Ashton Kutcher, Mila Kunis issue apology for Danny Masterson support letters
Kutcher says the letters weren't written "to undermine the testimony of any of the victims, or re-traumatize them… We’re sorry if that has taken place"
Aux News Ashton Kutcher
Mila Kunis and Ashton Kutcher have issued a statement today on social media, with Kutcher bluntly saying, “We are aware of the pain that has been caused by the character letters that we wrote on behalf of Danny Masterson.”
Masterson was sentenced to 30 years in prison this week, after being convicted on two charges of rape in May of this year. As part of the conversation surrounding Masterson’s sentencing, news recently broke that several of his That ’70s Show castmates—including Kutcher, Kunis, Debra Jo Rupp, and Kurtwood Smith—had written character letters on his behalf, speaking warmly of him, and calling for leniency in his sentencing. (Said pleas do not appear to have had much effect on Judge Charlaine Olmedo, who denounced Masterson as both a “true coward” and a “heartless monster” before setting his first chance at parole for 2048.)
Given the glowing nature of these letters, which call Masterson an “amazing friend,” “positive influence,” and other effusive labels of support, the reaction to their publication has been pretty uniformly negative, with many people viewing them as, at best, deeply dismissive of the feelings and lived experiences of the women Masterson has now been convicted of sexually assaulting, and, at worst, actively opposed to the truth of the ruling against him.
Now, Kutcher and Kunis have responded to these criticism, issuing a brief video on Instagram this afternoon in which they apologized for, if not the letters themselves, then at least the impact that they’ve had. In the video, the couple explains that they were approached by Masterson’s family several months ago to write the letters to “represent the person that we knew for 25 years.”
“The letters were not written to question the legitimacy of the judicial system,” Kunis said, “Or the validity of the jury’s ruling.” “They were intended for the judge to read,” Kutcher adds, “And not to undermine the testimony of any of the victims, or re-traumatize them in any way. We would never want to do that, and we’re sorry if that has taken place.” Kunis: “Our heart goes out to everyone who has ever been a victim of sexual assult, sexual abuse, or rape.”
216 Comments
But I spent all this money on a new pitchfork and torch!
See, this is how Big Angry Mob gets you. Everyone thinks they need a brand new pitchfork and torch each time, but the old ones you have were probably perfectly serviceable.
You don’t even need a real torch. The tiki torches you put around your RV campsite work just as well.
Ah, hell. Where’d I put that receipt?
Are you under the impression that this “apology” fixes anything
Keep them shiny and sharp. There will be another day.
You should consider torch rental.
It puzzles me how many people in showbiz support Roman Polanski since he was known for being a nightmare to work with on films like Rosemary’s Baby and Chinatown. Not that him being a good guy to being around would make what he did less horrific, but it would make it more understandable why people would support him.
I think it used to be considered established fact that great artists are necessarily tortured souls with a fuckton of character flaws. Whether it’s great art that exists in spite of the artist being a bad person, or great art that only exists because the artist is a bad person, the justification for their character is inherent in the quality of the work itself. Even if a person is awful to work with, and if they treat people like dirt, if the finished product is amazing, then that behavior must have been for the good of everyone involved. I think most of this philosophy has been repudiated these days, though some older people still cling to it, and many younger people are probably somewhat inclined to distrust happy or content artists.
That’s true, I think. As a card-carrying “older person,” I used to feel like a person’s flaws were part of what helped make them a great artist of some sort. Now I just accept that people whose work I admire may not be people I would want to know or particularly like.
I feel like it’s a little more complicated than that. These people were/are real artists, and the work is valuable, that’s why people with lots of options would/will still line up to work with them. Would Kubrick’s films still work if he weren’t such a driven perfectionist, or if he kept the perfectionism but would only make films if he had double the budgets he did, so he could turn one hard day into two or three relaxing days getting what he wanted.I think people are still just as inclined to deal with it, and the main reason we see less of it because there are fewer artists like that. People will go do 45 takes for David Fincher, repeating the same simple movements until they’re hallucinating an out-of-body experience, and be glad they did. But having an awful time on set making a movie with Lars von Trier is a lot different than having a miserable and difficult time making disposable entertainment. There’s zero point and purpose going through hell to make Bohemian Rhapsody. People aren’t interested in making excuses for that now, and I don’t think they ever really were.
There’s a whiff of “Roman got caught for doing shit a whole lot of entertainment industry types were doing back then,” and since he ran – those who “support” him are more chagrinned and relieved that he took one for the team and just glad that they didn’t get caught. That’s a whiff anyway.
I think a lot of the support was largely sympathy for the unthinkable tragedy of the Sharon Tate murder.
And the Holocaust survivor part.
So if my pregnant wife gets turned inside-out by murder hippies I’m all clear to groom and rape teenagers?
I’m not defending Polanski. Just attempting to speculate what the mentality around the support in 2002 was built around. A big factor was, at the time we only knew of one victim, and she had forgiven him. Which likely helped the feelings of “Let’s give Polanski a fair chance” when that happened in 2002. Of course, now we know there are more victims and now it’s increasingly clear Polanski doesn’t feel any remorse. So kindly don’t ever assume I’m defending Polanski there.
Polanski’s a great guy . . . as long as you’re not a hott little 13 year old girl with a penchant for champaign and ‘ludes!
