More Ashley Madison Files Published 301
An anonymous reader writes: A second round of Ashley Madison data was released today. The data dump was twice as large as the first time, which was bad enough for "19 Kids and Counting" star Josh Duggar, and includes some of CEO Noel Biderman's email as well. The release of the cheating sites data has spawned a small scammer industry as people scramble to find a way to have their information deleted from the leaks. Wired reports: "The new release is accompanied by the note: 'Hey Noel, you can admit it's real now.' The message is likely a response to assertions made by the company's former CTO this week, who tried hard to convince reporters after the first leak occurred that the data dump was fake."
Ouch? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Ouch? (Score:5, Insightful)
How many suicides and divorces and single-parent homes will this lead to...
By "this," do you mean the cheating, or the getting caught? The getting caught wouldn't have happened without the cheating...
Re:Ouch? (Score:5, Insightful)
Given that the customer list is 95% male, I'd rephrase that to "attempted" cheating.
I'd put money on number of guys that actually got lucky as a direct result of the site being no more than a rounding error compared to the total.
Now.... If you find your wife on there...
Do you pina coladas? (Score:2)
and getting caught in the rain?
Re:Ouch? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Not to forget, playing on the site is not the same as playing off the site. How many had no interest at all in an affair, they just wanted to play naughty on the web site with zero follow through. Using the site, making a keyboard connection with someone is not the same as rubbing genitals together with the risk of disease and adverse social interactions, that put families at risk (not so much break up more to do with introducing a psychopath or narcissist into the family relationship not to say that there
Re: (Score:2)
Using the site, making a keyboard connection with someone is not the same as rubbing genitals together with the risk of disease and adverse social interactions,
There are still a large number of people who believe that cheating is cheating and whether you're just talking dirty to someone or doing the dirty with them in person doesn't matter. People who value fidelity still exist.
It's like, if you rob a bank for real it's bank robbery, if you plan to do it it's conspiracy and you've still broken the law.
Re: (Score:2)
It's like, if you rob a bank for real it's bank robbery, if you plan to do it it's conspiracy and you've still broken the law.
That depends. Did you actually plan to go through with the bank robbery? Or from the outset did you know you were just fantasizing about being Bonnie and Clyde, and you were just pretending to plan a bank robbery because it gave you a thrill to act like your nebbishy couch-potato self really ever would?
I'm sure there are people who believe that even playfully flirting with someone else while you are in a committed relationship is infidelity. Most people - or at least those who have been married a long time
Re: (Score:2)
Ashley Madison advertises on pron sites, hence people are already in that mood but with themselves and playing on Ashley Madison is just an extension of the current 'hmmm' mood. Not defending nothing, not being attached it is not a problem for me either way, however, let's not get carried away with actually intentions versus pretty immature playing and having never played on that site but I have tested but never actually used to an conclusion nor even initiated contact other match making sites. Being a net
Re: (Score:2)
Now.... If you find your wife on there...
There's an 80% chance she was there to see if you were.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
A fuck buddy of mine is on Ashley Madison, she's a sex worker and uses it to find clients.
Re: (Score:2)
Hah hah hah...those are some pretty hefty non-sequiturs.
Do you blame the indictments on the whistle-blower? Are you part of the lynch mob for Snowden?
Re:Ouch? Bad Analogy, Belittles real victims. (Score:2)
To pretend that someone caught cheating is similarly a victim is a really offensive position to take. People are entitled to wear anything they want without threat of sexual assault. People are not entitled to commit adultery without risk of being discovered.
One must go out of their way to have an affair, whereas sexual assault can happen to anyone without provocation.
Fortunately
Re: (Score:2)
You're kidding right?
These sleaze balls have already registered to commit to an affair and so have already betrayed their SO.
So yes, getting caught is just a consequence, not the actual offence. Nothing remotely like wearing a short skirt leading to rape, Mr Bad Analogy.
Re:Ouch? (Score:4, Insightful)
You're assuming that everyone that signed up on the site is married . . . .
Yes, that's what it's SUPPOSED to be for, but I doubt anyone is requiring marriage licenses to prove they're part of the club
Re: (Score:2)
Who's to say that all the members of the site are necessarily married?
While the site is clearly advertised that way, there's nothing to stop single people or those in open relationships from signing up.
