I chose to write about this perennial topic because it frequently surfaces on social media, where people often reference news articles from reputable publications to validate specific claims. Believe me when I say that much of what you encounter online is dubious, far removed from reality, and often nothing more than clickbait designed to generate revenue.
Now, let’s delve into the subject matter. First, take a look at the headlines below from major news outlets. These titles alone can trigger panic among single and married individuals, leading them to question the fabric of their relationships and eroding trust in their partners, all because of purported data and statistics.
As a bonus, look at people’s reactions when they encounter these headlines. According to The Independent, a staggering 59% of links shared on social media have never actually been clicked. Notice what I did there? I cited a news article to bolster my argument. Of course, I am biased!
Twitter user Vinay Singhal asserts, “No wonder the divorce rate is increasing in India. Bangalore has become the divorce capital. Hello, but on the other side, there must also be men….”
Twitter user Alchemist Ph.D states, “Most are women – who are they having an affair with? Boys or other women? If not, then mathematically, the same percentage will be of men.”
When I first encountered all this negativity, I decided to delve deeper into who conducted these studies. Then, I stumbled upon something interesting. People may not have heard of it, but there exists Gleeden – an extramarital dating app made by women for women to cheat! Yes, according to their website, they claim that cheating might actually save a marriage (well, Jordan Peterson would like to have a word, pun intended).
The app is free for women to use, but men have to pay money. Interestingly, the survey that claimed such statistics was funded by Gleeden. We’ve heard that certain corporations fund biased and factually incorrect studies promoting their products. Gleeden makes money off cheating married individuals, so of course, they would fund such studies (sponsor bias). Now, let’s see what they have to say.
According to Mint, which cited that study, about 55% of married Indians have been unfaithful to their partner at least once, of which 56% are women. Readers interested in discovering the survey results may hover around and click the highlighted link to the external news report. Gleeden claims that the survey was conducted from a mix of crowds from tier-1 and tier-2 cities, and around 1500 individuals were surveyed. Now, they still need to reveal their survey method. Still, assuming that the survey was conducted on their app through the app users or online survey platforms that pay people to fill out online forms, specific problems are associated with it.
How surveys can be biased
Most of these surveys don’t record proof of age and are filled mainly by school and college-going kids hiding their actual age. They are not interested in filling up accurate data but in quickly filling it out to earn quick rewards. Why would a working individual like to fill out a 30-minute boring survey for a mere 50 to 100 rupees?
Suppose the survey responses were recorded by app users. In that case, the users are biased because they visited and registered themselves on the app to cheat (sample bias).
Testimonials from Gleeden users
Here’s an interesting argument from a fellow internet user, not from me. While Gleeden claims that they thoroughly check users’ profiles through advanced tools, considering the dating scene in India, there are usually more men than women on any platform and an equal number of men pretending to be women on those platforms. Here’s what they say:
Anonymous users stated on Quora,
“Going anonymous on this one for obvious reasons.
I am an Indian male, late 40s. I read about Gleeden in the news paper and I wanted to check this out. So here is my observation:
1.) Ladies on Gleeden: About 6 out of 10 are men pretending to be ladies. About 3 out of 10 demand “benefits”. For every 1 (about) genuine lady, there are at least 10 males (or female profiles, who are actually men – see point 3 below) connecting with them, every day. Imagine the lady trying to respond to all the messages that she receives. Your message gets less time and attention than a recruiter shortlisting your profile for a job.
2.) Men: young boys create ladies profiles, because of point 3, below.
3.) Ladies profile do not pay anything to send messages or read messages. And it is simple to create a ladies profile. Just need to have a mail id, that is all. No checks and balances.
4.) If a complaint is raised against a person pretending to be a lady, no action is taken, except, sometimes, the gender is changed in the back end.
5.) There are, of course more number of men, than women. So women never ever make an attempt to reach out to men. They create a profile and wait for men to get in touch. For me, this is by far the barometer on how good a “dating” or “hookup” website is: Do ladies connect with guys? If not, then it is not worth the effort.
6.) The numbers that Gleeden put out recently in the paper and claimed that Bangalore is the infidelity capital: Not sure how many of the lady profiles are genuine and how many men profile are married men – So is this really a site for extra marital “hookups” ?“
Another user stated:
“I have enrolled to Gleeden for my research on Datting app fraud and i realized that Gleeden itself is the biggest fraud against men. Because its full of 30 to 40 years old Hookers who don’t have regular clients. Also they demand 20000 a night, so when you ask them to video chat you will know the reality. Also Gleeden is the Heaven for Transgenders , They will chat with you and ask you to come, they charge 5000 for an hour , The moment you ask for a video call they will refuse. Also ALERT for sex starving Male, if you have been called to have free sex with a lady (and she demands that her Husband will be present during sex) , Please don’t go because after few days you will see your video sold to porn site and the women’s face will be blurred or will be edited. You will never know that you have been shot by tiny little cameras from 3 to 4 angles. Gleeden is a money sucking app as their are many men (Conman) posing as women and demand money. Gleeden dose not have ‘Verified’ feature like Tinder So whom you are watching are mostly fake. Gleeden credits system is very expensive and is money sucking app because they charge you heavily and gives you hooker and Transgender.“
Quora user, going by the name Sushma, stated:
“Its just a time waste. I don’t think anything happens. Men will lose their money. Men are just ignorant and fools to be behind every married woman for their sexuality. They don’t know whether females are genuine or not. Moreover, affairs doesn’t happen like this. Lot of familiarity should be there for the affairs to happen. Only then, trust builts up. It’s very easy and common to see affairs happening daily in film industry and modelling industry.
After all, what will be left in married people to give. All their heart, soul, mind, energy and emotions are already invested in their own family, in-laws and children. No happy and fresh faces are seen. All energy will be drained out. Those who are in troubled marriages will be in search of a partner. Also, they will be emotionally disturbed as they will be in sexless and loveless life searching for partner. Instead of going to counsellor to set right their married life , they would have come to gleeden.“
Gleeden launched in the Indian market in 2017, just a year before the Supreme Court scrapped Section 497 and ruled that adultery was no longer a crime. Now, the aim of this writing is not to judge whether infidelity or cheating in a relationship is morally right or wrong. The article presents facts and opinions that might help readers stay vigilant and always doubt the information they come across.
Information can be easily manipulated due to legal loopholes, and a news agency rarely cares about honest journalism rather than simply making money. While we can’t exactly claim that the findings are incorrect, proving this fallacy would require thoroughly studying and reviewing the methods used for these surveys.