Roman Polanski being a Holocaust survivor and having lost Sharon Tate and his unborn child to the Manson Family helped to fuel a narrative that he was wronged because the judge was going back on his deal as well as being an excuse for what he had done (i.e. a man with a ton of trauma acted out inappropriately because he had just “been through so much.”))
Tomorrow: “Ashton Kutcher, Mila Kunis retract apology, double-down on supporting Danny Masterson”
Next week: An AV Club slideshow retrospective on the Ashton Kutcher & Mila Kunis apology articles.
Top 10 Ashton Kutcher & Mila Kunis Apologies Slideshow
How about a slideshow of Topher Grace’s never-changing facial expression?
The apology itself boils down to “hey, we’re sorry you found about this. It was never our intention that anyone would find out we were vouching for this rapist. We thought we could get him a reduced sentence without you or the victims noticing, and we deeply regret that it hasn’t played out that way.” I buy that sentiment is sincere.
Given how scripted it was, how they still doubled down on how they did it because he’s such a great guy, they still don’t actually acknowledge Masterson’s victims but rape and sexual assault victims in general, they don’t acknowledge how their letters could have harmed Masterson’s victims at all, and when they openly stated that it was meant to have been seen by the judge… Hell, they don’t even acknowledge his guilt, just that they weren’t trying to diminish the jury’s decision.. They didn’t acknowledge the pain and suffering he caused his victims, nor do they acknowledge his guilt in the letters. Both of them just looked pissed off that this was now out in the open, and don’t look contrite or apologetic at all.Pretty sure they had no intention on these letters becoming public and still support and stand by their friendly rapist.What’s interesting with those letters is that they all follow the exact same format and read like Scientology BS from start to end and actively promoted his innocence.
They doubled down and still supported him in the video. So no retraction necessary. They don’t even acknowledge his guilt or the pain he caused his victims.
Meanwhile, Debra Jo Rupp and Kurtwood Smith still escape any and all criticism for writing the same letters of support for Danny Masterson. Funny how that worked out…
What kind of cultural currency do either of those people possess at this time?Shit, what do Kunis and Kutcher even do anymore? I guess she still voices Meg in Family Guy, but that seems like a role she’ll be entrenched in until they finally pull the plug on the entire series.
Apparently he has gone full tech bro with his investments. I don’t know if that culture gaf about him though. I shouldn’t think GenZ would know much or care about these people, even though they’re very rich. I also suspect that that’s exactly how this couple would prefer to opperate. They probably get up to some shady stuff and prefer to stay under the radar.
I don’t think they’te doing things to be shady, I think they’re clueless.
Y’know when I was a boy, we just called people like that “stupid”.
Shut up, Mila!
That took me longer than it should have to get.
That reads like a suggestion of some kind of -ism but I can’t figure out what. Reverse ageism maybe?
Seems more like people resent Kutcher and Kunis’ fame more than they do Smith and Rupp’s.
Who?
They’re featured on that show that you know Mila Kunis and Ashton Kutcher from that you’re pretending to have never heard of to make an inane point – hope that helps.
It’s ok, Franklin; there’s worse places to die than on a hill.
Hills are nice.
I like hills.
I like outrage being shown equally to actors who do the same thing another set of actors do – to each their own.
I like hills.
And cake. I like hills and cake. Ever have cake on a hill? I hope to someday.
I heard Joe Jonas say good things about cake by the ocean.
“I like outrage being shown equally to actors who do the same thing another set of actors do – to each their own.”
They were all included in the article. Only Kunis and Kutcher were included in THIS article because only Kunis and Kutcher issued an apology.
How are you this fucking stupid?
It does not work that way. Maybe in a legal sense if a famous person and a less famous person get caught for the same crime, then they get the same legal punishment. However the famous person has a larger fall from public grace. The less famous person may just be a foot note in the public perception. There is no right or wrong or equality to it.
The band on stage!
No one knows who they are and Mila and Ashton are A-list.We can have outrage for all, but the more famous (and the more influential) deserve the most of it first.
Nobody knows who the people on the show that made Kunis and Kutcher famous are? That’s as much of a stretch as saying Mila and Ashton are A-list – your fame-based outrage is noted and telling.
dude. i don’t disagree with your points, but i’ve just read like, 20 posts of yours just replying to this ONE comment. put the device down.
So people aren’t supposed to comment on threads here? TIL…
Good thing football’s on for the next couple of hours.
I mean have they though? (I’m being genuine here, I got off Twitter post-Elon so I haven’t kept up) Either way, I feel like they haven’t caught as much heat because, well, they’re old. I mean, honestly even if they’re famous (and at this point they’re not A-list celebs) they’re probably not really on social media, they probably have people running it for them for the most part. So what would be the point of angry tweeting at them? They either won’t see it… or won’t give a damn.
Both Red (@tahitismith) and Kitty (@DJRupp) have Twitter accounts. Being older and slightly less famous than Kunis and Kutcher absolves them of the scorn their younger contemporaries are getting for writing the same support letters? Come on…
I’m not saying it absolves them, I’m saying that’s probably why they’re not catching as much heat as Kutcher & Kunis are.
Gee, being able to know what Kurtwood Smith has to say about anything might nudge me to finally getting into this here twitter . . . thing.
People are plenty angry at them too.
But all the anger and articles are only about Kelso and Jackie’s letters of support, why do Red and Kitty get a pass?
We reached out to Fez for his take, but all he wanted to talk about was how he deflowered Mandy Moore and Lindsay Lohan.
They shouldn’t have either, but tbh, Kunis and Kutcher are both younger and more famous.
So older and slightly less famous people are allowed to write letters of support for people they worked with who commit brutal crimes, but when you’re younger and more famous you should know better?
Everyone’s allowed to do anything they want. I think most of us will hold people closer to our own age accountable for things they should know better about than people 30 years older than them. Seriously, I’m not sure what point you’re ultimately trying to make, and I doubt it’s in good faith, but does anyone care what Clarence Boddicker thinks about this?
If people care what Kelso and Jackie think about this, it seems weird that they don’t care about what Red and Kitty think about the same thing, especially when they all worked on the same show with the same actor guilty of rape. I’m not sure why you feel the actors who played Clarence Boddicker and the neighbour in “WandaVision” should get passes for writing the same type of support letters the actors who played Steve Jobs and a bad mom in “Bad Moms” did because of their age. Does that mean you don’t hold your parents accountable for things they should know better about because they’re older than you?
What does Donna’s cracker-ass boyfriend from when Eric left to be a rambling card player or something think about all this?
That cracker isn’t a big enough star so apparently, it doesn’t matter.
Now that I’m thinking of it, is Donna still down with the “church”?
You’re right. Let’s crucify them. It’ll be sick as fuck. I just wanted to make sure you were as down as I was.
“If people care what Kelso and Jackie think about this, it seems weird that they don’t care about what Red and Kitty think about the same thing”No it doesn’t. “Kelso” and “Jackie” are still young, famous, and in the media for all sorts of things. No one ever thinks about Rupp and Smith anymore. Famous people get talked about. Not-very-famous people don’t, generally.
I’m certain Rupp and Smith get talked about when the show that made Kunis and Kutcher famous gets mentioned. If the letters of support are the issue, it seems weird you think what Red and Kitty wrote is less problematic because they’re not-very-famous people.
“I’m certain Rupp and Smith get talked about when the show that made Kunis and Kutcher famous gets mentioned.”I mean I’m sure you’re “certain,” but your personal certainty doesn’t mean it’s actually true. Plus, the subject here isn’t “the show that made Kunis and Kutcher famous.” The subject here Danny Masterson raped some folks and famous people whose names get clicks wrote letters in support. Smith and Rupp aren’t famous people whose names get clicks. Also, Smith and Rupp didn’t issue apology videos. This article is about the apology video.“it seems weird you think what Red and Kitty wrote is less problematic because they’re not-very-famous people.”If you can show me where I said I thought it was less problematic, I’ll be better able to respond to this claim. Without that I have to assume you meant to address this part so someone else.
I get that you’re here for the clicks and big stars, but the real subject here is two sets of famous people wrote letters in support of Danny Masterson. I pointed out that one set is being crucified for it while the other set weren’t, your pissing and moaning about who’s more famous on the set of That 70s/90s Show won’t change that fact.
“I get that you’re here for the clicks and big stars”What? “I pointed out that one set is being crucified for it while the other set weren’t”That’s not all you did, though. You said “funny how that worked out” as if it’s not very easily explainable. What point were you trying to make there exactly? You expressed some seeming confusion as to why Rupp and Smith weren’t as big of a story. People tried to explain how news works to you and you still seem resistant for some reason. It’s not “funny” how it worked out. It’s literally how news works always in every case. “your pissing and moaning about who’s more famous on the set of That 70s/90s Show won’t change that fact.”What about my comments indicated to you that I thought it would change anything? You expressed confusion. I was trying to help you out. Why would I “moan” about Kunis and Kutcher being more famous? That doesn’t make sense. Why is their being famous something I would be sad about? Do you know what “piss and moan” means?I think what happened here is that you thought you expressed a thesis and you are learning that your communication wasn’t all you hoped it would be, and that’s upsetting for you. It seems the thesis that you wish you had put forth is that it’s a problem that Rupp and Smith are getting off without controversy. With that thesis I agree! It definitely is! And that’s really all you had to say. It’s weird that you’re acting like everyone else is crazy when you’re the one who doesn’t understand why they aren’t getting more press.
Do you know what “piss and moan” means?
Does it mean writing 7 paragraphs about why I can’t wonder why one set of co-stars are being crucified for writing letters of support for someone while the other set aren’t for doing the exact same thing?
No. “Piss and moan” means writing more than 7 paragraphs about how your panties are twisted that no one gives a shit about Kurtwood Smith and Debra Jo Rupp.
Despite being key players on the show that made Kutcher and Kunis now internet pariahs, Smith and Rupp are just a bunch of nobodies on a hit show despite committing the same offense their co-stars did- funny how that worked out.
Yeah you keep saying “funny how that worked out.” Except it’s not funny at all, or strange, as multiple people have explained to you. But you just want to continue to piss and moan, as is your right.
Yes, it is my right. How big of you to finally accept that.
lol okay
Everyone’s allowed to do anything they want. Wasn’t that Danny’s defense?
I didn’t say free of consequences.
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.
