A positive take on Ashley Madison

Before 2015 Ashley Madison was not a familiar name in the public consciousness, yet thanks to a hacking scandal which saw the personal details of its members exposed and widely publicised, the site has received its fair share of bad press. Its basic principle is allowing people to discreetly connect and enjoy extramarital relationships, a premise which has sparked debate about whether such a website should even be allowed to exist. It serves as a sordid promotion of infidelity, destroys families, and undermines the love and trust that form the basis of every good relationship. Or does it? Now it has addressed its problems with security and tightened up its safety precautions, should we learn to accept or even welcome such websites as part of dating in the modern world?

Ashley Madison has a diverse pool of members, starting from age 18 and going up to 55+. It is accessible to both men and women, and while the registration process does not require its users to divulge a huge amount of personal information one must specify their current relationship status. In other words, everyone who uses this site knows exactly what they are there for and what they can expect to find. In an interview on This Morning not long after the hacking story broke, Ashley Madison user Karen Marley defended her decision to date in this way by explaining that dating married people is often a lifestyle choice. It does not spring out of a desire to cause pain and create drama, but rather exists as a way for busy people to enjoy each other’s company without feeling the pressure to commit.

Even if Ashley Madison and other similar sites were to be banned or more heavily regulated, what real difference would it make? The concept of infidelity existed hundreds of years before the Internet had even been thought of – it’s not an issue that can be solved by turning off the computer and hiding the browsing history. In fact, making cheating a virtual reality may hold surprising benefits for those feeling bored or trapped in their relationships. If the desire to stray is an itch that can be scratched by chatting online and exchanging a few scandalous photos, as opposed to going out and picking up someone in a bar, it could be a more palatable option, and certainly a safer one. It makes the spread of STIs or unwanted pregnancies less likely; furthermore the structure of the website permits users to keep most of their information private, such as contact details and family background. It is even possible to blur or edit pictures to make identifying people much harder.

Whether or not this can be considered cheating is up to personal opinion. Marriage is itself a union of two individuals (in this country at least) who should be able to decide how they want their relationship to function, and if that might involve other people or not. Monogamy is not the only acceptable choice for personal fulfilment, as demonstrated by those who live happily in polyamorous partnerships. It is a practice common is some non-Western cultures, for instance in the Himalayas women can marry several brothers from one family (known as fraternal polyandry), the idea being that maintaining a farm in such a harsh environment will be made easier the more people are around to help out. In New Guinea traditionally the inhabitants did not associate sexual intercourse with causing pregnancy and babies were cared for by the mother’s family. Without being tied down by parental responsibility men and women felt no obligation to stay together if they didn’t want to. Of course the modern influence of more Western values has encouraged more formal marriages between two individuals in New Guinea, whereas in the Himalayas divorce rates have recently risen as people begin to consider marrying one single person for love rather than security. Nevertheless, both examples show how differing relationship models can work successfully. Plus there is never any guarantee that those that marry for love or for the sake of children will end up happy or stay together long term.

Ashley Madison may therefore have a role to play in keeping those satisfied who require a different model than the standard 1 man 1 woman together forever equation. The institution of marriage has survived centuries of upheaval, and in many cases the changes have been positive. Women are no longer purely recognised as the property of their husbands, and homosexual couples are now permitted the same freedom to marry as their heterosexual counterparts. Even a few decades ago such measures would have seemed unthinkable, so what’s to say that a few years from now extramarital relationships won’t be an accepted part of society? Adultery does not have to be the death knell of a marriage, and can sometimes strengthen a couple. In a 2017 survey 45% of men and 22% of women admitted to having an affair, yet their reasoning for doing so was not always the same. Studies have suggested that men are seeking sexual gratification, but women are more likely to crave affection and intimacy. If Ashley Madison and others of its kind are able to provide what people are lacking in their partner, then perhaps it is possible that a painful separation or expensive divorce can be avoided.

Websites like this will always have their detractors, and sometimes some people just need to break up. But to assume that everything that breaks the mould of the perfect faithful monogamous marriage is inherently threatening and evil merely simplifies the issue and papers over the cracks. Sex and relationships are far more complex than they are often given credit for, and the only way to achieve any harmony is for us to be honest and communicate our needs to each other. If the exposure of Ashley Madison can spark this conversation, then we really owe it a debt of gratitude.