OK, kiddo! Here are all the fantastically amazing posts tagged with Stupid arguments
Last Tuesday saw some pretty big wins for equal marriage rights in the United States. Voters in Maryland, Washington, and Maine solidly supported same-sex marriage, marking the first time that a popular vote granted marriage rights to same-sex couples in the country.
As usual, whenever big steps toward equality is made, I just have to check in on the Pope to make sure he hasn’t ruptured too many eye vessels. And from the noticeably stronger language coming out of the Vatican lately, he might need some prescription eye drops.
“It is clear that in Western countries there is a widespread tendency to modify the classic vision of marriage between a man and woman, or rather to try to give it up, erasing its specific and privileged legal recognition compared to other forms of union,” Federico Lombardi, the Vatican’s chief spokesman, announced after Tuesday’s elections.
Funny, I wasn’t under the impression that Maryland, Washington, and Maine “gave up” heterosexual marriage on Tuesday, but hey, in a country where the rights of minorities are voted on by the majority, I suppose anything can happen.
“Why not contemplate also freely chosen polygamy and, of course, not to discriminate, polyandry?” Lombardi asked rhetorically.
Well, that’s a little funny, because if you look at what the bible has to say about polygamous marriages (or “traditional marriages,” as historians would be correct to call them), I wouldn’t expect the Vatican to have any strong objections about it. Right?
In a speech to French bishops last week, Pope Benedict XVI announced that gay people aren’t fully developed humans and are threatening families. While I’m sure very few gay people actually care what the pope thinks of us, sometimes this guy just evokes imagery I really want to draw.
“The family is threatened in many places by a faulty conception of human nature,” the Pope said in reference to the emergence of equal marriage laws. “[The Church] must promote those values that permit the full development of the human person,” he continued.
Hmm… I was born a few weeks prematurely. Do you suppose that’s what the Pope means?
At any rate, this about-face on the subject of the “full development of the human person” is kind of new for the Catholic Church, who normally argues for the rights of zygotes, fetuses, and other not fully developed humans. Still, for the time being, it’s clear that half-developed human creatures (all of which are gay) are out to destroy your family. So, you know, be on the look out for that or something.
The Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC), an anti-choice and anti-gay lobby group based in the UK, has distributed fliers suggesting that legal same-sex marriage will lead to an increased number of abortions.
“Legalised same-sex marriage will increase confusion about what it means to be a man or woman and removes natural conception from the idea of marriage,” the pamphlet states. “We must protect real marriage because it protects children in the womb.”
Now, I know it sounds like there are some logical connections missing in this assertion. You may think that, due to the dedication and procedures necessary for a gay or lesbian couple to have a child, abortions would be highly unlikely in the LGBT community. SPUC, however, was clearly limited for space and had to omit some details. So, on behalf of SPUC, here’s how I think that they think this works:
All men are secretly gay and always have been, which is why governments enact laws to keep them from marrying each other. Once such legal barriers disappear, however, men will no longer be interested in any sort of physical reproduction with women, threatening the human race with extinction. Desperate for babies to continue our survival, humanity will have no choice but to construct a system of automated weaponry to launch razor-thin projectiles tipped with pre-fertilized eggs directly into the tummies of women (all of whom are still heterosexual since everyone knows that lesbianism is just a myth). The impregnated women—now alone and having left the kitchen to pursue careers—will be ill-equipped to raise their egg-gun children on their own, forcing them to choose between a quick abortion and a life of poverty. Piles of aborted fetuses will litter the cities, one beside each coin-operated abort-o-matic booth.
Did I get that right, SPUC?
An anti-gay group calling themselves New Yorkers for Constitutional Freedoms filed a lawsuit late last year to reverse the state’s equal marriage law. Like most attempts to get same-sex marriage overturned, they gave themselves a delightfully ironic name; unlike other groups, however, they didn’t seem to rely on the usual arguments about how families would be instantly vaporized or how children would now be used for cattle feed, etc. Instead they suggested that same-sex marriage is invalid in New York because two meetings of the Republican Senate’s majority should have been held in public instead of privately leading up to the vote.
The case was rejected almost immediately in November, but New Yorkers for Constitutional Freedoms appealed to the state supreme court. On Friday, that court unanimously found that private meetings are perfectly allowable, adding that even if they weren’t, it has nothing to do with why same-sex marriage should be banned in any fathomable capacity.
