Pandering to Philanderers

February 11, 2011 11:20 AM

Cheating, Incorporated: The Infidelity Economy. "Looking to sneak around on your spouse? Got a little cash to spend? The CEO of Ashley Madison, a website whose own backers don't even want to be associated with, is happy to take your money." (Previously on MeFi)

This is BusinessWeek's current cover story about the company's profitability. Here's their podcast about it. SlideShow: The CEOs of Sex

Full page print version of the main article.

posted by zarq (69 comments total)

A "doug" in Phoenix signed up for this site, and thought my gmail address was his. After ignoring the first half a dozen emails or so, I followed a link... explaining my morbid curiosity to my wife did not go as well as I'd hoped.
posted by DigDoug at 11:26 AM on February 11, 2011 [9 favorites]

huh. You know, reading Dan Savage advice columns, he often says people should have fuck buddies on the side if they are not getting adequate sex in their marriage and he says it so casually that I've often wondered how in the hell any normal adult is supposed to find a person that would willfully sign up for cheating emotion-free sex, but I guess there's finally a service for it beyond Craigslist.
posted by mathowie at 11:27 AM on February 11, 2011 [7 favorites]

Wow:

(Corrects the spelling of Danica Patrick in the 11th paragraph.)

The usage of her name in-context is fairly non sequitish already, but now her name is at the head of an article about an infidelity website. Just where I'd want my name associated, I'm sure.
posted by gurple at 11:29 AM on February 11, 2011 [1 favorite]

I couldn't believe this was a real site when I first read about it some time ago. I went there and made up a user name and registered, just to see if there was really anyone in my area using it. Answer -- yes, plenty.

My basic reaction remains the same. People are free to do whatever the hell they want, but my opinion of them and the site is --- ICK.
posted by bearwife at 11:33 AM on February 11, 2011 [2 favorites]

he often says people should have fuck buddies on the side if they are not getting adequate sex in their marriage and he says it so casually that I've often wondered how in the hell any normal adult is supposed to find a person that would willfully sign up for cheating emotion-free sex, but I guess there's finally a service for it beyond Craigslist.

I'm pretty sure Dan Savage advocates for couples to be open with each other about the fact that they have fuck buddies. That's not cheating - that's regular old non-monogamy, and IME it's as old as the hills.
posted by muddgirl at 11:34 AM on February 11, 2011 [6 favorites]

I remember, a couple of years ago, seeing commercials late at night for something like this. One of the few things I've seen on television that actually somewhat offended me.
posted by Dreamcast at 11:35 AM on February 11, 2011

One of the few things I've seen on television that actually somewhat offended me.

You don't get Fox News?
posted by rokusan at 11:42 AM on February 11, 2011 [8 favorites]

To my eternal shame and horror, it took me years of denial (and I tried living in 94108 too) before I finally accepted the fact that I am irretrievably straight and once committed, monogamous to an utterly ridiculous degree.

O woe is me
posted by infini at 11:47 AM on February 11, 2011 [15 favorites]

'm pretty sure Dan Savage advocates for couples to be open with each other about the fact that they have fuck buddies.

Eh, he sometimes "advocates" cheating. I mean, he'd agree that an open relationship is a better option, but I've definitely heard him suggest cheating in certain circumstances (usually a marriage w/ kids kind of situation with unresolvable sexual differences).
posted by wildcrdj at 11:48 AM on February 11, 2011 [1 favorite]

So...if you are in an open relationship, and you use this site, while not telling any partners you find that actually your spouse doesn't consider what you're doing cheating - is that unethical? Confusing.
posted by Jon Mitchell at 11:50 AM on February 11, 2011 [6 favorites]

I've often wondered how in the hell any normal adult is supposed to find a person that would willfully sign up for cheating emotion-free sex

Take out the "cheating" bit and that's adultfriendfinder.com and polymatchmaker.com and pretty much every website catering to folks in open relationships.

Also, remember that Dan Savage is a gay man, and there are many more venues for gay men to find NSA sex than there are for straight folks. Though certainly straight people in open relationships meet each other in bars, too.
posted by Sidhedevil at 11:53 AM on February 11, 2011 [2 favorites]

So...if you are in an open relationship, and you use this site, while not telling any partners you find that actually your spouse doesn't consider what you're doing cheating - is that unethical?

