 am —

    With bastards like that, you have to ask, how many other victims?
    Then you have to ask, what am I going to do about it?
    How about #boycottsony for a start?

  2. February 20, 2016 at 4:36 am —

    Sleazy attitude from Sony. Even if her next songs were all protest songs about Sony I would bet Sony could prevent them from seeing the light of day.

  3. February 20, 2016 at 9:40 am —

    Skeptic — One who questions everything, except the rape claim of a woman seeking to get out of a contract.

    • February 20, 2016 at 10:56 am —

      Hrm. a Skeptic with google could find the number of times this has already been directly addressed on this very site as well as others, but I’ll help you out and suggest you start here:, read the whole thing and then do some research on the claims and get back to us.

    • February 20, 2016 at 11:01 am —

      Internet MRAs or dude bro – one who only questions women’s claims and then makes assumptions about them. Also known for basement dwelling, being overly emotional and the uncontrollable desire to communicate with said women online.

    • February 20, 2016 at 12:47 pm —

      Skeptic — One who questions everything

      Wait, I thought that was a postmodernist??? I get so confused with the difference between “questioning everything” (postmodernism) and “questioning everything” (skepticism).

    • February 20, 2016 at 1:05 pm —

      Okay, let’s do the skeptical thing. We have two competing hypotheses:
      1) Kesha lied about being raped to get out of her contract.
      2) Kesha tried to get out of her contract because she was raped.

      Let’s look at a few points:
      1) Getting a conviction for rape on the testimony of the victim alone is next to impossible.
      2) Women who report rape are routinely called liars and sluts.
      3) Publicly accusing your producer of rape is likely to end your career, regardless of outcome. (It’s a common problem in all sexual harassment cases; who’s going to hire you if you accused your previous boss?)
      4) A priori, an accusation of rape is much more likely to be true than false.

      These facts alone suggest that hypothesis 1 is highly unlikely. At best, it assumes that Kesha is a complete idiot, advised by idiots. The chances of this situation favoring her are frankly hopeless. She would be risking everything she has now and even if she wins the case, she’s still likely to end up with no career.

      Hypothesis 2 is more favorable. Her actions can be explained as a desperate attempt to get away from her abuser. She’s wiling to risk her career because the alternative is horrifying. If she wins the case, she’s safe. If she loses, she’s really no worse off.

      Barring special knowledge that none of us have, the situation seems to favor her accusation being correct. We can consider some further circumstantial points, like the power differential between a young star and an established producer, or the history of abuse in the entertainment industry. None of these points favor hypothesis 1.

      I put it to you that you’ve only really evaluated the evidence for your preferred hypothesis, not for the competing one. That, as we good skeptics know, is a recipe for confirmation bias.

      • February 20, 2016 at 2:20 pm —

        You are arguing with a brick wall.

        Boomer is an uberskeptic who only shows up here to question the questions when those questions interfere with his worldview.

        Funny that in Boomer’s case his worldview only seems to get upset when someone suggests that misogyny, sexual assault, or rape actually happens.

        Internet dudebro indeed.

        • February 20, 2016 at 3:43 pm —

          I figured as much, but it was worth a shot. If nothing else, it’s here for the sake of any lurkers who drop by.

          • February 20, 2016 at 3:46 pm

            Yep! Thank you for taking the time to explain. It is appreciated!

          • February 20, 2016 at 5:04 pm

            Oh well worth the explanation, I wasn’t trying to suggest that it wasn’t. Sorry if it came out that way.

            I was just pointing out that Boomer is know for this.

          • February 21, 2016 at 5:20 am

            No worries.

      • February 20, 2016 at 4:50 pm —

        Yep, the simple fact is, when you accuse someone of rape, you’re the one on trial, with a presumption of guilt.

        (Personally the inherent power imbalance of a sexual relationship between a boss and an employee always raises huge red flags for me, though.)

      • February 22, 2016 at 1:55 pm —

        >I put it to you that you’ve only really evaluated the evidence for your preferred hypothesis, not for the competing one. That, as we good skeptics know, is a recipe for confirmation bias.

        You’re wrong. I haven’t evaluated anything because I don’t know anything other than what lawyers for both sides have made public. No one besides Kesha and Luke Gottwald will ever know for sure what happened, and anyone claiming otherwise has an agenda.

        • February 22, 2016 at 2:13 pm —

          Well, you claimed we are not questioning her rape claim.

          Where could your agenda lie, I wonder?

        • February 22, 2016 at 3:35 pm —

          Not questioning = agenda.
          Questioning = no agenda.

          Got it.

        • February 22, 2016 at 4:51 pm —

          No one has claimed to know with absolute certainty, nor do we need to. We can evaluate the available evidence and reach a tentative conclusion. That’s hardly a controversial point and I have to wonder how a supposed skeptic could be unaware of it.

          There is in fact evidence available to us and, as I’ve outlined, it points quite clearly in a particular direction. If you disagree, then explain why. Otherwise, when you explicitly refuse to evaluate the evidence at all, don’t expect anyone to take your opinions seriously.

  4. February 20, 2016 at 5:01 pm —

    I’m not sure I understand, if she changes producers within Sony, does she still have to work with this guy?

    • February 20, 2016 at 5:06 pm —

      He is one of their top earning producers. Her fear is that they won’t promote her properly if she switches producers, and regardless, she is afraid that the accusation alone has damaged her career with the label.

      • February 20, 2016 at 9:26 pm —

        Sony is a corporation, and for good or bad, you can always count on a corporation to do what’s profitable.

  5. February 21, 2016 at 7:16 am —

    Just a heads-up: the court only rejected her request for a preliminary injunction. The case is going to move forward. It’s not that she can’t be released from her contract (she may very well be eventually) or that the judge is ordering her to immediately honor it. The trial will determine whether the contract is still valid. There’s no question of her working with Dr. Luke again; either the court will void or alter the contract, or she’ll break it and pay the penalties.

    Also, her contract is with Dr. Luke’s company, Kemosabe, and RCA, both of which are, in turn, contracted with and owned by Sony.

Leave a reply