REUTERS — June 1 — eHarmony (founded 2000, 12m users) was sued yesterday for refusing to offer its services to gays, lesbians and bisexuals. A lawsuit alleging discrimination based on sexual orientation was filed in Los Angeles Superior Court on behalf of Linda Carlson, who was denied access to eHarmony because she is gay. Lawyers bringing the action said they believed it was the first lawsuit of its kind against eHarmony, which has long rankled the gay community with its failure to offer a "men seeking men" or "women seeking women" option. They were seeking to make it a class action lawsuit on behalf of gays and lesbians denied access to the dating service.
The full article was originally published at Gulf Times, but is no longer available.
Mark Brooks: Match.com's ad program for Chemistry.com sure sparked a fire. I wonder how far it will burn. Patrick is welcoming eHarmony gay member-denials with open arms at myPartnerPerfect.com.
26 thoughts on “eHarmony Accused of Excluding Gays”
Well, good. It’s about time. eHarmony’s refusal to serve gays and lesbians has been an undernoticed yet glaring flaw in their otherwise spic and span facade.
Something I have always liked about online dating from very early on was the leveling: women could contact men rather than waiting for guys to make the first move, and men could look for men and women for women, all on the same platform. eHarmony’s refusal to open up their service to gays can only, in this day and age, be a peek behind the curtain at eHarmony’s conservative — and homophobic — Christian roots. As I wrote in a blog posting on 5/10/2005 “From [eHarmony’s Neil Clark} Warren: ‘I don’t know how to do those matches, the research has not been done.’ What a weak excuse for blatant discrimination.” http://www.find-a-sweetheart.com/blog/item/eharmony_again_and_focus_on_the_family_connections/
For heaven’s sake, educate yourself. Go read a book.
From the same posting:
“What I do know is that eHarmony attracts many more women than men, so the odds are very bad for women, especially older women. Warren also believes that the more similar people are, the more likely for success of the relationship.
“So if you are male, heterosexual, with fairly traditional, conservative values, looking for the same in a woman, and you don’t mind someone else doing the picking for you or not seeing what the lady looks like until you have communicated for awhile, eHarmony would be a good place to sign up. If that doesn’t describe you, go somewhere else.”
If you’d like to read more of what I have written about eHarmony, there’s plenty. http://www.find-a-sweetheart.com/blog/C38/
Kathryn Lord
Romance Coach
Well, good. It’s about time. eHarmony’s refusal to serve gays and lesbians has been an undernoticed yet glaring flaw in their otherwise spic and span facade.
Something I have always liked about online dating from very early on was the leveling: women could contact men rather than waiting for guys to make the first move, and men could look for men and women for women, all on the same platform. eHarmony’s refusal to open up their service to gays can only, in this day and age, be a peek behind the curtain at eHarmony’s conservative — and homophobic — Christian roots. As I wrote in a blog posting on 5/10/2005 “From [eHarmony’s Neil Clark} Warren: ‘I don’t know how to do those matches, the research has not been done.’ What a weak excuse for blatant discrimination.” http://www.find-a-sweetheart.com/blog/item/eharmony_again_and_focus_on_the_family_connections/
For heaven’s sake, educate yourself. Go read a book.
From the same posting:
“What I do know is that eHarmony attracts many more women than men, so the odds are very bad for women, especially older women. Warren also believes that the more similar people are, the more likely for success of the relationship.
“So if you are male, heterosexual, with fairly traditional, conservative values, looking for the same in a woman, and you don’t mind someone else doing the picking for you or not seeing what the lady looks like until you have communicated for awhile, eHarmony would be a good place to sign up. If that doesn’t describe you, go somewhere else.”
If you’d like to read more of what I have written about eHarmony, there’s plenty. http://www.find-a-sweetheart.com/blog/C38/
Kathryn Lord
Romance Coach
I agree with Ms. Lord that Neil Clark Warren has been making weak excuses for catering exclusively to the heterosexual singles market. Warren ought not to have been compromising his life-long held beliefs about homosexual practices and simply stated what he has professed to believe (up until a few years ago).
His beliefs are accepted by 200 million+ Americans and 5.5 Billion+ people around the world – and for all of the recorded history of mankind across virtually all cultures, societies, tribes, religions, and, in modern times, yes, atheists, too (e.g. China, Soviet Russia, etc).
Instead, Warren has waffled and contorted himself to explain any-which-way but the obvious as to why eHarmony does not cater to the homosexual singles market.
The result has backfired on him, as his apparent goal was to assuage the constant focus from the secular media and hope the issue would go away. Instead, his “stance” has made things worse.
It is disingenuous for Ms. Lord to imply that “eHarmony’s conservative — and homophobic — Christian roots” are the problem. If only they would get out of the Dark Ages, eh? Disagree with a liberal and face their hypocrisy.
We social conservatives (all 150 million + Americans included) are constantly being told by our liberal counterparts to compromise our deeply held beliefs and give in to their “modern” modes of thinking.
“If you don’t like a particular TV show, don’t watch it”
“If you don’t like that radio host, don’t listen to him”
“If you find that magazine offensive, don’t read it”
“If that lifestyle is against your religion, tolerate it”
And on and on it goes.
However, when it comes to tolerating and respecting *our* rights, well – liberal values like tolerance and respect for differences go out the window. Instead lawsuits get filed to force *their* views on us.
Last I checked, we live in a free and democratic society with a free enterprise system. If eHarmony is not catering to the needs of the homosexual singles community, then the market will meet that need. Sites like MyPartnerPerfect.com are examples of that.
I fully respect anyone’s right to their views and lifestyle. All I (and other conservatives) ask for is the same in return. And, without the snide and deprecating remarks. Or the power-tripping lawsuits. The only winners are the lawyers.
I agree with Ms. Lord that Neil Clark Warren has been making weak excuses for catering exclusively to the heterosexual singles market. Warren ought not to have been compromising his life-long held beliefs about homosexual practices and simply stated what he has professed to believe (up until a few years ago).
His beliefs are accepted by 200 million+ Americans and 5.5 Billion+ people around the world – and for all of the recorded history of mankind across virtually all cultures, societies, tribes, religions, and, in modern times, yes, atheists, too (e.g. China, Soviet Russia, etc).
Instead, Warren has waffled and contorted himself to explain any-which-way but the obvious as to why eHarmony does not cater to the homosexual singles market.
The result has backfired on him, as his apparent goal was to assuage the constant focus from the secular media and hope the issue would go away. Instead, his “stance” has made things worse.
It is disingenuous for Ms. Lord to imply that “eHarmony’s conservative — and homophobic — Christian roots” are the problem. If only they would get out of the Dark Ages, eh? Disagree with a liberal and face their hypocrisy.
We social conservatives (all 150 million + Americans included) are constantly being told by our liberal counterparts to compromise our deeply held beliefs and give in to their “modern” modes of thinking.
“If you don’t like a particular TV show, don’t watch it”
“If you don’t like that radio host, don’t listen to him”
“If you find that magazine offensive, don’t read it”
“If that lifestyle is against your religion, tolerate it”
And on and on it goes.
However, when it comes to tolerating and respecting *our* rights, well – liberal values like tolerance and respect for differences go out the window. Instead lawsuits get filed to force *their* views on us.
Last I checked, we live in a free and democratic society with a free enterprise system. If eHarmony is not catering to the needs of the homosexual singles community, then the market will meet that need. Sites like MyPartnerPerfect.com are examples of that.
I fully respect anyone’s right to their views and lifestyle. All I (and other conservatives) ask for is the same in return. And, without the snide and deprecating remarks. Or the power-tripping lawsuits. The only winners are the lawyers.
As Mark mentioned above, the Chemistry.com ad campaign has definitely sparked a fire. The lawsuit alleging discrimination based on sexual orientation against eHarmony is more of a social justice issue for me and less about whether or not eHarmony has the right under our “democratic society” and “free enterprise system” to deny services to any segment of the population.
