Dating Site Kicks Out 30,000 Members for Being “Ugly”

The most exclusive dating site for beautiful people (aptly named recently dumped 30,000 members whose applications were accepted, despite the fact that they do not meet the site’s “aesthetic standards.”  The site claims that it was the victim of a computer virus, aptly named the Shrek virus, which interfered with its screening criteria.

“We have to stick to our founding principles of only accepting beautiful people — that’s what our members have paid for,” Greg Hodge, the site’s managing director, told The Guardian. “We can’t just sweep 30,000 ugly people under the carpet.”

Charming, right?  Well, at least the site has kindly realized that its actions will be potentially distressing for the thousands of people who have just been told that they are not sufficiently beautiful for this discerning site.  Apparently the site has set up a counseling hotline to help the “ugly” people deal with being rejected.

The decision cost the company more than $100,000 in refunds, but apparently that sum of money is not worth risking the exclusive site’s reputation. is no stranger to controversy.  They caused outrage earlier this month by declaring that Irish men were the ugliest in the world.  And certainly, they seem to have a type – perhaps because the acceptability of applicants to the site is determined by existing members, who vote to determine whether new people can join the site. 

According to the Guardian, “Norwegian women and Swedish men have the greatest chance of being accepted into the club, while Brazilian and Danish men are also popular – along with women from Sweden and Iceland.”  Sounds pretty homogenous to me.

One of the women who was kicked off the site said that she was getting along well with someone she had met, but now she couldn’t get in touch with them.  “I was getting on really well with this American guy and we were going to go on a date and then they said I’d been chucked off and they locked me out of the site,” she said. “Now I can’t get in touch with him.”

What’s truly disgusting is the narcissism of the site’s managing director, who seems to have been in charge of talking to the press.  He explained that he feels truly sorry for the “unfortunate people who were wrongly admitted to the site and believed, albeit for a short time, that they were beautiful.”  Considering that seems to have a pretty narrow definition of beauty, it seems more like a matching site for people with big egos than anything else.  Or maybe it’s just, as Lane Moore writes on Jezebel, that they have their brand and they’re sticking to it.

Photo from Screaming Monkey's Flickr photostream.


Laurita Walters
Laurita Walters7 years ago

Pretty is as pretty does: Hodge is UGLY!

Christopher M.
Christopher M.7 years ago

I used the Shrek avatar once because I felt that way.

Beautiful people can be ugly, and the ugly can be beautiful, I think is the moral.

Sarah M.
Sarah M7 years ago

these "beautiful people" are so ugly

Darlene S.
Darlene S.7 years ago

Who the heck would want to date anyone full enough of themselves to join this site? Confidence is beautiful, but conceit is a real turn off! I would also speculate that people that conceited are merely looking for a trophy partner to show off like a possession,not to seriously love forever.. they are too in love with themselves!

Denise Janssen Eager

This truly reads like something The Onion would write. Sad to think that it is true.

Judy B.
Judy B.7 years ago

Maybe they should change the name to

Randall S.
Randy Stein7 years ago

Those who remain on this site deserve each other. God help them. Superficial to the bone.

As far as the hacker and the Shrek virus he implanted . . . . THREE CHEERS TO YOU!!!!! You have exposed this site and it's owner for exactly what they are. If I was beautiful enough to get on that website I'd now be too embarrassed to remain on it after this.

Tiffany L.
Tiffany L8 years ago


Austin R.
Austin Rotter8 years ago

I can understand that they are accomplishing both exclusivity and publicity geared towards the ego-maniacal. And obviously there is a demand for this crap, but it seems like they are crossing a few lines. But what do I know? this stuff isn't geared towards me... but it is still a little disappointing to hear.

Michael M.
Michael M8 years ago

Greg Hodge is a lowlife piece of dung. He should be beaten for his comments. Who is he to decide what beauty is? I would love to see this site and especially Hodge bankrupted.