Thursday, August 14, 2008
No eHarmony For NYT Losers
For a curious joke I was wondering if eHarmony would match my wife and I.
I googled "go on eharmony to see if me and my wife are a good match" and up popped an article from a New York Times writer who's already run this experiment.
Here's his article - My eHarmony Experiment: Can This Marriage Be Matched?
To make a short story shorter, eHarmony didn't match John Tierney and his wife of 12 years. That certainly doesn't disprove the eHarmony algorithm as we have no idea how happy their marriage really is. AND, of course, *for example* does not constitute proof.
What makes this article blog-worthy is its hilarious, telling comment thread.
I haven't read the entire thread, but it suffices to say the tone was set by the first few comments. In fact, six of the first seven comments involved *gayness*.
Then the losers quickly ramped it up, inveighing against the *Christian* founders of eHarmony and their "bigotry".
The author, "John", was quick to defend himself...."I already mentioned their bigotry in a prior article!"
Hah! These guys and gals living in the NYT bubble-world are stereotypical to the bone.
The thread goes on with young women - most likely bereft of any relationship harmony - lambasting the author for giving momentary false hopes to the handful of women he was actually matched up with.
OMG, this comment thread is really funny. Make sure you click on the link above and peruse this well of levity for yourself.
Comment #44 - "Yes, I’m gay but, hey, I like to walk on the beach too..."
Comment #48 - Let’s say a restaurant reviewer goes to a place that won’t serve blacks. Should they mention it? Should they even *eat* at the place? Is it okay to say, "Gosh, I thought it was great! Too bad they don’t serve blacks."?
Comment #53 - I too submitted to eHarmony scrutiny once. I am not a practicing Christian and after telling them all the things I was looking for in a partner…..I received…one! count it….ONE match. It was a toothless hooker who was 18 years my senior! Which, strangely enough, sounded like the best thing they had to offer! hee hee!
Ah, dude, maybe that's your *match*? Consider it.
Comment #24 - I think you owe the women you rejected a better explanation than “no chemistry”? It’s not just a question of wasted time, it’s a question of feeling rejected.
Maybe if you didn’t "believe that compassion has a role to play in your life, in a structure of values that encourages people to take care of themselves" you would have realized that :).
Sounds to me like they could have substituted that whole spiel of "fostering independence” into the simple phrase "Tends to vote Republican".
— Posted by Debbie R.
Wow, this Debbie seems like a real catch! I wonder if she is single or if she has been chasing the wrong scents???
Comment #23 - Why would any rational person expect a computer to match him with his wife? Nature creates partners mostly by propinquity; computer matching does it based on assumptions by psychologists...
Ah, excuse me, Moron, a computer is a whole lot more *rational* than a person could ever be.
Alright, no more excerpts. Go read the Losers' comments for yourselves.
What kills me - to no end - is how smart and how highminded these NYT stooges deem themselves.