I’m older and not-famous-at-all. I write letters to judges all day. Nobody’s mad at me. Except a few of the judges.
Let’s hope Tommy Chong didn’t write anything, people won’t know if they should criticize him or downplay it because he’s old and more famous than all of them.
funny you say that…
Your thesis is flawed. Rupp and Smith were included in all the articles and their letters were printed. Rupp isn’t active on Twitter but I looked at her Instagram and it was filled with endless incendiary comments. They are not “escaping any and all” criticism at all. It’s simply not true.Obviously, you must understand that Kutcher and Kunis are bigger names. And that fame drives links being clicked. Correct? They also are more active in both their careers and with their online footprints, and they’re the ones who are deciding to address this fallout. But fame is fame. What do you want?In a way, your question is as preposterous as me asking the following: why did Masterson’s rape trial get more media attention than my aunt’s? Well. One of the rapists was on TV shows. Not rocket science, is it?
I must have missed the A.V Club article that singled out Rupp and Smith. Good thing your aunt’s rapist didn’t have letters of support from anyone famous, apparently you’d only be upset about the ones written by bigger stars.
Oh, I didn’t realize you missed it. Here it is, the original article where they are singled out. As I said, yes, Kutcher and Kunis end up in headlines because let’s face it, more people are clicking that link than one with Rupp and Smith. But they were definitely included in most every article I saw on this subject, and yes, their socials are being hammered by being people calling them out. So, again, I implore you, what are you mad about?https://www.avclub.com/ashton-kutcher-mila-kunis-danny-masterson-letters-1850819739
That Kurtwood Smith and Debra Jo Rupp aren’t facing the same amount of criticism or scorn for writing the same letters of support for Danny Masterson that Mila Kunis and Ashton Kutcher have; you may have noticed their names aren’t in that URL you provided, despite everyone involved being on the same show. Your support of clickbait aside, there’s plenty of anger going around these days, if you want to focus your indignation on the big stars, so be it. I hope your aunt received justice.
Your outrage at your perception of unbalanced outrage is bizarre. Then, someone corrected you by doing the social media research you should have done, you doubled down. AV Club doesn’t own all of media and it doesn’t exist to deliver the perfect and specific article you think is needed for this story. If this bothers you so much, start your own free media website. I have to warn you, though, that if you do you’ll read comments from willfully obtuse people such at yourself.
It was so, so wrong of me to have noticed the lack of criticism and outrage one set of co-stars got over another set of co-stars for doing the exact same thing – and the judge said Masterson was the heartless monster.
Anyways…
Is this a bit? Are you a pain piggy or something?
I’m more like a consistency cow. Meanwhile, Debra Jo Rupp and Kurtwood Smith still escape any and all criticism for writing the same letters of support for Danny Masterson that Ashton Kutcher and Mila Kunis did. Funny how that worked out…
So you didn’t read this article, the previous article, or look up their social media. Got it, pain piggy. Or is it sealion?
Like I said twice already, consistency cow.
Sealion, you’re commenting on an open forum. By all means, rewrite the article. Post it here. I’ll even pat you on the head for meting out the absolutely perfect amount of outrage as you see fit.
Aw, shit. Taryn Manning has also entered into the Masterson fight. I hope your outrage stores have recharged, because she got her own article, too!
Manning wasn’t a co-star on “That 70s/90s Show”, idiot. My issue is with one set of co-stars are being crucified for writing letters of support for someone on the show they all appeared on, while the other set of co-stars aren’t for doing the exact same offense. Like I’ve already said…
…consistency cow.
Sealion, that’s a dodge. And they were. Every article references their letters and they got dragged in social media. What the fuck are you talking about? As for working for free, you’ve spent a considerable amount of your precious time on Earth getting Big Mad Online because the universe didn’t hand out the exact equal amount of outrage according to you. You refuse to see that there was blowback for them. And now you’re stuck in this position. This is not being a “consistency cow,” people did give them shit for it. It’s sealioning.
Is that why you didn’t respond to the Taryn Manning comment?
I responded to both, silly. Read it again.
Yeah, I see you don’t want to talk about Taryn Manning anymore. Was it me pointing out she wasn’t a co-star on “That 70s/90s Show” and has nothing to do with my point about Rupp and Smith escaping the brunt of criticism for writing the same letters of support for Masterson that Kunis and Kutcher did? All that lecturing about sealioning must have caused you to lose your train of thought.
They didn’t escape it. They were referenced in these articles (and others if you bothered to look) and they were criticized on their social media. Multiple people pointed it out to you and you completely ignored them and insisted you were right for being outraged at uneven outrage. You aren’t interested in an exchange of ideas. Whatever argument you think you have is not only of little value, it’s extremely insensitive when compared to the very real criminal activities of a serial rapist. You’re an unserious person. A sealion.
They did escape it. Kutcher and Kunis were the focus of the outrage and the brunt of the social media criticism from people like yourself who weren’t as jealous of Red and Kitty’s fame as they were of Kelso and Jackie’s – that remains apparent 15 days after your post. Finally you’re consistent about something.
Kudos for propping yourself up as the only one of us who cares about Masteron’s crimes, who knew ignoring Rupp and Smith’s letters of support for Masterson was what you needed to feel empathy.
I don’t refer to actors as their character names because I’m not a baby-brained moron. That remains apparent 15 days after your post.
