Hugh Hefner Declares War on GOP Bedroom Politics

Hugh Hefner is ready for war — not against his former wives or girlfriends, but against conservative politicians thrusting their viewpoints into other people’s bedrooms.

In a rare move, the founder of Playboy magazine picks up his pen and writes an editorial in the May issue of the men’s magazine. The politics website Politico.com notes in his editorial, headlined “The War Against Sex,” Hefner blasts “repressed conservatives … [for] pounding on America’s bedroom door.”

“For months I have watched the rhetoric building,” writes Hefner. “Last October, in an interview with an evangelical blogger, Rick Santorum promised to defund birth control on the grounds that contraception is ‘a license to do things in a sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be.’

 

“Ron Paul was no better, believing that the birth control pill did not cause immorality but that immorality creates the problem of wanting to use the pill. Mitt Romney vowed to see a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage and to overturn Roe v. Wade.” 

He also references Georgetown University law student Sandra Fluke, who was lambasted by conservative talk-show show Rush Limbaugh as “a slut” and “a prostitute” after testifying to congress about employers paying for birth control.

The Hef  promises not to let down his guard on America’s sexual freedom: “We won’t let that happen. … Welcome to the new sexual revolution.”

But not everyone is eager to have Hefner waving a flag for women’s rights. The women’s business news site, TheJaneDough.com, noted that while it appreciated Hefner’s defense of Fluke and his defense against GOP values, he’s a “notorious girlfriend collector” and “hardly one to preach about women’s rights.”

” Though many argue he had a role in the sexual revolution and provided lots of opportunities for women, he also sends the message that it’s acceptable to juggle multiple significant others at once, all the while objectifying them publicly.”

The GOP Does Not Even Know How Badly They Are Behaving

 Former Republican presidential candidate Jon Huntsman hinted he might depart the party in favor of a more-inclusive unnamed third party. Or did he? That seems to the debate following an interview with Jeff Greenfield.

 I like Huntsman. He had the right measure of conservative credentials along with a moderate approach to many of the most fervent issues in politics. And his experience in Asian foreign policy is unmatched in the history of U.S. presidential candidates. That’s what we need as China continues rev up its economic muscle.

So what makes Huntsman — always the loyal Republican – suggest he could depart the party of Lincoln within a few years? The answer is simple: The Republican Party is becoming so exclusional that it is difficult to reach out to independents and crossover Democrats.

 Huntsman has reluctantly given his endorsement to Mitt Romney. As a lifelong Republican, I can relate. I reluctantly will support Romney not because I think there is anything wrong with him — he’s more than qualified — just that he is uninspiring and, unfortunately, will have to move to the right on most issues to protect his base as the campaign unfolds.

 Last year, the Washington Post opined that Republican Party politics had devolved to a “coalition of intense policy demanders … own agendas that aim to get the voters.” Long gone are the days of campaigning on the major issues and doing what is right on all issues. These days, candidates from both parties are forced to pander to their base just to garner enough votes to win. Moderation in politics seems to be a bad thing, which is why candidates like Huntsman and the presumptive nominee Romney have such trouble gaining widespread support.

This has to change. We need more Republicans of the caliber of former Sen. Howard Baker. He knew how to govern and to compromise without sacrificing his principles. That’s the cure for America today.

Jon Huntsman Fed Up With the GOP Decides to Leave

It’s an exhilarating, if somewhat mystifying, experience to find yourself a supporting player in a modern media maelstrom. It’s even more instructive to learn that a dust-up over a few words can obscure a much more significant message.

“My first thought was, this is what they do in China on party matters if you talk off script.” 

Those words were spoken Sunday night by Jon Huntsman, the former Utah governor and Republican presidential candidate, in a public interview with me at New York’s 92nd Street Y. Huntsman was describing how his comments about the potential appeal of a third party got him disinvited to speak at a Republican National Committee event in Florida.

Before dawn, websites were reporting the quote under headlines like “Huntsman compares GOP to Communist Party of China.” By sunrise, Huntsman was on “Morning Joe,” scoffing that “bottom-feeder” blogs had taken his comments out of context. By midday,Buzzfeed–the target of Huntsman’s critique–had posted a lengthy video excerpt from my interview to argue that no, he had not been taken out of context.

For what it’s worth, I don’t think Huntsman was painting with a brush so broad as to compare the Republican Party with Communist China. For one thing, Huntsman is not yet under house arrest with his Internet access forbidden.

But here’s what the dust-up missed. If you take all of what he said to me over some 90 minutes, it is all but certain that John Huntsman is not going to be a Republican much longer.

Yes, he has endorsed Mitt Romney for president, though his expression when he does so has all the spontaneous pleasure of the star of a hostage tape. He cites President Barack Obama’s failure to work the levers of power to accomplish change–intriguingly, he contrasts Obama not with a Republican president, but with Bill Clinton–and Romney’s understanding of the free market and job creation. (Huntsman was animated in scorning Republican candidates who called for a hard line on China or protective tariffs–notions that Romney has enthusiastically embraced.)

The real message he is carrying is that both parties–the “duopoly,” as he calls it–are paralyzed by polarization and inertia, and that the Republican Party in particular is pursuing an “unsustainable” course.

Why, I asked him, shouldn’t Republicans learn from their 2010 midterm victory that an unswerving opposition to Obama is politically profitable?

Because, he replied, “It’s unsustainable. It can’t last more than a cycle or two. … With the political center hollowed out, the American people are going to say, who’s going to populate the center where you’ll get things done.”    

His distance from the party whose nomination he sought goes beyond tactics. When he recalled his first appearance on a debate stage with his rivals, he said he remembers thinking two thoughts. First: “The barriers to entry are very low.” Second: “In a nation of 315 million people … is this the best we can do?” 

If he was including himself, this is a remarkable example of self-deprecation. If he was talking about his rivals, it is an extraordinary indictment, because it includes the man he is supporting for president.

There was more to what Huntsman said than party politics. Listening to him describe his concerns over the emerging generation of Chinese leaders–because they were shaped not by the disasters of the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution, but by enormous economic growth, they‘re likely to be more nationalistic and “hubristic,” he said–you realize you’re listening to a political figure who served as an ambassador to three Asian nations (Singapore and Indonesia as well as China). His understanding of the Asian-Pacific region surpasses that of any presidential candidate in history.

When he talks of his three urgent priorities for change—term limits, campaign finance reform, and congressional redistricting–you can detect a touch of naiveté. Term limits have been a reality for years in California, where they have fed, not halted, a dysfunctional government. Campaign finance reform is beyond the reach of any political leader unless and until the Supreme Court stops thinking of money as speech, leading it to strike down such laws on First Amendment grounds. 

You can also hear in his critique of his party the voice of a candidate who tasted enormous popularity–he won re-election as governor of Utah with 77 percent of the vote–and who may have been wounded by the peremptory dismissal of his presidential prospects. (My belief is that his campaign was doomed as soon as he became President Obama’s ambassador to China. In this political climate, no Republican who served under Obama was going to win the GOP presidential nomination.) The charge of “sour grapes” or “sore loser” will not be far from the lips of many Republicans.

Why does this add up to a conviction on my part that Huntsman has one foot out the door of the Republican Party, and is likely placing a bet on his belief that a third party will be increasingly attractive to the electorate, perhaps not this year, but by 2016?       

One reason isw he contrasted Republicans from Teddy Roosevelt to Dwight Eisenhower to Richard Nixon with the current party orthodoxy. Could Ronald Reagan be nominated today? I asked. “Likely, no,” he said. 

And here’s what he said when a member of the audience posed this question to him: “Given the present direction and positions the party has taken … is there room for people like you?”

Well, he answered, “I’m sitting here as a Republican.” But after he talked with great enthusiasm about the rise of the unaffiliated voter and the challenge to the political duopoly, I posed one more question.

“Why do I get the feeling,” I asked him, “that if we have this conversation a couple of years from now, you will not be sitting here as a Republican?”

“Because,” he said with a smile, “you’re a good journalist.”

Flattery aside, the answer couldn’t have been clearer.

Why Autistic Children Are Bullied More — and Bully in Return

Despite the growing awareness, bullying is still common in schools these days. Some kids are bullied and some bully others. But, as a new study finds, kids with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) may have an even harder time with bullying, being many times more likely than their neurotypical siblings to have experienced it in their lifetimes. Even more disturbing, autistic kids may be intentionally triggered into having meltdowns by bullies who know how to push the right buttons. 

The new study, from Kennedy Krieger’s Interactive Autism Network, surveyed families with autistic and non-autistic siblings from all over the country, asking about their experience with bullying in the past and present. 

Almost two-thirds of autistic children had been bullied at some point in their lives, and they were three times more likely than neurotypical kids to be bullied in the past three months. This was even true for home-schooled autistic children, who were sometimes educated at home precisely because of the bullying issue. “After a horrible year in 3rd grade,” said one mother, “where he was clinically diagnosed as depressed (he has always been anxious), I pulled my son out of public school and am homeschooling him this year. He is doing much, much better without the constant name calling and being singled out for his ‘weird’ behaviors!” 

The three most common types of bullying were verbal, or, in other words, psychological in nature: “being teased, picked on, or made fun of” (73%); “being ignored or left out of things on purpose” (51%), and “being called bad names” (47%). But almost a third of autistic children also experienced physical bullying – being shoved, pushed, slapped, hit, or kicked. 

Even more disturbing was the fact that over half of the autistic children surveyed had experienced intentional triggering of meltdowns or had been “provoked into fighting back.” One mother said, “Often kids try to upset her because they find it funny when she gets upset and cries. She is overly emotional, and they seem to get a kick out of this.” 

Bullying was most pronounced in regular public schools (43%), but better in special education public schools (30%), and lowest in regular private schools and special education private schools (28% and 18%, respectively). 

Oddly, when the team broke down bullying as a function of the different types of autism (Asperger syndrome, autism, and “other ASD”), they found that children with Asperger syndrome were actually the most bullied group. Since Asperger is a higher functioning form of autism, this is peculiar. The researchers aren’t sure why this is true, but one hypothesis is that it’s because people with Asperger are often highly intelligent but can still have considerable social deficits, which makes them, in effect, the “perfect target.” 

How does your family cope with bullying?Children with autism are also more likely to bully others: About 20% of kids with autism bullied (vs. only 8% of neurotypical children). According to the report, many of these kids may actually be both bully and victim, which is somewhat more common in children with developmental or emotional problems. Children with ASD who bully may do it unintentionally. “My son doesn’t realize he is bullying,” said one parent. “He is trying to get other kids to pay attention to him so he does it by grabbing their ball away from them or getting ‘in their face’ when they say to stop.” Another parent said, “Our boy… may take an object from another child or scream when unhappy but any purposeful cruelty, he would never do.” 

And for autistic children who are being bullied and bully in return, they may not have the social skills to avoid or to get themselves out of the situation. According to the report, “Unlike victims who are more passive, bully-victims insult their tormentors or otherwise try to fight back in a way that only makes the situation worse.” 

Finally, a critical issue that the report brings up is whether bullying may cause people with autism to develop more mental health problems as a result. Some studies have suggested that any child who is bullied has a greater risk for everything from headaches and stomachaches to anxiety, depression, and suicide. 

Parents, caregivers and schools work hard to help kids with autism gain social skills and emotional tools, and the idea that bullying could negate this work is disheartening. “Bullying can undo all our efforts,” Connie Anderson, of the Interactive Autism Network, told NPR. “I think that’s the most devastating thing about it. Children on the spectrum can be anxious anyway. This can just put them over the top and undo all the good that everyone’s trying to do.” 

Autistic Child Bullied and Taunted By TEACHERS

Stuart Chaifetz Secretly Tapes His Autistic Son at School, Discovers He’s Being Bullied by Teachers

By Lylah M. Alphonse, Senior Editor, Yahoo! Shine | Parenting 

.

After sending his son to school wearing a wire, Stuart Chaifetz found out that his son, Akian, was being bullied …When his 10-year-old son, Akian, started getting into trouble at school, Stuart Chaifetz was stunned. The notes from Horace Mann Elementary School in Cherry Hill, N.J., said that Akian, who has autism, was having violent outbursts and hitting his teacher and his aide – behavior that the boy had never exhibited before. 