Well, that should have gone without saying.
Seriously, anti-gay lobbyists? Your arguments have always been deeply flawed, but this one isn’t even fun. How am I supposed to get new material for this site when you’re not mischaracterizing gay people in amusing ways anymore? Your next lawsuit had better involve accusations of conspiracy to release genetically engineered vampire pigeons, repurposed to inject schoolchildren with experimental gaydar genes or something. That just sounds a lot more fun to draw than someone following bureaucratic procedure improperly, you see.
- Court Rejects Argument Against Gay Marriage Bill [New York Times]
A recently retired politician in Denmark seems to have discovered a new argument against equal marriage: Killer snails are hermaphroditic, therefore same-sex marriage should be illegal. Gee… I never thought of it that way before.
Check out this video of Jane Svoboda arguing against a non-discrimination ordinance in Lincoln, Nebraska. It’s about as coherent and reasoned as any other anti-gay argument, but the reactions of the guy in the back is priceless!
Family Research Institute, an anti-gay lobby group based in the United States, has warned Americans that advancements in equal rights for GLBT citizens has “doomed” Canada forever. Funny… I don’t feel particularly doomed today. I mean, once you get used to all the walking corpses wailing through rivers of fire along the streets, you’ll wonder how you ever got along without them. A particularly roasty corpse returned some sunglasses I dropped today. His fingers were hot enough to melt the plastic frame a bit, but it was a kind gesture nonetheless.
Linda Harvey, an anti-gay activist and lobbyist on behalf of Mission America, has announced that “there is no proof that there’s ever anything like a gay, lesbian, or bisexual or transgendered child, or teen, or human.”
“There are no such humans,” she added.
Well, that’s certainly surprise to me, a gay man. If I don’t exist, then logically, how is it that I’m typing right n—*poof*
- Harvey: “There’s No Proof” LGBT People Exist [Right Wing Watch]
Kari Simpson, an anti-gay activist and conservative radio host, has filed a police complaint against an anti-homophobia program designed to reduce the bullying of LGBT students and foster a safer atmosphere in schools.
Slap readers may remember Kari from the time she unsuccessfully launched a class-action human rights complaint against the B.C. Education Ministry for not introducing the “thousands” of schoolchildren who “suffer from homosexuality and other dysfunctional sexual orientations” to sexual re-orientation therapies. (Oddly enough, not one of these thousands of schoolchildren seemed interested in supporting Kari’s case—or in the universally rejected therapies—which was promptly thrown out by the BC Human Rights Tribunal.)
Anyway, Kari went away for a while. And that was nice. But she’s back now, spearheading an attempt to get the police to investigate Out in Schools, an anti-bullying initiative designed to “facilitate discussion with youth on bullying, homophobia, and stereotypes, [giving] youth a safe space to explore these issues.”
According to Kari, though, the anti-bullying motives behind Out in Schools is really just a clever front. The real reason for the anti-homophobia program, she says, is to “dupe parents and introduce children into homosexist politics and pornography,” effectively recruiting children “into a sexualized culture of porn and games of debauchery.”
Oh, Kari. Where would this website be without you?
So let me respond to this allegation with the only appropriate question: Is Kari actually delusional, or does she merely have an intense psychological need to get in the media despite lacking the intelligence and talent necessary to accomplish this without doing something so astonishingly dumb that people can’t help but become fascinated by the mounds of wiggling, manifested stupidity?
The police, by the way, have yet to comment on Kari’s complaint.
(Special thanks to Slap reader Christina for alerting me to this mind numbing stupidity!)
Pope Benedict XVI appeared before an audience in Croatia yesterday to plead for couples to marry instead of simply living together as common-law partners. In his anticipated homily, the pope lamented a “secularized mentality which proposes living together as preparation, or even a substitute as marriage.”
So, to all you young couples out there: Do not, under any circumstances, live together before marrying. Just trust that all your quirks will be perfectly compatible, legally combine your lives and finances, and start having children right away. Don’t adopt; that robs children of their natural, unfit-by-admission parents. And take this advice to heart. After all, how could recommendations from an 84 year old celibate who has no personal experience with romantic relationships be wrong?
Still, it’s nice to hear the pope come out in vocal support of marriage after dedicating years to preventing me from getting married. I wonder what made him change his heart so quickl—oh, wait, my mistake; his speech still implied that gay families aren’t real families, our relationships are unnatural, and that we somehow rob children of their rights.