No, you just proudly ignore the actions of one set of actors in favor of chastising another set of actors despite both sets doing the exact same thing – Hyde’s victims weep at your callousness.
(P.S. That’s the name of the character Masteron played, superfan.)
No I didn’t. They are all pieces of shit for defending a rapist. What I did do is make fun of you for clutching your pearls over the perception of “unfair treatment” in the press. A thing that is not only not true, but doesn’t matter. Sealion.
You went from insisting to only mattered that Kutcher and Kunis were pieces of shit for defending a rapist to saying everyone from the cast of “That 70s/90s Show” who wrote letters of support for Masterson are all pieces of shit – way to stick with to your guns and make a stand.
Your typo, as well as your entire reply doesn’t make sense. I don’t know what you are attempting to say. Regardless, refusing to process a counter argument isn’t something to be proud of. Sealion.
Refusing to process a counter argument and rejecting your whiny take about my comment are two different things. You went from insisting it only mattered that Kutcher and Kunis were pieces of shit for defending a rapist to saying everyone from the cast of “That 70s/90s Show” who wrote letters of support for Masterson are all pieces of shit – way to stick with to your guns and make a stand.Clear enough for your flipflopping mortality yet?
It’s not flipflopping morality. My personal feelings about all the people who supported a rapist weren’t what we were originally discussing. We were discussing you freaking out because you believe your parasocial friends (Kunis and Kutcher) are receiving unbalanced treatment in the press. They aren’t. I am capable of containing multiple opinions about multiple things at once: (1 Kutcher and Kunis are not being unfairly called out any more than any one else who wrote the letters, and 2) Everyone who wrote the letters is shitty. You apparently cannot maintain more than one thought and accuse others of having the same cognitive defect. Sealion.
Not a problem – mind if I wait until G/O Media puts me on their payroll? You may work for free, I don’t.
Consistency cow.
Of course I noticed. That’s why I pointed out how media works. The headline of the article is:A Bunch of That 70’s Show Actors Wrote Letters Asking For Leniency For Danny Masterson.The article clearly discusses all these people, Rupp and Smith included, and quotes their letters. Your original thesis was that these two have escaped “any and all criticism.” Perhaps you were just going overboard to make your, quite odd, point? I’ve clearly shown you how that’s not true. The articles all mentioned them. Their socials are being hammered. But you’ve decide, (accurately, I would assume) that the two most famous people involved are driving a greater share of the reaction. One could also point out, Kutcher has a far greater public linking with Masterson than anybody else here, having appeared on subsequent projects with him.Personally, I’m not focusing much ire on any of these people. As vile as these crimes are, I also understand the brutally hard situation these associates were put in. It’s terrible all around. I understand they’ll take shots, that’s the price of this.
If writing letters of support for a rapist is the issue, Rupp and Smith got off easy compared to Kunis and Kutcher. I had no idea pointing that out would be considered a concern.
“Rupp and Smith got off easy compared to Kunis and Kutcher”
No. They. Didn’t.
“you may have noticed their names aren’t in that URL you provided”?
So fucking what? Why is the URL the important part? READ THE ARTICLE.
Apparently they’re mad that Rupp and Smith aren’t getting exactly the same amount of media attention for this as Kutcher and Kunis. You know, like how Disney and WB insisted that Mickey and Bugs get exactly the same amount of dialog and be on screen for exactly the same length of time in Who Framed Roger Rabbit.I’m preferring to wait a bit before getting outraged over Rupp and Smith getting a pass (relatively speaking). My outrage is currently more focused on attempts by certain parties to transform this country into Gilead.
“I must have missed the A.V Club article that singled out Rupp and Smith.”
They. Were. Included. In. The. Article. About. Kunis. And. Kutcher’s. Letters.
They weren’t singled out because THEY HAVEN’T ISSUED APOLOGIES.
Jesus fucking Christ, dude.
I think people have been critical of them, but they also don’t suppose anti-trafficking charities publicly which put more light on Kunis and Kutcher.
Some people need to stop obliquely implying their point…
They’re old.
Because nobody cares about them anyway. Nobody approves of anyone writing these letters but it’s not as if people ever talk about Rupp or Smith anyway. Also it’s hella hypocritical for Kutcher, who runs a sex-trafficking non-profit.
Well, Rupp and Smith did play the parents on that show. They probably “got away” (e.g. face less scrutiny) with it because they are older (“the olds”, he was a sweet boy) and perhaps had a more maternal/paternal relationship with the young cast.Whereas Kunis and Kutcher are contemporaries. They presumably would have more intimate knowledge of how he acted off set.
These two are idiots. I’m smart, so whenever someone I care about gets in any legal trouble I immediately throw them under the bus to make sure I look like a good guy.
In the middle of all this, one has to ask themselves where is Wilmer Valderraaaaaahhh that’s right…..
He’s… doing television?
Ugh that dude was fucking Lindsay Lohan – so he’s prob getting IV penicillin.
Keeping his head down and staying out of it. Which honestly, is the best move.
No we don’t.
Wilmer has quite the reputation of his own for sexual harassment in the Vail, CO area. New waitstaff is warned about him. Don’t fuck with (or just plain try to fuck) your wait-people, guys- we all talk to each other.
Rape? Bad. Rape by someone who shows up to work on time? Less bad.
