So I suscribe to Sirius and listen to Stern in the mornings during my hour-and-a-half commute in. Ashleymadison.comis one of his advertisers. According to thier site, they also advertise or were mentioned on Dr. Phil, Tyra, Ellen, 20/20 and Larry King.
The jingle sings “Ashley Madison, find your lovers here” and the narrator talks about how the site is designed for those that are “missing something” in their relationships. It “guarantees” them a “discreet affair”.
Now, I know that several Dopers are polyamorous, and I don’t want this to become a discussion of that, because that’s not what this site is about. It is a site specifically meant for people in committed relationships to find someone with whom to have a discrete (unknown) affair. Their tagline is “Life is short. Have an affair.”
I never considered myself a prude, but every time I hear this commercial it turns my stomach. I’m happily married and have no cause for doubt, but my parents’ marriage was riddled by infidelity and it made my mother miserable. While I know that someone who wants to cheat will find a way, I can’t believe someone started a business on this premise. What bad karma.
To be honest I find it kind of vile, too, but it just goes to show you the market will meet any demand.
Of course, some people find porn sites horrible (some even think it constitutes cheating if you’re married) and I don’t think there’s anything wrong with porn as long as kids aren’t involved. What squicks me out about Ashley Madison (who also advertise in newspapers) is that they are actively involved in facilitating the breaking of civil contracts. In a sense, cheating on your spouse is, technically, illegal. It’s not a criminal act, but it makes you civilly liable. They’re essentially facilitating the breaking of contracts. It’s profoundly unethical, IMHO.
I think that’s it. Not that I expect Stern to be moral, but I suppose I do expect him to be ethical. I guess he doesn’t have the luxury of turning down advertisers, though.
Thanks for the factual evidence.
Is there a situation where the use of the site would be ethically and morally justified?
There is a cause of action called “intentional interference with contractual relationships.” However, I believe it requires a much more active effort than simply providing an opportunity to breach a contract. In fact, so far as the law is concerned, there’s nothing at all wrong with “efficient” breach of contract, and it might as well be encouraged. It seems to me the vast majority of commercial enterprises are providing opportunities for breach of contract.
This Web site might be unusual in that it seems that all its transactions constitute breach of contract, but let’s look at that more closely. I’m not sure you’re correct in asserting that marital fidelity basically constitutes a legally enforceable provision of a civil contract. Perhaps that was (is) the case in fault divorce regimes. However, most jurisdictions now are no-fault regimes. There is no need to show breach in order to dissolve a marriage.
Marriage might at one point have constituted something more like a civil contract between two parties, but I think that law and custom have changed to the extent that it’s not really useful to continue using contract law as a model for marriage.
See, now, that’s the problem with you young whippersnappers. At common law, back in the day, we had the tort of alienation of affection, which is what is described here: a cause of action against a third party for action which leads to the dissolution of a marriage. The usual target was the spouse’s partner in adultery, but alienation of affection suits were brought against others who maliciously sought to destroy the marriage. The plaintiff typically had to show a tortfeasor that, by his malicious or deliberate conduct, alienated the genuine love that previously existed between spouses.
(I say “we had” only in the sense that this was what they claimed in school; I never saw such a claim in real life and this wasn’t my area of law anyway…)
So far as I remember, there are still a handful of states that recognize this tort; most have abolished it. Just another sign of these decadent, modern times, if you ask me.
Maybe. But maybe it’s a developing recognition that marriage is a personal human relationship quite unlike a commercial relationship governed by contract and that the parties should not be able to look to the state to punish bad acts or remedy harms. In a way, it makes a marital relationship more personal/human/sacred and less businesslike.
It definitely seems like a sleazy business to be in.
I don’t think there was that much less sleeping around in the past, but I just think women stayed with their husband because of lack of career options and the stigma of divorce.
Those radio ads just reek, and I’m often surprised when and where they show up (like, back in the day when I listened to the radio, during prime hours on mainstream stations. And they’re not quite subtle enough to keep a 10-year-old from asking, ‘Mom, what’s an affair?’). Obviously, people are using other dating sites to cheat, creating fake personas and all that, but this is just so blatant. Certainly the shortness of life can’t be helped by getting herpes from a stranger and giving it to your unassuming spouse.
You have to admire the courage, though, of the attached people who include their photos in their profiles. Let’s hope their SOs don’t know how to work a computer.
Nope.
Okay, one, stretched all the way out into HypotheticalLand: if a person is brain dead but being kept “alive” on a respirator and feeding tube and is never ever going to get better and his/her spouse is lonely, I wouldn’t judge him/her for having a discrete affair. Much.
I also listen to Stern and find these ads more vile than any others - and he had one for ball deodorant. (Actually, it’s nice for balls to smell good, so maybe it’s not a good example.) Not only is the subject vile, but the writing is too. “Wow, look at you! All smiles and no more desperation!” Come on, “no more desperation”? Who even says that???
Does it make it any less unethical if the person isn’t married but is in a long-term exclusive relationship, and just wants a little something on the side without ending the relationship?
Did the ad say that the TV spots weren’t exactly positive. I saw the Dr. Phil and Tyra one. Mostly people were just like, WTF? Really?
I find the idea completely repulsive. Yes, some people are going to cheat, but why make it acceptable and easy for them. Why doesn’t everyone see why marriages don’t last anymore? This is the kind of attitude that we have about “relationships” now!
I don’t know. Do the aforementioned herpes sores burn less? Besides, it’s no longer ‘exclusive’ if someone strays.
It sort of smacks with laziness. ‘Too lazy to start an affair the old-fashioned way, at a local dive bar or with your company’s branch manager? Try the internet!’ I suppose there’s something alluring to would-be cheaters about the internet’s illusion of anonymity, but once your profile is up there, if and when you get caught, you can hardly use the ‘It just happened’ defense.
I don’t know if you meant “I never saw such a claim” to mean against the 3rd party in the marriage or against “other parties” but back in the '80s when my parents divorced, my mother’s attorney found such an “Alienation of Affection” law on the books in Illinois and used it to sue the woman my father was seeing. I can’t say how it would have held up in court since my father wound up giving up the house and car in return for my mother dropping the suit. To hear my mom speak of it, when the attorney filed the suit, the clerk was a bit surprised to learn such a law still existed and that anyone was using it.
I had this same thought. My mother had a friend whose husband was terminally ill with brain cancer, which turned him into a complete ass. He used to throw stuff at her and she had a hard time coping but didn’t want to put him in a home. She went to a support group and met someone whose wife was in a similar situation. They ended up having an affair, both the spouses died and I couldn’t help but to feel empathy for the horrible situation they were in.
But neither paid for a hookup, per se.
Nope. Even if you’re gay and in a state that doesn’t recognize your union, or simply in a Brangelina-type partner situation, there is still a commitment that you are dishonoring unless you are open about your wishes and your partner accedes. It’s a breach of trust.
Not only is it lazy, but it smacks of entitlement. “Not only do I want to cheat on my SO, but I want to make sure I am properly matched with the best adulterer possible, and guaranteed satisfaction and discretion!”
Wanna know what’s even funnier? Ashley Madison also airs commercials on TV during Cheaters. You know, that trainwreck of a show that makes its money by catching various trailer-trash dumbasses cheating on camera.
…or… ummm… so I’ve heard. Because I wouldn’t be caught dead ever watching Cheaters, of course (or Jerry Springer, or any other trashy early '00s talk TV for that matter).