Ouch. And given all his years of wisdom, he must have a point; the pope lifestyle is far more natural. I mean, why else would popes emerge so readily in nature?
Food for thought, I guess…
Sad news, everyone. Harold Camping, an 89 year old pastor and expert on the Christian bible, has discovered the date of the rapture. And it’s this Saturday, May 21st.
Unfortunately it looks inevitable, too. Camping, who previously said the end of the world would occur on September 6th, 1994, has since spent many years studying the bible and has stated without any uncertainty that the bible “guarantees” this Saturday as the rapture—for real.
Sadder still, it looks like we gays are at least partly responsible for earth’s destruction. “The emergence of the ‘Gay Pride Movement’ and the complete disregard of the Bible in all of society today” are some of the very few primary factors that Harold included in his calculation of the date.
So, unfortunately for a lot of us, at around 6:00 pm California time, a massive earthquake (a phenomenon which, as you already know, is caused by homosexuality) will destroy everything on Earth, opening graves and calling all Christian believers—both deceased and living—into the sky toward heaven, somewhere in outer space. The rest of us will be left behind on a ruined planet until October 21st when God will apparently destroy the place entirely.
While a few months without any bigots actually sounds quite nice, the inconvenient timeframe means I’ll have to schedule my annual Halloween party a little earlier in the month before Earth is finally destroyed. Also, the earthquakes don’t sound very pleasant. Luckily I think I’m insured for that.
Anyway, I’m not yet sure if I’ll continue updating this site after the rapture, but stay tuned just in case.
- Christian radio network warns of Judgment Day on May 21 [USA Today]
- Billboards along Florida’s Turnpike warn that May 21 is Judgment Day [Orlando Sentinal]
- Science versus religion — Will the world end on October 21, 2011? [Digital Journal]
John Cummins, the only candidate for the leadership position of the provincial Conservative party in British Columbia, has declared that being gay is a choice and that the Human Rights Code in the province should therefore exclude gay and lesbian citizens.
“In my view it was not necessary to add another category,” Cummins told the press last week. “I’m not a scientist, [but] some of the research tells me that there’s more of an indication that that’s a choice issue.”
Well, no credible research says that, actually. And while my M.Sc. would happily indicate that I am a scientist, I won’t presume—as does Mr. Cummins—that I have any authority to speak about this subject on an academic level since this isn’t my particular field of science.
That said, I have plenty of experience in research methodology and can recognize credible peer-reviewed studies when I see them. In the medical and psychological community, there is no controversy. The American Medical Association, the American Psychological Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Counseling Association (and so forth ad nauseam), have all concluded that sexual orientation is not a choice, and that it’s not changeable.
(Or, you know, Mr. Cummings could have just asked a gay person, like me, if they chose their sexual orientation. I didn’t, in case he’s wondering.)
Still, I’m curious about something…
In addition to prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation, the B.C. Human Rights Code also prohibits discrimination based on religious affiliation. Since religious affiliation is clearly a choice, and since I’m sure Mr. Cummins uses consistent and sound logic in making important leadership decisions, why does he feel that religious protections should be stripped from all BC citizens?
I’m still awaiting his response, but will surely let you know when he gets back to me. (Chortle.)
As many of you know, we gays possess supernatural powers capable of untold terrors. Religious ambassadors have identified gay people as the source of everything from mass bird deaths to Earthquakes (and even more mundane things like the widespread implementation of airport security patdowns). Until now, though, I don’t think we’ve ever been blamed for the collapse of world empires.
Professor Roberto De Mattei, the head of Italy’s National Research Council, declared last week that the “abhorrent presence of a few gays infected a good part of the Roman people,” introducing a “contagion of homosexuality and effeminacy” that made the empire susceptible to attack from hordes of manly, barbarian invaders.
Yes, it appears the culture that brought us gladiators and near world domination was defeated by the “presence of a few gays.” Clearly, our powers are doubling by the minute! With these capabilities as leverage, perhaps we ought to start making better demands than just equal treatment in law and to be left alone from discrimination?
- Gay Romans weakened empire: prof [The Star Phoenix]
As some of you may have heard, around two thousand blackbirds have died mysteriously, literally falling from the sky in Arkansas. Although dubbed the Aflockalypse by the fear-loving media, scientists are reassuring people that mass bird deaths (which sound more impressive than they are, considering a single roost can contain several million birds) are actually fairly normal, caused by any number of mundane reasons.
