You have this point a touch backwards. Perhaps due to a lack of context.
Josh insinuated that people that use sex toys are deviants. The post you are referring to, the subtext is, “you like them too, so all of us are not deviants, right? So stop calling us depraved, since you know it isn’t”
For what it’s worth, another article I saw regarding this made it seem as though he had simply checked off every single box in the “what are you interested in” section, likely in the hopes of casting as wide a net as possible.
Fair 'nuff, but I don’t think that really changes my point. But I appreciate it 
Agreed. Just pointing out that I don’t think he was specifically all “Oooh, sex toys, yeah, sign me up”. More of a “Well, I just want to see if ANYBODY is interested, so let’s just check all these boxes here”. The fact that he was there at all, of course, is condemning enough.
Question:
Suppose a person had an account- a real account. And suppose that person paid (fools!) Ashley Madison the $15 extortion charge to delete their data (which apparently wasn’t done).
Would they have grounds to file suit for fraud given that the service they paid for wasn’t actually provided?
And since I’m assuming the number of people in that group is larger than 2, does that mean there will be a class action lawsuit soon?
[edit for clarity, and edit again to add this edit note]
I think the odds are good for some kind of comeuppance related to this. Right now they’re scrambling to rearrange the deck chairs, but once the ship sinks and all that’s left is a bank account…
I believe they would. I’d anticipate several class actions against AM.
Exactly!
Josh was just conducting research.
I was going to say the exact same thing. And to the poster who referred to it is as this situation being “nasty”, that’s not the proper description. It is just “irresponsible journalism” to not put disclaimers and/or fact check until confirmed it wasn’t spoof accounts. I find it just as believable that they were fakes as I do that it was actually him.
I actually read on Consumerist that it was $20 and that they were making $2 million a year in profits alone just from that deletion charge.
Duggars just released a statement that doesn’t outright confirm it was Josh, but there’d be no reason for this groveling if it weren’t real: http://www.duggarfamily.com/2015/8/statements-from-jim-bob-and-michelle-duggar-and-josh-duggar
Pull quote from statement:
"Statement from Josh Duggar:
I have been the biggest hypocrite ever. While espousing faith and family values, I have been unfaithful to my wife."
I wonder who wrote this. The self awareness showing here seems so unlikely.
I heard one ‘nightstand’ was just the maximum height he would accept.
I feel pretty bad about accidentally submitting this one, because it is just not funny.
If they weren’t paid accounts, I would agree with you. The fact that they were ongoing paid accounts to the tune of nearly $1000 means that it would have to have been a pretty committed fake.
Forgive me, this earworm.
Mister Christian
Oh, the time has come
And you know that you’re the only one
To say, what’s okay.
What’re they doing?
What’s this posted for?
This breached data isn’t good for you
It’s true.
You’re Commenting…
On where they shine their light.
Is posting this ever right?
boing used to be so alright.
Yes! And we should be encouraging that rather than discouraging it, especially given the propensity of the Family Research Council to just make stuff up.
Goddamn you @funruly, +100 internets for the day.
Also from that statement:
"When we learned of this late last night our hearts were broken."
Kind of a common theme in the Duggar household, I guess.
I read a couple interesting pieces back when this first hit about how Madison was marketed differently to different groups, the central point being that a not-insignificant number of users were actually people in vulnerable situations who couldn’t use traditional dating sites.
