3 ms·

The arm-chair morality here is mindblowing. Reminds me of when homosexuals developed aids in the 80s; "Serves them right." I think people need to really stop i

The arm-chair morality here is mindblowing. Reminds me of when homosexuals developed aids in the 80s; "Serves them right." I think people need to really stop it with the revenge fantasies for behaviors they dislike. If anything, AM reflects something that might change in society, namely if life-long monogamy makes sense. Many would argue that of course it does, but not too long ago these were the same people calling homosexually immoral as well. Personally, I find monogamy questionable and from the few discussions I've had on this subject, many feel obligated to be monogamous only because of social convention. Considering the divorce rate, it seems to be the idea of marriage as this lifelong romantic bond may not be compatible with a modern lifestyle. Some of the happiest and most fulfilled people I know are on their second or third marriage or have non-traditional lifestyles in regards to the social contract they have with their SO(s). Frankly, its none of our business is someone is cheating. Why do we suddenly feel the need to be busybodies in that regard? There's this sad kind of "I can fuck with you with my hax0r skills and report this to your wife" neckbeardism at play here. I wish we lived in a society where people minded their own business. Funny how HN's libertarianism takes a backseat to its largely Christian-Judeo moral roots. I don't see how cheating must compel someone to whistleblow. It just seems like a nerd powertrip to me. My only issue here is that sex work is somehow still illegal and that means the ladies on AM can be, and probably are, victimized by pimps, human trafficking, etc. Shame that this narrative won't make the press but "OMG CHEATERS" will.

Karunamon 11y ago
If anything, AM reflects something that might change in society, namely if life-long monogamy makes sense. The time for that discussion is long before one decides of their own free will to take part in life-long monogamy. Once you've made that promise, and then renege on it (a harmful act in of itself), there is a second person in that equation who is being harmed. Are innocent people likely to be harmed by this? Of course. But AM's entire reason for existing is perpetuation of marital infidelity. Given that AM's advertising emphasizes the "go have an affair!" business, we can reasonably assume that most of this company's clientele are people who are in committed relationships. I find it very hard to be bothered by the fact that the majority of that site's customer base will be called to account for grave lies to their spouse. (I was going to make an admonishment to stop downvoting the guy above me, but then they added the completely unwarranted "neckbeardism" remark.. knock yourselves out, I guess) (And then they added the further completely unwarranted remark about "judeo-christian" values... jeez dude...)
- eloff 11y ago
  Spot on. You can have whatever views you want on life long monogamy, but once you enter into a life long monogamous relationship with someone whose views may not match yours, you are morally committed to hold up your end of that deal or renegotiate it. Having affairs behind the back of your SO is just terribly selfish. Let's not pretend it's anything else.
- DannyBee 11y ago
  " But AM's entire reason for existing is perpetuation of marital infidelity" Not that you are completely wrong, but just to note, AM also exists for people who are married but separated or getting divorced :) Most, if not all states in the US have waiting periods of 6 months to 2 years once you file for divorce before you can be legally divorced (even if you are already divorced according to your religion or whatever). Adultery is not really a crime anymore (most criminal adultery statues are now unconstitutional), but this would be considered adultery (whether you did it on AM or elsewhere) Certainly not their main use case, but there is a "morally blameless" portion of their user base. (My ex was a family lawyer, and AM seemed to get used as a discreet place for those getting divorced to do things without it getting noticed by the other side)
jaawn 11y ago
I would completely agree if the site were geared toward open relationships, but it is built on assisting people harm their partners in secrecy. It has nothing to do with the monogamy issue. Basically, there are a few truths we know about users of the site: 1. They are in a committed relationship (or seeking someone who is) 2. They are unfulfilled. 3. Those in a committed relationship do not want their partner to know about their activities (because it would hurt them) It is the 3rd item that changes things a bit with this specific site. The unaware partners should be valued as much as the users of the site, but the site enables its users to put themselves above their partners in a way. It is perfectly valid to criticize monogamy or to support equal treatment for people in different types of relationships, but Ashley Madison is built to help people indulge at the expense of another "innocent" person, and I think that makes it not okay. I don't necessarily think the hackers are "justified," but I do think it is understandable to feel less sympathy for the victims in this case.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
cjsthompson 11y ago
Being knowledgeable about the typical behavior of polygamous primate species as compared to monogamous ones, I find polygamy questionable.

Karunamon 11y ago

If anything, AM reflects something that might change in society, namely if life-long monogamy makes sense. The time for that discussion is long before one decides of their own free will to take part in life-long monogamy. Once you've made that promise, and then renege on it (a harmful act in of itself), there is a second person in that equation who is being harmed. Are innocent people likely to be harmed by this? Of course. But AM's entire reason for existing is perpetuation of marital infidelity. Given that AM's advertising emphasizes the "go have an affair!" business, we can reasonably assume that most of this company's clientele are people who are in committed relationships. I find it very hard to be bothered by the fact that the majority of that site's customer base will be called to account for grave lies to their spouse. (I was going to make an admonishment to stop downvoting the guy above me, but then they added the completely unwarranted "neckbeardism" remark.. knock yourselves out, I guess) (And then they added the further completely unwarranted remark about "judeo-christian" values... jeez dude...)

eloff 11y ago
Spot on. You can have whatever views you want on life long monogamy, but once you enter into a life long monogamous relationship with someone whose views may not match yours, you are morally committed to hold up your end of that deal or renegotiate it. Having affairs behind the back of your SO is just terribly selfish. Let's not pretend it's anything else.
DannyBee 11y ago
" But AM's entire reason for existing is perpetuation of marital infidelity" Not that you are completely wrong, but just to note, AM also exists for people who are married but separated or getting divorced :) Most, if not all states in the US have waiting periods of 6 months to 2 years once you file for divorce before you can be legally divorced (even if you are already divorced according to your religion or whatever). Adultery is not really a crime anymore (most criminal adultery statues are now unconstitutional), but this would be considered adultery (whether you did it on AM or elsewhere) Certainly not their main use case, but there is a "morally blameless" portion of their user base. (My ex was a family lawyer, and AM seemed to get used as a discreet place for those getting divorced to do things without it getting noticed by the other side)

jaawn 11y ago

I would completely agree if the site were geared toward open relationships, but it is built on assisting people harm their partners in secrecy. It has nothing to do with the monogamy issue. Basically, there are a few truths we know about users of the site: 1. They are in a committed relationship (or seeking someone who is) 2. They are unfulfilled. 3. Those in a committed relationship do not want their partner to know about their activities (because it would hurt them) It is the 3rd item that changes things a bit with this specific site. The unaware partners should be valued as much as the users of the site, but the site enables its users to put themselves above their partners in a way. It is perfectly valid to criticize monogamy or to support equal treatment for people in different types of relationships, but Ashley Madison is built to help people indulge at the expense of another "innocent" person, and I think that makes it not okay. I don't necessarily think the hackers are "justified," but I do think it is understandable to feel less sympathy for the victims in this case.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

cjsthompson 11y ago

Being knowledgeable about the typical behavior of polygamous primate species as compared to monogamous ones, I find polygamy questionable.