According to someone on alt.polyamory or the LJ polyamory community (can't remember which), the site maintainers will delete you if you say you're in an open relationship.
posted by Sidhedevil at 11:54 AM on February 11, 2011

PRETTY GROSS COMPANY BUT I STILL LIKE THEIR MINIATURE POWDERED DONUTS!
posted by infinitywaltz at 11:54 AM on February 11, 2011 [1 favorite]

I'm not a Savage expert, but usually he advises someone in this situation to sit down with their spouse and say, "if you don't fuck me, someone else will" (perhaps with a bit more tact). He doesn't call this an "open relationship", or polyamory (because it's really not). It's non-monogamy with prior notification.

Is this cheating? That's a matter of culture, not fact.
posted by muddgirl at 11:55 AM on February 11, 2011 [2 favorites]

To my eternal shame and horror, it took me years of denial (and I tried living in 94108 too) before I finally accepted the fact that I am irretrievably straight and once committed, monogamous to an utterly ridiculous degree. O woe is me

So, flag it and move on. No need to rub it in the face of some of us who are lonely and miserable, and desperate.
posted by Melismata at 11:57 AM on February 11, 2011 [3 favorites]

When I went to sign up to check it out, somebody had my user name. So I went to my theoretical sockpuppet name, Taken too. I gave up at that point, but somebody is getting laid in my name!!
posted by AugustWest at 12:00 PM on February 11, 2011 [1 favorite]

It's non-monogamy with prior notification.

Yes, I'd say that's more common advice (and is basically like giving an ultimatum). But having listened to like 1 SL podcast a day for the last couple months, I can assure you he has advocated straight-up cheating on a few occasions. To be fair, they were REALLY bad relationships, and it was usually more of a "well, if you're not just going to DTMFA, you should cheat."

the site maintainers will delete you if you say you're in an open relationship

Odd since they have single people on the site. Single OK, married and cheating OK, married and open not? Lol.
posted by wildcrdj at 12:01 PM on February 11, 2011 [1 favorite]

Going from one website to an "economy" seems like an exaggeration. (exxxaggeration?)
posted by GuyZero at 12:01 PM on February 11, 2011 [1 favorite]

Melismata, sorry this stab at snark offended you - I believe that its happened before between us. Perhaps our senses of humour do not jell well?

Also, was coming to say that I have found that being comfortable with a 'romantic' partner's other partners happens in some situations and in others, you simply cannot conceive of it. So perhaps its not a permanent orientation so much as a response to the specific individual or result of a particular emotional resonance and depth? (in response to Sidhedevil)
posted by infini at 12:03 PM on February 11, 2011 [1 favorite]

So much work. My laziness is a heavily weighted factor in my total fidelity.
posted by everichon at 12:06 PM on February 11, 2011 [16 favorites]

No problem, infini. It came across to me as serious, and I'm wildly jealous of those who flaunt their monogamous relationships, since I so desperately want one. At my age, I need to check out sites like this, i.e. look for people who might be unhappy in their marriages, because there are few other places to look.
posted by Melismata at 12:09 PM on February 11, 2011 [1 favorite]

Also, was coming to say that I have found that being comfortable with a 'romantic' partner's other partners happens in some situations and in others, you simply cannot conceive of it. So perhaps its not a permanent orientation so much as a response to the specific individual or result of a particular emotional resonance and depth? (in response to Sidhedevil)

I think it's both--some people are always polyamorous and others choose it situationally. I myself am pretty strongly polyamorous by nature but in a monogamous marriage, because it's a deal-breaker for my Largely Mythological Husband.
posted by Sidhedevil at 12:14 PM on February 11, 2011 [2 favorites]

A large chunk of his work as an agent involved helping professional basketball players juggle their wives and mistresses, so when he read somewhere that 30 percent of users of Internet dating services were pretending to be single when they weren't, a light went on, pointing the way to an underserved online niche market.

I first read that as "undeserved online niche market" and then, once I realized my mistake, determined that I pretty much had it right the first time.
posted by norm at 12:15 PM on February 11, 2011

Gleeden.com is basically the same thing. There's a bunch of them. Is anyone really surprised? Seems like the natural progression of dating sites to me.

