In other news... (humorous news items)

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10332
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby addams » Sun Aug 23, 2015 1:46 am UTC

Like so many of us,
They want to fit.

Like so many of us,
They don't fit.

I know how it feels.
Poor them.

Honestly; My heart goes out to them.
And; I laughed. People laugh at me.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
Coyne
Posts: 1110
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2009 12:07 am UTC
Location: Orlando, Florida
Contact:

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Coyne » Sun Aug 23, 2015 3:30 am UTC

Louisiana GOP Leader: I Was On Ashley Madison To Do ‘Opposition Research’

Louisiana Republican Party, Executive Director Jason Dore.

("Opposition research is something you delegate to a staffer, Jason. So, nice try, but you're not fooling anyone.")
In all fairness...

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10550
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby CorruptUser » Sun Aug 23, 2015 4:50 am UTC

"I was hiring underage prostitutes as part of gonzo journalism, honest!"

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Diadem » Sun Aug 23, 2015 9:50 am UTC

Well his excuse "I own a law firm that specialized in finding dirt on people" actually sounds pretty plausible. Not likely, but plausible. Ashley Madison is a good place to find dirt, and while it could be the kind of thing you leave to a staffer, it's certainly not unlikely that he did some of the research himself.

It's an interesting excuse though: "No, I wasn't there because I was cheating, I was there because I'm a horrible human being".
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

User avatar
Link
Posts: 1419
Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2009 11:33 am UTC
Location: ᘝᓄᘈᖉᐣ
Contact:

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Link » Sun Aug 23, 2015 10:28 am UTC

Diadem wrote:Well his excuse "I own a law firm that specialized in finding dirt on people" actually sounds pretty plausible. Not likely, but plausible. Ashley Madison is a good place to find dirt, and while it could be the kind of thing you leave to a staffer, it's certainly not unlikely that he did some of the research himself.

It's an interesting excuse though: "No, I wasn't there because I was cheating, I was there because I'm a horrible human being".
Supposing for a moment that what he says is entirely true, using your own personal details on a cheating website is still a pretty damned stupid thing to do if you want to have a career in politics. If you're going to register on such a site to do research, use fake account details and a company credit card!

Also, I consider cheaters to be a subset of horrible human beings.

User avatar
Thesh
Made to Fuck Dinosaurs
Posts: 6598
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: Colorado

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Thesh » Sun Aug 23, 2015 1:53 pm UTC

Diadem wrote:Well his excuse "I own a law firm that specialized in finding dirt on people" actually sounds pretty plausible. Not likely, but plausible. Ashley Madison is a good place to find dirt, and while it could be the kind of thing you leave to a staffer, it's certainly not unlikely that he did some of the research himself.

It's an interesting excuse though: "No, I wasn't there because I was cheating, I was there because I'm a horrible human being".


I'm not familiar enough with the site, but if you could search the list of cheaters, wouldn't it defeat the whole secrecy part of the service? I have a feeling it couldn't be used for what he said he used it for.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.

Chen
Posts: 5580
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Chen » Mon Aug 24, 2015 11:57 am UTC

Thesh wrote:I'm not familiar enough with the site, but if you could search the list of cheaters, wouldn't it defeat the whole secrecy part of the service? I have a feeling it couldn't be used for what he said he used it for.


I always thought the site was just like any dating site, but catered to people who wanted to have extra-marital affairs. I mean it seems kinda difficult to work if you couldn't search for at least the characteristics of the person you wanted to cheat with. I suppose maybe you had to actually talk to people based on picture/profile before you could get their email address or anything.

Honestly though, consider there was an explicit mention of how the company did NOT verify email addresses, you'd think more people would use the "I never made a profile here, someone must have just signed up with my email address" as an excuse. Especially those in the public eye.
Last edited by Chen on Mon Aug 24, 2015 1:34 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Diadem » Mon Aug 24, 2015 12:17 pm UTC

Link wrote:
Diadem wrote:Well his excuse "I own a law firm that specialized in finding dirt on people" actually sounds pretty plausible. Not likely, but plausible. Ashley Madison is a good place to find dirt, and while it could be the kind of thing you leave to a staffer, it's certainly not unlikely that he did some of the research himself.