I decided I wanted to post a comment here after reading Sam’s response. Like the ChristianCafe.com, myPartnerPerfect.com is a niche site. We make every attempt to represent the population we serve…in our case it’s gay men. Although eHarmony was originally very upfront with its Christian identity and goals to join heterosexuals in the matrimony of marriage, that message quickly became hidden as the site hit the masses. Dr. Warren and eHarmony have not been consistently upfront with their intensions and are now receiving the backlash. I don’t have a problem with eHarmony unable to provide services for the LGBT community if their reasoning is due to their matching methodology focusing exclusively on heterosexual relationships (which is one of many wavering reasons presented by Dr. Warren). Although there are many similarities between heterosexual and homosexual relationships, there are also many differences in partner selection.
I don’t believe this is an issue of liberal versus conservative politics or one religion versus another either, as posited by Sam. This is an issue of social justice and equality. Homosexuality is far from a “modern” lifestyle or way of thinking and has been around just as long as heterosexuality. Like many minorities today and in the world’s history, homosexuals are a population that has suffered from its social marginalization. Unfortunately, much of the discrimination towards homosexuals throughout time has been at the hands of religious fundamentalists, such as Dr. Warren. In my opinion, it is this discrimination and social injustice that is being challenged today.
As Mark mentioned above, the Chemistry.com ad campaign has definitely sparked a fire. The lawsuit alleging discrimination based on sexual orientation against eHarmony is more of a social justice issue for me and less about whether or not eHarmony has the right under our “democratic society” and “free enterprise system” to deny services to any segment of the population.
I decided I wanted to post a comment here after reading Sam’s response. Like the ChristianCafe.com, myPartnerPerfect.com is a niche site. We make every attempt to represent the population we serve…in our case it’s gay men. Although eHarmony was originally very upfront with its Christian identity and goals to join heterosexuals in the matrimony of marriage, that message quickly became hidden as the site hit the masses. Dr. Warren and eHarmony have not been consistently upfront with their intensions and are now receiving the backlash. I don’t have a problem with eHarmony unable to provide services for the LGBT community if their reasoning is due to their matching methodology focusing exclusively on heterosexual relationships (which is one of many wavering reasons presented by Dr. Warren). Although there are many similarities between heterosexual and homosexual relationships, there are also many differences in partner selection.
I don’t believe this is an issue of liberal versus conservative politics or one religion versus another either, as posited by Sam. This is an issue of social justice and equality. Homosexuality is far from a “modern” lifestyle or way of thinking and has been around just as long as heterosexuality. Like many minorities today and in the world’s history, homosexuals are a population that has suffered from its social marginalization. Unfortunately, much of the discrimination towards homosexuals throughout time has been at the hands of religious fundamentalists, such as Dr. Warren. In my opinion, it is this discrimination and social injustice that is being challenged today.
Patrick, I appreciate your point of view and the respectful manner in which you presented it.
I disagree that forcing eHarmony to include homosexuals in their website is an issue of “social justice and equality”. Rather, I think it an attempt to force their viewpoint on those who disagree with it and try to legislate morality. No court or gov’t has that right.
But, be this as it may, we can agree to disagree.
Patrick’s site is a niche site, and by its nature discriminates against heterosexual singles. ChristianCafe.com (and our JewishCafe.com) also discriminate. But, “discriminate” in this context is not a *negative* – everyone discriminates in their choices every day. There is nothing wrong with that.
I think Warren and eHarmony need to figure out where they stand – and why. This waffling has only made things look badly on them, as I have stated before. My hope is that they will stand fast and stick to their principles and beliefs.
Patrick, I appreciate your point of view and the respectful manner in which you presented it.
I disagree that forcing eHarmony to include homosexuals in their website is an issue of “social justice and equality”. Rather, I think it an attempt to force their viewpoint on those who disagree with it and try to legislate morality. No court or gov’t has that right.
But, be this as it may, we can agree to disagree.
Patrick’s site is a niche site, and by its nature discriminates against heterosexual singles. ChristianCafe.com (and our JewishCafe.com) also discriminate. But, “discriminate” in this context is not a *negative* – everyone discriminates in their choices every day. There is nothing wrong with that.
I think Warren and eHarmony need to figure out where they stand – and why. This waffling has only made things look badly on them, as I have stated before. My hope is that they will stand fast and stick to their principles and beliefs.
Nothing like a little spirited discussion to clarify thoughts. Sam’s comments make me realize that it’s not eHarmony’s refusal to work with lesbians and gays that I find so grating, it is that they don’t make that clear. I have yet to explain eHarmony’s anti-gay stance to ONE of my clients who knew it beforehand. Just say so, eHarmony, right up front. Same with the following — this is what I wrote on my blog on 3/5/2005:
“The site also TURNS DOWN one in five applicants: Can you imagine getting this message after you screwed up your courage to sign on in the first place, and then spent several hours filling out the questionnaire?
‘Unfortunately, we are not able to make our profiles work for you. Our matching system is not suitable for about 20% of potential users, so 1 in 5 people simply would not benefit from our service. We hope that you understand that we regret our inability to provide service for you at this time.'”
Singles venturing into online dating are often quite tender. Getting turned down by a dating site, much less by another single? That could be devastating.
So I challenge eHarmony to state, maybe on the home page, that the site only matches heterosexuals, and turns down 20% of those. Then — I’ll have no problem. Much as I dislike True.com’s practices, I have to respect its front page chuzpah: “Married people will be prosecuted. Because we care, we screen members against public records to check marital status.” That’s a clear warning if I ever read one.
BTW, I clicked on Sam’s link and went over to look at ChristianCafe. I didn’t see anywhere that the site will not work with gays, though that is implied when one tries to do a search and the classic “I am a man/woman looking for a man/woman” does not come up. Here’s what ChristianCafe DOES state on the first page:
“Welcome to the premier Christian singles site. ChristianCafe.com is a comfortable relaxing online Cafe where Christian singles connect with one other. Whether you’re looking for a companion, a date, or a soul mate, ChristianCafe.com is the place for you! Warm, romantic, inviting…”
There are lots of single Christian gays and lesbian who might assume that ChristianCafe’s “warm, romantic, inviting…” atmosphere was for them, too. Maybe, Sam, you should make it a little clearer that ChristianCafe’s warmth is for heterosexuals only.
And Patrick, I’m glad to see myPerfectPartner’s coming out. I’d love to hear more about it. Can I have a tour? I am often asked about gay and lesbian resources.
Kathryn Lord http://www.Find-a-Sweetheart.com
Nothing like a little spirited discussion to clarify thoughts. Sam’s comments make me realize that it’s not eHarmony’s refusal to work with lesbians and gays that I find so grating, it is that they don’t make that clear. I have yet to explain eHarmony’s anti-gay stance to ONE of my clients who knew it beforehand. Just say so, eHarmony, right up front. Same with the following — this is what I wrote on my blog on 3/5/2005:
“The site also TURNS DOWN one in five applicants: Can you imagine getting this message after you screwed up your courage to sign on in the first place, and then spent several hours filling out the questionnaire?
‘Unfortunately, we are not able to make our profiles work for you. Our matching system is not suitable for about 20% of potential users, so 1 in 5 people simply would not benefit from our service. We hope that you understand that we regret our inability to provide service for you at this time.'”
Singles venturing into online dating are often quite tender. Getting turned down by a dating site, much less by another single? That could be devastating.
So I challenge eHarmony to state, maybe on the home page, that the site only matches heterosexuals, and turns down 20% of those. Then — I’ll have no problem. Much as I dislike True.com’s practices, I have to respect its front page chuzpah: “Married people will be prosecuted. Because we care, we screen members against public records to check marital status.” That’s a clear warning if I ever read one.
BTW, I clicked on Sam’s link and went over to look at ChristianCafe. I didn’t see anywhere that the site will not work with gays, though that is implied when one tries to do a search and the classic “I am a man/woman looking for a man/woman” does not come up. Here’s what ChristianCafe DOES state on the first page:
“Welcome to the premier Christian singles site. ChristianCafe.com is a comfortable relaxing online Cafe where Christian singles connect with one other. Whether you’re looking for a companion, a date, or a soul mate, ChristianCafe.com is the place for you! Warm, romantic, inviting…”
There are lots of single Christian gays and lesbian who might assume that ChristianCafe’s “warm, romantic, inviting…” atmosphere was for them, too. Maybe, Sam, you should make it a little clearer that ChristianCafe’s warmth is for heterosexuals only.
