eHarmony gets with the program, permits same-sex matches

[Ellen Forradalom]

as part of a settlement with New Jersey's Civil Rights Division. :eyes: It won't kill ya, guys, and it may even make you some money.


http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-eharmony20-2008nov20,0,1772906.story

[Ian David]

1. Why would you give your business to a company that had to be sued into serving you? n/t

[sam sarrha]

2. if "MONEY" is the key.. just require couples to donate $1000 to the GOP.. it'll pass

[Newsjock]

3. Yeah, screw them

Another company that's (now) all too happy to take our money while kicking us in the rear end.

[RetiredTrotskyite]

4. I Don't Intend to Patronise These Guys....

But I think their getting kicked in the ass by the New Jersey Civil Rights division is great. I love to see assholes like this catch it. Smug, self-righteous bastards. Bet they won't have commercials for prospective same-sex clients.

[ROakes1019]

5. Christian couples

I thought eHarmony was started by a couple of Christians. Naturally, they wouldn't want gays to join. Good for New Jersey's Civil Rights Division.

[MissMarple]

6. They are still creepy. Their commercials remind me of Topeka in "A Boy and His Dog".

Good story, interesting little movie.

[juno jones]

7. I looooove that movie.

The original story too. Ellison is amazing.

[meegbear]

8. But will we fit into the "28 levels of compatibility"?

:eyes:

[DarkTirade]

9. Hmm. Kinda torn on this one.

A part of me wants to say "Fuck them, let them do what they want, but I'll never patronize them." Another part of me wants to say, "Haha! Stupid bigots." :P

[Book Lover]

10. Salon interviewed the founder a little while ago

IIRC, he said they didn;t "do" gay people because the goal is eHarmony is to get people to get married, and since gays can;t do thatm they would not be well served by eHarmony.

Aha! Found it
http://dir.salon.com/story/mwt/feature/2005/06/10/warren/

<snip>
But we wound up talking for two hours straight. During the conversation, Warren grappled -- honestly, it seemed -- with his feelings about homosexuality, his pride in his multiracial workforce, his commitment to marriage, and his belief that I should really consider dating an Asian guy. I occasionally felt played, as if he was pulling out some shiny tricks to show a lefty reporter he isn't James Dobson. But I also thought we genuinely connected.
<snip>
When I asked Warren about his refusal to serve same-sex couples, he listed several reasons for his policy. "First, we're into marriage," he said, pointing out that gay unions remain illegal in almost every state. He also doesn't feel there is adequate research on how men can be matched up with other men, or women with women.

Businessmen have approached him and asked for his help in building a company designed specifically for gay couples. Warren was proud to tell me that he advises them to research the kinds of compatibility that make gay relationships last. "It did my heart good that these guys I talked to, these gay guys, have since said, 'Neil Clark Warren was sympathetic.' That meant the world to me," he said. But it's also pretty clear that eHarmony is not about to reverse its own policy. Warren is simply too torn on the issue.

When I told him that I found it sad that my gay friends don't have the opportunity to take advantage of the eHarmony compatibility elixir of which he is so proud, he was quiet for some time. "I love the spirit with which you make that point," he said thoughtfully. "And we do do a lot of talking about how we love the idea of being inclusive." He paused again, sounding slightly shaken. "It's just not an easy point! We've got thousands of years of history of the human race in which this was never treated as a marriage and there are a lot of people who think it's just not going to have the same kind of stability over time.
<snip>

[RetiredTrotskyite]

11. Word to Warren:

Gay marriage will never have stability until it is given a basis. Even now, though, with all the homophobia out there, there are amazingly long, stable, happy gay unions.

Oh and you are wrong about same-sex unions being a new thing. They're not. Read John Boswell.

[galledgoblin]

12. damn, I was kind of hoping to let the market settle this (n/t)