Re: (Score:2)
When people do stupid things in front of people with little self control, how much sympathy are we supposed to have for them?
victim blaming at its finest, why should women step outside at all, what with those dangerous men out there. better to keep them inside!
Re:Ouch? (Score:5, Insightful)
I think the real blame lies y'know, with the people who actually used this as a vehicle to cheat on their spouses. Blaming this leak for the fallout is like blaming your spouse's friend who rats you out for cheating on them.
Re: (Score:2)
I think the real blame lies y'know, with the people who actually used this as a vehicle to cheat on their spouses. Blaming this leak for the fallout is like blaming your spouse's friend who rats you out for cheating on them.
This statement is like saying "Yeah, I know revenge porn is bad, but the real blame lies y'know, with the girl who sent nude pictures in the first place. It was only a matter of time before someone re-published it"
Three things need to be remembered before you support this hack because the cheaters deserved it:
1. Ashley Madison was its self a scam. People who used the site were already being punished. Shutting down the site is actually GOOD for cheaters, because they will now know to turn to a more legitimat
Re: (Score:2)
1. Ashley Madison was its self a scam. People who used the site were already being punished. Shutting down the site is actually GOOD for cheaters, because they will now know to turn to a more legitimate dating site in future.
How would they recognize one? More likely they would be shy of any such site in the future.
2. Just because someone signed up to the site doesn't mean they were actually going to cheat on their spouse. It's like a list of people who've ever walked into a brothel.
Fine. Anyone who has an AM account is only officially guilty of having an AM account. For a lot of couples that will be a significant betrayal of trust, assuming the AM account was kept secret.
2a) / 2b)
Its definitely going to create a lot of new issues for a lot of people. But if it leads to uncomfortable questions at school or a divorce that's hard on the kids, the fault is ultimately with the person who lied to their partner. Blaming the gossipy neighbor or the internet for airing your dirty laundry so you can't deal with it privately sort of misses the point. And if the only reason you are dealing with it at all is thanks to the gossipy neighbor or internet its a bit of a catch-22.
You have no privacy online. That horse has bolted.
Agreed. and its a lesson that needs to be learned. This will hit a lot of people in a way that the target or home depot breaches never would... it might actually make them think before they put something online. That's a good thing.
Re: (Score:2)
> This statement is like saying "Yeah, I know revenge porn is bad, but the real blame lies y'know, with the girl who sent nude pictures in the first place. It was only a matter of time before someone re-published it"
Ex-fucking-cuse me? How about this perspective:
Sending porn to your boyfriend is not a crime. Revenge porn posting is a crime
Adultery is actually still on the books as a crime in 21 US states. Does that not mean that AM was a potential facilitator of criminal acts in those 21 states? I th
Re:Ouch? (Score:5, Insightful)
I hope none. The database can't be trusted, and I can verify this because my email address is in their database despite the fact that I had never heard of Ashley Madison or Avid Life Media until the hack happened. You do not need an email verification to make an account there - again, I know this because whoever signed up my address was able to do so without access to my email account. The mix-up is likely due to the fact that my email address is a shortened version of a common first name and a common Hispanic last name (though I didn't realize this when I made the account, oddly enough). I would post my email address here so people could verify, but I'd rather not so that I don't inadvertently attract people to whoever the poor bastard was that made the account using my email.. and also to avoid spam.
Merely having an email address listed in the leaked database is not proof of anything, and I would hope that any spouses who see their partner's email on that database get independent verification first before accusing them of anything. I know I would hate to have a significant other see that and assume I was trying to cheat on them, even though I'd never attempted anything of the sort.
On top of this, there's the problem of computer-assisted reporters (most of whom are preparing numbers-based stories about things like how many people in the Canadian government had emails in the database) using this database for stories that may not reflect the reality of what's going on.
Re:Ouch? (Score:5, Interesting)
The database can't be trusted, and I can verify this because my email address is in their database...
I know this because whoever signed up my address was able to do so without access to my email account...
Merely having an email address listed in the leaked database is not proof of anything...
How about credit card transactions? It doesn't mean a whole lot when joesmithsonnwa@gmail.com is listed as a member, but when that account is paid for by Joshua Duggar with two of his known addresses [gawker.com] then that's a little more incriminating.