And Patrick, I’m glad to see myPerfectPartner’s coming out. I’d love to hear more about it. Can I have a tour? I am often asked about gay and lesbian resources.
Kathryn Lord http://www.Find-a-Sweetheart.com
I agree Sam and thank you for helping me clarify my point. I don’t think that eHarmony needs to provide services to homosexuals (or any minority group for that matter) as a matter of social justice and equality. The social justice issues for me come into play when uncovering the intent of the discrimination.
eHarmony, just as ChristianCafe.com and myPartnerPerfect.com, has the right to focus on whichever segment of the market they so choose. My only contention here is the motivation for choosing not to provide services for this segmented population. There is a difference between discerning discrimination to focus on a service market and direct discrimination due to a individuals or groups “characteristics” (in this case, sexual lifestyle).
I also agree that eHarmony’s waffling and avoidance of their corporate beliefs to secure major market positioning has hurt them and most likely put them in their current situation.
If they need to, I welcome eHarmony to provide myPartnerPerfect.com as a referral source to any and all gay men that come to their site!
fyi…Kathryn, please enjoy the tour of our site accessed from the homepage http://www.mypartnerperfect.com
I agree Sam and thank you for helping me clarify my point. I don’t think that eHarmony needs to provide services to homosexuals (or any minority group for that matter) as a matter of social justice and equality. The social justice issues for me come into play when uncovering the intent of the discrimination.
eHarmony, just as ChristianCafe.com and myPartnerPerfect.com, has the right to focus on whichever segment of the market they so choose. My only contention here is the motivation for choosing not to provide services for this segmented population. There is a difference between discerning discrimination to focus on a service market and direct discrimination due to a individuals or groups “characteristics” (in this case, sexual lifestyle).
I also agree that eHarmony’s waffling and avoidance of their corporate beliefs to secure major market positioning has hurt them and most likely put them in their current situation.
If they need to, I welcome eHarmony to provide myPartnerPerfect.com as a referral source to any and all gay men that come to their site!
fyi…Kathryn, please enjoy the tour of our site accessed from the homepage http://www.mypartnerperfect.com
Patrick, I appreciate your reasoned response. It is all about any business having the right to focus on whatever segment of the market they choose (why then the lawsuit against eHarmony? My assumption from your reasoning is that it has no merit).
Again, I disagree that any discrimination (in a negative sense, i.e. trying to put down homosexuals) is happening by eHarmony (or us) choosing not to offer services to homosexual singles. My (profound) beliefs dictate that I am unable to do this; it goes against Biblical teaching and thus everything I stand for.
Let the market meet any demand (for “Christian” homosexuals); GayHarmony.net (since changed to RainbowChristians.com) was an atttempt, which has so far not succeeded (the market size is too small to work, IMHO, as I said here in May 2006 when the site launched).
From a business point of view, Patrick, eHarmony’s non-service certainly plays well for you.
Kathryn, per your comment about us making it a little clearer that we cater to heterosexual singles, I am not sure how much clearer we could make than by what we do offer – only two choices: “I’m Male seeking Female” or “I’m Female seeking Male”.
That’s self-evident.
Patrick, I appreciate your reasoned response. It is all about any business having the right to focus on whatever segment of the market they choose (why then the lawsuit against eHarmony? My assumption from your reasoning is that it has no merit).
Again, I disagree that any discrimination (in a negative sense, i.e. trying to put down homosexuals) is happening by eHarmony (or us) choosing not to offer services to homosexual singles. My (profound) beliefs dictate that I am unable to do this; it goes against Biblical teaching and thus everything I stand for.
Let the market meet any demand (for “Christian” homosexuals); GayHarmony.net (since changed to RainbowChristians.com) was an atttempt, which has so far not succeeded (the market size is too small to work, IMHO, as I said here in May 2006 when the site launched).
From a business point of view, Patrick, eHarmony’s non-service certainly plays well for you.
Kathryn, per your comment about us making it a little clearer that we cater to heterosexual singles, I am not sure how much clearer we could make than by what we do offer – only two choices: “I’m Male seeking Female” or “I’m Female seeking Male”.
That’s self-evident.
We are disappointed in eHarmony’s continued practice of discriminating against the gay community and other groups, for example those who have had multiple divorces. Ultimately, however, we believe eHarmony will do whatever it wants, including discriminating against whomever it wants, but that consumers will be the ultimate judge as to whether institutional discrimination is smart business. The alleged justification eHarmony puts forth for discriminating against same-sex relationships is hogwash. Science says that the gay and lesbian community basically wants the same thing heterosexuals want. We believe eHarmony should be more candid about its real reasons for discriminating and should stop hiding behind false ‘science.’
As eHarmony’s chief competitor, Perfectmatch.com does not believe it is right or smart to discriminate against groups. We never have and never will judge our members. Our service is based on science and accommodates anyone that wishes to find a committed, long-lasting relationship – no matter their sexual preference.
Despite the progress made in mainstream media representations, Perfectmatch recognizes that the gay and lesbian community is still underserved as an audience. We strive to fill that void by welcoming all singles seeking relationships to use our service – including individuals who are pursuing same-sex relationships. We believe that all people deserve the opportunity to find the person right for them.
We are disappointed in eHarmony’s continued practice of discriminating against the gay community and other groups, for example those who have had multiple divorces. Ultimately, however, we believe eHarmony will do whatever it wants, including discriminating against whomever it wants, but that consumers will be the ultimate judge as to whether institutional discrimination is smart business. The alleged justification eHarmony puts forth for discriminating against same-sex relationships is hogwash. Science says that the gay and lesbian community basically wants the same thing heterosexuals want. We believe eHarmony should be more candid about its real reasons for discriminating and should stop hiding behind false ‘science.’
As eHarmony’s chief competitor, Perfectmatch.com does not believe it is right or smart to discriminate against groups. We never have and never will judge our members. Our service is based on science and accommodates anyone that wishes to find a committed, long-lasting relationship – no matter their sexual preference.
Despite the progress made in mainstream media representations, Perfectmatch recognizes that the gay and lesbian community is still underserved as an audience. We strive to fill that void by welcoming all singles seeking relationships to use our service – including individuals who are pursuing same-sex relationships. We believe that all people deserve the opportunity to find the person right for them.
All right, Duane! Good to see your comments.
And Sam, it’s not clear at all that ChristianCafe does not welcome gays and lesbians. I was looking for signs, and did not see them. If I missed it, others would to. Heterosexuals, anyway. Gay folks probably would notice, though, since they have much more experience sniffing out exclusion. Like pictures of straight couples only. And Christian gay folks would likely be wondering if the “Christian” part of ChristianCafe was inclusive of them, too. Since heterosexuals are not as sensitive to exclusion as gays, they tend not to look for those subtle signs or notice them. But gays folks would. And I think that that is what you are relying on: That ChristianCafe can descriminate without notice by most comsumers, except those you want to keep out. It seems to me that that is just what eHarmony is doing.
All right, Duane! Good to see your comments.
And Sam, it’s not clear at all that ChristianCafe does not welcome gays and lesbians. I was looking for signs, and did not see them. If I missed it, others would to. Heterosexuals, anyway. Gay folks probably would notice, though, since they have much more experience sniffing out exclusion. Like pictures of straight couples only. And Christian gay folks would likely be wondering if the “Christian” part of ChristianCafe was inclusive of them, too. Since heterosexuals are not as sensitive to exclusion as gays, they tend not to look for those subtle signs or notice them. But gays folks would. And I think that that is what you are relying on: That ChristianCafe can descriminate without notice by most comsumers, except those you want to keep out. It seems to me that that is just what eHarmony is doing.
Kathyrn, I think it is a cheap shot to rope eHarmony and us together concerning the gay issue. As I stated, it is self-evident that we cater to heterosexuals. You don’t need to be a rocket scientist to figure that out – or a homosexual used to “sniffing” out “subtle signs”.
“I’m Male seeking Female”
“I’m Female seeking Male”.
If anything, I think your unwillingness to give us a fair shake comes from your own biases against those 100’s of millions of us who don’t share your views.
A little tolerance is in order, please. You demand it; kindly reciprocate.