Scientists’ explanations aren’t enough for everyone, though. There are people like Cindy Jacobs of the Generals International Ministry who have an entirely different explanation.
“According to biblical principles,” Cindy announced in an online video, “marriage is between a man and a woman, so we have to say ‘what happens when a nation makes a decision that’s against God’s principles?'”
Yes, this is going exactly where it sounds like it’s going.
The reason that two thousand blackbirds “just fell out of the air,” according to Jacobs, is a combination of the United States’ increasing acceptance of equal marriage rights and the recent repeal of the military’s discriminatory Don’t Ask,Don’t Tell policy. But don’t take my word for it. Let her explain it herself.
Yeah, I know.
Anyway, Cindy may have discovered our little secret—but know this, Cin-dee Jay-Kobs! Our bird killing powers can be used for more than just blackbirds! Soon, we will move on to pigeons! Then emus! And so on in that fashion… So if you don’t deliver a box of ten assorted Timbits™ to my doorstep before sundown, you will feel the wrath of our Gay Aflockalypse!
Invasive airport security pat-downs are part of a “wide-scale homosexual agenda,” at least according to Eugene Delgaudio, an elected Virginia politician.
In an email alert sent from the Public Advocate, an anti-gay lobby group, Delgaudio said the pat-downs were the natural next step in the TSA’s non-discrimination hiring policy: “The next TSA official that gives you an ‘enhanced pat down,'” he wrote, “could be a practicing homosexual secretly getting pleasure from your submission.”
Egad! They’re on to us, kids! Delgaudio has somehow gotten a hold of pages 287 and 288 of the Gay Agenda and is fast discovering that everything that annoys him is all the gays’ fault. It would be wise, at this point, to quickly dispose of any physical copies of The Agenda; we’ll discuss what to do to correct and contain this leak at our biannual meeting in January. See you then!
(Special thanks to Slap readers Allan and Konrad for the story.)
Raila Odinga, the Prime Minister of Kenya, has declared his intentions to arrest gay people in the country. “We want a country that is clean,” the Prime Minister said during a speech on Sunday, “a clean way of doing thing [sic] has clean mannerisms; we do not want things to do with sodomy.”
Odinga then justified his threat by citing data from August’s census, which showed the population was split exactly between men and women. With such an even proportion, he argued, there was “no need” for homosexuality in the country.
Uh, I… Ugh.
Regardless of his reasoning, Odinga may actually be quite capable of following through on his threats. Kenyan law forbids “sex outside the order of nature,” carrying a sentence of up to fourteen years in jail.
I’m not sure, mind you, how sex outside the order of nature is interpreted as gay sex, unless there aren’t any documented instances of homosexuality in the animal kingdom. Speaking of which, has anyone witnessed an animal politician enforcing sexuality laws binding on all members of its species within some well-defined governing region? If not, then human politicians might be unnatural; we should have laws against them.
Last week, CBC employees released their own contribution to the It Gets Better Project, encouraging bullied gay teens to stick through the tough years and reap the rewards that life offers afterwards. Like most contributions to the project, it’s heartwarming and very badly needed.
Not everyone seems to appreciate the sentiment, though. Sticking up for the bullies by being one himself, television commentator Michael Coren blasted the video, suggesting that gay teens aren’t more at risk for bullying than anyone else. Coren then picked on specific personalities in the video, calling Rick Mercer—a comedian whose lighthearted look at the news helped inspire this site—“pathetic” for sharing his story about a third-grade crush.
Now, I know what you’re thinking: Why is David Letterman bald and talking like Ann Coulter?
Not sure how to explain it myself, but it looks like this guy is just another commentator that relies on controversy to sustain a career. When Coren says stuff like gay Christians are “an oxymoron,” it makes for sensational copy, and some people get a kick out of seeing someone get away with saying their discriminatory leanings out loud. Let’s call it a CYST career: Eking a living out of the “Can You Say That?” reaction.
Coren likes having his CYST, and that’s alright. I like mocking his CYST. Though if it gets out of hand, he might want to get it checked.
Charles McVety, the president of Canada Family Action Coalition, Canada’s largest anti-gay lobby group, has ramped up his opposition to Bill C-389. The bill, if passed, will prohibit discrimination on the basis of gender identity, giving transgendered men and women equal rights in housing, employment, and public services.