And you know, I'm am so pro-poly and open relationships and all of that, but I am not pro-lying to someone you ostensibly love.
posted by Lutoslawski at 12:18 PM on February 11, 2011 [5 favorites]

But having listened to like 1 SL podcast a day for the last couple months, I can assure you he has advocated straight-up cheating on a few occasions. To be fair, they were REALLY bad relationships, and it was usually more of a "well, if you're not just going to DTMFA, you should cheat."

I always thought he was reacting to those people who are like, "My spouse never sleeps with me... but I can't divorce him because of ABC... and I can't ask for an open relationship because of XYZ... and I can't do something else because of MNQ etc. etc." We get those questions in AskMe sometimes - basically someone looking for encouragement for something naughty that they want to do - and if I were getting paid to answer AskMe questions I'd probably just give them the encouragement that they were looking for like Savage does.
posted by muddgirl at 12:27 PM on February 11, 2011

"polymatchmaker.com"

What? No, polymatchmaker is really not full of people who want emotion-free sex. It's not in any way equivalent to or similar to adultfriendfinder. It's mostly people looking for relatively emotionally intimate relationships.
posted by the young rope-rider at 12:30 PM on February 11, 2011

Gleeden.com is basically the same thing.

Man, I'm really disappointed that that url isn't just a webcam on a burrow full of mirthful foxes. That would have been so much better than infidelity.
posted by Greg Nog at 12:30 PM on February 11, 2011 [22 favorites]

I wanted to be all upset about this site, since it will inevatably cause so much pain and drama.

Then I remembered that there are sites that sell death machines. I love those death machines and now there is a plate in my arm.

One of the things Dan Savage seems to make a point about is the notion that you shouldn't have an affair if you can help it, but if you can't help it you should keep it a secret. I'm not sure the web is a secure platform for that kind of secrecy.
posted by poe at 12:34 PM on February 11, 2011 [2 favorites]

I've often wondered if these sorts of businesses have a blackmail department overseas.
posted by device55 at 12:37 PM on February 11, 2011 [7 favorites]

At my age, I need to check out sites like this, i.e. look for people who might be unhappy in their marriages, because there are few other places to look

I totally understand where you are coming from, but since trust is a pretty critical element in a working monogamous relationship (and, I'd assume, in a health poly one too), I'd suggest this is not a good place to find your candidates. People tend to repeat their behavior in their later relationships, too.
posted by bearwife at 12:51 PM on February 11, 2011 [10 favorites]

Maybe it's in there somewhere, but today's NYTimes has the story on, what? some married NJ politician forced to resign for sending bare chested CL dating posts. They said he had also met someone on this site, and was warned by the GOP to "cool it."
posted by StickyCarpet at 12:51 PM on February 11, 2011

No need to rub it in the face of some of us who are lonely and miserable, and desperate.

I feel for you. That's an awful situation to be in. One of the few worse situations is lonely, miserable, desperate and married. I would guess that a site like Ashley Madison is going to be used by a large percentage of cheating jerks, but also some pretty swell people who are in some frustrating and miserable situations. If you're 38, married, got a couple of kids, and really can't financially afford a divorce because you need both incomes and there's not enough money to set up a second household, yet your spouse is making your life a living hell when they aren't ignoring you...I can see why Ashley Madison might seem like a lifeline, one small chance to connect with another adult who might actually care.
posted by cute little Billy Henderson, age 4 at 12:53 PM on February 11, 2011 [2 favorites]

If thy don't ..... Nah!
not how I roll. All the same I dislike cheaters. They usually lie to everyone involved with them. In fact many of them lie when the truth would be a safer option, would get them less of a beatdown for example.
posted by Katjusa Roquette at 12:54 PM on February 11, 2011

Ashley Madison might seem like a lifeline, one small chance to connect with another adult who might actually care.

I don't know why now, but I thought this site was for women looking for sugar daddies.
posted by anniecat at 1:01 PM on February 11, 2011

Ashley Madison might seem like a lifeline, one small chance to connect with another adult who might actually care.

That whole comment read like ad copy to anyone else?
posted by kilo hertz at 1:05 PM on February 11, 2011 [7 favorites]

I don't know why now, but I thought this site was for women looking for sugar daddies.

