Room for rent - no heterosexuals

Complete non-story. Their house their rules.

Plenty of people I wouldn't want to life with for varying reasons.

You see adds all the time wanting X or Y or Z.

Out of interest how about wording it differently?

'Room for rent, prefer straight people' - not really discriminating? But should send a clear enough message to non-straight people (whatever they want to call themselves these days).
 
People will always choose room mates they can get on with it and fit in with their lifestyle but it's a bit disheartening to see an advert reject you before them even meeting you. I don't like it but I guess I understand it.
 
I think that focusing on the positives: 'we are LGBT members/allies and would welcome similar' is reinforcing the same message that 'no straight people' has, but in a positive fashion without saying others would be unwelcome.

You can read into it that they wish to have someone gay there, without it having to say that those of another persuasion are particularly unwelcome to apply.

wordy said:
We all came out* in support of those hoteliers in Devon who didn't want homosexuals staying at their guest house & said it was up to them as it was their business & property
Click to expand...

Um, I don't think that's entirely true.

dl8860 said:
I see your mind is now governed by the ways of the patriarchy
Click to expand...

Can you expand on this supposition?

How is it that he hasn't reached his own conclusion?
 
Back at university my brother rented a room in a property owned by a gay couple, who also lived there. It became very obvious soon after he moved in that they weren't comfortable with having a heterosexual living with them. He was single and never even took anyone back to the place (male or female). As a result he ended up having to move out at the end of the first term. He just accepted it as the fact it was their home and their choice as to who they wanted in their property. That's how I would look at it too - your place, your choice.


Posted from Overclockers.co.uk App for Android
 
Thing is though if he's renting it out for money then should things not change? Akin to the b and b situation we had a few years back.
 
Stovepipes said:
People will always choose room mates they can get on with it and fit in with their lifestyle but it's a bit disheartening to see an advert reject you before them even meeting you. I don't like it but I guess I understand it.
Click to expand...

This.

And there's probably plenty of 'silent discrimination' that goes on everywhere we don't see - you might not list in the ad "No x/y/z", but, when you meet someone you can easily say no later and not give a reason!
 
[FnG]magnolia;29102059 said:
A room-for-rent advertisement in Wellington that specified 'no heterosexuals' has been criticised by the Human Rights Commission.

However, it's not illegal.



Now aside from the fact that the both flatmates sound like every caricature of a triggered Tumblr wreck of a human being, this is creating a bit of news here as NZ is generally fairly laid back and accepting of others' views.

The flatmates then responded to the flack they were getting and the comments section of this article also had to be closed down.

So GD, are they being specific and direct in the type of flatmate they want and thus saving straight people (and couples and party-hards) from wasting their time or are they being negatively discriminatory? Would it make a difference if they were straight and would not consider homosexuals, transgenders and so forth?
Click to expand...

ts really no different than female flatmates advertising a room only for other females, it s statement of preference.

If it was the landlord stipulating the requirements then it would be discrimination.
 
D.P. said:
ts really no different than female flatmates advertising a room only for other females, it s statement of preference.

If it was the landlord stipulating the requirements then it would be discrimination.
Click to expand...

Exactly. If it's your place of residence that you own you can choose how to live with it for security and comfort. Nobody should be uncomfortable in their own home even if it is a little odd nowadays.

I might need to rent my house out but i'll be going on the criteria of no poor, disrespectful chavs lol...
 
bazzabear said:
In their rebuttal:

"Contrary to popular opinion, heterophobia and cisphobia do not exist."

Yeah, they're cretins.
Click to expand...

I disagree. They're hypocritical bigots. That means that they're irrational and nasty and all sorts of bad...but it doesn't mean they're cretins. Bigotry correlates with lack of intelligence, but it's not a perfect correlation.
 
estebanrey said:
I somewhat suspect that had gay marriage been legal at that point in time their defense may have been have been somewhat different.

But that's neither are nor there, the point I was making is there is a difference between refusing to offer a business service for X and refusing to rent a room in a private house for X
Click to expand...
I agree, on the latter point. On the former, I would suspect exactly the same thing. But of course, there's no way to know.
 
[TFU] Thegoon84;29104165 said:
God damn it!!! I have tried my hardest to be "child friendly" to my kids!
Click to expand...

:D

I've noticed that Lesbian Feminists tend to occupy extreme Left positions on everything, therefore they should be required by law to state their housemate preferences. If only to save any normal people unfortunate enough to have been misled.


This seems a good point to hear about the OP's views on this :)
 
Dis86 said:
Thing is though if he's renting it out for money then should things not change? Akin to the b and b situation we had a few years back.
Click to expand...
Bear in mind there's a series of differences between renting a room in your home, and a B&B.

For a start, the B&B is running a business, while renting a room is not. That changes the legal position quite significantly, and the tax situation drastically. Though, the rent-a-room tenant has slightly higher tenancy protection than the B&B resident, who has no residency. They're just paying night by night. At least for rent-a-room, you need to be given "reasonable" notice to quit, though as an excluded "occupier" that'll normally be whatever your rental period is.
 
Aldav said:
Bear in mind there's a series of differences between renting a room in your home, and a B&B.

For a start, the B&B is running a business, while renting a room is not. That changes the legal position quite significantly, and the tax situation drastically. Though, the rent-a-room tenant has slightly higher tenancy protection than the B&B resident, who has no residency. They're just paying night by night. At least for rent-a-room, you need to be given "reasonable" notice to quit, though as an excluded "occupier" that'll normally be whatever your rental period is.
Click to expand...

However, at their core both are the same. Are they not?

The exchange of residence in ones property for money. Renting out a room you're surely acting as no more than a live in landlord.
I couldn't (and wouldn't!) say 'no fags' on an add for a property I was renting out and not living in. Why are these chumps allowed to do effectively just that because they'll be around at the time the other person is?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom