eHarmony Loses Lawsuit
In 2005, a gay man by the name of Eric McKinley sued eHarmony because they didn't offer services to the LGBT community. Three years later the case has finally been settled and eHarmony lost the suit. Gay and lesbian users will now have their own eHarmony portal as of March 2009, and same-sex couples who are matched via the system will be advertised in the "Diversity" section of the website. As well, all discriminatory materials located in eHarmony's marketing materials, website and company publications will be removed completely.
I for one am happy with this resolution. Although eHarmony had complained previously that the reason why they didn't have gay or lesbian matching through their website was because their research was only focused on heterosexual partnerships (understandable), a quick review of their website showed obvious bias. I remember being struck several years ago how a company of such stature could get away with this stance.
Some critics, including an Editor over at the Jackson Sun, found the whole scenario overly litigious. Why would someone target eHarmony specifically, he said, other than for monetary reasons? Why not go after all of the dating sites that don't offer services to same-sex couples as well?
My thoughts as to why is simple: eHarmony didn't just ban same-sex couples from its database, but also discriminated openly against them (and thus why their marketing and company documents had to be changed). There is a definite difference between saying a certain demographic isn't your target market, and purposefully omitting their participation.
The only question now I'm wondering is this: what will online matchmaking competitor Chemistry do now? A lot of its marketing focused on eHarmony's denial of certain user groups, including same-sex couples. I'll be eager to see how they position themselves with this news. Perhaps they'll open up their database to users outside of the U.S., for starters. Hey, one can hope.
Related: Gay and Lesbian Dating Sites
Comments
They were forced to accept same sex couples? What about dating sites that only accept gay singles? What about christian dating sites? Are them discriminatory?
Again, they had discriminatory information on their website and company documents. As well, most Christian and same-sex dating sites allow other members to join, and don’t exclude anyone from their database. They just make it clear that their demographic is other people.
The only site that I can think of that might have an issue is True.com, who refuses to allow married folks or those who have been incarcerated.
eharmony owns their business. They should run it as they please.
The gay and lesbian movement has been allowed to piggyback on the backs of the blacks and native Americans, who were truly oppressed, for too long. Let’s save special treatment for those who really have been oppressed.
Excuse me? We piggyback? How about you try going up to get married and being told, “Ya know what? Just because you don’t like women, I’m not going to give you the same civil rights as those who do. Sorry.” That’s atrocious!
And yes my friend, we have been oppressed. We are only now REALLY starting to gain some speed in gaining civil equality. It was only in the 1960s that it was legal to be in a gay relatoinship. and to this day, in Canada, you must be an adult to engage in gay sex, yet heterosexuals can do so prior to legal adulthood. Fair? Not really. Piggybacking? Not at all. The only thing we have in common with those who were “really oppressed” is the fact that we stood (and unlike many) still stand on unequal footing with white, heterosexual, Christian society.
Tim,
If you can’t recognize the difference between genocide and “unequal footing”, you have a major problem.
If your “unequal footing” complaint justifies every one buying in to your mind set, or being punished, how do yo differ from hypocritical Christians?