- Teen’s photo of Nazi-themed school-dance invite goes viral 5 Years Ago
- Ben Shapiro comes out as pro-baby Hitler in March for Life message 5 Years Ago
- Facebook staffers caught writing 5-star Amazon reviews for Portal speaker 5 Years Ago
- R. Kelly supporters are using #FirstThem to protect him 5 Years Ago
- Lin-Manuel Miranda tweets his disappointment about Trump and Puerto Rico Today 1:28 PM
- YouTuber Simone Giertz reveals her brain tumor has returned Today 1:07 PM
- ‘Conversations With a Killer: The Ted Bundy Tapes’ feels like a bad one-man show Today 12:37 PM
- Post-cataclysmic sci-fi flick ‘IO’ fails to stand out in its saturated genre Today 12:30 PM
- Trump peddles right-wing ‘prayer rug’ conspiracy Today 11:29 AM
- Summit1G reportedly overtakes Ninja as king of Twitch subscribers Today 11:18 AM
- FCC’s request to postpone net neutrality case denied by federal court Today 11:02 AM
- School employee investigated for yelling, ‘Build the wall,’ at picketing teachers Today 10:50 AM
- Netflix announces staggering viewership for ‘You’—but many are skeptical Today 10:50 AM
- YouTuber Jesus Christ responds to sexual misconduct allegation Today 10:32 AM
- Pro-Trump Twitter blasts BuzzFeed report claiming Trump directed Cohen to lie to Congress Today 10:24 AM
Match.com rethinks policy of making bisexual users pay for two accounts
A double standard for those doing double duty won’t last.
Match.com has always seemed like a “serious” alternative to hookup-oriented services like OkCupid and Grindr. Its users are more likely to be seeking long-term relationships, and they have to pay a considerable recurring fee for access—double if they swing both ways.
This has been Match.com’s stance on bisexuality since at least August 2013, when freelance journalist Emily Magdij received an email from the company about her interest in searching both men and women as potential partners, later published by the European gay outlet PinkNews.
For all the conciliating touches here (“unfortunately,” “apologies,” “not an ideal solution”), the missive still boils down to: “We are not equipped to handle someone of your fairly common sexual orientation and will therefore have to impose a financial penalty, you weird free-spirited nympho.” And given that an account can cost $34.99 monthly, it’s hardly a minor surcharge.
The call for suggestions as to how to remedy the situation, meanwhile, invites a deadpan reply: “Uh, just don’t do it that way?” But apparently Match.com has received enough polite feedback to consider addressing their troublesome bias—PinkNews just received another corporate letter which first notes that most dating sites don’t allow both genders to be scanned from one profile, then indicates a willingness to evade any blowback for this lazy arrangement:
We can confirm that we will set up [Magdij] with two profiles so that [she] can review both male and female profiles on the site. The second profile will be provided at no additional cost to the member. In addition, we will be making it easier for bisexual members to use the service. All they need to do is contact our customer services team directly to be set up with two profiles as part of the existing subscription.
So: no more discrimination against the “B”s of the LGBT set, unless you count the necessity of calling technical support and telling them exactly where you stand on the Kinsey scale. But why should you care about such intrusions—you’re already looking for love online, right? As long as you’re being judged by strangers, one more surely couldn’t hurt.
Miles Klee is a novelist and web culture reporter. The former editor of the Daily Dot’s Unclick section, Klee’s essays, satire, and fiction have appeared in Lapham’s Quarterly, Vanity Fair, 3:AM, Salon, the Awl, the New York Observer, the Millions, and the Village Voice. He's the author of two odd books of fiction, 'Ivyland' and 'True False.'