Rival Dating Sites Showing Signs of Incompatibility

PJ Richards
The relationship between Chemistry.com and eHarmony.com is anything but harmonious. Chemistry's new ads featuring attractive young men and women wondering why they were rejected by eHarmony strikes a sour note with eHarmony.

Chemistry.com is the new kid on the block (born last year) but does have serious backing. The conglomerate that owns Chemistry also owns match.com, ask.com, HSN and Ticketmaster.

EHarmony has spent seven years building its reputation and a service that boasts 13 million signups. Fearing its carefully built reputation is being seriously tarnished, eHarmony is fighting back.

In addition to name calling and insults between the two entities, eHarmony's outside legal counsel approached NBC and People magazine in an effort to get the ads suspended or altered. People magazine, knowing controversial ads can be excellent for business, declined involvement and kept running the ads. Interestingly enough, eHarmony's legal counsel, Larry Davis, handled media issues for the Clinton-Lewinsky affair.

One of the most serious weapons wielded by Chemistry.com is the "rejected by eHarmony" red graphic accompanied by the notice that over 1 million people have been rejected by eHarmony.

EHarmony doesn't deny that they don't accept everyone who applies. What Chemistry.com isn't revealing is the reason why applicants are rejected.

The number one reason for rejection at eHarmony? Marriage. Yes The legal union of two people in holy wedlock. One third of rejected applicants are rejected because they are already married.

Other reasons for eHarmony rejection include age (must be 21), inconsistent answers to questions, and being married more than four times.

EHarmony doesn't accept gay singles. Officials state that's because the software and the site are set up for heterosexual relationships. The option may be available at a later date. Chemistry.com accepts gay applicants and declares that the ads are to highlight differences between the two companies.

"We're saying that we're very accepting and very non-judgmental," says a Chemistry.com representative as reported in several newspapers.

Not true declares eHarmony. One ad shows a young black man stating he was rejected. EHarmony fears viewers will see the ad and read racial discrimination.
As if all the other differences weren't enough, a Chemistry.com ad also focuses on religion. A young woman mentions her love for Buddha. Ouch. EHarmony is a primarily Christian singles group.

Brotherly love probably won't be demonstrated anytime soon by either company. The battle continues. Since the battle is more about the money to be made with on-going monthly memberships and less about matching singles, those looking for love will be the losers.

Published by PJ Richards

Published in a variety of venues online and in print.  View profile

3 Comments

Post a Comment
  • Astronut4/11/2008

    Yeah... Chemistry sounds great if you if you don't want to have discrimnating taste when choosing your mate.

    Let's see...

    Currently married: Hoping to find someone to help them cheat on their spouse... Red flag maybe? You think?

    Married more than four times: Three strikes, your out works for me... Hello! They want their matches to succeed...

    Lying on your profile: Or, more politely put, inconsistent answers to questions. Don't you WANT a liar?

    Under 21: OK... I can see that should not be a problem if that is what you are looking for. However you know it's 21+ going in.

    eHarmony should scream form the rooftops... WE HAVE BETTER CANDIDATES ! ! !

  • Donna Porter6/5/2007

    I love the title! I wrote a piece on the two sites back in December - and though I have no problem with Christians, a non-practicing one myself, the last book I read at the time was "The Fist of God" - not a religious book, but about the Gulf War. Well I entered it in my profile and had a slew of _overtly_ (as in Holy Roller), per their profile, religious, potential matches. That was one of many problems with eHarmony. Chemistry had its own set. Good article.

  • Megan Shannon5/29/2007

    Great read!

Displaying Comments

To comment, please sign in to your Yahoo! account, or sign up for a new account.