March 19th, 2010
 

365 Gay: Living

eHarmony now loves gay people. Really.

, Special to 365gay.com

It’s true. After a court settlement in November, 2008, online dating giant eHarmony is coming out with Compatible Partners, a new website offering gay and lesbian members the same chance to find love as heterosexual customers.

"Is this a marriage of convenience or a shotgun wedding?"
Since the news, the blogosphere has reacted with signature snark: After nine years of being told to take their business elsewhere, gay folks are skeptical. Likewise, conservablogs are accusing eHarmony of succumbing to government bullying and caving in to the gay agenda.

And in a move that took that gay agenda and draped it in 1960s game show dressing, a recent episode of the Ellen Degeneres Show unveiled the set of the Game Show Network’s new Newlywed Game, sponsored by eHarmony – not exactly a paragon of gay pride – as the affable host brought her wife Portia De Rossi on to play.

A segment of the Ellen show sponsored by eHarmony? How did it come to this?

Back in 2005, New Jersey man Eric McKinley wanted to experience eHarmony’s much ballyhooed matching methodology. The problem for McKinley was that he was a man looking for a man. And eHarmony’s services are strictly for heterosexual matches. So Eric lodged a complaint with the New Jersey Office of the Attorney General, Division of Civil Rights.

After two years of “back and forth, back and forth,” says McKinley, the attorney general found probable cause. At that point, the parties agreed to negotiate toward a settlement. One of the conditions? That eHarmony would agree to provide an option for same-sex connections (McKinley and the first 10,000 to join up get free memberships).

Why would a company, so heaven-bent on promoting traditional marriage, “cave in” to the “gay agenda,” as so many conservative bloggers have alleged? Why didn’t they fight?

“We chose to settle ultimately because litigation outcomes are unpredictable,” says CEO and founding investor Greg Waldorf. “We were at it with New Jersey between 2005-2008 and said, ‘This is a real burden for the company.’ We’re just moving forward with a business that we hope turns out to be successful. ”

Compatible Partners is the settlement’s lovechild – a “what’s good for business” compromise negotiated between a gay partner-seeker and a company not known for its gay-friendliness. What’s unclear is if this unholy alliance is an arranged marriage or shotgun wedding.

It’s no secret that the company’s founder, psychologist Dr. Neil Clark Warren is a born-again Christian. National ad campaigns introduced the grandfatherly Warren boasting of the company’s exclusive ‘29 Dimensions of Compatibility’ to demographics larger than their original Christian following.

From the company’s emergence in 2000, when they first marketed their matchmaking services primarily to fellow Christian websites, Warren credited much of their early ascent to his relationship with evangelical group Focus on the Family and its founder James Dobson.

Inevitably, eHarmony’s growing pains put strain on that relationship, and in 2005, Warren broke from Dobson and Focus on the Family. The break, however, did not signal any change in the company’s policy of exclusively heterosexual match-ups.

While Warren was active in the company, whenever the topic of homosexual clients arose, he would insist that the results gleaned from his compatibility matching system were based solely on research of heterosexual couples. Competitor Chemistry.com launched their own ad campaign, “Rejected by eHarmony,” poking fun at the Christian matchmaker’s rejection of all types of folks.

Warren, 74, retired from active management in 2006 yet still sits on the board, today. Interestingly, under his watch, the company began offering spouse and domestic partnership benefits to their employees back in 2004. It took the threat of a lawsuit, however, for the company to offer the “benefits” of their patented algorithms to the general public.

After so many years of claiming that their 29 Dimensions were not compatible with homosexuality, how will the company convince people that suddenly, their system will work?

Current CEO Waldorf is “very hopeful that this will work just as well in the gay community. I think that anyone who says that they’re interested in a serious relationship,” he says, “will benefit from [our] deep compatibility matching.”

Next page: Working out the quirks

Pages: 1 2

Login or Register to comment.

or Login with Facebook:

  • Jessi Said: April 1st, 2009 at 10:48 am
    • and what about trans-persons looking for partners?
      is this included?
      or is this another lawsuit?

  • Phil in Colorado Said: April 1st, 2009 at 10:55 am
    • I took their ‘29 dimensions of compatability’ quiz years ago (under the guise of a heterosexual, of course) just to see it and there was NOTHING in that quiz that wouldn’t apply to ANYONE taking it, regardless of sexuality or gender expression. They hid behind that argument for a long time and ultimitely had their lies uncovered.

  • Cameron Said: April 1st, 2009 at 10:58 am
    • This is an interesting predicament we find ourselves in. Do we give our total attention to a gay friendly organization or spread the wealth in the optimism that our influence will rub off.
      By reading their responses, I feel that they are wanting to understand us from a purely ecomonical reason. There is nothing wrong with that. In America, if you are not worth a buck then you are nothing. Can we play devil’s advocate with E-Harmony to further our influence and the battles without feeling guilt over this Machiavellian move we are to make? Is it the right time to divide and conquer? I mean E-Harmony is a religious dating site so Compatible Partners will most likely cater to the same. We will only be sacrificing a few of our members to further our great agenda. Do you think it is worth it? I think so.

