[hda2]

Because sex, age, and race are statistically significant factors in how much the insurance companies will pay out for each demographic.

Personalized pricing for a digital service with a more-or-less constant cost-per-user doesn't make sense here (unless you want to maximize profits by unfairly discriminating against certain demographics).

[barry-cotter]

What’s this “unfair” crap? We’re talking about dating and mating. Apart from war there may be no human activity in which fairness applies less. Price discrimination in dating apps is as problematic as in airline tickets. Twenty year old men moan about actually having to try and ask people out if they want a date. Thirty five year old women complain that they can’t find someone who loves them for their career accomplishments or how superficial men their age are, dating women 10 years hone younger. Dating sucks unless you’re a young woman looking for casual sex or an attractive, solvent (young) man who wants to get married.

[hda2]

I don't know what you're going on about, but this "crap" was in reference to increasing price without offering something in return. If a store sold a woman an specific item for 5x the price they offer to men, they would be sued for discrimination. Unless serving certain demographics costs tinder more (thereby justifying the increase the price), it is objectively unfair and discriminatory. End of story.

[barry-cotter]

The “crap” you’re talking about is the idea that fairness has a place in mating. The thing that justifies tinder charging different groups of people different prices is that they want to and if people don’t want to buy they don’t have to. It’s the same rationale by which tiers of software services that differ in their cost to the provider by little or nothing differ in their cost to the buyer by orders of magnitude. If you don’t want to buy don’t.

If discrimination by gender or other relevant characteristic was illegal in the US that might have some legal, not moral bearing, but no one cares.

> In the United States, a few states have adopted statutes forbidding gender-based price discrimination, but these policies are largely unenforced.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender-based_price_discrimin...

[hda2]

> The “crap” you’re talking about is the idea that fairness has a place in mating.

That "crap" is something you brought up on your own. We're discussing unfair discriminatory pricing, not mating.

[spoonjim]

> Apart from war there may be no human activity in which fairness applies less.

Agreed, which is why it was a big collective fuckup for Western societies to migrate from the societies where premarital and extramarital sex was condemned, thus ensuring a far more even distribution of sexual access for men and women.

[rahimnathwani]

Most people are fine with movie theatres charging children less than they charge adults.

Is that 'unfairly discriminating against a certain demographic'?

[gruez]

>Is that 'unfairly discriminating against a certain demographic'?

I suspect it gets a free pass because the demographic being discriminated against is better off (eg. adults who tend to have more disposable income). If it were the other way around (eg. software companies charging elderly people more because they don't know any better), there's going to be more backlash.

[chii]

It's not that they're better-off, but rather that the movie theater discovered that a movie the child wants to see often forces the parents with them. By discounting the child, they increased the sale of at least 1 ticket for the parent, and therefore, they make more money. If the child wasn't discounted, the parent might choose an alternative source of entertainment (because face it, adults tend not to want to watch children movies) and the theater lose out on that adult ticket!

this is why you don't see a discount for couples usually - coz they were going to pay even without the discount.

[rahimnathwani]

OK, pretend that I said this instead:

"Most people are fine with movie theatres charging 65+ SENIORS less than they charge adults."

[smt88]

In the US, insurance rates certainly cannot vary by race.