Re: (Score:2)
The Joshua Duggar scenario is certainly one where it is possible to prove he did it, but consider this (hypothetical) scenario:
The person who used my burner email to sign up pays for his Ashley Madison subscription with a pre-paid Visa or Mastercard, the kind you can buy at any Wal-Mart for cash. My (nonexistent) SO knows about my burner email. She Googles and finds any one of the number of sites that allow you to put an email in and see if it's in the leaked database (without showing supporting info such a
Re: (Score:2)
The Joshua Duggar scenario is certainly one where it is possible to prove he did it
Proof is irrelevant now, he's admitted to everything
Re: (Score:2)
Sort of. He admitted the account was his, but then claimed that the porn made him do it.
Re: (Score:2)
The possibility that I cheated now exists, and the possibility alone can be enough to cause a breakup or divorce.
"The possibility" always exists. You could have another email she doesn't know about, or use another service that hasn't been hacked.
She's going to have to evaluate the likelihood of your burner address finding its way onto the site, via any other explanation than that you put it there. IF your a celebrity... its pretty reasonable someone would use it. IF its a common name or phrase its reasonable. If its an address known to your friends and your friends are known to be the sort of people who would use it o
Re: (Score:2)
Still doesn't mean anything, with all of the data breaches that have happened over the years; would Ashley Madison really be beyond plumping up their membership lists bought from hackers? Real cheaters would be using freebee Gmail or outlook accounts with Greendot cards and burner phones. You only have to watch a couple movies to learn more spy-craft than the Impact Teams expects us to believe the typical cheater has.
Re: (Score:2)
Pffff.
Still can't be trusted. Case in point:
I had my brand new enhanced security chip embedded credit card from my bank for all of thirty days before it was compromised and utilized to purchase some porn subscription out of Europe. ( Likely wait staff at the restaurants I frequent, since that's the only thing I had used it for before it was hit. I pay cash only now when I eat out. )
Since I have account alerts active on all my accounts, I get shot a text message the instant anything happens to any of my a
Re: (Score:3)
The chip-and-pin system itsself is very secure. The weakness lies elsewhere: Those cards have three different means of authentication, and you only need to hack one in order to make a payment. The other two are weak (magstripe) and absolutely pathetic (The numbers printed on it).
Re:Ouch? (Score:5, Informative)
Agreed, when you see addresses like the following in the DB it becomes clear how easy it was to insert records that are not indicative of actual use:
Doubly so when some addresses show up more than once:
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Thankfully the database has a verified flag. The ones you list dont have the verified flag set.
Re: Ouch? (Score:5, Funny)
And even if she was, she'd be running her own e-mail server anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
The mix-up is likely due to the fact that my email address is a shortened version of a common first name and a common Hispanic last name.
Dear Canadian Hispanic friend,
I feel for you. I'm also a politician and someone has registered my email address by mistake as well. Luckily that person is 10 years younger, 30~ pounds lighter, 3 inch taller, and an homosexual, according to the leaked data, which definitely proves that my Ashley account was started by someone completely different.
So I can't really say that my situation is as dire as yours.
Re: (Score:3)
Good question.
Here's another one: is the person releasing this info criminally liable for felony murder or wrongful death if any deaths are a direct result? Suicide, homicide, you name it... somebody is carrying a big legal liability flag over this, regardless of the social ethics.
Re: (Score:2)
dunno, are you going to go after the Ford Motor Company or Colt Firearms when their products are involved in deaths as well?
Two wrongs don't make a right... (Score:5, Insightful)
If the hackers want to shut down Ashley Madison they might accomplish that, but they have also shown in so doing that there is a market demand for the services they provided, which will just cause someone else - presumably with better network security practices - to launch an identical service.
Re: (Score:2)
which will just cause someone else - presumably with better network security practices - to launch an identical service
People used the service because they thought it was a way to cheat without getting caught. While I'm sure there would be enough demand to make a future service profitable, I would expect the demand would be significantly reduced by this incident.
Re: (Score:3)
Perhaps the hackers believe that leaking the customer details will reduce the demand for these services by proving that nothing done on the internet is ever really private.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
It's fraud. It's claiming to sell a service which you're not actually selling.
Perhaps legally it's fraud but actually I don't think you are going to see many of the victims filing lawsuits to get their money back.