It's an interesting excuse though: "No, I wasn't there because I was cheating, I was there because I'm a horrible human being".
Supposing for a moment that what he says is entirely true, using your own personal details on a cheating website is still a pretty damned stupid thing to do if you want to have a career in politics. If you're going to register on such a site to do research, use fake account details and a company credit card!

Well I don't know how Ashley Madison works. I assume you create a profile there, that's at least partially visible to other people. But credit card details presumably aren't, and your real name might also not be visible. I mean if this was a paid forum and I signed up for it, my real name and credit card info would be in the site's database, but everybody here would still only see my nickname.

Don't get me wrong, I don't believe his story for a second either, I was only saying it's not impossible. And really I found the irony of his defence delicious. It's like saying: "No your honor, I didn't rob that store. I have an alibi, you see, I was out that night murdering people".

Also, I consider cheaters to be a subset of horrible human beings.

Nonsense. Cheating is something that over half of all people do, and generally causes no harm. I mean sure it's generally better to be honest, but we as a society place quite ridiculous demands on people, and it's no miracle that most people fall short.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10550
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby CorruptUser » Mon Aug 24, 2015 1:41 pm UTC

Diadem wrote:
Also, I consider cheaters to be a subset of horrible human beings.

Nonsense. Cheating is something that over half of all people do, and generally causes no harm. I mean sure it's generally better to be honest, but we as a society place quite ridiculous demands on people, and it's no miracle that most people fall short.


Actually, I consider most people to be "horrible" human beings, so "over half" doesn't contradict anything. Mostly my worldview is that everyone has some flaw and most people have huge enough flaws to be "awful" but in general most people are a "net postive" in spite of this, such that removing all "bad people" in most cases won't be in society's favor. We should still punish people for the bad things they do in the hopes that others realize that Action X is Bad, though in such a way that does not prevent people from contributing to society.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Aug 24, 2015 3:31 pm UTC

Diadem wrote:
Also, I consider cheaters to be a subset of horrible human beings.

Nonsense. Cheating is something that over half of all people do, and generally causes no harm. I mean sure it's generally better to be honest, but we as a society place quite ridiculous demands on people, and it's no miracle that most people fall short.


Strictly speaking, the membership of AM itself, presuming that it's mostly American, would make up a significant proportion of the adult married population.

I believe membership was biased heavily towards men, though, which gives you some interesting conclusions. First, it's likely that the vast majority of members got screwed only in a financial/privacy sense. Second, it makes the "percentage of men willing to cheat" even more dramatic. I mean, this is a pretty active thing, it appears. Likelihood of there being some other intent seems relatively low.

KrytenKoro
Posts: 1487
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 2:58 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby KrytenKoro » Mon Aug 24, 2015 5:22 pm UTC

Nonsense. Cheating is something that over half of all people do, and generally causes no harm. I mean sure it's generally better to be honest, but we as a society place quite ridiculous demands on people, and it's no miracle that most people fall short.

...we're not talking polyamory or open relationships, we're talking cheating. As in, "purposefully concealing sexual activity from someone who trusts you to have the same bill of health you did when you became exclusive, before you then have sex with that person."

It may not legally qualify as sexual violence, but its damn fucking close, and i have no sympathy for those who didnt just end their prior relationship except in cases of abuse where they are legitimately afraid their ex will hurt them.

Defending polyamory or open relationships as acceptable does not require us to defend -purposefully trying to hurt those who trust you-, and fuck the idea that it does.
From the elegant yelling of this compelling dispute comes the ghastly suspicion my opposition's a fruit.

