Dating site nukes 5,000 overweight members

"Letting fatties roam the site is a direct threat to our business model and the very concept for which was founded." And with that, BeautifulPeople reportedly nuked 5,000 members it deemed "fatties."(thanks, Antinous)


  1. Wow…shallow stuck up jerks don’t want people who are ‘ugly’ on their site..

    What a surprise…

  2. Ummm… that’s what anybody gets for wanting to be on such a crappy site.

    I’m glad that site exists though, it’s a convenient place to find people to avoid dating!

    1. I had the exact same thought!
      But it turns out you can’t see any profiles or anything unless you’re a member, and that’s just not something I plan on doing.

  3. I saw the story earlier, and my initial reaction was similar – I know I’d never get on the site anyway, but I’m not sure I’d want to…

    But I now wonder – how do we know they actually did? Is it not just an outrageous statement designed to give it free publicity? It’s not as if anyone’s going to own up to being one of those kicked off…

  4. What’s really unfortunate is that this manufactured scandal and the resulting press is going to get them far more members and money than any ad campaign they could afford.

  5. I suspect that, in more or less utilitarian terms, the existence of this site is a fair boon to human happiness. It modestly reduces the chances of some sort of heartwarming made-for-TV epiphany about what’s inside being what counts; but it is a very efficient way of keeping otherwise problematic people in each others’ company.

    More broadly, I’m leery of making moral judgements about other people’s standards for partners. That sort of thing just doesn’t tend to go well. If somebody doesn’t meet yours, don’t be a prick about it(ie. if it doesn’t come up, don’t bring it up, if it does, start with a polite refusal and only resort to unpleasantry if that doesn’t work); but that is your prerogative. Nobody has a duty to like anybody else.

  6. “Is it not just an outrageous statement designed to give it free publicity?”

    Yeah, this was my thought exactly. Where else is this sort of figure going to come from but the company itself? If you take a look at the site they are definitely working the angle of appealing to the kind of person who wants to get into the club that turns away all the ordinary slobs. They’ve done a stellar job of getting us to carry their water pushing this little stunt into the spotlight.

  7. Because fat is a synonym for unattractive, amirite? This is all a bunch of balderdash.

    Xeni, you shouldn’t even have given those self-righteous schmucks a mention in passing. I haven’t been this offended by a dating site since that Darwin dating site banned redheads. Sigh.

  8. Nobody has a duty to like anybody else.

    They nuked people for gaining a couple of pounds over the holidays. And it’s not a dating site. It’s a site for people to try to bolster their non-existent self-esteem by voting other people off. If any dating happens, it’s tangential to the primary purpose of the site.

  9. There was a dating blog a while ago that banned redheads, and one of the people involved later said that it was there to manipulate the press by manufacturing outrage. I’d take a guess this is the same thing!

  10. I have no problems with the referred site or the implications thereof. In fact, I now want to start a site called If you can’t see where I’m going with this, then you can’t join.

  11. How the site can be improved.

    1. Don’t kick out the uglies. You’ll get a bigger membership.

    2. Have different categories. C1 to C4. Everyone deemed not beautiful enough, drops to C4. The rest goes to C3. The top 25% of that goes to C2. And then the top 25% of C2 goes to C1.

    3. Work out new rankings constantly. People can vote. People can promote themselves. Get more traffic for the site. At the end of each month, the top 10% of each category gets promoted to the next higher group. The bottom 10% gets demoted.

  12. Careful, people. By condemning the alleged actions of this site, you not only affirm and reinforce it, but express certain things about yourself and your own self esteem.

    I see absolutely no difference between this dating site for beautiful people and, say, a dating site for people with high IQs. Each is either meaningful or arbitrary, depending on your personal view, but neither is doing you or anyone else any harm against their will.

  13. Found this part in the article…

    >The members were singled out after posting pictures of themselves that reportedly showed they had put on pounds over the holiday period.

    Oh, pfft! How low-tech. I’ll bet Facebook can harvest data directly from people’s bathroom scales.

  14. Pfft. . . I don’t waste my time with such a pedestrian website; only is up to my superior standards.

  15. I’m sure there’s a BBW social network or dating site out there. I personally find morbid obesity unattractive, but I genuinely prefer a curvy, even chubby partner.

  16. I’m not fat bit I am becoming a little chubby. It’s good to maintain a positive if not comedic view towards losing those extra holiday pounds. I am reading The Art of War Against Fat, a funny mashup Kindle Ebook. By taking a comedic approach towards fatness in general. It helps me laugh those pounds away.