This, of course, has thrown McVety into utter fits, conjuring some pretty bizarre ideas. “As adults,” he told the media, “we can handle these things, but my daughter turned 13 on Saturday, and I don’t want some guy showering beside her at the local swimming pool.”
McVety continued, saying that the bill would allow people like convicted killer Russell Willams, who was photographed wearing women’s lingerie, to enter gender-restricted spaces.
Well, I hate to alarm McVety, but convicted killers can already enter locker rooms in public pools. Karla Homolka could be in his daughter’s locker room right now. Heck, there could be murderers in the men’s locker room too. Who knows who’s waiting to jump out from behind the shower curtains? No one is safe from the these maniac killers—no one! What was that sound?! AAAAAH!
Bill Siksay, the Bill’s sponsor, put it eloquently: “I think this is Mr. McVety being his alarmist best, once again, when it comes to an issue of human rights, equal rights, for minorities in Canada.” Clarifying the obvious, Siksay continued: “There is nothing in this bill that will change our understanding of appropriate behaviour in public washrooms or in gendered spaces.”
Indeed, transgendered people can largely already use the gendered spaces with which they identify, and it hasn’t even entered my mind that they’d somehow be any more likely to be voyeurs or act inappropriately than anyone else. Bill C-389 is simply about ending discrimination, particularly with regards to employment and other standard rights. And as it enters its third and final reading, things are looking promising, regardless of whatever paranoia McVety is content on spreading.
- Evangelical leader accuses Tories of helping push NDP bill on gender [Globe and Mail]
Charles McVety, one of Canada’s most frothy anti-gay lobbyists, has warned that a proposed sexual education curriculum reform currently being held for review in Ontario is “part of a militant homosexual agenda to normalize homosexuality in everyone’s mind and thereby promote homosexuality.”
(Say, wouldn’t it be swell if a kitten were born each time McVety uttered the word “homosexuality?” The world would become so much more adorable.)
The proposed curriculum—based on research into preventing teen pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases—is really just a frank discussion of sexual health issues introduced at appropriate ages.
The earliest grade affected by the reforms, grade three, is taught differences in skin colour, body size, cultures, and families. “Some students live with two parents,” one of the documents states, “Some live with one parent. Some have two mothers or two fathers.” (Across the country, several kittens are mysteriously willed into existence.)
By grade six, students learn about puberty and the physical changes they will experience. By grade 7, they’re finally taught about pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases, and descriptions of safe-sex practices. Once the students have graduated from high school, teen pregnancy and infection rates will have dropped noticeably.
McVety, always one to expect the unrealistic, describes the whole thing differently, saying that the reform will “subject sixth graders to instruction on the pleasures of masturbation, vaginal lubrication, and 12-year-olds to lessons on oral sex and anal intercourse.” And all of this, of course, in an effort to “promote homosexuality.”
And who does McVety blame for all these non-existent, step-by-step lessons on anal sex and discussions on the “pleasures of masturbation?” Here’s a hint: It’s not the health researchers and scientists who back the real curriculum.
“We warned the country about this when same-sex marriage came in,” McVety announced to the press, “We changed the laws in this country, redefined marriage, the end result now this is coming into our classrooms.”
Such zeal! Such pent-up frustration! Perhaps McVety could use some relaxation time—a vacation—to help reflect on the strong possibility that he’s an idiot.
Evo Morales, the president of Bolivia, has cocked many-an-eyebrow this week after declaring that eating chicken will turn straight men gay.
(I guess I see how one could make that mistake.)
Specifically, Morales was referring to the poultry industry’s practice of injecting chickens with female hormones to promote the growth of white meat, which is substantially more popular than dark meat. “When men eat those chickens,” Morales stated, “they experience deviances in being men.”
Fortunately for all my straight crushes, there is zero evidence to support Morale’s assertion. Not that it would have stopped me from preparing all those delicious blackened chicken dinners. You know, just in case.
John Sheehan, a retired army general from the United States, has blamed the lifting of a ban on gay troops in the Dutch army for the 1995 Bosnian massacre.
Serbian forces overwhelmed Dutch peacekeepers stationed in Bosnia fifteen years ago, leading to one of the largest genocides in Europe since World War II. Approximately 8,000 men and children were killed by Serbian forces.