User avatar
eran_rathan
Mostly Wrong
Posts: 1846
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:36 pm UTC
Location: in your ceiling, judging you

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby eran_rathan » Mon Aug 24, 2015 6:06 pm UTC

Diadem wrote:
Also, I consider cheaters to be a subset of horrible human beings.

Nonsense. Cheating is something that over half of all people do, and generally causes no harm. I mean sure it's generally better to be honest, but we as a society place quite ridiculous demands on people, and it's no miracle that most people fall short.


I'd take a bit of an issue with the 'generally causes no harm' part of your quote there, mate.

STIs?

general loss of trust in relationships, and other mental health issues from people sleeping around, plus financial difficulties (in the case of cheating causing a divorce) - I can't say that falls under 'generally causes no harm'.
"Does this smell like chloroform to you?"
"Google tells me you are not unique. You are, however, wrong."
nɒʜƚɒɿ_nɒɿɘ

User avatar
Quercus
Posts: 1810
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 12:22 pm UTC
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Quercus » Mon Aug 24, 2015 6:07 pm UTC

KrytenKoro wrote:...we're not talking polyamory or open relationships, we're talking cheating. As in, "purposefully concealing sexual activity from someone who trusts you to have the same bill of health you did when you became exclusive, before you then have sex with that person."

It may not legally qualify as sexual violence, but its damn fucking close, and i have no sympathy for those who didnt just end their prior relationship except in cases of abuse where they are legitimately afraid their ex will hurt them.

Defending polyamory or open relationships as acceptable does not require us to defend -purposefully trying to hurt those who trust you-, and fuck the idea that it does.

Well said. I wanted to add that aside from the health status issue, which is an important one, cheating in a monogamous relationship also necessarily implies a betrayal of trust; doing something in a relationship that you have explicitly agreed not to do (and if you haven't explicitly agreed whether your relationship is monogamous or not, then why the hell not? This stuff's important - communicate!).

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10550
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby CorruptUser » Mon Aug 24, 2015 6:55 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:I believe membership was biased heavily towards men, though, which gives you some interesting conclusions.


Isn't that the way it is with virtually every dating site ever?

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Aug 24, 2015 7:28 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:I believe membership was biased heavily towards men, though, which gives you some interesting conclusions.


Isn't that the way it is with virtually every dating site ever?


Perhaps, though I haven't crunched numbers to see if this is more skewed than average. I suspect it is, but it'd require some digging to know for sure. Plus, there's always the issue of fake accounts, which is big in online dating in general.

But it indicates a very large pool of intentional cheaters. Hard to justify something like this as an accidental mistake, there's a degree of planning there.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10550
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby CorruptUser » Mon Aug 24, 2015 8:33 pm UTC

Aren't most fake accounts an impossibly hot female that somehow has difficulty finding a date in meatspace, not a man?

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Diadem » Mon Aug 24, 2015 10:59 pm UTC

KrytenKoro wrote:
Nonsense. Cheating is something that over half of all people do, and generally causes no harm. I mean sure it's generally better to be honest, but we as a society place quite ridiculous demands on people, and it's no miracle that most people fall short.

...we're not talking polyamory or open relationships, we're talking cheating. As in, "purposefully concealing sexual activity from someone who trusts you to have the same bill of health you did when you became exclusive, before you then have sex with that person."

It may not legally qualify as sexual violence, but its damn fucking close, and i have no sympathy for those who didnt just end their prior relationship except in cases of abuse where they are legitimately afraid their ex will hurt them.

No, I'm not talking about polyamory or open relationships. I'm talking about cheating.

I'm not saying cheating is a good thing that we all ought to do more. I'm just saying it's not that big a deal, and I'm tired with this society's obsession over it. Certainly not something you ought to call people horrible humans beings over. And yes, I'm aware of this STD risks, that's why I said it can sometimes cause harm. But really that risk is not that great, especially if you take some precautions.