Re: (Score:2)
It's fraud. It's claiming to sell a service which you're not actually selling.
Probably. It was specifically written into the terms and conditions of the website though, so AM is probably safe.
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
it's a criminal offence in Islamic Law, and in 21 US States (punishments vary from a ten Dollar fine in Maryland to life imprisonment in Michigan).
(in 2008 a 13 year old rape victim in Somalia was stoned to death for adultery by fifty men from her village, because she couldn't prove that she was raped. Her rapists (plural, allegedly) were never sought to answer).
Re: (Score:2)
it's a criminal offence in Islamic Law, and in 21 US States (punishments vary from a ten Dollar fine in Maryland to life imprisonment in Michigan).
I have never heard of a law against introducing people with the intent of setting up an extramarital affair. If you know of such a law, please provide a citation. Again, I find the AM website immoral but I am not aware of them breaking any laws. Did they take advantage of people? Absolutely. But they themselves did not conduct acts of infidelity to the best of my understanding.
Prior to this it seemed that the most common place where people met and eventually hooked up in spite of being married was
Re: (Score:2)
Next batch includes more interesting emailadresses (Score:2)
Otherwise, they're going to miss out on all the fun. I mean, the US Army said they didn't like this conduct of their soldiers, so adding a lot of known emailaddresses for high ranking officials could be fun.
More suggestions for the next release: contacting some well-known figures in advance, and extorting money from them. Yeah I know - a lot of scammers are already trying that one. Too bad. You could still give it a try though. Adding a few presidential candidates in the mix would be entertaining too.
My hop
Wide vector for malicious uses (Score:5, Insightful)
The thing that is really concerning about this AM hack is not the data being real. I'm sure it MOSTLY is.
The problem is that the hackers could ALSO have added a handful of entries for people they hate for whatever reason. Even if AM could verify they were not a customer, would anyone believe them?
You also have to wonder, how much did the hackers make from pre-accepting payments for deletion from the master set they are releasing...
It will be very interesting going forward who is rapidly identified as being in the database... especially political figures.
You have to wonder, how did someone find Josh Duggar in there so quickly? Were they tipped off?
Heidi Fleiss (Score:5, Funny)
Way back when Heidi Fleiss [wikipedia.org] got arrested for running a prostitution ring, and her list of clients fell into the hands of the police, my first thought was: if it were *me*, I'd have:
a) had a backup copy, and
b) been regularly adding high-ranking authorities (for instance: the chief of police) to the list of clients. In a diary fashion, interspersed (in the records) with the appointments of real clients.
For b) especially, having dates and times when the high-ranking official is known to be away from home, such as noon times if they have a day job, or adding verifiable corroborating information such as "and he came in soaking wet" on rainy days and such, would have gone a long way towards giving Ms. Fleiss some leverage.
Ah well... people don't think ahead in these modern times.
Apropos of nothing, I saw this on a friend's twitter feed:
ME: Hunny, did you have an Ashley Madison account?
HER: What?! No!
ME: Damn. That would have made what I'm about to say, a lot easier.
Re: (Score:2)
You need medication. Or counseling. Or better yet, both.
"The wedding episode of âoe19 Kids and Countingâ racked up 4.4 million total viewers and posted a 3.5 household rating" - and every news rag on TV, magazines, and vlog wannabes are constantly on the lookout for tips on celebrities.
Ever watch TMZ? It's on OTA TV, so sometimes I turn on the TV when it's on. They spend a lot of time looking for info. And when the next data dump hits, the
That's my point - why Josh? (Score:2)
4.4 million total viewers and posted a 3.5 household rating
So what? You seriously think there's not someone even MORE famous, or good for gossip, in that set of data?
Why Josh, of all people, to be first there? It's not like I'm a fan, or car at all about what people think of him. I just find it odd that his is the only well-known name floated, and it happened just hours after the release of the data.
Not that easy (Score:2)
Trustily only searches by email address. Do you know Josh Duggar's email address? Much less the one email address he would have felt secure enough with to sign up for AM?
To search by name, you have to download a 9+GB torrent...
Getting their money's worth (Score:5, Funny)
They paid to get screwed.
Seems they are getting their money's worth.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You can probaly guarentee that some of the idiots on this site have used thier email account password as the password for the AM site, and in most corps that is also the password that provides access to thier network accessible resources.
