As more women in both Australia and the UK come forward with allegations about their experiences on Married At First Sight (MAFS), it is becoming increasingly apparent that the show is fundamentally broken, writes Women’s and Girls’ Emergency Centre prevention director, Moo Baulch.
Want to support our work? Cheek is offering 30% off annual subscriptions until June 30, meaning you can get access to ALL of our content for just $49 a year!!
Talking to anyone about domestic and family violence and abuse is unimaginably difficult. Doing so in the context of a television franchise as powerful as Married at First Sight (MAFS) is incredibly brave. As more women in both Australia and the UK come forward with allegations about their experiences on the show, it is becoming increasingly apparent that MAFS is fundamentally broken.
The MAFS franchise is a relic of an outdated and outright dangerous idea of what a relationship should be. The premise of the show, in which both “partners” must agree that a relationship should end, is demeaning and plain wrong. It perpetuates an expectation that removes agency from an individual and further entrenches damaging societal norms.
The allegations that have been made by women in both the UK and Australia are shocking, but sadly not surprising. The show has a history of treating gender-based violence with a light touch, treating abuse as a plot point rather than something that must be met with condemnation and consequence.
MAFS has a duty of care to participants it appears to have completely ignored. As one of the most watched TV shows in Australia, it also has a responsibility to shape the national conversation about respect in relationships. It has consistently forsaken this responsibility across multiple seasons.
Commitments to rectify previous mistakes are not enough. MAFS has made a statement by encouraging and then airing this behaviour. It now has a responsibility to fundamentally rethink the format that allowed it to occur.
Much like the cycle of violence, the problem goes beyond individual incidents or a single season. Multiple seasons of Married at First Sight have provided an alarming display of violent behaviours, on occasions bordering on a how-to guide for perpetrating abuse.
Across multiple “relationships”, viewers have watched men display textbook signs of coercive control, intimidation, manipulation and emotional abuse, often with minimal consequence or correction. With millions of Australians watching, the excusing of violence sends a clear message that abusive behaviour is normal, understandable or simply part of the entertainment.
Time and again, women have been praised for “forgiving” abusive behaviour, while men have been rewarded with glowing redemption arcs for temporarily refraining from further harm. The audience is encouraged to celebrate reconciliation and personal growth, as though violence and abuse can be neatly resolved within the confines of a television storyline. But cycles of violence are not that simple.
Domestic violence experts have long identified a common pattern of behaviour used by many perpetrators: tension building, intimidation, escalation, remorse, pursuit, a honeymoon period, and repeat. Following an abusive incident, displays of remorse, love bombing, gifts and promises to change often manipulate victims into believing the violence will never happen again. Then the cycle repeats.
This is not simply theoretical. It is one of the reasons leaving an abusive relationship can be so difficult. For many it’s not an option. Others may attempt to leave multiple times before they can do so. Others stay because they desperately want the violence to stop and believe the promises that it will.
Responsibility for violence always lies with the perpetrator. Yet the relationship “experts” on Married at First Sight have repeatedly failed to identify these behaviours when they emerge. In doing so, they have also missed opportunities to provide viewers with basic respectful relationships education. What’s more, the producers have clearly failed to put in place preventative measures to to set a culture that condemns abuse before it starts.
The show has too often excused, justified or reframed problematic behaviour and abuse as relationship conflict. In praising men at various stages of abusive cycles, MAFS has done far too little to challenge the public discourse that continues to blame women for staying with violent partners.
Gendered violence is a national crisis that has stolen the lives of 32 Australian women and 13 Australian children in 2026 alone. As one of Australia’s most watched television programs, MAFS occupies a privileged position in our culture. It has the ability to shape attitudes, influence conversations and model behaviour for millions of viewers.
That influence comes with responsibility. The show could choose to identify abusive tactics when they occur. It could explain coercive control. It could challenge victim-blaming narratives. It could use expert commentary to educate audiences about healthy, respectful relationships. Instead, it has dramatised violence, positioned victims as instigators and offered redemption arcs to those who display abusive behaviours. This is a choice.
The more frequently people see violence perpetrated, excused and made light of, the more likely they are to accept it as normal. MAFS cannot simply tweak casting processes or strengthen participant welfare policies. The problems are far too embedded in the show’s format, incentives and storytelling for such tinkering.
If MAFS is to continue, it must completely change. It must stop treating abuse and control as entertainment and start treating it as the serious social issue it is. It must abandon formats that trap participants in unhealthy dynamics. It must prioritise safety over ratings. And it must ensure that any expert commentary is exactly that - grounded in a clear understanding of domestic and family violence and evidence-based research.
Domestic and family violence is a crime and a breach of human rights, not a plot line. Much work has been done by Australia’s media to improve reporting on violence against women. Broadcasters have an opportunity to shift public attitudes, challenge abusive behaviour and promote respectful relationships. MAFS has spent years doing the opposite.
Former contestants who have spoken out have done the public a service. The question now is whether the broadcasters are willing to listen.
About the author
Moo Baulch is Director of Primary Prevention at Women’s and Girls’ Emergency Centre (WAGEC), a feminist, grassroots organisation that supports women and families impacted by domestic and family violence. Moo works with corporates, not for profits and governments to advance gender equality, prevent violence, and improve outcomes for victim-survivors.
Thanks Moo. Great article and so important to keep this front of mind. We live in a misogynist society (& world) and it is so entrenched that its not seen. I have written to Albo (& others) many times about this as I believe the buck stops with him. As you can imagine I got a nothing response or push back 'not my issue'. Until men take a good look at their privilege and take ownership for their behaviour we are not going to see change. Pale male and stale don't get it.
Educating people about DFV and respectful relationships through MAFS could be super effective, if they did it right! A lot of the criticisms around the culture MAFS creates also applies to Love Island I think. Last year’s season of Love Island Australia was actually sickening.