Sugar daddies need not be single.
posted by device55 at 1:05 PM on February 11, 2011

If you want to try being lonely, try having your boyfriend say "wrong number" and hang up on you when you call because his wife is in the room. Try holidays without a phone call or an email because he can't get away. Try never being introduced to his friends or his family or, hell, even his favorite restaurant.
posted by the young rope-rider at 1:07 PM on February 11, 2011 [15 favorites]

That reminds me of another site that was linked to in a comment previously (can't remember the thread) that was a match-making site specifically for people looking for sugar daddies/mommies.
posted by kilo hertz at 1:09 PM on February 11, 2011

I totally understand where you are coming from, but since trust is a pretty critical element in a working monogamous relationship (and, I'd assume, in a health poly one too), I'd suggest this is not a good place to find your candidates. People tend to repeat their behavior in their later relationships, too.

While I agree that some people are serial cheaters and/or are unable to simply express their feeling honestly in a relationship, I tend to think that the bulk of cheating is the of "things aren't bad enough to fully leave, but not good enough to fully stay" variety.

Like most human behaviors, there are often complex forces driving the end result. Everybody as their cross to bear and this is a tough spot to be in.

I say this - I've been cheated on a lot in the past. It's not the worst thing in the world. Usually, when people violate your trust, it's about them and not you, anyway.
posted by Pogo_Fuzzybutt at 1:11 PM on February 11, 2011 [1 favorite]

A friend and I are hoping to start a children's academy that teaches "advanced success strategies." All the courses for the fall semester will be things like, how to cheat on standardized tests, how to fake disabilities, how to grind negotiations to a halt, how to surreptitiously undermine power structures, how to drastically alter one's appearance, etc. etc. And then in the spring semester after the parents drop the kids off, we'll bus them all in to a regular public school where they'll be enrolled under fake names, going forth each day with missions to observe and destroy.

I figure that even rich NYC liberals will balk at letting their kids into our school, until we come back with, "Um, are you sure your kid can even past the test to get IN to our school?" At which point they'll splutter and fume and be like, "What? OF COURSE she can! Here's $7,000, where do we sign up for that test?"
posted by hermitosis at 1:13 PM on February 11, 2011 [22 favorites]

Found it!
(from the OK Cupid being bought thread)
posted by kilo hertz at 1:15 PM on February 11, 2011

how to grind negotiations to a halt, how to surreptitiously undermine power structures,

Those don't seem like good strategies. Let's stop for a second and brainstorm about some alternate approaches we might take. Here's a white-board, for me to write things down, and here's a talking stick. The rules for the talking stick are that anyone may speak if the stick is being held by the person to their left. The person to the right may question any of the proposed ideas, and the person directly across from the talker may strike everything from the record. Let's start with the oldest person to hold the stick first.
posted by Greg Nog at 1:32 PM on February 11, 2011 [1 favorite]

Ashley Madison is distinctly different than AdultFriendFinder in business model, user interface, and culture, and both of them are leagues--leagues--different than Polymatchmaker. I'm kind of amazed that anyone would bring up the latter in any way related to the former.

AM allows users to post XXX rated pictures, but puts them behind a sign that identifies them as such, so folks know what they're getting. AFF lets people post XXX pictures with impunity but they're only mostly visible to paying members, though lots of people show it all off on webcams and non-paying customers can watch them, albeit in limited numbers. Whereas PMM is very strict about not being sleazy--there's some discussion of sexual matters in the forums, but it's a very small part of the whole site, far more relationship talk (imagine! on a polyamory chat site!) and the picture policy is strictly enforced to prevent XXX pics.

I'm married and have met and had relationships with married men who're stepping out on their wives, through both sites. Pogo is right, life sure is complicated.
posted by Lola Xaviera Boom-Boom McPuppet at 2:24 PM on February 11, 2011 [1 favorite]

What? No, polymatchmaker is really not full of people who want emotion-free sex. It's not in any way equivalent to or similar to adultfriendfinder. It's mostly people looking for relatively emotionally intimate relationships.

Fair enough, though it was not always thus. The larger point I was trying to make is that there are already long-established websites for people looking to practice responsible non-monogamy without lying to their partners.
posted by Sidhedevil at 2:26 PM on February 11, 2011

It seems like he's frustrated because from a business standpoint, it doesn't really make any sense that people won't invest (or even let him be listed to publicly invest) in the company. I mean, after all, these are the sorts of companies (hi-tech, silicon valley startups with little initial cost and a seemingly proven way to monetize the site) the people flock to these days.