Once you get access to somebodies email account, you can pretty much take over thier life.
Re: (Score:3)
To AM's credit, they only stored password hashes, and they used a decent hash algorithm.
my name was revealed (Score:2)
Top 10 Ashley Madison Pickup Lines... (Score:2)
...stolen from the hacker's files! [battleswarmblog.com]
Like: “Sure, Miss Wong, I’ll let you use my login!” — SecuritySupervisor@opm.gov.
100% authentic!*
*Which is to say, every bit as authentic as the vast majority of "women" you can contact on Ashley Madison...
Re: (Score:2)
(Unfortunately all their tweets appear to be plagiarized from fortune cookies.)
Re: (Score:2)
Adversity is the parent of virtue.
Donald Trump ... (Score:2)
... was in the data dump. It seems he was having a secret fling with the Democratic Party.
Better Call Saul (Score:2)
Does anyone have the number of the good divorce attorney?
Asking for a friend.
Re: (Score:2)
1-800-flt-rich
You're welcome.
Re: (Score:2)
Want some divorce advice?
If there is any disagreement about who gets what property, you should promptly and immediately just sign over all of your possessions to your lawyer.
You will end up doing it anyway, so get a jump on starting over with a new life.
Another bug! (Score:2)
And the lesson to be learned is .. (Score:2)
Re:Guess what? (Score:5, Insightful)
About the hypocrisy of duggar? Yeah, it is pretty pointless, his politics are stupid even if he were to have abided by them.
About the security breach and responses to it? You're on the wrong website.
Re:Guess what? (Score:5, Insightful)
If someone not only takes but advocates a strong position in the culture wars and then themselves violates that view, they deserve to be ridiculed for it. The view or position also deserves to be ridiculed.
Re:Guess what? (Score:5, Insightful)
The view or position also deserves to be ridiculed.
I was right with you up to this statement. You are welcome to ridicule the position, as you are entitled to your opinion, however the phenomenon of hypocrisy and people behaving like jerks is orthogonal to the correctness or incorrectness of the position they postured themselves as upholding. If you will allow me a quote from the Bible, "Put not your trust in princes," meaning even the (alleged) best specimens of humanity will let you down. This is true of views you may cherish as well -- so you find public environmentalists who privately show they really don't care, etc.
Re:Guess what? (Score:5, Insightful)
If you will allow me a quote from the Bible, "Put not your trust in princes," ...
And "let he who is without sin cast the first stone." As in, human beings are imperfect creatures, and you'll find many of them that haven't perfectly obeyed every principle they value.
Except the perfect people on /. who ridicule not only the imperfect people who can't manage perfection in following a moral standard, but the moral standard as well because it is followed by those imperfect people.
Re: (Score:2)
so all humans are imperfect and deserve compassion and understanding, except for the ones that disagree with you? gotcha!
Re:Guess what? (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm pretty sure most dashslot readers have not even been accused of "molesting five children, including his own sisters", become addicted to pornography, AND been unfaithful to their spouse and parent of their children.
I've managed to avoid all of that, and I imagine that most here have managed to avoid most of that.
That's basically the reason that we can't have an honest conversation about these things. Social norms are apparently perpetuated by the people least interested in preserving them, under some sort of pretense that they feel they need to show, due to those norms.
The very people who most want or need to change society feel compelled to vocally oppose that change. It was easy when we could point to race or gender as being obviously different, but you can't get a gay Republican to say "I'm gay, and you guys like me, so let's just drop it." Okay, maybe 3.
Can you get someone to stand up and say "I think it's normal to molest children, so let's just decriminalize it"? No, and it's really unlikely to happen for a lot of reasons unrelated to culture. But acceptance of infidelity and homosexuality is culture specific.
Let's ridicule everyone who professes one life and lives another, because they should have done more to stand up for their true beliefs. Not just for themselves, but for everyone like them.
That's so much more like the Golden Rule, and the Jesus part of the Bible, as opposed to the Angry God part of the Bible, which Jesus specifically waved aside in several specific areas, your example being one.
"Do unto others" does not mean "persecute those who actually follow the lifestyle you want to have".