Sheehan, speaking to a senate committee currently discussing a proposal to end the country’s ridiculous policy banning openly gay men and women from serving in the military, said that the Dutch would have prevented the Bosnian catastrophe if only they hadn’t “made a conscious effort to socialize their military,” adding “that includes open homosexuality.”
Roger Van de Wetering, a spokesperson for the Dutch Defence Ministry, dismissed the comments as “total nonsense:”
The whole operating in Srebrenica and the drama that took place over there was thoroughly investigated by Dutch and international authorities and none of these investigations as ever concluded or suggested a link between homosexual military personnel and the things that happened over there.
- General blames gay Dutch troops in massacre [CBC News]
J.D. Hayworth, Senator John McCain’s primary challenger in the United State’s upcoming senate elections, is trying to ban same-sex marriage nationwide. Rather than offering any reasons why gay marriage is bad (they are awfully hard to come by, after all), he had this explanation:
You see, the Massachusetts Supreme Court, when it started this move toward same-sex marriage, actually defined marriage—now get this—it defined marriage as simply “the establishment of intimacy.” […] I guess that would mean if you really had affection for your horse, I guess you could marry your horse. It’s just the wrong way to go, and the only way to protect the institution of marriage is with that federal marriage amendment that I support.
Hayworth is essentially declaring that if marriage is all about love, then it is impossible to legally deny marrying other “lovable” things—like horses.
The problem here—as if such an argument deserves any dissection—is that marriages aren’t one-way; they involve two people that love each other. Does a horse have the capacity to consent to such a partnership? Can it sign the necessary state documents? Can it uphold its legal responsibilities involving property, decision-making, taxes, etcetera?
The answer, of course, is neigh.
And with that, have a great Wednesday, kids!
- J.D. Hayworth: Gay Marriage Law Could Produce Man-Horse Nuptials [The Huffington Post]
Pope Benedict XVI issued a strong condemnation against Britain on Monday for enacting legislation protecting gays from workplace and housing discrimination.
After a confirmation that he would be visiting Britain later this year (the first such visit in 28 years), Benedict XVI seemed to imply that he wasn’t terrifically happy about it, announcing that the country’s equality laws had imposed “unjust limitations on the freedom of religious communities to act in accordance with their beliefs.”
Religions, incidentally, are exempt from Britain’s anti-discrimination legislation, granting Churches the ability to fire gay employees, or pass them over for promotion with impunity.
But this is an argument I hear time and time again—the idea that gay people are actually the intolerant ones, and equality legislation is all basically an attempt to limit religious freedom.
I’m not sure why it can’t go without saying, but that argument is dumb. Really, super dumb. The premise is essentially that tolerance means tolerating intolerance. We gay people, they imply, should submit ourselves to being treated as inferior, turn an accepting cheek to lobbying efforts to have us fired from our jobs, evicted from our homes, denied the equal right to civil marriage, and worse. Otherwise, it follows, we gays are restricting religious freedoms.
If there were gay lobby groups seeking constitutional amendments to ban religious marriage, attempting to gain the right to fire and evict religious people from their jobs, or seeking to deny religious people civil services, well, then these kooks can speak of intolerant gays trying to limit religious freedoms, but until then—they can apply their own standards of freedom and see who’s intolerant of whom.
- Pope’s swipe at UK equality laws provokes foes [Washington Post]
- Anger as pope condemns Britain’s gay-friendly laws [Tolerance.ca]
eHarmony, a popular online matchmaking service, has settled a lawsuit regarding their refusal to match same-sex couples. The California-based company was taken to court two years ago over its heterosexual-only policy, with the company steadfastly refusing to have any part in matching gay couples throughout most of the suit.
Neil Clark Warren, an evangelical Christian and eHarmony’s founder, said that the company was not discriminating against gays, but that their patented compatibility formulae were based exclusively on heterosexual married couples and therefore not applicable to same-sex partners. (Apparently, we gays prefer that our partners dislike all our goals, hobbies, and personal tastes; life’s more difficult that way!)
Despite the mysteriousness of us gay couples, the company ultimately agreed to open a second website, called Compatible Partners, which offers same-sex matchmaking. Under the terms of the settlement, the eHarmony website will now automatically direct gay singles to their separate, but equivalent site and state that it’s “brought to you by eHarmony.”
Well, that’s great news for everyone seeking a same-sex partner! Now you too can be begrudgingly accepted by a service that thinks your pursuit for love is so different from heterosexuals that they probably shouldn’t bother at all.