In this case, money (capitalism) is running straight up against whatever non-capitalistic sense of morality/ethics we might have left. And it doesn't make any sense, really. Like poe pointed out above, we let people buy motorcycles and cars, which probably kill a lot more people than affairs (granted I have no citation for that). Tons of people invest in those companies. It's legal to sell all sorts of guns, up to and including semiautomatic ones, legally. Lots of people buy them, and lots of people make money off of selling the guns themselves, ammunition, etc. I'm sure lots of folks have money in those companies, even if through diverse investment strategies. Lockheed Martin and Boeing are major defense contractors and have produced thousands upon thousands of literally deadly machines for the military. Lots of people invest in those companies, and they're damned sure traded on the NYSE. We've given up our scruples pretty much everywhere, else, but this is where the line is? Really? So without getting into the morality of the site itself, from a business standpoint it really doesn't make any sense.

(Not saying I agree with him, but I can sure see why he's pissed.)
posted by scdjpowell at 2:30 PM on February 11, 2011

I've never cheated on anyone. Whether or not it's "wrong" per se, and to what extent, and under what circumstances has never really given me much pause for thought. To me, it's kind of just pathetic. What are doing in a relationship you that you have to cheat on? Why are you so lame, spineless and pathetic that you're actually lying to the face of the one person in the world you're supposed to have the most trust with? What could be more cowardly than that? Why not just get out? That's what I've always done, irrespective of however much screaming and crying from crazy codependent chicks it takes; it's always worth it.

I realize that's pretty callous, especially to all the miserable married folks, but still... an "unhappy marriage" has always seemed like an oxymoron to me. Isn't happiness supposed to be the point of the whole thing? No?

Never mind the original subject of this post, the message I get from the comments here is just: "Never get married." I'm 33 and single in a major metropolitan city, and happy as a clam. It's the "happily ever after" suckers who're miserable.
posted by slumberfiend at 2:48 PM on February 11, 2011 [2 favorites]

Why not just get out?

So. No kids then.
posted by device55 at 2:58 PM on February 11, 2011 [1 favorite]

I went onto AM for an article I was hired to do. My expectation was that it was gonna be a sleazefest for married guys trolling for a quick hook up. The reality was that while there were some men just looking for sex, most of them seemed desperate to find someone who would listen to them, and talk to them. They didn't seem that focused on sex AT ALL. I communicated with a handful of members via email for a while (I came clean to them about why I was on the site) and I have to say they were happy just to have a friend. I've kept contact with two of the men for 2 years now-one is divorced and the other is still married. Over all, I found the experience amazingly depressing. It's one thing to go outside of a marriage to find sexual fulfillment, it's another just to find basic human contact.

Slumberfiend-there are lots of reasons people don't get out of marriages including fear of never seeing their kids, financial problems, and often the fear of trying to re-enter the "singles" scene. Some people literally can't afford to live without his/her spouse. Sometimes people pick the devil they know over the one they don't. I know lots of married people who are also unhappy, for some it's a phase brought on by external factors (job lost, etc), for others it's a more pronounced problem finally surfacing. I also know lots of happily married people.

Basically as Pogo said, whether your single or not, life is complicated and my experience on AM taught me not to be quite so judge-y about the people who use the service.
posted by miss-lapin at 3:19 PM on February 11, 2011 [7 favorites]

the message I get from the comments here is just: "Never get married." I'm 33 and single in a major metropolitan city, and happy as a clam. It's the "happily ever after" suckers who're miserable.

Oddly enough, unmarried couples manage to make each other miserable, too.

I theorize that some people are just predisposed to cheat, whether or not they are married or just dating, and it has little to do with ethics or morals. My spouse and I have had our ups and downs, but even in the worst times, the thought of adding another complicated emotional and physical relationship to my schedule just tires me out.
posted by muddgirl at 3:21 PM on February 11, 2011

I learned something today. That those commercials that ran on latenight Comedy Central were not trailers for an upcoming, stuck-in-development animated series about a woman in a unfulfilled marriage moonlighting as an online madame to help those in similarly rut-worthy situations. As a show it didn't look very well produced and the concept was kind of shaky, but I'm still disappointed somewhat.