Mussolini couldn’t make the trains run on time, but Danny made sure the rapes ran on time.
Rape by someone who helps daughter with math homework = not bad at all…
It’s actually a big deal. If you’re out raping all night it’s easy to oversleep that alarm.
I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone so visibly pissed that they had to give an apology as Mila is here
Stereogum has a lot more damning evidence for Ashton and Mila:https://www.stereogum.com/2235655/the-mars-voltas-cedric-bixler-zavala-comments-on-danny-mastersons-30-years-to-life-sentence-for-rape/news/
Damn, that really nails Assy and Mila hard! Worth the click! I guess Assy calling the RAPE Victims ‘crazy fucking bitches’ wouldn’t have played as well now as it did the last time they slung that nastiness out? From the timing of past instances that shoots down any further attempts to sweep it under the carpet, but they are still acting like they are shocked by the horrid actions of their long-time buddy. They’ve known for a while that he was a free-range rapist and they continued to protect him. I never really cared enough to like or dislike either of these two idiots before, but they are major pieces of rape apologist shit! Thanks for that link!
Oh shit I just realized the date that Chrissie Bixler refers to is the date that Ashton’s girlfriend was murdered:“Ashley Ellerin was a fashion design student at the Los Angeles Fashion Institute of Design and Merchandising. She was also a part-time stripper in Las Vegas. On February 21st, 2001, Ashley Ellerin was brutally murdered inside her Los Angeles apartment.”Hmmm…I wonder what they said on the phone call?
That’s a big bowl of yikes.
These two are complete phonies. I’ve never been able to stand them. That’s just me, maybe. But I’ve never understood where their popularity came from. Were they ‘cool’ once?
Also, they don’t bathe their kids, so that’s gross.
Wait, what?! Actually, now that I think about it, how bad could it be?
Are you talking about Ashton and Milla, or Cedric and Chrissy?
Holy shit, thanks for sharing.
This would be a lot more effective if it wasn’t exclusively teen gossip queen vagueposting. Especially the part where he heavily implies that Danny Masterson helped Ashton plot and commit a murder! It all ends up coming across as “Ooo, you better watch, you; I’ve got proof of the most heinous dirt on you!…But not the kind of proof that would stand up to any legal challenge for libel, so I’m not going to get into details about it at this time, in this public forum!”
One thing about this: It was helpful to know that showing up for work on time is a feat worthy of mentioning in a rapist-but-nice-guy character reference letter.You are a class act, Mr. Kutcher.
I don’t disagree, but I am always shocked at just how many people have difficulty showing up for work on time. Or sometimes at all. The old adage that “80% of success in life is just showing up” is surprisingly accurate because a lot of people can’t seem to manage even that.
Yeah. I don’t expect all my colleagues to be there at seven, but if you’re not there until ten and you go home before I leave? Maybe there’s a reason our team is struggling to keep up with the workload.
Or, maybe you have to come in early and leave late because YOU…are incompetent, while I come in late and leave early because I know what the fuck I’m doing?
I work with a guy who we basically say he’s on “____ Time”; whatever the call time is, add 30 minutes before he shows up
CPT?
That’s what I thought he meant at first, but I think it’s just supposed to be “Jason Time” or whatever.
Jason kills when Jason’s goddamned good and ready. You better be as well.
Have you considered just giving this person a schedule where every meeting is shifted forward half an hour?
Can confirm this works like a charm on people who are perennially late. I worked with someone for a volunteer org and she could not arrive to anything less than fifteen minutes late. I started lying to her about start times and remarkably she started showing up on time.
Maybe they have time blindness.
https://www.tiktok.com/@chaotic_philosopher/video/7255063782970445098?_r=1&_t=8e469vr81vf
I made a comment somewhere else about how if “being a professional at work and being nice to people”, which is somewhere near the bare minimum for being human, was the about the best thing someone could say about my “character”
That reeked of their lawyers writing the letters to me.
It is making me think a little bit of the Norm Macdonald “The worst part is the hypocrisy/I think the worst part was the rape” line.
Well I hardly think the Masterson was wall-to-wall rapist in the set. So it’s kinda logical that he might have been nice person towards his ex-cast members.
Ah, the classic “sorry you took it that way”.
And the classic “these celebrities owe me more (for some reason).”
What creeps. Pick a fucking lane – either help your friend or don’t.
They’re Hollywood elites. Everything they do is to help themselves, especially when it looks like they’re helping someone else.
Oh, no! Not “Hollywood elites”!
Maybe it’s just me, but that so-called ‘apology’ sure AF comes off as more like they were seriously pissed off having to make it and doesn’t seem sincere at all. Their nice little speech sounds nothing like empathy and more like it’s based in anger. Anger that it got too hot for them and that they had to retract their previous stupid comments. It sounds like they are attempting to lecture us about how they’ve always supported rape/assault victims, but if you read DraculaMountain’s Stereogum link that’s definitely not the case. They are all pieces of shit!
Ashton Kutcher is absolutely fuming that his time spent telling us that “real men don’t buy girls” a decade ago didn’t buy him a little goodwill here. Isn’t being against some forms of rape enough???