Kathyrn, I think it is a cheap shot to rope eHarmony and us together concerning the gay issue. As I stated, it is self-evident that we cater to heterosexuals. You don’t need to be a rocket scientist to figure that out – or a homosexual used to “sniffing” out “subtle signs”.
“I’m Male seeking Female”
“I’m Female seeking Male”.
If anything, I think your unwillingness to give us a fair shake comes from your own biases against those 100’s of millions of us who don’t share your views.
A little tolerance is in order, please. You demand it; kindly reciprocate.
Here we go again. It’s time to beat up on the “religious fundamentals.” Can Rosie O’Donnell’s comparison to radical Islamists be far behind? It seems that Christians are the only group that can be attacked anymore without repercussion. Why is that? I guess “Freedom of Religion” must have had an expiration date.
Let’s be honest. This lawsuit isn’t about a gay person being rejected by eHarmony, and it’s not about a lack of communication on the site regarding sexual preference. This is about trying to put sexual orientation in the same class as race, gender and the rest. It’s about forcing your views and beliefs on the world, the very thing you accuse “religious fundamentals” of doing. Do you see the hypocrisy? If Christians stand up for what they believe, it’s discrimination and intolerance. But when those with opposing views do it, it’s being “open-minded” and “tolerant.”
On eHarmony and christiancafe.com, you have to make a selection between “Man seeking a Woman” and “Woman seeking a Man” right up front, so how can you not know that same-sex relationships are not included? Are you saying gays and lesbians can’t figure that out for themselves, so it needs to be spelled out for them?
WELCOME TO EHARMONY
HETEROSEXUALS ONLY
And, really, how many gays and lesbians haven’t heard by now that eHarmony doesn’t do same-sex matching? This has been all over the Internet for at least two years. It comes up in virtually every interview Neil Clark Warren does.
I’m really tired of people puffing themselves up because they supposedly are the ones who “welcome gays and lesbians” and who believe in “social justice and equality.” According to whom? Who gets to define this “social justice and equality?” How about if we take a vote? Oh wait, that’s already been done in several states in the US and in most cases same-sex relationships (marriage) were VOTED DOWN.
I liked this comment: “For heaven’s sake, educate yourself. Go read a book.” To imply that reading a book is enough research to enable sophisticated matching of gays and lesbians is an insult to them and to anyone who tries to do legitimate work in the relationship field. (Note I said legitimate.) Apparently, gays and lesbians are so simple that it doesn’t take much to understand all the nuances of attraction, romance and love in same-sex relationships.
Here’s another comment: “There are lots of single Christian gays and lesbian…” Really? Do you have any quantitative data on that? ‘Cause I’d love to see it if you do. I have no doubt that there are gays and lesbians who perceive themselves to be “Christians,” but I believe they are either fooling themselves or have been mislead by non-biblical teaching which falsely claims that the Bible does not say homosexuality is wrong.
Let me close with this. A true follower of Jesus Christ would NEVER hate any gay or lesbian. I am saddened by some alleged Christians who have perverted Scripture and go around saying things like “God hates (you know who).” That is NOT TRUE. Although I do not agree with homosexuality, I have compassion for gays and lesbians and I care about their eternal destiny, just as I do everyone else in the world. Gays and lesbians were created in the image of God the same as everyone else, and Jesus died on the cross for them the same way He did for everyone else in the world. It’s important that gays and lesbians know that God loves them and true believers in Jesus do, too. Please don’t throw all “Christians” together into the same pot. There are plenty of them who do things with which I don’t agree as well.
Here we go again. It’s time to beat up on the “religious fundamentals.” Can Rosie O’Donnell’s comparison to radical Islamists be far behind? It seems that Christians are the only group that can be attacked anymore without repercussion. Why is that? I guess “Freedom of Religion” must have had an expiration date.
Let’s be honest. This lawsuit isn’t about a gay person being rejected by eHarmony, and it’s not about a lack of communication on the site regarding sexual preference. This is about trying to put sexual orientation in the same class as race, gender and the rest. It’s about forcing your views and beliefs on the world, the very thing you accuse “religious fundamentals” of doing. Do you see the hypocrisy? If Christians stand up for what they believe, it’s discrimination and intolerance. But when those with opposing views do it, it’s being “open-minded” and “tolerant.”
On eHarmony and christiancafe.com, you have to make a selection between “Man seeking a Woman” and “Woman seeking a Man” right up front, so how can you not know that same-sex relationships are not included? Are you saying gays and lesbians can’t figure that out for themselves, so it needs to be spelled out for them?
WELCOME TO EHARMONY
HETEROSEXUALS ONLY
And, really, how many gays and lesbians haven’t heard by now that eHarmony doesn’t do same-sex matching? This has been all over the Internet for at least two years. It comes up in virtually every interview Neil Clark Warren does.
I’m really tired of people puffing themselves up because they supposedly are the ones who “welcome gays and lesbians” and who believe in “social justice and equality.” According to whom? Who gets to define this “social justice and equality?” How about if we take a vote? Oh wait, that’s already been done in several states in the US and in most cases same-sex relationships (marriage) were VOTED DOWN.
I liked this comment: “For heaven’s sake, educate yourself. Go read a book.” To imply that reading a book is enough research to enable sophisticated matching of gays and lesbians is an insult to them and to anyone who tries to do legitimate work in the relationship field. (Note I said legitimate.) Apparently, gays and lesbians are so simple that it doesn’t take much to understand all the nuances of attraction, romance and love in same-sex relationships.
Here’s another comment: “There are lots of single Christian gays and lesbian…” Really? Do you have any quantitative data on that? ‘Cause I’d love to see it if you do. I have no doubt that there are gays and lesbians who perceive themselves to be “Christians,” but I believe they are either fooling themselves or have been mislead by non-biblical teaching which falsely claims that the Bible does not say homosexuality is wrong.
Let me close with this. A true follower of Jesus Christ would NEVER hate any gay or lesbian. I am saddened by some alleged Christians who have perverted Scripture and go around saying things like “God hates (you know who).” That is NOT TRUE. Although I do not agree with homosexuality, I have compassion for gays and lesbians and I care about their eternal destiny, just as I do everyone else in the world. Gays and lesbians were created in the image of God the same as everyone else, and Jesus died on the cross for them the same way He did for everyone else in the world. It’s important that gays and lesbians know that God loves them and true believers in Jesus do, too. Please don’t throw all “Christians” together into the same pot. There are plenty of them who do things with which I don’t agree as well.
Children, knock it off.
If eHarmony wants to do whatever, let them. They are not a place of public accommodation, so don’t have to cater to everyone.
Those attracted by their proposition are ones you wouldn’t want to associate with anyway. Conservative, very conservative, not proactive, those who are afraid of mixing it up, or those who have a plan or vision of how dating should go without deviation. Even those who believe that scheme is “romantic”. Gimmeafrigginbreak.
Dr. whatshisname and his shareholders will not make money, or be in business, unless they appeal to some.
Where is the outcry about Gay.com not catering to hetros?
Frankly, the Geez could give a rats ass……spend your money where you are comfortable, where you are willing to contribute to the business’s philosophy, and keep it in your pocket otherwise.
Lest you think the Geez is a bible thumper, I won’t patronize any business with a fish on it. My experience is poor customer service, high prices, and we don’t give a damn attitudes are found there.
Quit whining, give your money to Chemistry.com if you like, or if you are really wound up about Discrimination, start beating up on Gay.com for not serving hetros.
Live and let live, and vote with your pocketbook.
Geez rests now.
Children, knock it off.
If eHarmony wants to do whatever, let them. They are not a place of public accommodation, so don’t have to cater to everyone.
Those attracted by their proposition are ones you wouldn’t want to associate with anyway. Conservative, very conservative, not proactive, those who are afraid of mixing it up, or those who have a plan or vision of how dating should go without deviation. Even those who believe that scheme is “romantic”. Gimmeafrigginbreak.
Dr. whatshisname and his shareholders will not make money, or be in business, unless they appeal to some.
Where is the outcry about Gay.com not catering to hetros?
Frankly, the Geez could give a rats ass……spend your money where you are comfortable, where you are willing to contribute to the business’s philosophy, and keep it in your pocket otherwise.