Meanwhile, "Date A Cougar" seems to be in season two and every Wednesday night after dinner with my in-laws I need to grab the remote after Modern Family ends so I can change it before I have to explain to my MIL what a "cougar" is.
posted by krippledkonscious at 3:30 PM on February 11, 2011

It's one thing to go outside of a marriage to find sexual fulfillment, it's another just to find basic human contact.

Yeah, I've noticed this, and it makes me really sad too. Women are often stereotyped as confusing physical and emotional intimacy, but it seems to me that this is part of the human condition - it just expresses itself differently. Women are taught that physical intimacy stems from emotional intimacy, and men are taught the opposite.
posted by muddgirl at 3:36 PM on February 11, 2011

Man, fuck AshleyMadison. Not for the sex. Not for the name. For condoning cheating, as a societal construct. I mean, no, I'm not expecting the site to enact societal change, but people need to be open about their need for sex/sexual encounters/hookups. No, poly/casual sex/open relationships aren't for everyone, but neither is monogamy. Sure, the shame helps end the political careers of some terrible people, but this just really makes me feel sorry for sex.
posted by Eideteker at 3:50 PM on February 11, 2011 [1 favorite]

Well, another use for AM is as a hookup finder. There are plenty of singles there (or so they say, and considering the website, there's no incentive for people to lie).

I've used OKC, Alt.com, Craigslist, and AM in the past and AM has the best user interface I've encountered by far. Being able to have pics posted but not available for view to anyone except those that you've sent your key to is brilliant. Not having to pay to post a profile but having a pay schedule for services makes sense-the more you use the more you pay; acknowledging that peoples sexual preferences don't just fall into "straight" or "gay" and having random kinks and fetishes available to check off as part of your profile; these are things that I wish more dating sites would incorporate.
It's an intelligently designed site that's targeted towards a controversial market. If they would start another more generic site, or even just tried to expand their user base to include more singles, they would probably blow OKC out of the water.
posted by newpotato at 3:52 PM on February 11, 2011 [1 favorite]

My hand is up in the air and I'm waiving it like I just don't care.
posted by Sailormom at 4:02 PM on February 11, 2011

(Corrects the spelling of Danica Patrick in the 11th paragraph.)

The usage of her name in-context is fairly non sequitish already, but now her name is at the head of an article about an infidelity website. Just where I'd want my name associated, I'm sure.

By now, we're well used to seeing her name where it doesn't belong. Jeez, guys, all I want to do is renew our domains.
posted by kurumi at 4:17 PM on February 11, 2011

So what does AM if someone gets blackmailed or killed over a relationship started there?
posted by empath at 4:23 PM on February 11, 2011

Doesn't this type of site fall under the same category as companies that make radar detectors, or write your term paper for you, or provide phone numbers with actors on the other end who will "be" a phone reference for you?

The companies themselves are not breaking the rules/laws, but they provide services or products that are designed purely to help people do just that.

I still can't quite wrap my mind about how they are legal.

Yes, I know police don't use radar per se anymore.
posted by jfwlucy at 5:44 PM on February 11, 2011

Is having an affair illegal?
posted by GuyZero at 6:00 PM on February 11, 2011

I still can't quite wrap my mind about how they are legal.

Well, both AM and some of the examples you give aren't about "legality" but ethics. I mean, cheating on a term paper isn't illegal. Adultery isn't illegal in most states, and even where it is it's almost never enforced. Same with references, radar detectors, etc. All of those are more "dubious ethics" than illegality.
posted by wildcrdj at 6:04 PM on February 11, 2011

At my age dollymadison.com holds considerably more allure.
posted by jcworth at 7:46 PM on February 11, 2011 [2 favorites]

Sorry if my pop culture knowledge is woefully inadequate (heh), but does the name "Ashley Madison" reference something, the site's founder's name, or a reference to twee suburban kids' names popular in the '90s, or something?
posted by porpoise at 7:48 PM on February 11, 2011

Is having an affair illegal?

Hard to say. As recently as 2004 adultery laws were still being enforced in some parts of the US. Such laws probably wouldn't hold up post-Lawrence, but until they get struck down by appeals courts some hapless cheaters may find themselves dragged into court.

Sorry if my pop culture knowledge is woefully inadequate (heh), but does the name "Ashley Madison" reference something, the site's founder's name, or a reference to twee suburban kids' names popular in the '90s, or something?

