The roundup of new Sex Listings and escort reviews is below as usual. If you submitted it before 5 pm PST today, it's online. But before that, my opinion is important and you should listen damnit! Or not...

So eHarmony.com has settled out of court and will provide some sort of service for men seeking men.

Online dating service eHarmony said Wednesday it will launch a new Web site that caters to same-sex singles as part of a discrimination settlement with New Jersey's Civil Rights Division.

The settlement is the result of a complaint New Jersey resident Eric McKinley filed against the online matchmaker in 2005.

McKinley, 46, said he was shocked when he tried to sign up for the dating site but couldn't get past the first screen because there was no option for men seeking men.

What am I missing here? It’s discrimination in the literal sense to only provide a product that matches men and women together but how is that harmful (i.e. Discrimination) to gays and lesbians? There is no shortage of similar businesses that specifically cater to gays and lesbians.

I understand challenging discrimination based on sexual orientation in other businesses. If an airline decided it was only going to fly heterosexuals that would make no sense. Love and sexuality, like skin color, have nothing to do with their product and service. Nor do those things have an inherent relation to eating at a restaurant or what water fountain from which one can drink.

This business, like eHarmony.com, is all about matching people with people for the purpose of sex and or love -- our product is a forum for written communication on a particular interest among those who share it. Why should we be legally coerced into offering a form of that product in which we have no interest? Why should we be forced to divert money and resources to it? If some sort of monopoly situation existed I can see legal interference but resources needed to create an online space for like-minded people to communicate about sex/love are minimal and access to them cannot be denied on the basis of sexual orientation, or ethnicity, etc. (because an ISP or a vBulletin license, like drinking from a water fountain, have nothing to do with sex or skin color). If a business like CFS or eHarmony.com were the recipient of tax dollars I could understand the argument that it must be open to everyone.

I'm not defending bigotry and eHarmony.com certainly had close ties with Focus on The Family. The basis for which they don't wish to serve gays and lesbians is fucked up. But the bottom line is they're offering a product inherently related to sexual orientation. Shouldn't they be allowed to offer one version of the product like any other business? Beef is inherent to a Big Mac but we're not demanding that McDonald's serve prime rib too. Maybe legal minds can see why it's necessary for businesses providing services directly related to sexual orientation must serve all orientations but I can't.

The argument that this logic is applicable to gay marriage and Prop 8 has been discussed. I don't buy that either. Marriage as a matter of civil rights is a "product" consisting of a certain tax structure and legal conveniences. The government has put forth this "product" because the inherent stability of partnerships based on sharing a life has an overall stabilizing effect on society, this "product" enhances and reinforces it. (The current form of marriage being the union of two people out of a shared sense of love though it's certainly had other forms.) Gays and lesbians are arguing that sexual orientation has no inherent relation to the purpose of the "product" and its current form. That is, the stabilizing effect is present regardless of sexual orientation of the partners. The matchmaking process by which you reach marriage is where sexual orientation is relevant.

Sex Listings...

US
California - Northern Arcata, San Francisco, San Jose
California - Southern Blythe, Los Angeles, Riverside and San Bernardino Counties
Colorado Colorado Springs
Connecticut Manchester
Florida Miami, Tallahassee
Georgia Toccoa, Villa Rica
Georgia Adairsville
Illinois Aurora, Chicago, Mount Prospect
Louisiana New Orleans
Massachusetts Boston, Braintree
Missouri Grandview, Kansas City
Ohio Warren
Montana Bozeman
New Hampshire Keene
New Jersey Burlington
New Mexico Santa Fe
New York New York City
North Carolina Statesville
Pennsylvania Lancaster
Rhode Island Providence
South Carolina Greenville
Tennessee Knoxville
Texas - Eastern Austin
Washington Pasco

ELSEWHERE
Australia Newcastle (New South Wales)
Canada Toronto (Ontario)
England Blackpool (Lancashire)
Japan Tokyo
Mexico Puerto Vallarta

Cruising For Escorts...

US
Alabama Heal Hands (Mobile)
California Dave (Los Angeles)
Florida Kevan (Miami), MasterRyker (Fort Lauderdale)
Illinois Taylor (Peoria)
Indiana EthnicBro (Indianapolis)
Minnesota Smiles (Minneapolis)
Ohio Sean (Cincinnati)
Texas Jason (Dallas), Logan (Dallas), Paul (Houston)