eHarmony Changes Its Tune? But They Still Suck

[furrbear]

eHarmony has changed its tune on queers. Sorta.

The California-based company will begin providing same-sex matches under as part of a settlement with New Jersey’s Civil Rights Division.

Garden State resident Eric McKinley filed a complaint against the online matchmaker in 2005.

Under terms of the settlement, the company can create a new or differently named Web site for same-sex singles. The company can also post a disclaimer saying its compatibility-based matching system was developed from research of married heterosexual couples.

Neither the company nor its founder, Neil Clark Warren, admit any liability.

In addition, eHarmony will pay the division $50,000 to cover administrative costs. It will pay McKinley $5,000 and give him a free one-year membership to its new service.

A separate site, huh? How, uh, Jim Crow-esque of them. (”We’ll just put those people over here, dear customers. So you can go right on pretending they don’t exist.”)

And my guess is that they probably won’t get any great rush of people signing up for their segregated service for queers. But I’m glad that New Jersey stood on principle on this one.

Still. I wonder what the The Big Gay Sketch Show on Logo will make of this.

Find more videos like this on Sweet Homo Alabama Readers Parlor

I don’t know that they’ll have to get rid of this sketch, but I can only imagine what they will do with the idea of a separate site for gays…

Comments

[blackwingbear.livejournal.com]

eh, fuck eHarmony. I hope their bigoted asses go bankrupt and go out of business.

[grizzlyzone.livejournal.com]

JUst an idle thought here. Neil Clark Warren makes a big selling point of his compatability questionaire. Would the compatability questions be the same for "us", as they are for "them", and just how much time (zero) has gone into figuring it all out?

[urbear]

I'm going to articulate an unpopular view.

Don't get me wrong, I think the eHarmony folks are the doucheist of douchebags, but I don't see why they should be compelled to accept Teh Gheys. They're not government funded and they're not a public accommodation in any way, shape or form; there are any number of services that are quite happy to work with Friends of Dorothy. They're a private business and should be able to pick and choose their customers as they see fit. Sure, their attitude is odious, but that's an issue for the marketplace, not the courts, don't you think?