"In an effort to attract women to the site, Biderman and his colleagues combined two of today's most popular baby names and invented their fictional proprietor." (Source)
posted by jedicus at 8:19 PM on February 11, 2011

Ah, the cheating website. It lures you in....out of curiosity. It surprises you...with real people.

This is technology bringing human beings together.

That line is so cheesy, I am going to leave it for you. Enjoy!
posted by Xoebe at 10:05 PM on February 11, 2011

...

I don't know.

It just seems so dumb when a website purporting to aid in sexual sleuthing while married cannot figure out the difference between discrete and discreet, all in a chipperly entitled article telling a potential client, "HOW TO HAVE AN AFFAIR: Ashley's Married [Man's] Dating Tips Keys to Success!" (Cue rhinestones, cowboys, loud music entourage.)

Angles? Obtuse. Right. Acute. Discrete, even.

To be on the sly? Discreet, y'all. Although grammatical lack of prowess, like most inanity, doesn't stop people from getting laid. And, do people really need a website to tell them how to cheat? It's been happening unincorporated for a really, really long time. I just don't understand.
posted by simulacra at 6:25 AM on February 12, 2011

Okay, maybe not discrete angles, but discrete math proofs, sure!
posted by simulacra at 6:31 AM on February 12, 2011

On Dan Savage and cheating: It's non-monogamy with prior notification.

Sort of. He supports cheating "with cause," too. Check this response to a guy who snooped on his mom's email and found out she'd been cheating on dad, whom the writer calls an "abusive asshole and borderline psycho":

Yes, yes: Maybe your mom should've divorced your father, or had him murdered, but for reasons that will only ever be known to her, MOM, she decided that keeping her family intact—maybe for cultural reasons, maybe for her boys—was more important than remaining faithful to an antisocial psycho. It's easy to say that cheating is always wrong and to call everyone who cheats a POS, but sometimes an affair is the least worst option.

I'm not sure I find his take on cheating completely consistent (I'm not sure I find it inconsistent, either, haven't thought about it that much), and he does draw a distinction between Cheating Piece Of Shit and Honest Nonmonogamy, but his response to the 2nd letter here couldn't be more clear:

People cheat because monogamy isn't natural and we are wired to cheat. That doesn't make cheating right, of course; people should honor their commitments, and blah-de-nine-iron-blah. But we shouldn't encourage people to make commitments we all know they're unlikely to keep. The end.

On the other hand, his response to this serial cheater borders on vicious:

If you leave your current husband and break up your first child's second home and your second child's first home, it won't be long before you get around to cheating on the love of your life, too. Because you're a cheater, SCIL, a habitual, serial cheater. You're precisely the kind of person who shouldn't make monogamous commitments. Or get married. Or have children.

So what should you do? Stay? Go? Frankly, SCIL, I don't give a fuck what you do. Stay or go, it's not going to make a fuck of a lot of difference. Your personal life is a mess, SCIL, and it always will be. Because, you see, wherever you go, there you are.

That said: If your current husband doesn't mind being cheated on, if he can put up with your affairs and wants to put your children first, then I think you should stay with him for the sake of your kids. They deserve whatever stability and continuity you can provide for them between infidelities. Again, if you leave your current husband for the love of your life, SCIL, it won't be long before you're cheating on your third husband and preparing to uproot your kids a third/second time. I know it, you know it, everyone out there reading this knows it, even your current husband seems to know it. So just stay put, okay?
posted by mediareport at 6:46 AM on February 12, 2011 [1 favorite]

muddgirl, it comes back to the selfish gene, some individuals have a strong drive for sex, some because their genes have a strong need to reproduce themselves at perilous cost of the organism.
more here
Others because they're bastards. Sex is sex, i have three kids, i'm not looking for a fourth ;)

I'm not saying infidelity is right, IMHO it isnt. but for some, this might explain some of their behaviour.
posted by xcasex at 6:47 AM on February 12, 2011

A series of discrete discreet dates (budget at lease $20 for each, SAIT) requires much better time management skills than one continuous date.
posted by Tuesday After Lunch at 5:05 PM on February 12, 2011

and I tried living in 94108 too

I live in 94108! Am I missing out on certain neighborhood delights? Explanation and/or links, pls.
posted by ryanrs at 7:06 PM on February 12, 2011