Re: (Score:2)
> I'm pretty sure most dashslot readers have not even been accused of "molesting five children, including his own sisters",
Given the accusations and abuse heaped on various software project leaders or contributors, it's more common than you may realize.
Also, I'm afraid that the standards for what constitutes "molesting children" vary from culture to culture, and even from state to state. There are cultures where clitorectomy, which I would certainly classify as sexual abuse of children, is considered par
Re: (Score:2)
the phenomenon of hypocrisy and people behaving like jerks is orthogonal to the correctness or incorrectness of the position they postured themselves as upholding.
What bullshit, if your position is correct then you don't need to engage in hypocrisy to hide your true motive.
Re:Guess what? (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't know who Mr Duggar is, and by the sound of it, I wouldn't really want to know him. But, it is sad fact that the ones who speak out the loudest against 'sin' are the ones who have most trouble staying away from it. However, cheating on your spouse or partner is plainly wrong - not because any supposed sanctity of marriage or because haveing several sex partners is wrong as such, but because when you get married or enter a partnership, you make a promise, explicitly or implicitly, to stay faithful - unless you explicitly agree that not doing so is OK. Being trustworthy is what it is about, and it is fundamentally important, not just in a family, but also in the wider society. Business, among other things, runs on trust. As they saying goes, a man is only as good as his word.
Re:Guess what? (Score:5, Interesting)
After years of union with the same person, isn't that normal to want another body? Isn't that a natural and physical need?
No, I don't think it is. At least, not from my point of view. I'm married and would never ever consider cheating.
Re:Guess what? (Score:5, Interesting)
There are biological foundations to this issue. I used to work with researchers at the Yerkes Primate Center who were working on this very problem. The idea is that males want to ensure the paternity of their children if they are going to expend resources raising them. So they are protective of their sex partner. Females want to ensure that they have the help they need in providing for their offspring, so they desire a faithful partner. These needs drive the species toward monogamy.
At the same time, females want to enhance the odds of successful offspring by having more than one mating partner. (Partners who would be notoriously bad as long term spouses are particularly attractive ... the bad-boy alpha male) Males also want to enhance their chances of having successful offspring by having partners that do not require them to stay around and provide for the kids. So both genders have an incentive to secretly violate the monogamous bond.
Therefore you see a continuum of activities along these lines within and among human societies. One of the researchers reported that as many as 1/3 to 1/2 of all children in the pre-industrialized societies she examined were the result of illicit affairs. Most of these societies frowned on infidelity much more than we in the west do.
Enter game theory and genetics, which argue for a balancing act between the two competing needs, with different people taking different strategies and feeling different drives. Another researcher at Yerkes gave a talk about the "seven year itch". She had evidence that suggested a biological basis for the lagging emotions of marriages a few years along - with parallel evidence from other species. You know that "he's just not romantic any more" trope that is trotted out to explain a flagging libido and attraction to other partners? She had a theory that this was an instinctual result of changing hormones affecting the brain. The end result was to drive a woman to seek out other sex partners in order to ensure genetic diversity in her offspring.
So the answer is yes, it is complicated.
BTW, I'm in your camp. I would never consider cheating, and have a few decades of experience to back up that characterization of my own proclivities. But I do recognize that this is not everyone's experience. And I've been close enough to a few people who took a different path to know that it isn't just culture or upbringing that makes for fidelity.
Re: (Score:2)
I suppose the point of view is determined by several variables. Some of which would be:
1) Are you content with your relationship ? Is your partner ? ( Your answer may be one thing today, and something far different twenty years from now )
2) Your beliefs ( religion and non-religion )
3) Your societies beliefs ( some are strictly monogamy, others polyamory )
Marriage has devolved into something to fear these days. If you get married and something doesn't go right ( and last I checked quite a few marriage
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Guess what? (Score:5, Interesting)
This is a viewpoint that's very vocal but overstated. For a lot of people monogamy is secure, comfortable, and satisfies their sexual needs - particularly when the partners communicate openly about sex.
Incidentally a relationship is between two people, not society at large; if you feel you need to have sex with other people be up front about it, maybe your potential partner will be game, maybe they won't, but at least it saves the messy lying and trust violation.
Re: (Score:3)
No, it really doesn't. It may provide women with some transitory security as far as child rearing goes but to claim monogamy is the de facto best option is a sorry punchline.