  17. Isn’t this kind of sweet justice though? I mean, those kicked off the site joined a site that limited its membership to those whom the other members voted in as being “beautiful”. They joined a superficial club and were shocked, shocked when it turned out to be superficial?

    Mr. G. Marx put it best “I’d never join a club that would have me as a member.”

  18. I’m fat AND beautiful. Too bad “” is too stupid to look beyond their own prejudices.

  19. I wonder how fat is “too fat for their website”? Some people are unreasonably obese, and not taking proper care of your body (or any care at all as the case may be) is universally unattractive. Having said that, I usually prefer larger women myself – not huge, but definitely soft and curvy. One bruise from someone else’s rib bones was all I needed to realize that.

  20. also if they really said the words “letting fatties roam the website” then it’s pretty obvious the site operates on a high-school mentality, and that this is also their target demographic. perhaps a name change is in order, maybe something along the lines of

  21. I fail to see the reason for the hub hub here.

    Websites / online dating by definition allows you to dismiss and select a vast amount of people based on your arbitrary metrics.

    So this site says: Thin is in. Why “hate” them for it? As someone else said, there is probably a website for the opposite end.

    Or is the “annoying” thing here that they call themselves “beautiful people”? Hey, you can’t debate taste, and beauty falls in that category as well, what some people find beautiful others find ugly.

    Get over yourself, for a lot of people that isn’t the site, so what.

    I bet their marketing team right now though is all giggly over the exposure they get.

  22. Hey, that’s they’re call. It’s not they’re they’re a vital government service. If they don’t like fatties then they don’t have to have them around.

    To the “I’m fat -and- beautiful” people: I’m sure you are. To some people. Good for you, I can only hope we’re all beautiful in someone eyes.

    I’m not fat, nor am I beautiful. In fact I’m sure some people would probably say that I’m ugly. That’s also a perfectly valid opinion. Because that’s what it is, it’s an opinion. And of all the fascist alternate realities that scare me, one where I can’t have my own opinions scare me the most.

  23. Everyone thinks of themselves as superior to certain other people. The only difference among individuals is what reasons they use when looking down their noses at others.

    It’s probably good to look down upon the practice but if you also further that by talking of them as inferior people it looks really, really bad and is extremely, plain-as-the-hand-in-front-of-your-face hypocritical.

  24. Yeah, well, as the ST:TNG episode said, ya’ all are ‘ugly bags of mostly water’… so there! ;-p

  25. This guy say something outrageous once in a while and a zillion newspapers write articles, and even more blogs will link to the site. Very good PR and SEO.

  26. “Beautiful” is such subjective word.

    And besides their use of it is referring just to the standard of an apparently very small (and shrinking) community.

    1. I suspect that their members look less like a Victoria’s Secret runway show and more like the cast of Jersey Shore. Surely one of our readers is brave enough to join and check out the photos.

      1. You are correct. Club lighting hotties.

        And yeah, this is publicity for them.

        They are hoping that people will join who have been burned by meeting up with the scary reality behind internets disease.

  27. I believe you are all missing the point. It’s clear that the site operators were simply concerned about the extra bandwidth the overweight users would consume.

  28. Huh? This is 100% pure PR by Do you think this really happened? The BBC article reads like it was written direct from a PR newswire.

  29. The best thing is that everyone on that site will eventually fall foul of their own rules… assuming they don’t hook up first – but even if they do they seem so shallow that it won’t last long!

  30. So over the break, 5000 beautiful people who let themselves gain a few pounds over Christmas, honestly updated their picture on the site to let everyone else know – following which the site banned them?

    I’m positive this is fabricated.

  31. I was suckered in by this nice bit of free advertising and went to check out the site (not to join, can’t see me getting past their test).

    I was really surprised, I was expecting the place to be packed full of stunningly beautiful people, all models and the like, but it really isn’t. Even in their “Top 50” women, they were not actually what I think of as beautiful, they all looked like those pouting teenagers on MySpace, the sort of look that tabloid newspapers and Z-list celebs think is attractive. All, too much blusher and eye-lashes.

    So I’m not at all surprised by this, it would appear that the genuinely beautiful don’t need a bunch of stuck-up kids to tell them they are.

  32. Poetic justice. You try to join a group intent on excluding others based on their looks and find out it excludes you, based on your looks. What’s fairer than that?

    On the other hand, people should lighten up; doesn’t give the owner any power over the definition of beauty, nor any duty to represent it fairly.