Lest you think the Geez is a bible thumper, I won’t patronize any business with a fish on it. My experience is poor customer service, high prices, and we don’t give a damn attitudes are found there.
Quit whining, give your money to Chemistry.com if you like, or if you are really wound up about Discrimination, start beating up on Gay.com for not serving hetros.
Live and let live, and vote with your pocketbook.
Geez rests now.
Well, good. It’s about time. eHarmony’s refusal to serve gays and lesbians has been an undernoticed yet glaring flaw in their otherwise spic and span facade.
Something I have always liked about online dating from very early on was the leveling: women could contact men rather than waiting for guys to make the first move, and men could look for men and women for women, all on the same platform. eHarmony’s refusal to open up their service to gays can only, in this day and age, be a peek behind the curtain at eHarmony’s conservative — and homophobic — Christian roots. As I wrote in a blog posting on 5/10/2005 “From [eHarmony’s Neil Clark} Warren: ‘I don’t know how to do those matches, the research has not been done.’ What a weak excuse for blatant discrimination.” http://www.find-a-sweetheart.com/blog/item/eharmony_again_and_focus_on_the_family_connections/
For heaven’s sake, educate yourself. Go read a book.
From the same posting:
“What I do know is that eHarmony attracts many more women than men, so the odds are very bad for women, especially older women. Warren also believes that the more similar people are, the more likely for success of the relationship.
“So if you are male, heterosexual, with fairly traditional, conservative values, looking for the same in a woman, and you don’t mind someone else doing the picking for you or not seeing what the lady looks like until you have communicated for awhile, eHarmony would be a good place to sign up. If that doesn’t describe you, go somewhere else.”
If you’d like to read more of what I have written about eHarmony, there’s plenty. http://www.find-a-sweetheart.com/blog/C38/
Kathryn Lord
Romance Coach
Well, good. It’s about time. eHarmony’s refusal to serve gays and lesbians has been an undernoticed yet glaring flaw in their otherwise spic and span facade.
Something I have always liked about online dating from very early on was the leveling: women could contact men rather than waiting for guys to make the first move, and men could look for men and women for women, all on the same platform. eHarmony’s refusal to open up their service to gays can only, in this day and age, be a peek behind the curtain at eHarmony’s conservative — and homophobic — Christian roots. As I wrote in a blog posting on 5/10/2005 “From [eHarmony’s Neil Clark} Warren: ‘I don’t know how to do those matches, the research has not been done.’ What a weak excuse for blatant discrimination.” http://www.find-a-sweetheart.com/blog/item/eharmony_again_and_focus_on_the_family_connections/
For heaven’s sake, educate yourself. Go read a book.
From the same posting:
“What I do know is that eHarmony attracts many more women than men, so the odds are very bad for women, especially older women. Warren also believes that the more similar people are, the more likely for success of the relationship.
“So if you are male, heterosexual, with fairly traditional, conservative values, looking for the same in a woman, and you don’t mind someone else doing the picking for you or not seeing what the lady looks like until you have communicated for awhile, eHarmony would be a good place to sign up. If that doesn’t describe you, go somewhere else.”
If you’d like to read more of what I have written about eHarmony, there’s plenty. http://www.find-a-sweetheart.com/blog/C38/
Kathryn Lord
Romance Coach
I agree with Ms. Lord that Neil Clark Warren has been making weak excuses for catering exclusively to the heterosexual singles market. Warren ought not to have been compromising his life-long held beliefs about homosexual practices and simply stated what he has professed to believe (up until a few years ago).
His beliefs are accepted by 200 million+ Americans and 5.5 Billion+ people around the world – and for all of the recorded history of mankind across virtually all cultures, societies, tribes, religions, and, in modern times, yes, atheists, too (e.g. China, Soviet Russia, etc).
Instead, Warren has waffled and contorted himself to explain any-which-way but the obvious as to why eHarmony does not cater to the homosexual singles market.
The result has backfired on him, as his apparent goal was to assuage the constant focus from the secular media and hope the issue would go away. Instead, his “stance” has made things worse.
It is disingenuous for Ms. Lord to imply that “eHarmony’s conservative — and homophobic — Christian roots” are the problem. If only they would get out of the Dark Ages, eh? Disagree with a liberal and face their hypocrisy.
We social conservatives (all 150 million + Americans included) are constantly being told by our liberal counterparts to compromise our deeply held beliefs and give in to their “modern” modes of thinking.
“If you don’t like a particular TV show, don’t watch it”
“If you don’t like that radio host, don’t listen to him”
“If you find that magazine offensive, don’t read it”
“If that lifestyle is against your religion, tolerate it”
And on and on it goes.
However, when it comes to tolerating and respecting *our* rights, well – liberal values like tolerance and respect for differences go out the window. Instead lawsuits get filed to force *their* views on us.
Last I checked, we live in a free and democratic society with a free enterprise system. If eHarmony is not catering to the needs of the homosexual singles community, then the market will meet that need. Sites like MyPartnerPerfect.com are examples of that.
I fully respect anyone’s right to their views and lifestyle. All I (and other conservatives) ask for is the same in return. And, without the snide and deprecating remarks. Or the power-tripping lawsuits. The only winners are the lawyers.
I agree with Ms. Lord that Neil Clark Warren has been making weak excuses for catering exclusively to the heterosexual singles market. Warren ought not to have been compromising his life-long held beliefs about homosexual practices and simply stated what he has professed to believe (up until a few years ago).
His beliefs are accepted by 200 million+ Americans and 5.5 Billion+ people around the world – and for all of the recorded history of mankind across virtually all cultures, societies, tribes, religions, and, in modern times, yes, atheists, too (e.g. China, Soviet Russia, etc).
Instead, Warren has waffled and contorted himself to explain any-which-way but the obvious as to why eHarmony does not cater to the homosexual singles market.
The result has backfired on him, as his apparent goal was to assuage the constant focus from the secular media and hope the issue would go away. Instead, his “stance” has made things worse.
It is disingenuous for Ms. Lord to imply that “eHarmony’s conservative — and homophobic — Christian roots” are the problem. If only they would get out of the Dark Ages, eh? Disagree with a liberal and face their hypocrisy.
We social conservatives (all 150 million + Americans included) are constantly being told by our liberal counterparts to compromise our deeply held beliefs and give in to their “modern” modes of thinking.
“If you don’t like a particular TV show, don’t watch it”
“If you don’t like that radio host, don’t listen to him”
“If you find that magazine offensive, don’t read it”
“If that lifestyle is against your religion, tolerate it”
And on and on it goes.
However, when it comes to tolerating and respecting *our* rights, well – liberal values like tolerance and respect for differences go out the window. Instead lawsuits get filed to force *their* views on us.
Last I checked, we live in a free and democratic society with a free enterprise system. If eHarmony is not catering to the needs of the homosexual singles community, then the market will meet that need. Sites like MyPartnerPerfect.com are examples of that.
I fully respect anyone’s right to their views and lifestyle. All I (and other conservatives) ask for is the same in return. And, without the snide and deprecating remarks. Or the power-tripping lawsuits. The only winners are the lawyers.
As Mark mentioned above, the Chemistry.com ad campaign has definitely sparked a fire. The lawsuit alleging discrimination based on sexual orientation against eHarmony is more of a social justice issue for me and less about whether or not eHarmony has the right under our “democratic society” and “free enterprise system” to deny services to any segment of the population.
I decided I wanted to post a comment here after reading Sam’s response. Like the ChristianCafe.com, myPartnerPerfect.com is a niche site. We make every attempt to represent the population we serve…in our case it’s gay men. Although eHarmony was originally very upfront with its Christian identity and goals to join heterosexuals in the matrimony of marriage, that message quickly became hidden as the site hit the masses. Dr. Warren and eHarmony have not been consistently upfront with their intensions and are now receiving the backlash. I don’t have a problem with eHarmony unable to provide services for the LGBT community if their reasoning is due to their matching methodology focusing exclusively on heterosexual relationships (which is one of many wavering reasons presented by Dr. Warren). Although there are many similarities between heterosexual and homosexual relationships, there are also many differences in partner selection.