Of course betraying someone's trust is bad. But people do shit like that all the fucking time both inside and outside relationships, and often it's considered completely normal or at most a slight transgression. Heck, passively aggressively manipulating your partner into doing what you want is practically the Hollywood definition of romance. And the pressure society puts on people to be monogamous is ridiculous. It's really not strange at all that many people don't know how to properly deal with such pressure.

KrytenKoro wrote:Defending polyamory or open relationships as acceptable does not require us to defend -purposefully trying to hurt those who trust you-, and fuck the idea that it does.

Yes, that's totally why people cheat. Because they want to hurt their partner. That's also why people never try to hide it.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

User avatar
ObsessoMom
Nespresso Bomb
Posts: 929
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 5:28 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby ObsessoMom » Mon Aug 24, 2015 11:40 pm UTC

Diadem wrote:I'm not saying cheating is a good thing that we all ought to do more. I'm just saying it's not that big a deal to a lot of men, who have a lot more years of fertility and sexual desirability than women do, and thus have MUCH more opportunity to find success in a subsequent relationship if the current relationship crashes and burns, and I'm tired with this society's obsession over it.


Fixed that for you.

User avatar
Link
Posts: 1419
Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2009 11:33 am UTC
Location: ᘝᓄᘈᖉᐣ
Contact:

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Link » Mon Aug 24, 2015 11:42 pm UTC

KrytenKoro wrote:
Nonsense. Cheating is something that over half of all people do, and generally causes no harm. I mean sure it's generally better to be honest, but we as a society place quite ridiculous demands on people, and it's no miracle that most people fall short.

...we're not talking polyamory or open relationships, we're talking cheating. As in, "purposefully concealing sexual activity from someone who trusts you to have the same bill of health you did when you became exclusive, before you then have sex with that person."

It may not legally qualify as sexual violence, but its damn fucking close, and i have no sympathy for those who didnt just end their prior relationship except in cases of abuse where they are legitimately afraid their ex will hurt them.

Defending polyamory or open relationships as acceptable does not require us to defend -purposefully trying to hurt those who trust you-, and fuck the idea that it does.

Agreed, especially on the part where it's just a small step down from sexual violence.

Diadem wrote:But people do shit like that all the fucking time both inside and outside relationships, and often it's considered completely normal or at most a slight transgression. Heck, passively aggressively manipulating your partner into doing what you want is practically the Hollywood definition of romance. And the pressure society puts on people to be monogamous is ridiculous. It's really not strange at all that many people don't know how to properly deal with such pressure.
To me, the fact that such things are often considered normal doesn't change the fact that I consider it pretty horrible behaviour. In fact, it's one of the things that make me feel that society, in general, is pretty horrible. Regarding the pressure to be monogamous: OK, fair enough, that's an unrealistic expectation -- but that still doesn't excuse cheating, IMO. Polygamy isn't a problem, betraying someone's trust is -- especially when it concerns something as intimate as sex. If you want to fuck multiple people, be honest about it.

Diadem wrote:
KrytenKoro wrote:Defending polyamory or open relationships as acceptable does not require us to defend -purposefully trying to hurt those who trust you-, and fuck the idea that it does.

Yes, that's totally why people cheat. Because they want to hurt their partner. That's also why people never try to hide it.
No, that's not why people cheat -- but it's a pretty damned fucking obvious consequence of cheating, that anybody with half a brain can figure out well before actually betraying their spouse like that. And trying to hide it is, in my opinion, covering up being a dick by being an even bigger dick. If you find yourself in a drunken one-night stand, that -- to me -- may be forgiveable if you're honest and upfront about it. But paying for membership on a site deliberately designed to facilitate having extramarital affairs, that sort of stuff gets you put in the special hell, if you ask me.

User avatar
ObsessoMom
Nespresso Bomb
Posts: 929
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 5:28 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby ObsessoMom » Mon Aug 24, 2015 11:49 pm UTC

Yeah, my best friend stumbled upon evidence of her husband's affair in an email account. She confronted him, believed him that this side relationship with a co-worker "had just happened," and they managed to patch things up and reconcile.