It’s clearly mixed emotions. I think they meant what they said, but they do seem a little irritated, Mila especially. Poor thing had to get up in early in the morning and explain to the internet how two things can be true. (which to be fair, always needs to be explained to the internet). She can barely look at the camera, lol
But no one’s arguing that two things can’t be true? Everyone knows that a person who serial rapes can and usually does appear to be a super nice guy to the folks he’s not raping? No one ever said that a person who serial rapes never shows up to work on time? We didn’t need that explained to us.What we needed explained to us is why they thought that a person who was a nice guy to them personally while also serial raping other people should receive a lighter sentence. And that’s the part they didn’t explain.
They definitely could have said more
They can’t really “retract” it, though. They submitted it to a court. Now, it’s an official government record. It’s out of their hands, and it’s permanent. (Also, obviously, the judge already announced the sentence.) This new statement is quite literally too little, too late.
“Looks like so-called PC culture is killing the rape apologist industry!”
Their PR team has failed majorly at this whole thing. They shouldn’t have let them write the letters, and having written them, they should have done a WAY better job with this apology. It’s just horrible. They would have been better off keeping their mouths shut and letting it blow over. It completely misses the point of the criticism.
I have to wonder if their PR people were involved at all in this? I would bet that this was probably them reacting after becoming very angry and then posting while still Very Hot. They were probably pissed that not being allowed to support their old rapey (but he’s just a misunderstood great guy!) cohort. They don’t seem to be mad at Danny in this video. No, they’re mad at everyone who rightfully put them on blast. Just look at the thumbnail for this video. Does this appear to be the faces of people who are deeply saddened by their unforced errors? I doubt that any PR person was involved at all and if their PR people/person was halfway smart, they’d probably be wise to dump them as clients. It probably won’t be career-ending for either of them, but it certainly won’t help their careers out. Cue the requisite floating dumpster fire in the flood gif…
The instagram account colormeloverly does an ongoing thing of PR for celebrity blunders, and she released her one on this and it’s funny. Basically saying, yes, PR teams were probably not involved here at all.
“Maybe it’s just me, but that so-called ‘apology’ sure AF comes off as more like they were seriously pissed off having to make it and doesn’t seem sincere at all.”
It *is* you.
“Sorry we got caught supporting a convicted rapist.”
Why do any of you even give a shit what they think about him or whether or not they support him? If you aren’t one of the 3 girls how does it affect your lives in any way?
Because, as a society, rapists get away with rape every single day. And part of that is because friends and family of the rapists say that they are good people and couldn’t have possibly done this…
“He’s such a nice young man with a good future ahead of him. You should sentence him to 100 hours of public service and time served.” Sadly there isn’t a person reading this who doesn’t know of a case where this was the outcome and it’s enraging every single time.
Jezebel just did a story about Title IX offices that refuse to do anything to rapists/sexual assaulters because they don’t want to “ruin their bright future,” but don’t think twice about ruining the futures of any of the accusers.https://jezebel.com/college-title-ix-sexual-assault-himpathy-1850382616Kunis and Kutcher are just perpetuating that same bullshit.
It because of people like them that rape victims don’t go to the police.
Uhh, his victims did go to the police, and now he’s going away for 30 years. If anything he’s an example that no matter how rich you are or how powerful your friends are, doing rape means you go to prison.
You don’t have to be a rape victim to think that rape is terrible. You’re asking us to explain to you the human emotion of empathy. …Do you have a disability? A personality disorder or some form of autism?
Because it happens in real life all the time to girls we know. And because we know that we don’t actually even have to know the girls to give a shit about rape? Because that Brock dude got clean off on a rape because his dad told the judge he had a bright future that shouldn’t be derailed over a “few minutes of action”?
Well, some of us have this thing called “empathy”. You should look into it.
“We are extremely sorry to have thought that these letters would never become public.”
“Who knew people had strong opinions about convicted rapists? TIL, right?”
Why is this a surprise? He’s probably quite pleasant to those he doesn’t plan to RAPE.
They weren’t intended to undermine? That’s what they did do tho…. Ashton Kutcher clearly isn’t as intentional as Masterson.
“They were approached by Masterson’s family several months ago” Just say the church of scientology my gosh
It’s probably just the wife/lawyer. This happens in every single sentencing case.
Questions about truthfulness and the ethics of supporting a friend convicted of a horrible crime aside, why can’t actual actors pull off a better apology video? There’s you, there’s a camera and there’s a script or at least a list of key phrases your publicist told you to hit. How is this different than your usual job? Look into the camera and project regret and sincerity as best you can. Definitely don’t refuse to make eye contact while spitting out canned lines in a tone that suggests you’re pissed about having to do this. Maybe you can’t change being a piece of shit but you can at least be a professional and spray some air freshener to cover up the stink, Jesus. Also this is like a 3 out of 10. Ukulele lady set a new standard in a toxic gossip trainwreck kind of a way. If you’re going to be cringe you have to be laughable too. I barely recall what she did, only that she’s incredibly lame despite having a nice voice. So mission achieved for her, pretty much.
Hey now, I like how they bounced lines back and forth. That had to take a few rehearsals, at least. We see this with presenters at award shows. Dress these two in formal wear, put them on a stage, and it works just as well.
“And now, here are the nominees…”
Maybe their hearts weren’t really in this job. You know what they say in the business, you do one apology video for them, one apology video for you.
“why can’t actual actors pull off a better apology video?”
Because they’re actors, not writers.
They have all been good friends for 20 years, of course they are going to write a character letter to the judge. Why is that a problem?
If you don’t innately understand the problem of writing a great character reference for a convicted rapist, I don’t know what to tell you.
They did what friends do. None of them said what he did was ok. They provided character references of their friend as they knew him. Thats what happens in criminal cases every single day throughout the country. The only difference is these got publicized.
You’re missing the part where you shouldn’t be friends with a rapist.
Nobody is missing that. Its not like they sat there and watched him rape. They didnt excuse what he did, or claim it didnt happen. Mortimer Brewster has a good post about it in these comments, that explains it better than me, but basically they did what they were expected to do as long term friends of the guilty party.
Again, the thing everyone else is pointing out is that you don’t have to stand by rapists as their friend. You can male them your ex-friend instead. Being a rapist should be a one-way ticket to being an ex-friend.
“ Thats what happens in criminal cases every single day throughout the country.”We know? Why do you think that’s something we don’t know? It’s the remaining friends with a rapist part, claiming to “support victims,” just not these victims, and generally being a big hypocrite part that bothers.
Giving a support letter for sentencing does not mean that they agree with his actions, or that they dont support the victims. Not everything is that black and white.
It just means they think the judge should go easy on the sentence, which if I were a victim would not make me feel supported. Writing a letter of support for my victimizer is literally the opposite of supporting me. I don’t know if “everything” is that black and white but this damn sure is. I’m just curious do you feel you could remain good friends with a rapist and still with a straight face tell his victims “I support you also”? Tell me how that would work.
You are misrepresenting what has happened in order to justify your outrage.
1. Who said I was outraged? Oh, just you, because you’re doing that internet thing where you pretend the other person has high emotion so that you can pretend they’re being illogical. Fair enough.2. I’m not misrepresenting anything. That’s literally what the character support letters are for. It’s their literal, actual purpose, to influence the judge not to impose a heavy sentence.
“They did what friends do.”
No, they didn’t.
You can stop being friends with someone if they cross an ethical line, and for me, “multiple proven rapes” definitely counts.
If one of my friends or family members was convicted of rape, they’d be dead to me.
“Why is that a problem?”
Because, and I’m not sure if this article covers it, DANNY MASTERSON WAS CONVICTED OF MULTIPLE FORCIBLE RAPES.
That’s the problem.
How do you not understand that?
Maybe tomorrow they’ll issue an apology to Danny Masterson because their apology undermines the support for their long-time colleague and friend.
Having been asked to write a letter of support for someone facing sentencing in a felony trial, I know that I was told to not mention anything about the case and just write about some good things I knew about the person. It was designed to show the judge a different side to the person that didn’t come out in trial. It wasn’t meant to relitigate the case or to minimize the things that the person had been convicted of doing – that was all already part of the record. They aren’t even an attempt to say ‘this person shouldn’t be punished’ or ‘this good outweighs the bad.’ And it’s not meant to influence the public. The intent is to try to give the judge a stronger idea of who the person he’ll be sentencing is as a whole. And yes, we can argue that such letters are meant to influence the judge and can result in injustices and sentence disparities themselves.Maybe they just shouldn’t have written letters at all given their fame and the nature of the charges against Masterson. But the content of the letters they did write was unremarkable for these types of letters, and I don’t think it’s necessarily fair to criticize the specific content given the kind of writing they were asked to do (if they wrote a NYT Op-Ed with the same content, it would be a different story) and the limitations they were very likely asked to adhere to. Again, in retrospect, just refusing to write the letters would have been the way to go, but I doubt either of them thought much about the public impact of their letters when they were asked to write them. It was easier for me to say yes when I was asked because 1. I’m not famous (nor was the person convicted), and 2. the case was bankruptcy fraud which has a much smaller outrage circle.
I could see them thinking (or even being told) these would only be read by the judge.
How did these letters even come to light, I wonder? Or did I read that detail in the article and immediately forget?BTW, I once was asked to write one of these letters too. I refused, because I thought the guy was a POS, even outside of the specific crime he committed and was sentenced for.
“I could see them thinking (or even being told) these would only be read by the judge.”
And that makes it OK?
“And yes, we can argue that such letters are meant to influence the judge and can result in injustices and sentence disparities themselves.”lol We don’t even need to argue it. It’s literally the actual point of the letters.
“Having been asked to write a letter of support for someone facing sentencing in a felony trial, I know that I was told to not mention anything about the case and just write about some good things I knew about the person.”
You. Don’t. Have. To. Write. A. Letter. Of. Support. For. Someone. Who. Was. Convicted. Of. A. Felony.
You CERTAINLY don’t have to support a rapist.
Sorry. Im sorry. Im trying to remove it.
I’m starting to think Kutcher’s role in Vengeance was pretty close to the real him (albeit much more articulate, probably).
Nothin wrong with a lil hanky panky
“represent the person that we knew for 25 years.”Right but the person that you knew for 25 years was out there serial raping… You didn’t want to re-traumatize the victims in any way, but you wanted to make sure he didn’t get a heavy sentence for raping them? Come on.Friendship is friendship but I’m really surprised their PR people didn’t talk them out of this. It’s the absolute worst look. I wonder if they were told the letters would become part of the public record.