I don’t believe this is an issue of liberal versus conservative politics or one religion versus another either, as posited by Sam. This is an issue of social justice and equality. Homosexuality is far from a “modern” lifestyle or way of thinking and has been around just as long as heterosexuality. Like many minorities today and in the world’s history, homosexuals are a population that has suffered from its social marginalization. Unfortunately, much of the discrimination towards homosexuals throughout time has been at the hands of religious fundamentalists, such as Dr. Warren. In my opinion, it is this discrimination and social injustice that is being challenged today.
As Mark mentioned above, the Chemistry.com ad campaign has definitely sparked a fire. The lawsuit alleging discrimination based on sexual orientation against eHarmony is more of a social justice issue for me and less about whether or not eHarmony has the right under our “democratic society” and “free enterprise system” to deny services to any segment of the population.
I decided I wanted to post a comment here after reading Sam’s response. Like the ChristianCafe.com, myPartnerPerfect.com is a niche site. We make every attempt to represent the population we serve…in our case it’s gay men. Although eHarmony was originally very upfront with its Christian identity and goals to join heterosexuals in the matrimony of marriage, that message quickly became hidden as the site hit the masses. Dr. Warren and eHarmony have not been consistently upfront with their intensions and are now receiving the backlash. I don’t have a problem with eHarmony unable to provide services for the LGBT community if their reasoning is due to their matching methodology focusing exclusively on heterosexual relationships (which is one of many wavering reasons presented by Dr. Warren). Although there are many similarities between heterosexual and homosexual relationships, there are also many differences in partner selection.
I don’t believe this is an issue of liberal versus conservative politics or one religion versus another either, as posited by Sam. This is an issue of social justice and equality. Homosexuality is far from a “modern” lifestyle or way of thinking and has been around just as long as heterosexuality. Like many minorities today and in the world’s history, homosexuals are a population that has suffered from its social marginalization. Unfortunately, much of the discrimination towards homosexuals throughout time has been at the hands of religious fundamentalists, such as Dr. Warren. In my opinion, it is this discrimination and social injustice that is being challenged today.
Patrick, I appreciate your point of view and the respectful manner in which you presented it.
I disagree that forcing eHarmony to include homosexuals in their website is an issue of “social justice and equality”. Rather, I think it an attempt to force their viewpoint on those who disagree with it and try to legislate morality. No court or gov’t has that right.
But, be this as it may, we can agree to disagree.
Patrick’s site is a niche site, and by its nature discriminates against heterosexual singles. ChristianCafe.com (and our JewishCafe.com) also discriminate. But, “discriminate” in this context is not a *negative* – everyone discriminates in their choices every day. There is nothing wrong with that.
I think Warren and eHarmony need to figure out where they stand – and why. This waffling has only made things look badly on them, as I have stated before. My hope is that they will stand fast and stick to their principles and beliefs.
Patrick, I appreciate your point of view and the respectful manner in which you presented it.
I disagree that forcing eHarmony to include homosexuals in their website is an issue of “social justice and equality”. Rather, I think it an attempt to force their viewpoint on those who disagree with it and try to legislate morality. No court or gov’t has that right.
But, be this as it may, we can agree to disagree.
Patrick’s site is a niche site, and by its nature discriminates against heterosexual singles. ChristianCafe.com (and our JewishCafe.com) also discriminate. But, “discriminate” in this context is not a *negative* – everyone discriminates in their choices every day. There is nothing wrong with that.
I think Warren and eHarmony need to figure out where they stand – and why. This waffling has only made things look badly on them, as I have stated before. My hope is that they will stand fast and stick to their principles and beliefs.
Nothing like a little spirited discussion to clarify thoughts. Sam’s comments make me realize that it’s not eHarmony’s refusal to work with lesbians and gays that I find so grating, it is that they don’t make that clear. I have yet to explain eHarmony’s anti-gay stance to ONE of my clients who knew it beforehand. Just say so, eHarmony, right up front. Same with the following — this is what I wrote on my blog on 3/5/2005:
“The site also TURNS DOWN one in five applicants: Can you imagine getting this message after you screwed up your courage to sign on in the first place, and then spent several hours filling out the questionnaire?
‘Unfortunately, we are not able to make our profiles work for you. Our matching system is not suitable for about 20% of potential users, so 1 in 5 people simply would not benefit from our service. We hope that you understand that we regret our inability to provide service for you at this time.'”
Singles venturing into online dating are often quite tender. Getting turned down by a dating site, much less by another single? That could be devastating.
So I challenge eHarmony to state, maybe on the home page, that the site only matches heterosexuals, and turns down 20% of those. Then — I’ll have no problem. Much as I dislike True.com’s practices, I have to respect its front page chuzpah: “Married people will be prosecuted. Because we care, we screen members against public records to check marital status.” That’s a clear warning if I ever read one.
BTW, I clicked on Sam’s link and went over to look at ChristianCafe. I didn’t see anywhere that the site will not work with gays, though that is implied when one tries to do a search and the classic “I am a man/woman looking for a man/woman” does not come up. Here’s what ChristianCafe DOES state on the first page:
“Welcome to the premier Christian singles site. ChristianCafe.com is a comfortable relaxing online Cafe where Christian singles connect with one other. Whether you’re looking for a companion, a date, or a soul mate, ChristianCafe.com is the place for you! Warm, romantic, inviting…”
There are lots of single Christian gays and lesbian who might assume that ChristianCafe’s “warm, romantic, inviting…” atmosphere was for them, too. Maybe, Sam, you should make it a little clearer that ChristianCafe’s warmth is for heterosexuals only.
And Patrick, I’m glad to see myPerfectPartner’s coming out. I’d love to hear more about it. Can I have a tour? I am often asked about gay and lesbian resources.
Kathryn Lord
http://www.Find-a-Sweetheart.com
Nothing like a little spirited discussion to clarify thoughts. Sam’s comments make me realize that it’s not eHarmony’s refusal to work with lesbians and gays that I find so grating, it is that they don’t make that clear. I have yet to explain eHarmony’s anti-gay stance to ONE of my clients who knew it beforehand. Just say so, eHarmony, right up front. Same with the following — this is what I wrote on my blog on 3/5/2005:
“The site also TURNS DOWN one in five applicants: Can you imagine getting this message after you screwed up your courage to sign on in the first place, and then spent several hours filling out the questionnaire?
‘Unfortunately, we are not able to make our profiles work for you. Our matching system is not suitable for about 20% of potential users, so 1 in 5 people simply would not benefit from our service. We hope that you understand that we regret our inability to provide service for you at this time.'”
Singles venturing into online dating are often quite tender. Getting turned down by a dating site, much less by another single? That could be devastating.
So I challenge eHarmony to state, maybe on the home page, that the site only matches heterosexuals, and turns down 20% of those. Then — I’ll have no problem. Much as I dislike True.com’s practices, I have to respect its front page chuzpah: “Married people will be prosecuted. Because we care, we screen members against public records to check marital status.” That’s a clear warning if I ever read one.
BTW, I clicked on Sam’s link and went over to look at ChristianCafe. I didn’t see anywhere that the site will not work with gays, though that is implied when one tries to do a search and the classic “I am a man/woman looking for a man/woman” does not come up. Here’s what ChristianCafe DOES state on the first page:
“Welcome to the premier Christian singles site. ChristianCafe.com is a comfortable relaxing online Cafe where Christian singles connect with one other. Whether you’re looking for a companion, a date, or a soul mate, ChristianCafe.com is the place for you! Warm, romantic, inviting…”
There are lots of single Christian gays and lesbian who might assume that ChristianCafe’s “warm, romantic, inviting…” atmosphere was for them, too. Maybe, Sam, you should make it a little clearer that ChristianCafe’s warmth is for heterosexuals only.
And Patrick, I’m glad to see myPerfectPartner’s coming out. I’d love to hear more about it. Can I have a tour? I am often asked about gay and lesbian resources.
Kathryn Lord
http://www.Find-a-Sweetheart.com
It sounds like we are all in agreement on one thing: eHarmony needs to make clear that they don’t work with homosexual singles. ‘Nuff said!
It sounds like we are all in agreement on one thing: eHarmony needs to make clear that they don’t work with homosexual singles. ‘Nuff said!