“I could not understand why this was happening,” Chaifetz, a 44-year-old animal rights activist in New Jersey, wrote on his website. “I had never witnessed Akian hit anyone, nor could I dream of him lashing out as had been described to me.” 

In October 2011, he met with Akian’s teachers and school therapists. A behaviorist was called in, but during several classroom visits he didn’t see Akian become violent. “He tried to create a scenario that would push Akian so far that he would lash out,” Chaifetz explained. “And Akian did not.” 

“If Akian was pushed and didn’t do anything, what was setting him off?” his dad wondered. After six months of meetings yielded no answers, he decided that he needed to know what was happening in his son’s class. Like Akian, all of the other kids in his class also have autism, and complications from the disorder prevent them from being able to communicate to their parents about what goes on in the classroom. 

“The morning of February 17, I put a wire on my son, and I sent him to school,” Chaifetz says in a video he created to showcase the audio clips. “What I heard on that audio was so disgusting, vile, and just an absolute disrespect and bullying of my son, that happened not by other children, but by his teacher, and the aides — the people who were supposed to protect him. They were literally making my son’s life a living hell.” 

The recordings are raw and intense. Angry adults yell at kids to “shut up,” “shut your mouth,” and “knock it off.” Adults have inappropriate personal conversations in front of the children, discussing how drunk they were the night before, complaining about their husbands, and talking in detail about adult issues. More than once, an adult goads Akian to the point of tears — and then laughs at him. 

“Go ahead and scream,” one adult hisses menacingly at Akian. “Because guess what? You’re going to get nothing… until your mouth is shut.” 

And later: “Oh, Akian, you are a bastard.” 

“The six and a half hours of audio I had proved that my son wasn’t hitting the teacher because there was something wrong with him — he was lashing out because he was being mocked, mistreated and humiliated,” Chaifetz writes on his website, No More Teacher/Bully. “His outbursts were his way of expressing that he was being emotionally hurt at school.” 

Chaifetz gave the entire six-and-a-half-hour recording to the Cherry Hill School district (you can hear more of the clips here). One aide, Jodi Sgouros, was fired. Another aide and the teacher, whom theCollingswood Patch identifies as Kelly Altenburg, were reassigned but not fired. 

“I don’t know why the teacher wasn’t fired,” Chaifetz writes on his blog. “Maybe the District had no choice; perhaps tenure or HR regulations did not permit them to do so. I know that they were sincere and shocked when they found out what happened. I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt in this.” 

On Tuesday, officials at the Horace Mann School in Cherry Hill, New Jersey, directed calls from Yahoo! Shine to the Cherry Hill School District’s offices; a call to a spokesperson there was not immediately returned. Cherry Hill Public School District spokesperson Susan Bastnagel told the Collingswood Patch on Tuesday only that the incident is “an internal personnel matter that the district took seriously and handled appropriately.” 

Chaifetz disagrees, and has started a Facebook page and launched a petition at Change.org calling for the teacher’s dismissal. He’s already gathered nearly 18,500 signatures. “No one who treats children like that, who calls them vicious names, who humiliates them, who batters them verbally, deserves to be a teacher,” Chaifetz says in the video.

“How is it possible that teachers and staff can do these things, and you have evidence — not just accusations, but evidence — and they’re still teaching?” he said in an interview with Babble.com. To me, that’s the bigger outrage here. How many times has this happened before? How many times will it happen again if I remain quiet?”

For his part, Chaifetz says that what he really wants from the teacher and aides involved is a public apology and a willingness to take responsibility for their actions. 

“I want an apology, not for me, but so one day I can play this video back for my son and say Akian, you didn’t deserve anything that happened to you,” he says in the video. “I’m not going to sue anybody. I’m not going to file a lawsuit. It’s not about money. It’s about dignity. This is to reclaim my son’s dignity.” 

Leaf Company Horns In On Andrew Luck’s Fame on Eve of Draft.

