Reading it accurately it does indeed look a joke. The attempt to show that actually only a tiny, tiny, tiny minority of site users are actually cheater, that almost all credit cards number were stolen ones (why would crooks waste them this way?), that all the cheaters had a very good reason and partner permission, especially that unforeseen illness called 'pregnancy' as a valid excuse ('really, I didn't know sex lead to pregnancy').
And everybody of course was very, very careful about sexually transmitted diseases, and not having children with their occasional partner...
And the rant about the military, but still noticing their 'publicly sworn oath' - and, after all, a marriage is too a publicly sworn oath you do because you choose it.
Also, that identifying an hypocritical politician is good (especially if it raises the journo notoriety, status and pay), while identifying your hypocritical partner is not.
And really, the closing lines about the moral standard asserting that wanting to know if your partner cheated you is worse than actually cheating. That's the real true old moral standard, when women had to accept silently their partner cheats, violence and so on... because as long as everything was 'secret' it was OK.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
