A lawsuit recently filed in Los Angeles claims that Match.com's staff have turned up for dates with clients in order to keep them interested when no one else seems to be interested in them....Well, would you go out with that Florida man? He seems unpleasantly litigious and prone to conspiracy theories. Picture yourself on a date with him, and he starts describing this lawsuit. Wouldn't you excuse yourself to go to the ladies' room and then never come back?
It has been brought by a Florida man who accuses the company of posting profiles of fictitious potential clients on its website to give the impression, he says, that it has more single people on its books than is really the case.
I anticipate comments that begin "but I'm a lesbian so I wouldn't go out with a man" or "but I'm a man so I wouldn't go out with a man" or "but I'm a gay man so I wouldn't go to the ladies room." I know I'm being heteronormative and gynonormative. Deal with it.
Posts
16 comments:
I was going to retell the joke Sen. Bob Kerrey told then Gov. Clinton about Gov. Jerry Brown, but that would be in poor taste (your comment about the various gender and orientations that might find offense or reason to joke is what brought that to mind).
Instead I will say, you are absolutely right. Both cases seem to involve the perception of fraud, but really shouldn't amount to a hill of beans and if using those services doesn't prove fruitful it is more likely a consequence of your own faults rather than fraud committed by the organization helping you to find a match.
(and why the hell does BBCNews care, do they not have these services in Britain?)
Not having a legal background as most of your readers and yourself, my response may not appear to be legally cogent.
Having said that however, what about his claim of fraudulent misrepresentation of clients? Whether this guy is a jerk or not, might there be some basis in fact behind his suit? Maybe they DO have less of a list than they claim? And then wouldn't he have a right to sue?
You're right though,the ladies room visit would prove quite lengthy if I was one of his unfortunate matches.
Aren't those who have people in their employ whom they offer up as "dates" called pimps and aren't those willing to go out on these "dates" called prostitutes?
Pimping and prostitution being illegal, how is it that these dating services are allowed to stay in business?
I think it was in Freakonomics (I think the book, but maybe the blog) that looked at Internet dating and found that many people didn't get dates, or got very few of them. It looked at what got people dates, and it was not surprising. Women got dates on their looks and men on their money or profession (presumably equating to money).
It did appear that some did lie a little. Men claimed an inch or two in height, and women shaved some weight.
An ex almost girlfriend of mine from a couple of years ago seems to like their results. She called me yesterday from the SLC airport where she was going to see her latest guy from match.com. Notably though, she does go national in her searches. Just last week, before this last minute trip, she was talking about going back there and looking some more.
erp
Only if sex is a requirement. Otherwise, it is just the equivalent of an escort service - which if legitimate, is typically legal.
I had forgotten that, but in that Freakonomics look at computer dating, they found just as you did - women (and men) pretty much don't respond to ads without pictures.
I do like your idea of having a platonic friend of the opposite sex (or gender?) review your ad first. I have just the woman in mind. (the one I mentioned above - she does relationship counseling for a living).
What's the plaintiff's name, Michael Newdow?
Slightly off-topic, but not, as it concerns dating and ads for same. Ever read Jane Juska's "A Round-Heeled Woman,(subtitled) My Late-Life Adventures in Sex and Romance?" Ms. Juska placed the following ad in the New York Review of Books:
Before I Turn 67 - next March - I would like to have a lot of sex with a man I like. If you want to talk first, Trollope works for me.
And no photo, either. The book is funny, well-written, and, in a word, great!
Um, isn't it relevant to know if the Match.com staffers who show up are available? Maybe they're using the job to meet people!Wouldn't that be cool, I mean, they've seen your profile, and picked you out from hundreds.
Also relevant: are the Match.com staff unusually, y'know, hot?
OK, I can't resist. The stock photo the BBC chose to use with that story is... just... so... GAY.
I mean, is there any way to say that that DOESN'T sound homophobic? Seriously though. Have those guys change into t-shirts or something.
MCG: Well, they are English, aren't they? I think they're cute.
How many men immediately looked up Susan's profile after reading her post up above?
Finn: are you suggesting starting an Althousian dating service?
(only Althouse Men need apply; and the women who love them)
(must haves: Warhol wig, sense of purpose, sense of humor)
(must avoids: Shorts, recumbant bicycles, full beards)
(and would the Althouse service be heteronormative, or would there be the Althouse Man who loves men; same rules apply, just must also want men as sexual/life partners)
(We really don't know who the Althouse Woman is, or have there been clues that I've missed along the way, have to start asking the lesbian commenters to chime in)
MCG: Well, they are English, aren't they? I think they're cute.
So are a lot of gay men. :)
But OK, I'll be a good sport, and posit instead that the man seated called over to the man standing so that he could show him a hilarous profile he pulled up for a woman on match.com. You know, something like, "I'm not religious, but I am spiritual. And I don't work out as much as I'd like, but I'm working on it." :)
Post a Comment