Response: Possibly true (I can neither confirm nor refute this claim). But even if true: It's an extreme case - probably applying to only a tiny, tiny percentage of all divorces. Thus of negligible importance for this discussion. Like pointing to "men who have climbed Mt. Everest divorce their spouses more than women who have climbed Mt. Everest divorce their spouses" - might be true but is still, on the whole, statistically unimportant. Functionally equivalent to observing "most serial killers are men" and then concluding "(all) men are monsters."
2. "20 million, or 1 in 6 married American men, were on Ashley Madison before it was hacked. That's an awful lot of married men looking to trade up from the woman they've got."
Response: We don't really know what those married men on AM were doing / seeking. Were they just "joy-riding" or maybe "testing the waters" or simply "assessing their market value?" Looking for a casual hook-up to allay the pain, frustration, and loneliness of an already sexless marriage? Seriously contemplating divorcing their spouses, and already on the look-out for a new mate? Or was their marriage effectively already a "marriage in name only?" Had the women already announced her desire to split? Were the men merely waiting for the divorce to be finalized? The hypergamous scenario you posit ("trading UP") is pure speculation. We simply don't know what they were up to.
3. "Claiming women are the gatekeepers of sex, is only an excuse for [...]"
Response: Are you perhaps claiming that women are NOT the gatekeepers of sex?! Really?! Then who are?! Men?! If you admit that not men, but rather women are the gatekeepers, then your "is only an excuse" evaporates.
4. "If men want virgins for wives, then they need to stop hypocritically pressuring women into having sex with them and then looking on them with contempt for giving them what they pushed for."
Response: Apex Fallacy mixed with Equivocation Fallacy! In essence: You are invalidly / deceptively saying "men" when "top 4% of all men" would be correct in one clause, and "vast majority of low-tier men" would be correct in the other clause.
The men wanting virgins are namely the "regular Joes" - the average guys who are themselves hardly able to score, and who might have a notch-count of 2 or 3. Whereas it is the "Chads" who are having rampant sex (you assume without evidence that some form of "force" is involved).
Regards,
Whether men currently are or not gatekeepers of sex is irrelevant. They SHOULD be.
Women have been forced into that position by men who are abdicating their role as protector of women by not being gatekeepers of sex.
What a BS weasel out answer.
They are on that site only to look for cheating on their wives.
Or maybe like with Playboy, they got it for the articles. (Yeah, right)
Response: Apex Fallacy mixed with Equivocation Fallacy! In essence: You are invalidly / deceptively saying "men" when "top 4% of all men" would be correct in one clause,
You can prove that number with stats I take it.
Or is that just a SWAG?