Ashley Madison's business is reviled by many, but that doesn't stop it from piling up revenue.
Toronto entrepreneur Noel Biderman knows better than anybody that sex sells.
Biderman pulls in "tens of millions" in revenue a year running a dating site called Ashley Madison. You might have seen Biderman's face on American TV shows like CNN, The View, Dr. Phil or The Tyra Banks Show. He's also received extensive media coverage in various large circulation newspapers.
Ashley Madison - ABC News.com
Noel Biderman
Why the fuss? Ashley Madison is aimed squarely at helping married people have affairs, complete with an "affair guarantee" that will refund you your money if you don't find someone in the first three months. The guarantee package costs $249 to purchase. Users can browse for free but must purchase credits to initiate a live chat, for example.
It's an objective that has, not surprisingly, generated a
firestorm of moral indignation.
It's also generated in the order of 4.6 million users worldwide, a depressingly dark statistic that underscores other statistics, such as the one that more than 50 per cent of men and women admit to cheating within a relationship at least once.
Awesome...really makes me hopeful for getting married....honestly though can't say I am shocked; just goes to show that most people out there are scum...hoooray!
The monogamic nature of a relationship is against the genetic message hardcoded into humans; reproduce. Cheating is that common because some people have such a high sex drive, or if you will - reproductive drive, that it just overrides their will to remain faithful.
In other words: for some people the genetic desire to have sex will override their quest to stay faithful.
And to answer your question, I believe that figure is quite accurate.
PS: I feel such a dumbass that I didn't figure to establish that kind of a dating service. (/sarcasm off)
this can be argued both ways, it can be said that a monogamous relationship promotes progressive evolution, if women and men do not stay together, then the chances of successfully raising a productive offspring would be very difficult. Human offspring, unlike offspring of other species require a much longer period to mature relative to other animals.
A polygamist relationship would mean that the parent has less time to spend with each of the offspring, thus has less time to pass important skills from one generation to the next, resulting in offspring that is "worse off" than the parent. This would be a decrease in the gene pool.
Historically humans have engaged for monogamous relationships for a LONG LONG time, if it didn't work would we still have marriage? Would we be the dominant species on this plant? Yes I understand that the divorce rate is over 50%, but what does that say about our society? Look at how things are in this country.
I personally believe that the whole women's rights movement is the cause of this astronomical divorce rate. If women and men are equal, then why do they need a movement to "make" them equal? The existence of an organization which sole purpose is to recognize the equality of women to men inherently implies that they are not equal; if they were inherently "equal" no such campaign would be needed in the first place.
Because of the women's rights movement, women are taking roles that use to be filled by men. This does a few things by it self, it increases the salary a woman makes, making her less dependant on a man, but at the same time it decreases the life expectancy of a woman by the additional stress created by working(additional stress also makes you look older and less attractive). This is why on average women live 8 years longer than men, this gap is slowly closing in due to women in the work force. Working more also forces a woman to spend less time with her family, thus weakening the bond within the family.
That is why many women have a very strong bond to kids and the cliched image of a cheater is a man. A woman can easily look after her kid alone. The reality is that while woman can bear only one child at once, a man has no limit to his reproduction speed.
While I agree to all you said, I'd say that monogamic nature of relationships is a production of "social evolution", which is basically the cornerstone of humans being the dominant species, while the high cheating rates are due to the genes wanting to reproduce. However I must admit that there are monogamist characteristics to some animal species as well if I recall correctly, never studied any animal biology whatsoever besides the utter basics.
Out of the western world there are many cultures of polygamic nature. Before the industrial age started it was very common among aristocrats and the higher class that woman had an arranged marriage and gave birth to a male heir and after that was free to cheat on her husband with her lover.
Well back then they didn't marry for "love" either. Marriages, especially among the aristocrats were very strategic.
And it was not polygamy to have mistresses or affairs, polygamy is when you have multiple marriages. That is considered adulterous.
Don_guillotine, what you said earlier about humans wanting to cheat because of their reproductive nature, I don't think that is why. I think it might be that married people get sexually bored with each other in many cases.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'll be damned if I have to climb another tree. From now on the Squirrels and Birds can come to me.
if they were inherently "equal" no such campaign would be needed in the first place.
that's false... if things are equal that doesn't mean that they are recognised as such... for instance... in societys that allow slavery, slaves are considered things and not humans, but we know that isn't true... so a campaign to eliminate slavery was needed some centurys ago (and it's still needed imo)
Historically, men have been quite the dominating sex, this is an unquestionable historical fact. Reasons as to why I won't go here. It is also a fact that women and men are different to some extent. The differences however do not mean that the sexes would be inherently inequal.
Only single inequality is the biological fact that the woman carries the child. I'm no anthropologist but the biggest reason women didn't work was that they had no other options. There were no daycare and only few centuries back neither any schools.
Single biggest reason to higher divorce rates in modern western society would probably be that the lifespan has been greatly increased in the last hundred or so years. When your life expectancy was up to 35 if you got lucky you didn't really have much time to get yourself divorced. Also during the early 20th century divorce wasn't socially acceptable, unhappy couples just stuck to their marriage because there was no real option - they did not want their entire families to turn against them.
Yea more fragmented society and free information flow via the internet. I read a statistic some where that 1/4 of marriages happened because they met online.
