News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
I don’t get what they were thinking, how could they write a character letter for a convinced rapist? “Ya but he never raped us!”
Someone in a comment a few days ago, who was themselves asked to write such a letter for someone they knew who was charged and ultimately convicted, made an excellent observation:
Defense attorneys are very likely to have requested those character reference letters way before the case even made it to trial. So it's entirely possible that Kutcher and Kunis wrote those letters long ago, based on information they had at the time, probably thinking the charges were unfounded.
Now, obviously, the easy solution to that would be if they were to come out now and tell whether that happened or not, and make clear what they think now. Which is what I would do, but I'm also not a Hollywoo celebrity with publicists and handlers and lawyers.
If I'm not mistaken, Kutcher's letter actually referenced the verdict.
Oh well fuck him, then.
Right?! There has to be missing info.
Why would someone take a stand against abuse, but defend an old friend found guilty of that offense.
Also- why should Ashton resign? If anything, he should redouble his efforts. Smells of cowardice.
I'm gonna rely on my tried and true method of "take the good and leave the bad". Rich/famous folk live in a different world that I'd rather not spend too much time thinking about. I will continue to appreciate power being used to benefit the entirety of this world, though. Greedy people like rewards as much as or probably more than peasants like me.
"Also- why should Ashton resign? If anything, he should redouble his efforts. Smells of cowardice."
A spokesperson who is now the lightning rod for an issue that will detract from the message the organisation is trying to espouse, is a bad spokesperson.
Bristol Palin the national spokesperson for teen abstinence. 🙄
She's actually not at all. But you might in fact be the spokesperson for misguided pregnancies.
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2015/06/bristol-palin-pregnant
Was that supposed to prove she's a national spokesperson?
The thing you don't want to admit is that Kutcher doesn't actually consider being a serial rapist a deal breaker for his friends.
As to why he would defend that, it's just simple relationship bias. We'll hesitate a hell of a lot more if it's someone we like or think we know.
You should have seen the irrational tenacity with which one of my parents stuck by a pedophile, right up until their first few nights in prison, simply because they were dating. Even if it meant losing everyone around her. She was the only person under god who couldn't see this a mile away. His own kid was his first accuser, but surely not, right?
What kind of thing could your best friends do that you wouldn't initially defend them over?
These two have known each other for literal decades. I'm not too surprised he would refuse to accept it from someone he's been friends with for that long.
I am shocked that he would choose to step down entirely over it. I could see the question presenting itself to him, since it's...not wonderful PR...but I would have thought the cause itself would have been more important to him. He's between a rock and a hard place.
Yeah my understanding was that these were post conviction. And if that were the case why weren’t there a bunch more letters from all the other cast members. Unless they knew. I bet Topher knew..
Yes.
lamag.com/.image/c_limit%2Ccs_srgb%2Cfl_progressive%2Ch_2000%2Cq_auto:eco%2Cw_2000/MjAwNjY1MDgzMjg0Njk0NDAy/masterson4.jpg
Clickable link from above.
I mean...
If he wasn't found guilty, who would see the letter?
I saw that comment too. It shed a lot of light on a topic that I personally don't know much about.
On the other hand, sometimes people can get weird about sticking up for their friends under any circumstances. My parents and brother are weird that way. One example - they know a rich white kid who killed an entire family by driving drunk. The kid's own family disowned him. They didn't help with his legal support, his twin brother cut ties with anyone who supported him, and he did time in the state prison. I don't know the details about the crime, but he had graduated from a flagship state university and was from a very wealthy family. Not "paid for a wing at the local hospital wealthy" but definitely, "has a regulation size basketball court in their basement" wealthy. He absolutely fit the profile of Brock Allen Turner (the rapist).
He still got 5-10 years in state. It must have been bad. My family stepped up to support this asshole.
My brother routinely visited him in prison and gave him a job when he got out. I don't really fault my brother for that. (OK - I judge him a bit. The kid was always an asshole and he killed people. But he did his time.)
On the other hand, my parents have nothing but good things to say about this guy and generally act like he was the victim of a huge conspiracy by the state. They were also offended that their own personal friend "Stanley" was sent to old people prison (nursing home) for "no reason" after he threatened to shoot his nephew. It was a credible threat, too. Stan is very well armed and had been going off his rocker for more than a few years.
tl/dr - my family are assholes but if they decide you're a ride or die friend it doesn't matter what you've done
Not commenting is also an option for you, just for future reference.
Because God forbid we try and understand?
I don't think that's weird. Your family are just assholes sticking together with another asshole.
This makes sense and it’s kind of what I thought has happened. No one could really be that unaware as to write a character reference for someone convicted and not expect backlash. But why wouldn’t they just say that then ? Why not make a statement saying the reference was old, and they’re shocked and disappointed someone they trusted could do such a thing.
That’s what I don’t understand
You're lying or spreading incorrect information.
If you're doing it maliciously: stop it.
If you're just an idiot, stop it.
But he mentors other actors! And he doesn’t take drugs!
I really don’t know what either of them were thinking. Rapists don’t need leniency, especially in this situation.
I'm sure that's not what was in his letter.
If your question is merely about public relations, sure it's a terrible move. But I think there's actually a more meaningful question underlying all this furor; what are the limits of friendship or love? What is one supposed to do when someone close does something horrible? Cast them aside? Pretend you never knew them?
Kutcher must have had some idea of the risk he was taking, but he did it anyway. I find that striking. For some people friendships can be like family. I feel like this is an older sentiment that doesn't find expression often today. Would you find it appalling if Masterson's mother spoke on behalf of his character, or should she likewise keep her distance?
I don't know. It all just seems more complicated and tragic than the typical social media mob can process.
If Masterson's mother ran a non-profit that helped rape victims it would be a conflict of interest for her to write a character reference for her rapist son.
As it was here for Kutcher and it damaged his reputation badly.
Otherwise appreciate your post. There are a lot of interesting questions in it about human nature.
Personally, I think the church of scientology black mailed him into writing this. That Masterson spilled some dirt to his cult.
Ashton plays an idiot on tv but I don't think he's that dumb in real life. So my bet is blackmail.
I knew a guy, generally a good guy, and he helped me out when I was young.
Anyways, he made some bad choices (namely cheating on his fiance with his childhood bestie), knocked said girl up, they got married... they had another kid... a few years later this relationship turned sour, and I was rarely hearing from him. I later learned he was living out of his car at times.
At one point during this mess he told me his soon to be ex wife invited him over one night, they slept together, then he woke up with the cops in his face and her accusing him of raping her last night.
I didn't know what to think of it at the time, and I still don't. The person I thought I knew never would've cheated on his fiance... surely he wouldn't have raped someone.
Unlike this story, the charges for the guy I know were dropped and he wasn't prosecuted, let alone convicted. Maybe it was just a ploy for a better outcome in the divorce? That seems to be the conclusion the police drew. If it had gone to trial and he'd been convicted... I probably wouldn't have written a similar letter? But also maybe it would've been in some ways good for the judge to see not just this person at their worst moments but at better moments? What if the evidence wasn't strong? What if I hadn't followed the case closely?
I haven't heard from this guy in years at this point, hence why I'm avoiding the word friend. However at one point, he was a friend ... and I don't find it so easy to reconcile the "person you know" with the "person you've been told you know"
I think it's more about that difficulty reconciling, than "he never raped me." If they weren't lying in their letters as well... maybe this should just be considered part of the process? Like, yes Masterson committed the crime, now who else was he? Did he contribute nothing to society except for being a vicious Hollywood predator? etc.
The scientology thing adds a whole other angle here...
Anyways, the point is it's easy to not understand why someone would do something, but that doesn't mean it's not understandable (it doesn't mean it's justified either).
All the letters have one thing in common though: they're overly saccharine and suspiciously dodgy (actually that's two things, sorry). It's like they're trying to describe a modern-day Beaver Cleaver.
They likely assumed it wouldn’t get out. They were banking on being able to use their celebrity to try and influence the outcome.
In this case, it's actually not.