  33. Admit to being tricked by their PR department, Xeni, and scrub all links from this post. Don’t give them the Google rankings they don’t deserve.

    The only source for the article was the site’s founder fer christs sake.

    1. and who’d have thought trolling would become such an effective marketing tool. 2010. that’s progress.

  34. My thoughts exactly. It never ceases to amaze me how many Americans, in particular, believe themselves to be very attractive. However, I find it superfluous to name a specific crappy “reality” show. The genre attracts inflated egos with megalomaniacle tendencies.

  35. Who gives a crap? I agree that this is likely for a bunch of free publicity, but I think it’s hysterical that people get mad about this. If the site wants to bill itself as a place to meet people who look a certain way, who cares? Do these 5000 people have some right to use the site?

  36. Yeah, this is not a big suprise. People have been dissing fellow fatties such as myself for too many years to count. The best part is that the majority of Americans are obese. So put that in your pipe and smoke it! Besides, fatties can be beautiful too!!!!

  37. As a fat person I understand how much this sucks, but honestly, if you go to a site called “BeautifulPeople” how can you possibly expect them to not judge you by your appearance?

  38. This is probably the best dating site I’ve ever seen or heard of. I don’t care about the possibility of finding anybody, I just like the idea that they acknowledge how full-of-shit most people are and let everybody else have a way to vote them off the site.

    vry sngl ft prsn lv hs th ptn t b ft r nt. t’s drct rslt f yr chcs. Clmng t b ‘ft *nd* btfl’ s nt nly dnl, t’s rrspnsbl.

    And remember, if enough people think somebody is an asshole, they can vote him off too, apparently.

    1. After all, if you want to be beautiful, it’s not that hard to develop an eating disorder, right?

    2. Putting aside your bizarre conclusions (how do you “lie” about beauty, which isn’t a truth?):

      “Claiming to be ‘fat *and* beautiful’ is not only denial, it’s irresponsible.”

      Are you denying the existence of cultures where fatness is prized as a sign of wealth, health, and fertility (which are often tied to the perception of beauty)?

    3. vry sngl ft prsn lv hs th ptn t b ft r nt. t’s drct rslt f yr chcs.

      No, this is absolutely not true. (At least, your devowelization does say something about how thinness is not always pretty. It’s downright annoying here…)

      It’s certainly possible to make bad choices that cause you to become fatter. But not all fatness is a result of overeating and/or laziness. It just plain stinks that anyone who’s big is auto-assumed by so many folks to have no self-control.

      I was once 280 pounds and spent 10 years eating once per day and taking long walks all the time. I lost nearly a hundred pounds, then my body had gotten as thin as it was going to get. To most people, this was still too fat to be put in the “attractive” category, so I gave up. It’s all you can do. I still only eat once a day. I actually rather hate eating.

  39. I’ll try not to write too much here since this was probably a publicity stunt and, as such, does not deserve too much thought energy dedicated to whether it was ethical or not.

    But really. If I want to create a website for a network of people who have black hair, or a network of people who visited Fairford UK as a tourist in July of 2007, or any other arbitrary characteristic… What’s wrong with that? Sorry, this website is only for men of Italian ancestry who are between 5’6″ and 5’9″ and who live within 30 miles of Seattle, so you can’t join. Whatever. If you don’t like it, go make your own website.

    And a related thought: I would love it if someone who knows about applicable laws would put together a table of some kind about what kinds of discrimination are or are not legal in what kinds of situations. Take employment. What kinds of employer can discriminate (i.e. decide to not hire someone, or to fire someone) based on… physical abilities? Looks? Age? Can a church choose to not employ non-believers nor Muslims? An aerospace company (and, for all I know, any company) can require applicants to be US citizens even when most of the company’s projects are not for the US government. If I open a store, why can’t I hire only clerks whom I find attractive? If an ad agency can hire one model rather than another based on attractiveness, why can’t I do that for store clerks? It would be impractical to have someone continue to work in a factory or restaurant after an accident causes him to lose the use of his legs, but could an office make that same claim? Why or why not? How do those lines get drawn? I would be really curious to find out. I would guess that whether or not these things are allowed depend on whether the employer has different kinds of non-profit or tax-exempt status or does work funded by the taxpayer. I think I’ll do some Googling about this later to see what I can find. And this can be generalized beyond employment: What kinds of organizations (private schools, churches, gyms, video rental stores, college fraternities) can deny membership to what kinds of people? If a business can deny service to anyone, then can a gym kick out fat people?

