Woman turned down by dating site as clients 'don't date people in wheelchairs'
thesun.co.uk
thesun.co.uk
They did not "turn the client down" (which to me, implies "refused service"). That seems like a very poor headline from The Sun.
The company, which seems to offer an expensive matchmaking service, was essentially saying "buyer beware", along the lines of "we can sell you this service, but you might be better served elsewhere".
Edit: Further to this, I think it prudent to point out the ethics of taking a persons money when knowing you are not likely to provide that person with the service they are looking for.
What is the alternative? Quietly line your pockets with their hard earned money because you don't want to offend that person by being honest about the limitations of your service?
I mean, is it mean if it’s true? They basically just interpreted some internal data on her behalf.
Matchmakers Dating's cheapest package is $1,650USD for 9 months, it's not Tinder.
It includes ongoing advice, which they gave her. If she didn't want advice she should have just used Tinder. Are they supposed to ignore the fact she is in a wheelchair? Then it would be Matchmaker didn't account for my disability. Feels like it's a setup to me.
As a journalist why tweet this rather than creating a story and giving the right to reply? Interview them. Because outrage is cheaper.
Reporters are just awful human beings. I guess people are awful but reporters have weaponized it.
Hilarious! For the paper of the page 3 girl and “Freddy Starr Ate My Hamster” (not to mention “Gotcha!”), that would be an extraordinary (and unlikely) improvement. Perhaps you had a different Sun in mind?
You can't make a statement like that and expect anyone to take you even remotely seriously. Here are some journalists I've particularly looked up to over the years:
[CJ Chivers]
C.J. Chivers, a former foreign correspondent, is a staff writer for The New York Times Magazine. His Pulitzer Prize-winning cover story for the Magazine in 2016 led to the release from an Illinois prison of an Afghan war veteran suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder.
[Dexter Filkins]
Dexter Price Filkins ... is an American journalist known primarily for his coverage of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan for The New York Times. He was a finalist for a Pulitzer Prize in 2002 for his dispatches from Afghanistan, and won a Pulitzer in 2009 as part of a team of Times reporters for their dispatches from Pakistan and Afghanistan. He has been called "the premier combat journalist of his generation".
[Tim Hetherington]
As a freelance photographer and filmmaker, Hetherington was interested in creating diverse forms of visual narratives from long-term projects. He spent eight years focused on stories in Africa, living in both Sierra Leone and Liberia. In Liberia he covered the Second Civil War behind the lines with rebel fighters, helping to film James Brabazon’s Liberia: An Uncivil War (2004).
He was killed by shrapnel from either a mortar shell or an RPG fired by Libyan forces while covering the 2011 Libyan civil war.
[Robert Fisk]
As an international correspondent, he covered the civil wars in Lebanon, Algeria, and Syria, the Iran–Iraq conflict, the wars in Bosnia and Kosovo, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, the Islamic revolution in Iran, Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait, and the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq. Fluent in Arabic, he was among the few Western journalists to interview Osama bin Laden, which he did three times between 1993 and 1997.
Dating in general is hard, dating as one with a disability is a whole new level of hard. I think the service's response is well-intentioned even if woefully ignorant. Surely the UK has laws similar to ADA and protected classes?
But maybe if there were more disabled people on dating platforms, they could - say - match them together, or perhaps abled people would become less prejudiced. I found an able-bodied partner, after all, who isn't resentful of my limitations.
I also wonder how well they tried to match their disabled clients before. If the matchmakers themselves are ableist, they might not be giving it their all.
The article seems to imply that the journalist was "refused service" because of their disability.
That does not seem to be the case. My understanding of the email was that the journalist was given a choice to proceed with the service after being informed that it's not likely to lead to a successful outcome.
Also, was that "service" basically a clone of GreaterExpectations (the one SNL made fun-of as LoweredExpectations)? One where they have "binders" that are basically collections of random photos and charge ridiculous sums for doing nothing useful?