  • David in Houston Said: April 1st, 2009 at 11:21 am
    • This is such a crock. They were legally forced to do this. They couldn’t care less about gay people. This reeks of hypocrisy. Then they have the audacity to create a new website instead of merging gay customers into eHarmony. We wouldn’t want to offend all those homophobic/religious straight customers would we? If I were single, I wouldn’t visit Compatible Partners even if it were my only option for meeting gay men online.

  • Josh Elder Said: April 1st, 2009 at 11:39 am
    • @David in Houston; I think it’s a better idea to separate the two websites because then you run quite a risk of heterosexual members who are against homosexuality harassing you or ‘pretending’ to be gay/lesbian. I don’t see why people are so up in arms over this. They’re a private company, if they didn’t want to cater to gays, they shouldn’t be forced to.

  • Michael P. Said: April 1st, 2009 at 12:02 pm
    • This is a crock. This should be illegal in California based on last year’s Supreme Court ruling in the marriage cases. Yes Prop 8 took away the word marriage but the rights and the concept of equal protection are still in force. I seriously suggest this company stop this separate system or face the possibility of continued litigation over this. EHarmony’s website clearly says “You are about to be taken to Compatible Partners, a new matching site for same sex relationships, powered by eHarmony” because you as a gay American, Californian are not good enough for our main matching system.

  • Amber Said: April 1st, 2009 at 12:54 pm
    • Wait… why the hell are we fighting with eHarmony?!?! There are SO many more important things going on that we should be focusing on. I don’t understand why we are wasting our breath with this… Are there REALLY any gay’s that would actually sign up for this? It is like looking for a gay partner in a straight bar… separate website or not. We should be boycotting.

  • Ray in HoustonTx Said: April 1st, 2009 at 1:03 pm
    • Finding this article on April 1 doesn’t thrill me, so I will withhold judgment until and see if the new matching site remains in place.

      IF it is for real, it’s a step in the right direction, even if it is for economic reasons or only because they were sued into seeing the error of their bigoted ways.

      Personally, I have no interested in pursuing their 29 areas of compatibility that were developed within a religious mind-set and worldview. But it will be interesting to follow this.

      I agree with Matthew P.’s comment. If we are actually considered equal, it would seem eHarmony would simply expand into same-sex options within their own Web site. This feels more little more than having to ‘use the other water fountain’ marked just for us.

  • Matt Said: April 1st, 2009 at 1:16 pm
    • Hmm… I don’t really agree with forcing a Christian Dating Service to partner gay men and women. Why are we forcing businesses to do what they don’t want to do? Especially since they have no experience with single-sex couples, and have decades of experience with heteros.

      That’s the free-market capitalist part of me ;)

      However, I am going to take this in good faith. There are not many online dating sites for relationships in the gay community, there are mostly hookup sites. Perhaps, although it is forced, it will turn out well.

      It seems that eHarmony was forced into the site, but they decided to embrace it and see if they can make a buck. If they want to make any cash off of it, then they will have to produce a good product. I checked out the site, and the first 6 months are free, as it’s probably the company’s beta testing for the site, to figure out what works and doesn’t for the gay community.

  • Austin Said: April 1st, 2009 at 1:33 pm
    • This is ridiculous. Why are we making a PRIVATE company do this? It only gives fodder to those who are bitter against gay people to say “Look! This is the gay agenda! Right here!!!”

  • Michael P. Said: April 1st, 2009 at 1:37 pm
    • Matt:

      The reason this is important is EHarmony sells a product and earns money from Californians. The bottom line is if you want to make money in California you have to treat all people equal and obey the laws of the state. An example of obeying the law is:” how many marriage licenses have been issued to same sex couples since Nov4.”

  • Jessi Said: April 1st, 2009 at 1:48 pm
    • business’s are always told what to do by the government, when the government is so inclined to to do so.
      I must have handicap access to my business, I must collect sales tax,I must not refuse business based on race or religion, most recently I must not permit smoking in my business.
      I would love to refuse service based on political affiliation, but I cannot.
      this is no different.

  • Frank Mastronuzzi, Founder of oneGoodLove.com Said: April 1st, 2009 at 2:33 pm
    • After starting a gay and lesbian relationship-focused dating site similar to eHarmony, called oneGoodlove.com, I am always happy to see more sites created to assist members of the LGBT community find TRUE LOVE. After all, we should all have the right to find our soul mate, regardless of sexual preference. But after working at Match.com and speaking to eHarmony about private-labeling their product to me 5 years ago, I only hope eHarmony and Chemistry.com (Match.com’s product) are offered to the LGBT community for THE RIGHT REASONS and not just for financial gain. I will only be happy when both eHarmony.com and Chemsitry/Match.com’s heart is truly in it!

  • Kate X Said: April 1st, 2009 at 3:27 pm
    • I’d like to address Jessi’s first question (I’m the writer). I neglected to include CEO Greg Waldorf’s answer regarding sex/gender identity. Here it is, unedited.

      Waldorf: “People are asked whether they are male or female and whether they are seeking to be matched with men or women. People need to answer those questions based on how they define themselves.”

  • Guy in SF Said: April 1st, 2009 at 3:45 pm
    • Another separate but equal. Why do we even bother wasting our time to spend LGBTQ $$$ with these bigots? Aren’t there more important issues on the GAY AGENDA?

 
Login

Register
Lost your password?


or Login with Facebook