    1. “I’ll try not to write too much here since this was probably a publicity stunt”

      You have the single longest reply in the entire thread..

      Do, or do not. There is no try.

      That said, definitely publicity stunt. What sort of company would use an inflammatory word like fatties otherwise?

    2. “What’s wrong with that?”

      It’s not a matter of ethics, but of taste and distaste.

      As much as you have the right to do a certain thing, I have the right to disapprove of you doing it. I surely can’t stop you … well, I could try, in some ways, so let’s say that I can’t take away your right.

      So what is “wrong” with … saying things?

      “If you don’t like it, go make your own website.”

      Ah, right, that old chestnut. So if I don’t like Avatar, I should go make my own multimillion-dollar blockbuster, right? :)

      And who says I haven’t made my own website? Or if I haven’t done that, that I don’t already patronize other dating websites I consider more worthwhile? And why do I have to quantify my opinions with some kind of project?

  40. I’m surprised by the biases this story has exposed. Personally, I was shocked to find myself thinking, “If they’re so beautiful, why are they single? Why do they have to resort to online dating?”

    Of course those are faulty premises (physical attractiveness is not the sole criterion of dating success, nor even an adequate or necessary one; using the Internet to socialize does not imply there’s something wrong with you). But funny how quickly they surfaced…

  41. “I have an important message to deliver to all the cute people all over the world. If you’re out there and you’re cute, maybe you’re beautiful. I just want to tell you somethin’ — there’s more of us UGLY MOTHERFUCKERS than you are, hey-y, so watch out.”

    Frank Zappa.

  42. I think the website is hilarious. The even have a link at the bottom that says “Too ugly to join? Click here to browse as a guest”

    Nightclubs have been using the same policies for generations. The big difference is, you can generally buy your way into a nightclub by being rich and/or famous, regardless of how hideous you are (I’m talking about you Sarah Bernhard).

  43. If you try to browse the site, you see

    “Dear member, has launched globally.
    The launch is being extensively covered by the global media.

    The huge media coverage is currently generating so much traffic on our servers that we have had to limit some users from using the site.
    We are sorry for the inconvenience.

    We’re excited to welcome you, so please check back later.

    The BeautifulPeople Team”

    Yes… the “launch” is being covered by global media. Yeah… I believe you… Why wouldn’t I trust your judgment?

  44. Would I be wrong for assuming people on that site, while physically beautiful, have repulsively ugly souls?

    After all love shouldn’t be about the packaging.

  45. “Letting people with no sense of humor roam the site is a direct threat to our business model and the very concept for which was founded.”

  46. Hilarious. I just went to the site (had to click on the “too ugly to join” link, I’ve gained a few pounds over the holidays). Got a message saying that due to increased traffic, they have to limit access to their site. So we uglies can’t even look anymore….. hee.

  47. These sorts of stories always bring out interesting comments. While it is obvious that there is some rudeness in how this site is promoting itself, people responding to it sometimes show a telling defensiveness. Insistence that you are beautiful and obese. There is definitely a gender thing going on there, as a man insisting he is beautiful feels different. You kind of have to let beauty speak for itself, declaring it seems either vain or defensive. Or you get the defensive reply that these people are all skin and bones and have eating disorders. I mean, it may be nice to believe that, but I tend to think it is just insulting back someone who has succeeded in insulting you. That rhetorical maneuver reminds me of insisting that some gay hating person is a closet case. Sometimes true, but seems more like it is designed to insult someone by calling them gay, because them being gay hating makes it likely that the insult will bother them.

  48. I’m at work, so I’m not going to try checking it out, but I’d be surprised if there wasn’t already a website.

  49. I wrote:
    I’m at work, so I’m not going to try checking it out, but I’d be surprised if there wasn’t already a website.

    Well, now I’m at home, and lo and behold, there isn’t a Or, at least, if you go to, all you get is a placeholder. There is, however,

  50. Being overweight is a pandemic in many nations and cultures. If you read why people behave the way they do because of 1) peer pressure, and 2) powerful advertising techniques, you would still be at the tip of the iceberg. Why? For one thing, dietary education is still relatively new in many school systems while advertising in it’s cuurently evolved state has been around for many decades. Then there are the psychological reasons. If eating is about the only mechanism available to someone who has emotional issues, they will almost certainly take this path. Then, there others who simply don’t or won’t think about what they are putting in their mouth. It can be exceedingly complex, or frighteningly simple, depending on the individuals mindset.

Comments are closed.