10 Shocking Truths About 'Are We Dating The Same Guy' (AWDTSG) Groups And The Lawsuits That Rocked Them

Are We Dating The Same Guy? (AWDTSG) is the question that launched a global, multi-million-member social phenomenon, creating a closed-network vetting system for women navigating the modern online dating landscape. As of December 2025, these groups continue to be one of the most hotly debated topics in digital relationships, existing as a powerful, yet controversial, tool for women seeking to share intelligence and "red flags" about men they have dated or matched with online. The core mission is simple: provide a collective safety net against dishonesty, predatory behavior, or simply bad dating experiences.

The concept, which started in New York in 2022, has exploded into a sprawling network of over 200 individual Facebook groups, each dedicated to a specific city or region globally. However, the groups' rapid growth and the nature of the unverified claims shared within them have led to a critical juncture, dominated by high-profile defamation lawsuits and intense ethical scrutiny. The battle between personal safety and digital due process is now playing out in courtrooms, forcing administrators to reconsider the risks of crowdsourced intelligence.

The Anatomy of an AWDTSG Group: How the Vetting Network Operates

The 'Are We Dating The Same Guy' (AWDTSG) network functions as a series of secret, women-only groups on Facebook. Membership is strictly vetted by volunteer admins to ensure only women are admitted, maintaining a gender-exclusive space for sharing sensitive information.

• The Chilling True Story 5 Key Facts About Richard Evonitz The Serial Killer Who Kidnapped Kara Robinson Chamberlain Xpjje

The primary mechanism involves a member posting a man’s profile picture, first name, and dating app bio—often taken from platforms like Tinder, Bumble, or Hinge—and asking the group if anyone has had an experience with him.

This simple query can quickly lead to a torrent of crowdsourced intelligence, ranging from benign warnings about a "bad kisser" to serious allegations of cheating, abuse, or financial misconduct.

The Core Rules and Their Enforcement

To operate, the groups rely on a strict set of internal rules designed to maintain secrecy and, ostensibly, mitigate legal risk.

• Shania Twains Bold Statement Why The Star Chose Nude Photoshoots At 57 Qf9cg

• Rule 1: No Public Sharing. Members are permanently banned for telling any man they have been posted or for sharing screenshots of group conversations publicly.
• Rule 2: Anonymity. Posts are often made anonymously, though comments may or may not be, depending on the group's settings.
• Rule 3: Focus on Behavior. The intent is to focus on reporting "red flags" and patterns of deceptive or harmful behavior.

Despite these rules, the effectiveness of moderation by volunteer administrators is a frequent source of internal and external criticism. With groups sometimes swelling to tens of thousands of members, the sheer volume of posts makes it difficult to filter out unverified claims, personal vendettas, or flat-out misinformation.

The Legal and Ethical Firestorm: Defamation Lawsuits and Due Process

The most significant development in the AWDTSG narrative throughout 2024 and 2025 has been the rise of defamation lawsuits filed by men who claim their reputations have been severely damaged by posts within the groups.

In early 2024, an Illinois man filed a high-profile lawsuit against the founder of the AWDTSG network, marking a turning point that brought the secretive groups into the public legal spotlight.

• The One Where They Tanked Jokes 15 Shocking New Secrets From The Friends Tv Show Behind The Scenes G9zdh

The central legal challenge revolves around the concept of online defamation. For a statement to be considered defamatory, it must generally be a false statement of fact (not opinion) that causes harm to a person's reputation. However, identifying the liable party—the poster, the moderator, the group founder, or the platform (Facebook)—presents unique legal challenges.

The fear of legal liability has already had tangible consequences. Several Australian branches of the "Sis, Are We Dating the Same Guy" network have ceased accepting new posts entirely, with administrators citing concerns over potential legal fallout.

The Due Process Dilemma

Ethical critics argue that AWDTSG groups operate as a digital "court of public opinion" without any mechanism for due process. Men who are posted have no right of reply, no ability to correct the record, and often remain completely unaware that their digital footprint is being scrutinized by thousands of women.

The potential for unverified claims to ruin reputations, impact employment, and cause significant emotional distress is the dark side of the groups' safety mission. Reports have surfaced of men suffering severe consequences, including job loss and mental health crises, due to malicious or false claims.

The groups' official mobile app attempts to address some of these concerns by incorporating advanced tracking and logging features to "catch bad actors," alongside technical measures like screenshot blocking and screen record blocking to prevent content from leaving the closed environment.

Beyond Facebook: The Future of Dating Vetting and Safety

The existence and controversy surrounding AWDTSG groups highlight a fundamental gap in online dating: the lack of robust safety and vetting mechanisms provided by the dating apps themselves. Women are actively seeking collective safety strategies because the platforms they use often fall short in protecting them from harmful behavior.

As the legal landscape evolves, the AWDTSG model may be unsustainable in its current form, forcing a shift toward more formal and legally defensible vetting alternatives.

Alternatives and the Rise of Formal Vetting

The demand for relationship vetting has spurred interest in more formal and structured alternatives that attempt to balance safety with legal compliance. These alternatives often focus on verifiable public records or use AI to flag known safety risks.

• Reputable Platforms: The focus remains on platforms that prioritize user safety, such as those working with organizations like the Cyber Rights Organization and the Online Dating and Discovery Association to raise industry safety standards.
• Background Checks: Some dating services are exploring or implementing optional background check features, which provide a legally sound, albeit limited, form of vetting.
• Personal Safety Practices: Ultimately, the most reliable strategy remains employing robust personal online safety practices, such as protecting personal information, using strong passwords, and meeting in public places.

The AWDTSG groups, while controversial, have undeniably sparked a necessary global conversation about digital accountability and dating safety. They represent a powerful, albeit legally precarious, form of collective action by women demanding more transparency and protection in their dating lives. As the legal challenges of 2025 continue to mount, the network will be forced to either evolve its moderation practices or face further decline due to the high risk of legal liability.

The tension between the right to privacy (for men) and the right to safety (for women) defines the current era of online dating, making the future of the 'Are We Dating The Same Guy' phenomenon an ongoing, unpredictable story.