I agree Sam and thank you for helping me clarify my point. I don’t think that eHarmony needs to provide services to homosexuals (or any minority group for that matter) as a matter of social justice and equality. The social justice issues for me come into play when uncovering the intent of the discrimination.
eHarmony, just as ChristianCafe.com and myPartnerPerfect.com, has the right to focus on whichever segment of the market they so choose. My only contention here is the motivation for choosing not to provide services for this segmented population. There is a difference between discerning discrimination to focus on a service market and direct discrimination due to a individuals or groups “characteristics” (in this case, sexual lifestyle).
I also agree that eHarmony’s waffling and avoidance of their corporate beliefs to secure major market positioning has hurt them and most likely put them in their current situation.
If they need to, I welcome eHarmony to provide myPartnerPerfect.com as a referral source to any and all gay men that come to their site!
fyi…Kathryn, please enjoy the tour of our site accessed from the homepage http://www.mypartnerperfect.com
I agree Sam and thank you for helping me clarify my point. I don’t think that eHarmony needs to provide services to homosexuals (or any minority group for that matter) as a matter of social justice and equality. The social justice issues for me come into play when uncovering the intent of the discrimination.
eHarmony, just as ChristianCafe.com and myPartnerPerfect.com, has the right to focus on whichever segment of the market they so choose. My only contention here is the motivation for choosing not to provide services for this segmented population. There is a difference between discerning discrimination to focus on a service market and direct discrimination due to a individuals or groups “characteristics” (in this case, sexual lifestyle).
I also agree that eHarmony’s waffling and avoidance of their corporate beliefs to secure major market positioning has hurt them and most likely put them in their current situation.
If they need to, I welcome eHarmony to provide myPartnerPerfect.com as a referral source to any and all gay men that come to their site!
fyi…Kathryn, please enjoy the tour of our site accessed from the homepage http://www.mypartnerperfect.com
Patrick, I appreciate your reasoned response. It is all about any business having the right to focus on whatever segment of the market they choose (why then the lawsuit against eHarmony? My assumption from your reasoning is that it has no merit).
Again, I disagree that any discrimination (in a negative sense, i.e. trying to put down homosexuals) is happening by eHarmony (or us) choosing not to offer services to homosexual singles. My (profound) beliefs dictate that I am unable to do this; it goes against Biblical teaching and thus everything I stand for.
Let the market meet any demand (for “Christian” homosexuals); GayHarmony.net (since changed to RainbowChristians.com) was an atttempt, which has so far not succeeded (the market size is too small to work, IMHO, as I said here in May 2006 when the site launched).
From a business point of view, Patrick, eHarmony’s non-service certainly plays well for you.
Kathryn, per your comment about us making it a little clearer that we cater to heterosexual singles, I am not sure how much clearer we could make than by what we do offer – only two choices: “I’m Male seeking Female” or “I’m Female seeking Male”.
That’s self-evident.
Patrick, I appreciate your reasoned response. It is all about any business having the right to focus on whatever segment of the market they choose (why then the lawsuit against eHarmony? My assumption from your reasoning is that it has no merit).
Again, I disagree that any discrimination (in a negative sense, i.e. trying to put down homosexuals) is happening by eHarmony (or us) choosing not to offer services to homosexual singles. My (profound) beliefs dictate that I am unable to do this; it goes against Biblical teaching and thus everything I stand for.
Let the market meet any demand (for “Christian” homosexuals); GayHarmony.net (since changed to RainbowChristians.com) was an atttempt, which has so far not succeeded (the market size is too small to work, IMHO, as I said here in May 2006 when the site launched).
From a business point of view, Patrick, eHarmony’s non-service certainly plays well for you.
Kathryn, per your comment about us making it a little clearer that we cater to heterosexual singles, I am not sure how much clearer we could make than by what we do offer – only two choices: “I’m Male seeking Female” or “I’m Female seeking Male”.
That’s self-evident.
We are disappointed in eHarmony’s continued practice of discriminating against the gay community and other groups, for example those who have had multiple divorces. Ultimately, however, we believe eHarmony will do whatever it wants, including discriminating against whomever it wants, but that consumers will be the ultimate judge as to whether institutional discrimination is smart business. The alleged justification eHarmony puts forth for discriminating against same-sex relationships is hogwash. Science says that the gay and lesbian community basically wants the same thing heterosexuals want. We believe eHarmony should be more candid about its real reasons for discriminating and should stop hiding behind false ‘science.’
As eHarmony’s chief competitor, Perfectmatch.com does not believe it is right or smart to discriminate against groups. We never have and never will judge our members. Our service is based on science and accommodates anyone that wishes to find a committed, long-lasting relationship – no matter their sexual preference.
Despite the progress made in mainstream media representations, Perfectmatch recognizes that the gay and lesbian community is still underserved as an audience. We strive to fill that void by welcoming all singles seeking relationships to use our service – including individuals who are pursuing same-sex relationships. We believe that all people deserve the opportunity to find the person right for them.
We are disappointed in eHarmony’s continued practice of discriminating against the gay community and other groups, for example those who have had multiple divorces. Ultimately, however, we believe eHarmony will do whatever it wants, including discriminating against whomever it wants, but that consumers will be the ultimate judge as to whether institutional discrimination is smart business. The alleged justification eHarmony puts forth for discriminating against same-sex relationships is hogwash. Science says that the gay and lesbian community basically wants the same thing heterosexuals want. We believe eHarmony should be more candid about its real reasons for discriminating and should stop hiding behind false ‘science.’
As eHarmony’s chief competitor, Perfectmatch.com does not believe it is right or smart to discriminate against groups. We never have and never will judge our members. Our service is based on science and accommodates anyone that wishes to find a committed, long-lasting relationship – no matter their sexual preference.
Despite the progress made in mainstream media representations, Perfectmatch recognizes that the gay and lesbian community is still underserved as an audience. We strive to fill that void by welcoming all singles seeking relationships to use our service – including individuals who are pursuing same-sex relationships. We believe that all people deserve the opportunity to find the person right for them.
All right, Duane! Good to see your comments.
And Sam, it’s not clear at all that ChristianCafe does not welcome gays and lesbians. I was looking for signs, and did not see them. If I missed it, others would to. Heterosexuals, anyway. Gay folks probably would notice, though, since they have much more experience sniffing out exclusion. Like pictures of straight couples only. And Christian gay folks would likely be wondering if the “Christian” part of ChristianCafe was inclusive of them, too. Since heterosexuals are not as sensitive to exclusion as gays, they tend not to look for those subtle signs or notice them. But gays folks would. And I think that that is what you are relying on: That ChristianCafe can descriminate without notice by most comsumers, except those you want to keep out. It seems to me that that is just what eHarmony is doing.
All right, Duane! Good to see your comments.
And Sam, it’s not clear at all that ChristianCafe does not welcome gays and lesbians. I was looking for signs, and did not see them. If I missed it, others would to. Heterosexuals, anyway. Gay folks probably would notice, though, since they have much more experience sniffing out exclusion. Like pictures of straight couples only. And Christian gay folks would likely be wondering if the “Christian” part of ChristianCafe was inclusive of them, too. Since heterosexuals are not as sensitive to exclusion as gays, they tend not to look for those subtle signs or notice them. But gays folks would. And I think that that is what you are relying on: That ChristianCafe can descriminate without notice by most comsumers, except those you want to keep out. It seems to me that that is just what eHarmony is doing.
Kathyrn, I think it is a cheap shot to rope eHarmony and us together concerning the gay issue. As I stated, it is self-evident that we cater to heterosexuals. You don’t need to be a rocket scientist to figure that out – or a homosexual used to “sniffing” out “subtle signs”.
“I’m Male seeking Female”
“I’m Female seeking Male”.
If anything, I think your unwillingness to give us a fair shake comes from your own biases against those 100’s of millions of us who don’t share your views.
A little tolerance is in order, please. You demand it; kindly reciprocate.
Kathyrn, I think it is a cheap shot to rope eHarmony and us together concerning the gay issue. As I stated, it is self-evident that we cater to heterosexuals. You don’t need to be a rocket scientist to figure that out – or a homosexual used to “sniffing” out “subtle signs”.
“I’m Male seeking Female”
“I’m Female seeking Male”.