Andrew Luck is being sued just before the draft

By MJD | Shutdown Corner 

Getty Images

Warning: This story shows how desperate Leaf Company is to drum up business. In a highly unusual move they have reversed the course of normal legal contests to try and get fame for themselves on the eve of the draft.  Have they no shame?? How about Ethics?? 

It’s a big week in the life of Andrew Luck, who will be the No. 1 draft pick, but it won’t be 100 percent pleasant. Amidst the pre-draft publicity tour, the draft night celebration and all the upcoming press obligations in Indianapolis, he’ll also have to worry about a lawsuit. He’s being sued by Leaf Trading Cards.

The Leaf people produced a few Andrew Luck cards, using a picture of him at the 2008 U.S. Army All-American Bowl, a high school All-Star game. Luck’s people sent them a cease-and-desist letter, saying that they don’t have the legal right to profit from an image of Luck. The Leaf people say they do indeed have the right to use images from the All-American Bowl. Now they’re suing Luck.

Here’s a snippet of a press release from Leaf, via PFT:

“Leaf Trading Cards is disappointed that it was forced to submit this matter to the judicial system,” lawyer O. Luke Davis, III said in a press release. “We are confident, however, that the court will find that Leaf has the right to produce and sell the Andrew Luck trading cards.”

I still don’t get why they’re suing Luck. Couldn’t they just ignore the cease-and-desist and keep doing what they’re doing, and if they eventually have to defend themselves from a Luck lawsuit, then just do that? Isn’t that how this typically works? If anything, I think Andrew Luck should sue them for putting his name in the same sentence as “Leaf” so close to the NFL draft.

Perhaps it’s the case that the Leaf people saw an opportunity to get their name in the newspaper and pounced on it. There’s more than one way to make money off of Andrew Luck’s name, I guess. One just hopes that they pay closer attention to their spelling in their legal documents than they do with their trading cards. Oof. That’s embarrassing. Call more attention to that, Leaf Company.

Women Willing to Date You For A Price… WOW

What’s Your Price – Website Reviews

REVIEW NUMBER ONE:

Review of WhatsYourPrice.com

Whats Your Price – Homepage

WhatsYourPrice.com intrigued me from the very start because of all the hype it’s gotten since it was launched by the same people from SeekingArrangement.com. What’s got people’s panties in a twist over this new sugar daddy dating site? Well, it’s probably the blatant honesty that’s freakin’ everyone out. This doesn’t work like your average dating site where you register and then pay a membership to get the most from the service. The deal here is that you offer payment to the people that you want to date and if your offer is accepted, then you get to arrange your first date with that person. We all know that a sugar daddy-sugar baby relationship is based around money. The sugar baby is rewarded financially for the time she devotes to her sugar daddy, but for some reason putting it out there with tag lines like “For the Generous – Date beautiful people – Guaranteed” and “For the Attractive – Get Paid for Dating – Guaranteed”, has got some people upset. Well, I say kudos for the honesty and clarity! This honest and real approach is the same reason why I appreciated their other site in the first place so how can I not marvel at the fact that WhatsYourPrice.com takes it a step further?

REVIEW TWO:

Dating Site Asks Women What’s Your Price, Is It Really Prostitution?

WEDNESDAY OCT 19, 2011 – BY BRITNI DANIELLE

When I first heard the commercial for the dating site WhatsYourPrice.com I thought it was a joke. As I listened to the description of the site–which allows users to set prices they’d either pay or charge for dates–I couldn’t help thinking it sounded a little like prostitution.

I made a note to myself to go to the website to check it out (for curiosity’s sake) and, yeah, I’m still convinced that it’s verrrrrry close to prostitution.

WhatsYourPrice.com breaks users into two categories: The attractive (women) and The generous (men). It allows women to create profiles and name their own price for a date. So, if you think you’re worth $100, you can charge that amount for a first date. The man would then pay you $100, and you’d make money simply by going out on the date. On the flip side, a “generous” user can say he’d pay $100 for a date, and interested women can vie for his interest and snag a date that would pay them (the woman) $100.

Although the site insists the money is to illustrate interest and not sex, it sounds a little creepy to me. But according to the site’s testimonials seems to work.