Totally different story if he'd been on AM. (Then again, maybe he is.) Anyway, I agree with Link that there's a difference between accidentally encountering temptation you can't resist, and going out looking for it.

[Edited to add: And again, there's the equity thing. A woman in her 40s, with young children in tow, and whose education ended at a BA because after that she was busy working to support his graduate degree, and who has a big hole in her resume because she was busy raising his kids after that, and who is still grieving the loss of the ex who dumped her...is at a MUCH greater disadvantage in later love and in life than the man in his 50s whose professional career benefitted from her behind-the-scenes support, and who isn't burdened by the nuisance of primary custody of his kids, and who already has another prospect lined up, and may go on to spawn a second family because he's got plenty of years of fertility left. Shall we just shrug and say life isn't fair, and boys will be boys because testosterone made them have wandering eyes...or do you agree that maybe infidelity tends to penalize women more than it penalizes men, and is therefore a bigger societal deal to some demographics than to others?]

User avatar
Quercus
Posts: 1810
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 12:22 pm UTC
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Quercus » Tue Aug 25, 2015 9:17 am UTC

Diadem wrote:Of course betraying someone's trust is bad. But people do shit like that all the fucking time both inside and outside relationships, and often it's considered completely normal or at most a slight transgression. Heck, passively aggressively manipulating your partner into doing what you want is practically the Hollywood definition of romance.

That means, to me, that the Hollywood definition of romance is all kinds of fucked up, not that cheating is okay.

And the pressure society puts on people to be monogamous is ridiculous. It's really not strange at all that many people don't know how to properly deal with such pressure.

I agree entirely on both counts. I just think that it's perfectly possible to be understanding about why people cheat, without minimizing the impact that cheating can have. The solution isn't to say that cheating isn't such a big deal, it's to change the narratives around relationships such that monogamy isn't the only socially acceptable option, that acknowledging, talking about and working through feelings of attraction to other people with your partner is generally accepted and such that other betrayals of trust in relationships are also seen as having an appropriate degree of seriousness. Now that process of change is way too slow, but I don't think anyone has found a good shortcut for it unfortunately.

Incidentally, I wouldn't say that cheaters are necessarily terrible people - I'd say that they're people who have made a bad decision which is likely to hurt people and could have serious consequences for their relationship. The bad decision isn't the sleeping with someone else bit, it's the doing it without your partner's consent. I think that people generally have a right to expect the kind of relationship that they've agreed to, and if that doesn't work for someone in the relationship, they need to sit down and talk it over first.

maybeagnostic
Posts: 669
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 3:34 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby maybeagnostic » Tue Aug 25, 2015 9:40 am UTC

ObsessoMom wrote:[Edited to add: And again, there's the equity thing. A woman in her 40s, with young children in tow, and whose education ended at a BA because after that she was busy working to support his graduate degree, and who has a big hole in her resume because she was busy raising his kids after that, and who is still grieving the loss of the ex who dumped her...is at a MUCH greater disadvantage in later love and in life than the man in his 50s whose professional career benefitted from her behind-the-scenes support, and who isn't burdened by the nuisance of primary custody of his kids, and who already has another prospect lined up, and may go on to spawn a second family because he's got plenty of years of fertility left. Shall we just shrug and say life isn't fair, and boys will be boys because testosterone made them have wandering eyes...or do you agree that maybe infidelity tends to penalize women more than it penalizes men, and is therefore a bigger societal deal to some demographics than to others?]

This is a terrible situation but infidelity isn't at the root. The situation would have been just as bad if the husband simply asked for a divorce and no shared custody of the children before dating someone new. It is also a situation that is becoming less common as the mother is no longer expected to make all the sacrifices for raising children* and figuring out alimony and the like is a big messy complicated part of the divorce process. As for different effects on different demographics, cheating men with successful carriers and vestigial consciences are less affected by this but that doesn't mean the majority of cheaters are men or terrible people.