Quote from "Nacho_ijp" »
that's false... if things are equal that doesn't mean that they are recognised as such... for instance... in societys that allow slavery, slaves are considered things and not humans, but we know that isn't true... so a campaign to eliminate slavery was needed some centurys ago (and it's still needed imo)
But in those societies salves were not equal to nonslaves and were not treated as humans in the same sense we have today...
In those days slaves were property and you can do whatever you want with your property.
that's false... if things are equal that doesn't mean that they are recognised as such... for instance... in societys that allow slavery, slaves are considered things and not humans, but we know that isn't true... so a campaign to eliminate slavery was needed some centurys ago (and it's still needed imo)
But in those societies salves were not equal to nonslaves and were not treated as humans...
But in those societies salves were not equal to nonslaves and were not treated as humans in the same sense we have today...
In those days slaves were property and you can do whatever you want with your property.
you didn't get the point, i meant that unequal treatment to a group of people doesn't mean that this group is in fact different from the other... slaves was just an example, but you can find a lot of other examples, take the jewish for instance...
you didn't get the point, i meant that unequal treatment to a group of people doesn't mean that this group is in fact different from the other... slaves was just an example, but you can find a lot of other examples, take the jewish for instance...
If they receive different treatment then they are in fact different... How else would you define it? Why would they receive different treatment if they were equal; how would the group giving the treatment even know the difference?
The world is not perfect, there will always be a group that is better than the other group(s). The illusion of equal treatment and equality is just a guise.
Honestly, I can understand why people cheat. I am not even married and I get sick and tired of hearing my girlfriend babble on about stupid shit. Just hearing her voice sometimes makes me want to fuck her best friend.
I read somewhere that the endorphinergic reaction to seeing a loved one dies out in about 9 months. Meaning we're biologically built to love each other just long enough for a child to be born. However, there are 'swans' that somehow stay in love for life.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Walk tall, kick ass, learn to speak Arabic, love music and never forget you come from a long line of truth seekers, lovers and warriors.
-Hunter S. Thompson
Honestly, I can understand why people cheat. I am not even married and I get sick and tired of hearing my girlfriend babble on about stupid shit. Just hearing her voice sometimes makes me want to fuck her best friend.
Break up with her then?
People are so stupid... :rolleyes:
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Eventually, we're all worm food. Even the worms.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Ashley Madison's business is reviled by many, but that doesn't stop it from piling up revenue.
Toronto entrepreneur Noel Biderman knows better than anybody that sex sells.
Biderman pulls in "tens of millions" in revenue a year running a dating site called Ashley Madison. You might have seen Biderman's face on American TV shows like CNN, The View, Dr. Phil or The Tyra Banks Show. He's also received extensive media coverage in various large circulation newspapers.
Ashley Madison - ABC News.com
Noel Biderman
Why the fuss? Ashley Madison is aimed squarely at helping married people have affairs, complete with an "affair guarantee" that will refund you your money if you don't find someone in the first three months. The guarantee package costs $249 to purchase. Users can browse for free but must purchase credits to initiate a live chat, for example.
It's an objective that has, not surprisingly, generated a
firestorm of moral indignation.
It's also generated in the order of 4.6 million users worldwide, a depressingly dark statistic that underscores other statistics, such as the one that more than 50 per cent of men and women admit to cheating within a relationship at least once.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
More than 50 percent of men and women cheat in a relationship once.... Lol I haven't have you?
A polygamist relationship would mean that the parent has less time to spend with each of the offspring, thus has less time to pass important skills from one generation to the next, resulting in offspring that is "worse off" than the parent. This would be a decrease in the gene pool.
Historically humans have engaged for monogamous relationships for a LONG LONG time, if it didn't work would we still have marriage? Would we be the dominant species on this plant? Yes I understand that the divorce rate is over 50%, but what does that say about our society? Look at how things are in this country.
I personally believe that the whole women's rights movement is the cause of this astronomical divorce rate. If women and men are equal, then why do they need a movement to "make" them equal? The existence of an organization which sole purpose is to recognize the equality of women to men inherently implies that they are not equal; if they were inherently "equal" no such campaign would be needed in the first place.
Because of the women's rights movement, women are taking roles that use to be filled by men. This does a few things by it self, it increases the salary a woman makes, making her less dependant on a man, but at the same time it decreases the life expectancy of a woman by the additional stress created by working(additional stress also makes you look older and less attractive). This is why on average women live 8 years longer than men, this gap is slowly closing in due to women in the work force. Working more also forces a woman to spend less time with her family, thus weakening the bond within the family.
And it was not polygamy to have mistresses or affairs, polygamy is when you have multiple marriages. That is considered adulterous.
Fuck you, I'm a dragon.
Fuck you, I'm a dragon.
no it was just a news article i came across somwhere, am i supposed to cite where i got it?
But in those societies salves were not equal to nonslaves and were not treated as humans in the same sense we have today...
In those days slaves were property and you can do whatever you want with your property.
you didn't get the point, i meant that unequal treatment to a group of people doesn't mean that this group is in fact different from the other... slaves was just an example, but you can find a lot of other examples, take the jewish for instance...
The world is not perfect, there will always be a group that is better than the other group(s). The illusion of equal treatment and equality is just a guise.
-Hunter S. Thompson
TED . LEAP . Woot . MF
Break up with her then?
People are so stupid... :rolleyes: