To eHarmony: Grow a Pair

In case you didn't hear about this, someone sued eHarmony.com a few years ago for not catering to his particular taste of partners. He couldn't find suitable partners on the site and thus declared the site was discriminating against him. I'm sure you've already assumed, but I'll clarify here: the man is gay. He was complaining about not having the option to be matched with other gay men.

Fast forward to this past week. eHarmony has settled this case. That's right - they sold out. The end result is that they have to pay the legal fees and other expenses of the attorney general's office ($50,000) as well as $5,000 to the man himself - let me guess - for pain and suffering. In addition, the business has to create a new website that solely caters to the gay and lesbian community; they're calling it Compatible Partners. They're giving the first 10,000 users free accounts and will be kept completely separate (database, etc.) from their regular site.

Now, on the surface, this issue seems like a gay issue. Don't be fooled - it's not. In a very real sense, this is just one more case of a company being trapped into making a so-called politically correct decision simply not to offend anyone. I contend that their decision was weak-kneed and will only set a precedent that need not be set.

Let's just forget about the whole gay aspect. It's not relevant to what happened. What essentially happened here is that an individual decided to go to a business and be served, only to discover the business didn't serve anything he liked. Normal people would go to another business that does serve what they like. Not so with Mr. I'm-a-minority (be it religion, race, sexual orientation, language). Mr. I.A.M. feels put down and trounced upon and wants every place he chooses to do business with to cater to HIM. Unfortunately for us without a minority mindset, I.A.M. wins more and more in our court system.

In this particular case, the charge was ridiculous. eHarmony.com is a private business. As long as it doesn't break any laws it can do whatever it wants. And - here's the kicker - both the company and even the attorney general agreed that no laws were broken! So why settle?!? It baffles the mind. At least - the normal mind. Let's take this analogy. I'm a carnivore. I love meat. Let's say I'm walking in a shopping center and I see a vegan market store. We'll suspend reality here for a second and say I walk in to this store to purchase some meat. What do I find? Steaks? Hamburgers? Pork Chops? NO?!?!? How could they! They are discriminating against meat-eaters! I'LL SUE!!!

(You see how ridiculous it is when you remove the I.A.M. slant?)

Here's a thought: Let's say that eHarmony.com doesn't give in. I don't call that discrimination - I call it a business opportunity! If there are that many people interested in finding a gay partner online, then there should be websites devoted to it! If I were gay that's where I'd go! You see - that's one of the benefits of our country; if someone sees a need for a product/business/idea, then they can fill that void with something that consumers will purchase. In some cases they can create a market where none existed before.

I wish people who felt disenfranchised didn't always look to the courts to solve their problems. I'm not saying the courts are never an option, but it's not like there weren't other alternatives for the dude - there are websites that cater to just about every type of partner-interest one might have. Nobody was forcing him to use eHarmony. He chose to implicate this business - this private, law-abiding business - in his own little "I'm a victim"-mentality-induced crusade, and the company just gave up. The real crime here is that he should have never been allowed his day in court. That would have saved everybody some dough.

The real scoop - the real reason this was even pursued - was because eHarmony has long been the bane of the gay community. The site/company was founded by a former affiliate of Focus on the Family - an evangelical Christian, Dr. Neil Clark. He designed the site and their formulas specifically to match heterosexual couples. Since this suit in 2005, at least one more was launched last year in California. Same concept - same goal - same I.A.M. mentality. By the way - this one is a class action lawsuit, and even the attorney for the plaintiff says,

This lawsuit is "about changing the landscape and making a statement out there that gay people, just like heterosexuals, have the right and desire to meet other people with whom they can fall in love."

I don't agree with his comment about "everybody has the right...". Nobody has the right to meet anyone. They may have the desire, for sure, but they definitely don't have the right. I'm pretty sure that nowhere in the Constitution does it say, "We all have the right to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and to meet our future lover." Maybe I missed that day in Civics class. To be sure - it would be nice if every company you wanted to do business with catered to you, but that's just not how it works in this country. If enough people want a business to change, the business will change. Obviously, eHarmony didn't feel the need to change to cater to the gay community and were staying as is. Could they have made more money had they done so? Probably. But again, not enough people wanted that service from them, so they didn't feel the business need to change.

The irony of this is that now that eHarmony is in the game, they will undoubtedly take business away from existing sites that specifically designed themselves to cater to the gay community. They have been so successful with the hetero market, who's to say they won't be just as successful with their new venture? What one hand giveth, the other taketh away...

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go sue that damn vegan store for not selling sirloins.

Bastards.