* At least that is my perception based on friends and acquaintances that have had kids in recent years but I would be very interested to see some hard data on the subject.
T: ... through an emergency induction port.
S: That's a straw, Tali.
T: Emerrrgency induction port.

User avatar
Link
Posts: 1419
Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2009 11:33 am UTC
Location: ᘝᓄᘈᖉᐣ
Contact:

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Link » Tue Aug 25, 2015 10:43 am UTC

Quercus wrote:Incidentally, I wouldn't say that cheaters are necessarily terrible people - I'd say that they're people who have made a bad decision which is likely to hurt people and could have serious consequences for their relationship. The bad decision isn't the sleeping with someone else bit, it's the doing it without your partner's consent. I think that people generally have a right to expect the kind of relationship that they've agreed to, and if that doesn't work for someone in the relationship, they need to sit down and talk it over first.

Yeah, it was rather brash of me to categorically call cheaters horrible human beings. Doing something horrible doesn't necessarily make one a horrible person. That said, when it comes to actively looking to cheat, that goes beyond "normal, decent human being" and moves into either "horrible human being" or at least "deeply troubled individual" territory, in my opinion.

If I had a significant other and found out they had a profile on Ashley Madison, that would be an instant "end relationship, do not pass Go, do not collect $200" for me. In fact, if I had a friend in a committed, monogamous relationship and found out they were on AM, that would kill the friendship. "Active cheaters" is a strict subset of "people I emphatically do not want in my life in any capacity". On the other hand, if I had a significant other who confessed to me that our relationship just wasn't fulfilling enough for them, and that they wanted to have sex with someone else, then that's something I'd be willing to talk about. I really don't know if I could deal with an open relationship (leaning towards "no", but it would depend on the relationship), but I could at least break up on friendly terms in that case.

User avatar
eran_rathan
Mostly Wrong
Posts: 1846
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:36 pm UTC
Location: in your ceiling, judging you

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby eran_rathan » Tue Aug 25, 2015 11:27 am UTC

maybeagnostic wrote: As for different effects on different demographics, cheating men with successful carriers and vestigial consciences are less affected by this but that doesn't mean the majority of cheaters are men or terrible people.



According to the AM data, about 95% of the accounts are men. While neither conclusive nor comprehensive, it does waggle its eyebrows suggestively while mouthing, "Look over there."
"Does this smell like chloroform to you?"
"Google tells me you are not unique. You are, however, wrong."
nɒʜƚɒɿ_nɒɿɘ

User avatar
PeteP
What the peck?
Posts: 1451
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2011 4:51 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby PeteP » Tue Aug 25, 2015 11:34 am UTC

Btw I'm not sure what to think of the disease argument, it's true of course it raises the disease risk. What I'm unsure about is the way how for it to work it has to treat STIs separately from other infections. Because of course there are other infectious diseases and increasing you risk to get them increases the risk of you infecting anyone you spent time with (though there SO or family are often at the top too) and I don't think that is treated the same way. Ways are for instance working in a laboratory with such diseases, visiting some regions of the world, working in a hospital (or maybe just spending much time there when visiting someone), refusing to get (or be unable to get) immunisation. Now a SO assumedly will know these things but the rest of your environment also gets increased risk and they aren't all considered things you should tell everyone you regularly spent time with.

So I'm unsure whether the special treatment is warranted. Though I guess the difference might just be how high the risk increase is and for non STIs it's lower.

speising
Posts: 2365
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 4:54 pm UTC
Location: wien

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby speising » Tue Aug 25, 2015 11:36 am UTC

Actually, women are said to cheat more often, but be more successful at hiding it. scientific paper

User avatar
krogoth
Posts: 411
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 9:58 pm UTC
Location: Australia

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby krogoth » Tue Aug 25, 2015 11:42 am UTC

"active membership" is probably a key word here, while it is a trashy site for even offering cheating, you can sign up while single, and state you are single, and it may still record your credit card info even if you've canceled your account ect. Some might even sign up pretending to be in a relationship, trying to make them self more interesting to other cheater or non-cheaters pretending to be cheaters like them self. The danger of getting caught or of being/meeting a bad/dangerous people can be exciting to these people, if tv, and an ex has taught me anything.