It's pretty obvious that you are not happily married, and you don't even know what a happy marriage is about. Really you have absolutely no clue about the comfort and daily happiness that comes from a secure long lasting relationship. Children have very little to do with it.
Re: (Score:3)
No, it really doesn't. It may provide women with some transitory security as far as child rearing goes but to claim monogamy is the de facto best option is a sorry punchline.
"Best" is a value judgment, so I'm not going to go there. But is it so hard to believe that some people like monogamy and have found a partner who is good enough to be monogamous with?
Hell, monogamy could be thought of as a sexual orientation.
Marriage works for me. (Score:2)
People are different. As you get older you'll start to understand this.
Re:Really, is it that difficult.... (Score:5, Insightful)
One thing to consider is that you don't know that that wasn't the case for at least some of the people on AM. AM is a way to find other people, it doesn't help you cheat per se'. I could easily see a case where someone is on AM with full knowledge of their partner, but on the proviso that they were discrete. Once that information is in the public discrete has gone out the window.
America has very puritanical views on sex, if you were to look at France as a comparison though extra-marital affairs are much more common and are often ok as long as partner is not exposed to it in public.
Re: (Score:2)
Well duh - things change (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The grass is greener where you water it.
Re:Really, is it that difficult.... (Score:5, Funny)
just tell them that they want to sleep with somebody else?
Don't think my SO would care if I slept with somebody else. It's the stuff we do while awake that bothers her.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
My name is in that database.
I never cheated on my wife. I did, for a little while, consider doing that because our marriage was falling apart, but the act of going online and attempting (halfheartedly) to meet people kinda shook me to my senses.
I decided to stay committed to making it work anyway. With a lot of talking, and weekly trips to a marriage counselor, over the coming months we were able to patch things up. It's still not the perfect marriage, but it works. Now we have a child, and our lives mostly
So you're what, 18 and single? (Score:2)
I'd say yes, it is that difficult for people to be that honest with their life partner. If it was so easy we probably wouldn't have an entire marital therapy industry, complete with entire sections at bookstores devoted to relationship advice, various professional qualifications and so on.
Even people who want to monogamous and only want to sleep with their partners find sex a total emotional minefield, difficult to discuss and so on. I don't know a married man over the age of 30 who hasn't complained abou
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. It is. Apprently you haven't heard of "culture", which is a set of things that people do, and don't do, to each other.
Many people violate this, but it is really hard to do so, or you have to not care.
I really don't think you understand much about marriage, especially 10 years in, and you really don't understand how difficult counter-culture is. You proba
Re: (Score:2)
Or, one could try just being honest with their partner, and ending the relationship if that's where it needs to go. if infidelity is an option, why isn't divorce?
Really, is honesty too much to expect?
Re: (Score:2)
I'm suggesting that people take responsibility for themselves and have some goddamn fucking integrity, and somehow *I'M* an idiot?
I think perhaps it is you that doesn't get it.
Re: (Score:2)
From your description, it seems that your ex was an emotionally abusive bitch. In all frankness, however, the fact that you admit to choosing option 1 really makes you sound like a total pussy.
Putting things more objectively, you were probably actually falling for the sunk costs fallacy, where the reasonable course of action would have been to leave her yourself when you confronted her and she wasn't going to change, and you should have confronted her as soon as the pattern of emotional abuse started.
Re:Soooo... (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
He's on the top floor, apartment 23. But you won't find him there... he's up on the roof with his cows. He keeps cows. Dirty... disgusting... filthy... lice-ridden cows. You used to be able to sit out on the stoop like a person. Not anymore! No, sir! Cows!... You get my drift?
Re: (Score:3)
The Nazi admins
What a bunch of pathetic sheep. How baaaaaad can they get?
Re: (Score:2)
But recognizing that humans are not naturally mon
Re: (Score:2)
...except 3% of mammal species and 90% of birds (Reichard, Barash & Lipton).
In almost all cases, monogamy seems to be a (successful) survival strategy where multiple births are relatively uncommon in nonsocial animals (ie birds where young are raised in clutches of three to five by one or both parents with no help from any other member of the species).
Re: (Score:2)
Or maybe it says something about the integrity of the people in your town.
it says the ministers couldn't find what they wanted among the locals, good for them