One user wrote: “I had a wonderful date with a wonderful guy on Sat Oct.1st.He was a gentleman.He flew in from NYC,w had a great time.And the way he gave me the money was very creatve.So thank you for your site.”

While another (a Black woman), said: “It was nerve racking at first, wasnt really sure what to talk about but as the date progressed (and the drinks kept rolling in) It turned out to be a wonderful date and I left with cash in hand!!!”

Yet another user wrote: “I had a wonderful evening with a true gentleman!
He gave me 300. for our date and I enjoyed the evening so much we have a second date planned next week! I can hardly wait to see him again!”

And the most interesting review so far, included a morning after: “Within the first 10 days I have been on four dates through the site, and what’s interesting is that the money aspect means something different each time. I had one date give me back my money… the next morning. In bed.”

One thing I noticed as I scrolled through the site was that most of the testimonials included descriptions of cash exchanges, shopping sprees, and 5-star restaurants. But what I didn’t notice very much of (besides people of color), however, were love connections. Most of the women raved about the “polite” and “sweet” men they met, but very few talked about meeting “the one.”

I know dating can be tough, but by making men pay for not only the date (going dutch isn’t an option), but also the mere OPPORTUNITY to go out on the date, seems a little weird.

But what do you think? Does paying for a chance to date weed out the lames or is this site just another place to advertise the oldest job in the world?

Would you sign up?

REVIEW NUMBER THREE:

From Freakonomics

Freakonomics is no stranger to studying prostitution, as discussed in Superfreakonomics. We are slightly less familiar, however, with a gray area of prostitution — “dating websites” that connect rich customers with attractive poor customers. Though these are by no means a new phenomena, a website has recently come to our attention that uses a dating website platform to ask what we all wonder about in one context or another: what’s your price?

Whatsyourprice.com auctions off dates and claims to be inspired by the charity dating model. It is divided into two halves: “Date Generous People” and “Date Attractive People” — apparently you’re either looking for one or the other. Upon a cursory read, the generous users seem to be overwhelmingly male, and the attractive users overwhelmingly female (and pictured in bathing suits). Each profile includes an “About Me” section and a “First Date Expectations” section. Several “attractive” members, it should be noted, specify that they will not fly Economy Class.

The homepage states:

Stop wasting time. Successful and generous people will pay for the chance to impress you on a first date. Traditional online dating can cost you both time and money. Here, you‘ll enjoy meeting people who will fight to show you they are worth your time.
Join Now, it’s 100% Free

Founded by Brandon Wade, the site purports to simply be upholding the tenets of capitalism. Wade describes himself as a graduate of MIT and the founder of websites seekingarrangement.com and seekingmillionaire.com.  Are you noticing a theme here? In his own words:

When capitalism is mixed in with dating, all of a sudden people start concluding “it must be prostitution.” But does paying money for a cup of coffee every morning mean Starbucks is engaging in prostitution? Does paying for gas every time you fill up at the gas station mean that Mobil or BP is pimping? Does donating money to the Church every Sunday morning equate religion to prostitution? Obviously not, and obviously buying a First Date isn’t either.

The original homepage included a man surrounded by five women holding price tags; it has since been changed to something more demure. The site has three easy steps: uploading a profile, negotiating a price, and setting up a date. It also includes some helpful dating etiquette reminiscent of craigslist warnings:

* Do Not pay or ask anyone for payment prior to meeting for a date
* If someone asks you to send money by Western Union, report them immediately
* Generous members are expected to pay for the date (there’s no going dutch here)
* Our advice: Pay 50% of the date at the start of the date, and 50% at the end
* Do Not accept personal checks or cashier’s checks – there’s just too much fraud

One wonders, though, what services are being provided in a date. Conversation? Company? Something more? The “First Date Expectations” section on individual profiles doesn’t clarify much, either.  In his blog posts, Wade often quantifies aspects of dating in terms of age, gender, income, etc. He gives insights into what kind of money is involved in these dates and writes:

Results of our study:  Men seeking casual or no-strings-attached relationships paid an average of $121 for a first date, whereas single men looking for serious long-term relationships paid an average of $194 for the opportunity of finding love.  However, men who seek only casual or no-strings attached relationships tend to be serial daters and more prolific, paying for first dates over 2.1 times more, than commitment-minded men.