So a few things to consider imo.

Was the account active and in use while in a relationship? or just set up before and not deleted/canceled.

Was the person actually in a relationship? or just lying to say they were in one, to appear more interesting.

etc etc. Just playing devils advocate for the users not the site. I really can't stand this type of site, even if I was to try a dating site, I'd never use one that offered this sort of service. I suppose the question might be should it be illegal knowing the detriment it's directly causing. Seems an even more clear cut case than should you teach religion to children, but I suppose people have a right to be *negative-explicative* up to a point.
R3sistance - I don't care at all for the ignorance spreading done by many and to the best of my abilities I try to correct this as much as I can, but I know and understand that even I can not be completely honest, truthful and factual all of the time.

User avatar
Quercus
Posts: 1810
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 12:22 pm UTC
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Quercus » Tue Aug 25, 2015 12:14 pm UTC

krogoth wrote: I suppose the question might be should it be illegal knowing the detriment it's directly causing.

I think I would have issues with that purely on the grounds of excessive governmental interference, but even if I didn't I wouldn't trust any current government to grok polyamory and various other forms of ethical non-monogamy well enough to be able to administer such a ban without trampling all over poly people, swingers, some sections of the kink/BDSM community and other, often already marginalized, groups that practice non-monogamy perfectly openly, honestly and fairly. In lots of cases I don't trust them not to bow to moralistic pressure and trample over such groups deliberately.

maybeagnostic
Posts: 669
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 3:34 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby maybeagnostic » Tue Aug 25, 2015 12:24 pm UTC

eran_rathan wrote:According to the AM data, about 95% of the accounts are men. While neither conclusive nor comprehensive, it does waggle its eyebrows suggestively while mouthing, "Look over there."

Then something about this data doesn't check out. Either these men created accounts but never successfully used the site or there is some strange dynamic to the way they use it. Either way, I think it is safe to assume that most people who cheat do not do it through this website.

As for the STI discussion, that seems like a particularly poor argument. If you cheat with someone who doesn't have any disease and can prove it, it is still cheating and the person you cheat upon is unlikely to find talk of testing and protection very comforting.
T: ... through an emergency induction port.
S: That's a straw, Tali.
T: Emerrrgency induction port.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Tyndmyr » Tue Aug 25, 2015 3:23 pm UTC

speising wrote:Actually, women are said to cheat more often, but be more successful at hiding it. scientific paper


Strictly speaking, given a mostly hetero population, one would expect women and men to cheat roughly equally overall.

"Trying to" is not necessarily equal, though, and that's what we're actually measuring with AM data. Albeit, you're only seeing those comfortable with online services and what not. So, the total number is surely larger, and we may see different gender distribution via different methods.

Quercus wrote:
krogoth wrote: I suppose the question might be should it be illegal knowing the detriment it's directly causing.

I think I would have issues with that purely on the grounds of excessive governmental interference, but even if I didn't I wouldn't trust any current government to grok polyamory and various other forms of ethical non-monogamy well enough to be able to administer such a ban without trampling all over poly people, swingers, some sections of the kink/BDSM community and other, often already marginalized, groups that practice non-monogamy perfectly openly, honestly and fairly. In lots of cases I don't trust them not to bow to moralistic pressure and trample over such groups deliberately.


I agree. I think cheating is unethical, but I do not believe that a law can stop it, and associated costs exist. We've had anti-adultry laws before, there's a reason we're moving away from such things.

User avatar
Whizbang
The Best Reporter
Posts: 2238
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2012 7:50 pm UTC
Location: New Hampshire, USA

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Whizbang » Tue Aug 25, 2015 3:30 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:I think cheating is unethical,...