If anything, I think your unwillingness to give us a fair shake comes from your own biases against those 100’s of millions of us who don’t share your views.
A little tolerance is in order, please. You demand it; kindly reciprocate.
Here we go again. It’s time to beat up on the “religious fundamentals.” Can Rosie O’Donnell’s comparison to radical Islamists be far behind? It seems that Christians are the only group that can be attacked anymore without repercussion. Why is that? I guess “Freedom of Religion” must have had an expiration date.
Let’s be honest. This lawsuit isn’t about a gay person being rejected by eHarmony, and it’s not about a lack of communication on the site regarding sexual preference. This is about trying to put sexual orientation in the same class as race, gender and the rest. It’s about forcing your views and beliefs on the world, the very thing you accuse “religious fundamentals” of doing. Do you see the hypocrisy? If Christians stand up for what they believe, it’s discrimination and intolerance. But when those with opposing views do it, it’s being “open-minded” and “tolerant.”
On eHarmony and christiancafe.com, you have to make a selection between “Man seeking a Woman” and “Woman seeking a Man” right up front, so how can you not know that same-sex relationships are not included? Are you saying gays and lesbians can’t figure that out for themselves, so it needs to be spelled out for them?
WELCOME TO EHARMONY
HETEROSEXUALS ONLY
And, really, how many gays and lesbians haven’t heard by now that eHarmony doesn’t do same-sex matching? This has been all over the Internet for at least two years. It comes up in virtually every interview Neil Clark Warren does.
I’m really tired of people puffing themselves up because they supposedly are the ones who “welcome gays and lesbians” and who believe in “social justice and equality.” According to whom? Who gets to define this “social justice and equality?” How about if we take a vote? Oh wait, that’s already been done in several states in the US and in most cases same-sex relationships (marriage) were VOTED DOWN.
I liked this comment: “For heaven’s sake, educate yourself. Go read a book.” To imply that reading a book is enough research to enable sophisticated matching of gays and lesbians is an insult to them and to anyone who tries to do legitimate work in the relationship field. (Note I said legitimate.) Apparently, gays and lesbians are so simple that it doesn’t take much to understand all the nuances of attraction, romance and love in same-sex relationships.
Here’s another comment: “There are lots of single Christian gays and lesbian…” Really? Do you have any quantitative data on that? ‘Cause I’d love to see it if you do. I have no doubt that there are gays and lesbians who perceive themselves to be “Christians,” but I believe they are either fooling themselves or have been mislead by non-biblical teaching which falsely claims that the Bible does not say homosexuality is wrong.
Let me close with this. A true follower of Jesus Christ would NEVER hate any gay or lesbian. I am saddened by some alleged Christians who have perverted Scripture and go around saying things like “God hates (you know who).” That is NOT TRUE. Although I do not agree with homosexuality, I have compassion for gays and lesbians and I care about their eternal destiny, just as I do everyone else in the world. Gays and lesbians were created in the image of God the same as everyone else, and Jesus died on the cross for them the same way He did for everyone else in the world. It’s important that gays and lesbians know that God loves them and true believers in Jesus do, too. Please don’t throw all “Christians” together into the same pot. There are plenty of them who do things with which I don’t agree as well.
Here we go again. It’s time to beat up on the “religious fundamentals.” Can Rosie O’Donnell’s comparison to radical Islamists be far behind? It seems that Christians are the only group that can be attacked anymore without repercussion. Why is that? I guess “Freedom of Religion” must have had an expiration date.
Let’s be honest. This lawsuit isn’t about a gay person being rejected by eHarmony, and it’s not about a lack of communication on the site regarding sexual preference. This is about trying to put sexual orientation in the same class as race, gender and the rest. It’s about forcing your views and beliefs on the world, the very thing you accuse “religious fundamentals” of doing. Do you see the hypocrisy? If Christians stand up for what they believe, it’s discrimination and intolerance. But when those with opposing views do it, it’s being “open-minded” and “tolerant.”
On eHarmony and christiancafe.com, you have to make a selection between “Man seeking a Woman” and “Woman seeking a Man” right up front, so how can you not know that same-sex relationships are not included? Are you saying gays and lesbians can’t figure that out for themselves, so it needs to be spelled out for them?
WELCOME TO EHARMONY
HETEROSEXUALS ONLY
And, really, how many gays and lesbians haven’t heard by now that eHarmony doesn’t do same-sex matching? This has been all over the Internet for at least two years. It comes up in virtually every interview Neil Clark Warren does.
I’m really tired of people puffing themselves up because they supposedly are the ones who “welcome gays and lesbians” and who believe in “social justice and equality.” According to whom? Who gets to define this “social justice and equality?” How about if we take a vote? Oh wait, that’s already been done in several states in the US and in most cases same-sex relationships (marriage) were VOTED DOWN.
I liked this comment: “For heaven’s sake, educate yourself. Go read a book.” To imply that reading a book is enough research to enable sophisticated matching of gays and lesbians is an insult to them and to anyone who tries to do legitimate work in the relationship field. (Note I said legitimate.) Apparently, gays and lesbians are so simple that it doesn’t take much to understand all the nuances of attraction, romance and love in same-sex relationships.
Here’s another comment: “There are lots of single Christian gays and lesbian…” Really? Do you have any quantitative data on that? ‘Cause I’d love to see it if you do. I have no doubt that there are gays and lesbians who perceive themselves to be “Christians,” but I believe they are either fooling themselves or have been mislead by non-biblical teaching which falsely claims that the Bible does not say homosexuality is wrong.
Let me close with this. A true follower of Jesus Christ would NEVER hate any gay or lesbian. I am saddened by some alleged Christians who have perverted Scripture and go around saying things like “God hates (you know who).” That is NOT TRUE. Although I do not agree with homosexuality, I have compassion for gays and lesbians and I care about their eternal destiny, just as I do everyone else in the world. Gays and lesbians were created in the image of God the same as everyone else, and Jesus died on the cross for them the same way He did for everyone else in the world. It’s important that gays and lesbians know that God loves them and true believers in Jesus do, too. Please don’t throw all “Christians” together into the same pot. There are plenty of them who do things with which I don’t agree as well.
Children, knock it off.
If eHarmony wants to do whatever, let them. They are not a place of public accommodation, so don’t have to cater to everyone.
Those attracted by their proposition are ones you wouldn’t want to associate with anyway. Conservative, very conservative, not proactive, those who are afraid of mixing it up, or those who have a plan or vision of how dating should go without deviation. Even those who believe that scheme is “romantic”. Gimmeafrigginbreak.
Dr. whatshisname and his shareholders will not make money, or be in business, unless they appeal to some.
Where is the outcry about Gay.com not catering to hetros?
Frankly, the Geez could give a rats ass……spend your money where you are comfortable, where you are willing to contribute to the business’s philosophy, and keep it in your pocket otherwise.
Lest you think the Geez is a bible thumper, I won’t patronize any business with a fish on it. My experience is poor customer service, high prices, and we don’t give a damn attitudes are found there.
Quit whining, give your money to Chemistry.com if you like, or if you are really wound up about Discrimination, start beating up on Gay.com for not serving hetros.
Live and let live, and vote with your pocketbook.
Geez rests now.
Children, knock it off.
If eHarmony wants to do whatever, let them. They are not a place of public accommodation, so don’t have to cater to everyone.
Those attracted by their proposition are ones you wouldn’t want to associate with anyway. Conservative, very conservative, not proactive, those who are afraid of mixing it up, or those who have a plan or vision of how dating should go without deviation. Even those who believe that scheme is “romantic”. Gimmeafrigginbreak.
Dr. whatshisname and his shareholders will not make money, or be in business, unless they appeal to some.
Where is the outcry about Gay.com not catering to hetros?
Frankly, the Geez could give a rats ass……spend your money where you are comfortable, where you are willing to contribute to the business’s philosophy, and keep it in your pocket otherwise.
Lest you think the Geez is a bible thumper, I won’t patronize any business with a fish on it. My experience is poor customer service, high prices, and we don’t give a damn attitudes are found there.
Quit whining, give your money to Chemistry.com if you like, or if you are really wound up about Discrimination, start beating up on Gay.com for not serving hetros.
Live and let live, and vote with your pocketbook.
Geez rests now.