to think you don't arrange an affair like travel insurance?

[Ouchmybloodythumb]

I'm confused by the story about the Ashley Madison website being hacked. I had no bloody idea websites like this existed.

My understanding of an affair is that one gets caught up in a whirlwind of sexy excitement; one can't help oneself; one relishes the unexpected promise of an illicit break from the monotony of married life; one can't resist the flattery of a bit of unexpected attention from a friend or a colleague.
The old adage 'one thing lead to another' rings true.

With this in mind, who the actual fuck is on a website arranging an affair like it's travel insurance? Who the fuck selects exactly what type of human they'd like to have an affair with, when and on what terms. Surely, the unexpectedness of an affair is part of the deal. Surely it completely undermines the excitement and spontaneity of an illicit encounter if you sit trawling the internet thinking 'Who would I like to have an affair with?'

I speak as someone who has been an OW, who has been cheated on and who has cheated on a partner.

"Darling, have you cancelled the credit card? I'm at the checkout in Waitrose and it's been refused".

This Ashley Madison site (and there are a few others apparently) is simply upfront about the nature of it

I'm not sure if I'd describe them as upfront, they may appear to be enabling people to have affairs but the real aim of the site is to extract membership fee's from men looking for casual sex
men who can be duped into thinking that there really are substantial number of 'local women looking for no strings encounters'

the reality is that there are a few women who might be up for something casual (about 1 woman for every 10 men) and some women who are looking to sell some kind of sexual service

Some of what you say could be a criticism of Internet dating in general. However, many people who have done ID will tell you that beyond an initial means of meeting (hopefully) available people there can be just as much excitement and anticipation.

I had a couple of short relationships via ID before meeting my husband via Guardian Soulmates. We are both shy introverts and like the upfront nature of ID - ie not trying to guess if someone is looking for a relationship. I would hope neither of us would ever have an affair but I could see how someone bored in their relationship would take this route.

I guess meeting others also in a relationship means they may be less likely to start demanding you leave your spouse (unlike a single OW) although it is no guarantee.

Like others I was having a bit of a giggle at the thought of some very anxious cheaters this morning!

many internet dating sites contain some element of scam, they dont want people to quickly pair up and settle down, they want people to stay active on the site to generate content and either pay membership fee's or encourage men to pay the fee's.

Yes they provide a means of meeting people but these sites are also in a position to manipulate the members

suzanne I think you are right.

All wanted to take me to dinner pay for a hotel etc. spend their family cash on me...

Without even a glance at me.

Any holes a goal eh?

Plus I could be really off key. I'm sure there are some people on there who could be quite dangerous.

They also got pretty aggressive after a polite fuck off. They'd paid their money so I should just put out?

I'm not sure you quite understand me....I dont mean that you are there to 'put out'

you get to use the site for free as a woman
remember the mantra
'if it's free you are the product'
You are served up by the site to their customers (for the site the men are the customers) as 'bait' to get them to pay the membership fee.

Really the women are working for the site for free, the work that they do consists of persuading the men to pay the membership fee

Yep, the existence of this site which advertises itself as existing to facilitate affairs - well, bloody hell I used to think I was a cynic, but now I realise I am very naive .

On the plus side, it does neatly prove that those who signed up to this site were just after sex with anyone, anyone at all. So not an affair per se, just impersonal rutting.

I can but assume that the sign-up fees were less than the cost of a prostitute.

No I understand you completely.

I was speaking further as an observer.

I'm surprised a journalist hasn't invented a profile and tried out some experiences on there.

apologies then Wally:)

Whereyouleftit, I'd imagine that paying for sex would be rather less time consuming than trying to score on a casual dating site, and possibly cheaper... all things considered

MoonriseKingdom I met my husband on Guardian Soulmates too!