Whatsyourprice.com has been featured on several media outlets, including HuffPo, the San Francisco Chronicle and Fox Business News.

So we must ask, dear reader, what’s your price?

The 70′s Show Stars Ashton Kutcher and Mila Kunis Reunited in Reality

Ashton Kutcher and Mila Kunis are not doing much to squash rumors that they’re dating. One week after photos surfaced of the two on a sushi dinner date, the former “That ’70s Show” co-stars spent a four-day weekend together holed up in the beach town of Carpinteria, California, just south of Santa Barbara. When they did come out of hiding , it was for more sushi, Starbucks, and to pick up sunflowers, which the casually-dressed “Black Swan” actress was seen carrying around before they hopped back in Kutcher’s Lexus. One thing’s for sure: The two are clearly not trying to impress each other. While the “Two and a Half Men” actor wore shorts paired with hiked-up red socks, Kunis looked like she had just rolled out of bed with her usually straight hair curly and messy.

Although they insist they are not friends with benefits, a source close to Kutcher, 34, tells People that he has long held a torch for 28-year-old Kunis, who played his girlfriend on the Fox series. “He was so in love with her for a while when they worked together. He thought she was a goddess, was always talking about how beautiful she is. But she was with Macaulay [Culkin] for a lot of that time and also just generally gave off a not interested vibe.”

But now that she is no longer with the “Home Alone” star (they split in 2010) and Kutcher separated from wife Demi Moore last November amid reports he had cheated, the time could be right. Or, this could just be Kutcher sowing his wild oats to make up for the eight years he was with Moore, who’s 15 years his senior. “He’s not looking for anything serious,” another source tells People. “He always talked about Mila like a little sister. They’re definitely close pals and have been. I think if anything she’s a good time for him.”

Yeah, but is he good for her?

and from another source:

Ashton Kutcher and Mila Kunis may deny being more than friends, but their actions speak louder than words.
 
The longtime pals and former “That ‘70s Show” costars have set the rumor mill ablaze by spending some quality time together during a recent three-day getaway to the coastal town of Carpinteria, Calif.

According to People, the genetically-blessed twosome traveled from Los Angeles to the quaint ocean side city south of Santa Barbara last Thursday. They reportedly had a sushi lunch date the following day, before photographers spotted Kutcher and Kunis buying sunflowers and blueberries from a roadside fruit stand.

On Saturday, the pair seemingly spent plenty of time in private as they weren’t seen publicly again until the next day, when they headed back to L.A. Kutcher was spotted taking in the Lakers game solo Sunday night.
 
In addition to their weekend retreat, Kutcher, 34, and Kunis, 28, spent some one-on-one time with each other on April 15. The two were photographed furniture shopping together before grabbing dinner at Asanebo in Studio City and then later retiring to Kutcher’s new Hollywood Hills home.
 
Kunis’ rep denied reports last week that the pair’s friendship had turned romantic.
 
“They have been friends for years and had dinner with a bunch of people that night,” the actress’ spokeswoman told the Daily News at the time.
 
Though reps have not commented on the pair’s latest outing together, a source told People that a romance may be under way.
 
The “Two and a Half Men” star has reportedly had a longtime crush on Kunis, who played his on-and-off love interest on-screen for eight years on their FOX sitcom.
 
“He was so in love with her for a while when they worked together,” the source told the magazine. “He thought she was a goddess, was always talking about how beautiful she is. But she was with Macaulay (Culkin) for a lot of that time and also just generally gave off a not interested vibe.”
 
“It never happened, but I’m not surprised by this – at all,” added the source.
 
Still, Kutcher may not be looking to settle down with the “Friends with Benefits” actress anytime soon.
 
“He always talked about Mila like a little sister. They’re definitely close pals and have been,” said the source. “I think if anything she’s a good time for him. But he’s not looking for anything serious.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/gossip/mila-kunis-ashton-kutcher-romance-rumors-heat-costars-weekend-getaway-article-1.1066620#ixzz1t15WLFNn