In many, modern/western, romantic marriages between equals.

There are many situations where the marriage itself is unethical and I would cheer on a person for cheating.

Chen
Posts: 5580
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Chen » Tue Aug 25, 2015 4:30 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:Strictly speaking, given a mostly hetero population, one would expect women and men to cheat roughly equally overall.


Where are you getting this from? Unless you're counting both sides of the relationship to be cheaters even if only one is married or otherwise in a committed relationship.

User avatar
Diemo
Posts: 396
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 8:43 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Diemo » Tue Aug 25, 2015 5:01 pm UTC

I assume Tyndmyr is saying that he does not think that there is a significant difference in the amount of women you would expect to cheat and the amount of men you would expect to cheat.

I am not sure that I stand by that statement, though. I figure that there might well be social factors that make one [cis]gender more likely to cheat than the other - there are definite social factors that disproportionately punish a woman more for cheating that a man.
In the beginning the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.
--Douglas Adams

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Tyndmyr » Tue Aug 25, 2015 5:16 pm UTC

Diemo wrote:I assume Tyndmyr is saying that he does not think that there is a significant difference in the amount of women you would expect to cheat and the amount of men you would expect to cheat.

I am not sure that I stand by that statement, though. I figure that there might well be social factors that make one [cis]gender more likely to cheat than the other - there are definite social factors that disproportionately punish a woman more for cheating that a man.


Well, they get married/in serious relationships in pretty much equal rates and have roughly equal numbers...so you have roughly equal opportunity, etc.

Sure, in theory, you've got various things that could skew numbers(poly relationships, etc), but in practice, those are rounding errors.

And sure, social factors might exist, but those are *really* bad at making people stop having sex. It just makes them hide it.

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7604
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Zamfir » Tue Aug 25, 2015 5:27 pm UTC


Then something about this data doesn't check out. Either these men created accounts but never successfully used the site or there is some strange dynamic to the way they use it. Either way, I think it is safe to assume that most people who cheat do not do it through this website.

I thought 'cheater' websites are mostly a thin cover for prostitution.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10550
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby CorruptUser » Tue Aug 25, 2015 6:16 pm UTC

That's what Backpage is for... That and making Craigslist look respectable.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Tyndmyr » Tue Aug 25, 2015 6:17 pm UTC

*shrug* I always figured it was like dating sites. All designed to get subscription fees, but actually providing dates is, really unnecessary. Sometimes even counter productive. If a potential customer is perfectly matched, they stop being a customer.

User avatar
Whizbang
The Best Reporter
Posts: 2238
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2012 7:50 pm UTC
Location: New Hampshire, USA

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Whizbang » Tue Aug 25, 2015 7:36 pm UTC

Except for the fact a person is likely not to continue paying indefinitely anyway. Either they get a match or they do not. Both outcomes results in them discontinuing service. However, people who get a match are much more likely to recommend the site to others, or return if things change in the future.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10550
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby CorruptUser » Tue Aug 25, 2015 8:07 pm UTC

But better to cater to the people who get matches but break up very quickly and thus come back AND recommend it to friends...

Ok wow, that's a weird filter for "cater".

User avatar
ObsessoMom
Nespresso Bomb
Posts: 929
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 5:28 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby ObsessoMom » Tue Aug 25, 2015 10:24 pm UTC

speising wrote:Actually, women are said to cheat more often, but be more successful at hiding it. scientific paper


Can someone help me with the math here? I'm trying to derive the headline...

Think men are the unfaithful sex? A study shows WOMEN are the biggest cheats - they're just better at lying about it


...from what the article actually said:

According to Dr David Holmes, a psychologist at Manchester Metropolitan University, women are having more affairs than ever - recent studies say the figure is around 20 per cent for men and a bit over 15 per cent for women - but they behave very differently from men when they cheat


15% > 20% ?

I thought the article made interesting points, but the headline sure looks like a fail.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests