Female Tenants | MensRights

[–]Ma99ie 89 points90 points91 points 15 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]your_gay_uncle 23 points24 points25 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]rcgarcia 7 points8 points9 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]ProjektTHOR 11 points12 points13 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]dakboy 37 points38 points39 points 15 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 28 points29 points30 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]aclashingcolour 5 points6 points7 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]InfinitelyThirsting 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]InfinitelyThirsting 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]dakboy 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]DomesticApe 79 points80 points81 points 15 years ago (65 children) | Copy Link

[–]megazen 42 points43 points44 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]ichlibejuice 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]megazen 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]GoatBased 24 points25 points26 points 15 years ago* (59 children) | Copy Link

[–]ExpendableOne 31 points32 points33 points 15 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 16 points17 points18 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]camelFace 7 points8 points9 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]GoatBased -1 points0 points1 point 15 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]ExpendableOne 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]GoatBased 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]jugzurtdgll 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]GoatBased 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ExpendableOne 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

If that choice is based on gender-based prejudice? It is absolutely sexism. The only exception I could see to this is if that choice is based in sexual preference(i.e. A heterosexual woman preferring to live with men because she is physically attracted those men, and vice versa, would be understandable). Sexual preference isn't a choice, you can't choose who you are physically attracted to but it is perfectly natural for people to be naturally inclined towards others they find sexually appealing.

You can, however, choose who you are personally biased or prejudiced against - that is a choice. You can also still treat others fairly and respectfully, even when you are physically/sexually attracted to them, and you can most definitely still respect and/or accept them even when they physically/sexually attracted to you.

[–]GoatBased 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The physical attraction thing is not gender-wide and probably should never be used to say "I don't want a guy to live here because I will be physically attracted to him" unless the person is a nymphomaniac or has some disorder which causes them to be attracted to everyone. Determining whether or not you have the ability to be physically attracted to someone is apparent in the first few seconds of meeting them, unlike personality traits which can be well hidden for weeks.

So where does rational like "I just find girls/guys easier to live with" come into play? A lot of people tend to prefer either the same or the opposite sex for whatever personality reasons. Much of it is built on past experience with previous roommates.

I think that reasoning seems to come from things like.. guys may be more straightforward about some things and girls may be more passive. Or girls may bring more drama while guys may bring more confrontation. So these preferences come from "I work better with a roommate who will/will not confront me about something." There's no secret that men and women have statistically significantly different ways of coping and problem solving, which is a major part of judging roommate compatibility.

These kinds of perceived attitudes and behaviors are all learned behavioral traits, and would be considered racism if applied to a race. For example "I don't like living with black people because they are more confrontational."

So what I'm taking away from this is that regardless of why you don't want to live with someone, unless it's based purely on the interaction with that person (for example I am attracted to this person, this person has different interests, this person told me they are passive and I don't want that), then it's got to be sexism.

I've seen houses listed that are 1 girl and 2 guys and they want another girl to "balance out the house." According to the above, that seems like sexism too.

[–]disposable_human 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]GoatBased -1 points0 points1 point 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]disposable_human -1 points0 points1 point 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Hey, I'm glad you're offended and all, but I think you missed my point. You certainly missed ExpendableOne's. He wasn't comparing sexism to racism. Although I understand being confused; he did lapse into a Jesse Jackson style string of adjectives at the end.

You made the argument that, given uneven levels of demand, it was permissible to have a women-only residency while not providing a male-only one. Name-stealer was using racism to illustrate your double standard. You let his point go completely unaddressed. Instead you threw out a single-line, flippant reply that at once: changed the scope of the argument from housing to all gender-specific spaces, and challenged him to defend himself as a hypocrite for having the 'normal' view.

Now you're happy to change the meaning behind it ex post facto, when you were surprised by his answer. Now it's about getting to know someone else's ideas better, when before it was about arguing the morality/legitimacy of this particular type of gender discrimination.

Rather than debating a boring manifestation of our different opinions in an endless loop

As much as that doesn't make sense in english grammar, I take from it that you believed staying on topic would amount to going around in circles. Given the way I've seen you argue just now, I can understand why you'd find that the case. You bail out of topics like they were on fire. Your solution is to uncritically breeze over topics doing nothing more than stating opinion or, at best, voicing disagreement with someone else's? I couldn't stomach a debate with someone who'd engage me without wanting to try to accomplish something.

It's mental masturbation you're engaged in. I understand everyone wants to look smart on the internet. The way you do it is by trying to find insight or nuance in whatever you're talking about. Not shoehorning the word 'manifestation' into a thought it doesn't belong in.

[–]GoatBased 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

A manifestation is a perceptible, outward, or visible expression that clearly demonstrates something such as a theory or abstract idea. We have different core beliefs. The manifestation of that belief is that he feels single sex housing is wrong and I don't. Our belief and reasoning does not begin and end with the issue of single sex housing. Thus, we shouldn't bother trying to debate single sex housing when the real difference in our opinions lies deeper than that and is much more general.

I didn't address his point because I don't think that's going to get me anywhere. What do you think is going to happen, I'm going to explain why it's not a double standard and he's going to instantly agree? No, he's not going to agree because what's motivating him isn't the fact that he thinks there's a double standard when it comes to race and sex. I've had enough debates to know that when you really want to get to the bottom of something you don't attack everything you disagree with because you'll just get bogged down with tangential and irrelevant arguments. You should try listening to your opponent and understanding them instead of thrashing around like a kid throwing a tantrum. Even if you win all the battles you won't win the war because what matters is why you disagree, not whether an analogy holds up to scrutiny.

Not everyone needs to be a jackass when they debate.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]thetrollking 3 points4 points5 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 15 years ago (38 children) | Copy Link

[–]chavelah 20 points21 points22 points 15 years ago (34 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 15 years ago (31 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]camelFace 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

I expressed my opinion on the idea of single-gender residences above -- the only people who benefit from the idea are squeamish parents. Most campuses are largely co-ed, classes are most definitely co-ed, and the second you step out the door of your residence...you're going to run into someone of the opposite gender!

Separation of genders in schools is fundamentally screwed up. It's a leftover from puritan idiots. Repression of sexuality and development of healthy relationships leads to perversion. Barring a carrier of infectious terminal diseases, no one should be isolated like that. It just screws them up.

Considering how easily most students slip into the "bubble" (off-campus? You mean the Big Dark Outside?) encouraging such behaviour is counterproductive to all aspects of personal development. Parents should be encouraging their children to meet new people, live in an apartment, work in the city. You know, grow the fuck up.

[+][deleted] 15 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheGDBatman 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]curious_bi-winning -1 points0 points1 point 15 years ago* (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]InfinitelyThirsting 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]curious_bi-winning 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]InfinitelyThirsting 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]curious_bi-winning1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]InfinitelyThirsting1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]camelFace 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I don't think anyone regardless of gender should be living in the same room as someone else -- the "two beds in a single room" style is awful. Apartment style -- separate rooms with a shared common area and shared bathroom -- I see absolutely no problem with.

Example: I lived in the Humber College lakeshore campus for the 06-07 school year. I knew of at least three instances in the residence (~300 people total at the time) where a male and female were sharing one of the double-rooms. I knew people in 2 out of the 3 situations, so I'll comment on them here: Situation A: I met Jane and Jack because we all moved in early. Saw Jane for a short period, was friends with Jack for the year. Things were kind of awkward with Jane, but only for me :P. Jack was a manwhore and Jane ended up with a serious boyfriend -- there were no serious problems as far as I ever knew. They had been friends in high school though, so they knew each other fairly well coming in.

Situation B: Call these ones John and Jill. Jill was a serious psycho bitch. John was a picture-perfect redditor -- I haven't seen him in a couple years, but I wouldn't be surprised if he had an account -- generally laid back, liked his video games and internet, and would've been a shoe-in for r/trees. They had serious problems, but it mainly came down to the fact that Jill was batshit crazy. She moved out in December and got an apartment, he moved in with another one our friends who had an empty spot after his roommate got kicked out at the end of 1st term.

In the same year, a friend of mine from high school lived in a 5 or 6 person setting with a shared common area, all co-ed. He ended up moving into a two-bedroom with one of the girls, where they lived for at least a year before moving out -- had a great time living together, the whole time maintaining separate relationships.

I've got several more examples I could go into, but this is going to be long. I've got a fair amount of personal experience and second-hand examples of co-ed living situations, but a rather limited exposure to single-gender institutions.

The thing is, mixing genders happens if you've got a sibling of the opposite sex. Mixing genders happens if you've grown up and your parent of the opposite sex is there to raise you. Segregation of any kind warps how people interact with those who are not of their group. Segregation based on gender is likely to cause difficulties in adulthood with relationships -- professional, romantic, personal, etc. The severity of this will depend on factors like the parent's willingness to let the child date during their teen years.

I would imagine the best course to take would be to continue normal interaction between genders as a child develops through to adulthood. Let the kid go to a school where girls sometimes sit at the desk next to a boy -- hell, they even have recess on the same yard at the same time. When they become a teenager, let them date. When they're in they're 18-20, you can pretty much assume your kid's no virgin and should act accordingly -- not stuff them into a single-gender residence, introduce your daughter's fiance as "Jill's friend," or threaten her boyfriend like some sitcom dad wannabe. They're adults, or damn close to it -- treat them like it.

[–]curious_bi-winning 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]camelFace 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yep. A lot were like your girlfriend -- just a little bit awkward, lacking the experience to confidently talk to guys. Others from more strict upbringings simply went bananas when they realized there was nobody to get them in trouble. Reality -- things like underestimating the work involved in a full university course load, extreme pressure to behave well and perform at a high academic standard in a difficult program, partying too much and the accompanying poor attendance -- all piled up around the end of first term. While this was present in a much smaller degree at other sections of campus and while I was at Humber the year before, it was much more severe for people living in the girls-only residence.

As I said, the worst off were those who came from very strict immigrant parents -- the cultural experience at a Canadian university is very different than the standards expected by Indian, Arab, and South-East Asian parents. Children of immigrant parents deal not only with the normal pressures accompanying new university students, but an additional difficulty of reconciling their parents' expectations and what's considered normative behaviour by their peers. This can be a...painful process, depending on the individual and their family.

[–]radamanthine 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]curious_bi-winning 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 15 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 15 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]paulginz 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]curious_bi-winning 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]tubbylardman 15 years ago* [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link

It was a single sex college. But anyway, I would love to live in a dorm where everyone was a girl.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]tubbylardman1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]michaelfarker 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]slyf 19 points20 points21 points 15 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]powerpiglet 23 points24 points25 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]powerpiglet 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]tankjr -36 points-35 points-34 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]huntwhales 12 points13 points14 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]tankjr -1 points0 points1 point 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]spacedout 216 points217 points218 points 15 years ago (98 children) | Copy Link

[–]theroc1217 41 points42 points43 points 15 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] -13 points-12 points-11 points 15 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]curious_bi-winning 3 points4 points5 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]theroc1217 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]iamplasma 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 15 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Slippyfists 5 points6 points7 points 15 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]kovu159 3 points4 points5 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]zipzo 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]disposable_human -3 points-2 points-1 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]iamplasma 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Nikola_S 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]FullOfSheeple 5 points6 points7 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Kilane 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]thingsarebad -2 points-1 points0 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]NiceIce0 points 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Faryshta 28 points29 points30 points 15 years ago (25 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 66 points67 points68 points 15 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 15 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 19 points20 points21 points 15 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 15 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]ropers 6 points7 points8 points 15 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]unholymackerel 33 points34 points35 points 15 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]ropers 7 points8 points9 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]efg1342 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Keyboardsamurai 8 points9 points10 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Anonimis 8 points9 points10 points 15 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Anonimis 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]spthomp 7 points8 points9 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]nikdahl 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Sarstan -1 points0 points1 point 15 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]theroc1217 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]unholymackerel 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]vinciblechunk 15 years ago [recovered] (12 children) | Copy Link

This. It's straight-up illegal to discriminate in certain ways when it comes to housing, gender being only one of them.

[–]ropers 27 points28 points29 points 15 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 51 points52 points53 points 15 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]mindaika 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]ropers -6 points-5 points-4 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

FHA exempts buildings with 4 or fewer units; one of which is owner-occupied...but sue away, neighbor

(...)

http://www.fairhousing.com/index.cfm?method=page.display&pagename=FHA_3603

Nothing in section 3604 of this title [Discrimination in the sale or rental of housing and other prohibited practices] (other than subsection (c)) shall apply to - ....(2)rooms or units in dwellings containing living quarters occupied or intended to be occupied by no more than four families living independently of each other, if the owner actually maintains and occupies one of such living quarters as his residence.

it also exempts single family houses so long as the owner owns three or fewer

Yeah, but why should we trust what you say? You're just some dude on the Internet. A little birdie told me not to take legal advice from there.

[+]Psythik -10 points-9 points-8 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]tankjr -22 points-21 points-20 points 15 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 44 points45 points46 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]tankjr 10 points11 points12 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]adenbley 10 points11 points12 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]DiggSuxNow -1 points0 points1 point 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]puskunk 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]tankjr 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]djk21108 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]eluusive 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]nikdahl 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]jmkiii 5 points6 points7 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]bottom 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]anon715 -9 points-8 points-7 points 15 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

[–]WikipediaBrown 7 points8 points9 points 15 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

[+]anon715 -6 points-5 points-4 points 15 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]MaybeComputer 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]anon715 6 points7 points8 points 15 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]MaybeComputer 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]puskunk -3 points-2 points-1 points 15 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]anon715 6 points7 points8 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Celda -1 points0 points1 point 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]puskunk -3 points-2 points-1 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]xtom 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Celda 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 15 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 15 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 15 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Celda -3 points-2 points-1 points 15 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]skewbuh -1 points0 points1 point 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Celda0 points 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]skewbuh1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]wolfsktaag -1 points0 points1 point 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]Airazz -38 points-37 points-36 points 15 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]ExpendableOne -1 points0 points1 point 15 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Airazz 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]Ma99ie -45 points-44 points-43 points 15 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[+]Airazz -13 points-12 points-11 points 15 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]surfnsound 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]ClownBaby90 -16 points-15 points-14 points 15 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]OfficerMudkip 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Airazz -5 points-4 points-3 points 15 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]discdigger 9 points10 points11 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]RsonW 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ClownBaby90 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Airazz -4 points-3 points-2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points11 points 15 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]shortywannaride 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 15 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]NiceCubes 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 15 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[+][deleted] 15 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]omegian 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]tedtutors 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]omegian 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]tedtutors 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]RsonW 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Dorsal_Fin 13 points14 points15 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ownworldman 6 points7 points8 points 15 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]the_misogynist 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]ownworldman 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]the_misogynist 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]ownworldman 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]eliasp 16 points17 points18 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]rg4yrxkiyv 10 points11 points12 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]skooma714 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheBadWolf 29 points30 points31 points 15 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]Cheeers 8 points9 points10 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]EatSleepJeep 13 points14 points15 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]DucoNihilum -16 points-15 points-14 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]spleeyah 4 points5 points6 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]I_divided_by_0- 5 points6 points7 points 15 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]WikipediaBrown 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]I_divided_by_0- 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]arkhound 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]megazen 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Liverotto 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points12 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]opk 7 points8 points9 points 15 years ago (30 children) | Copy Link

[–]Celda 63 points64 points65 points 15 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[+]thetrollking -32 points-31 points-30 points 15 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]aaomalley 11 points12 points13 points 15 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Ok, I can't begin to explain his misinformed you are. You would be right if not for the legal precedent set in the woolsworth lunch counter case. That case applied federal civil rights laws to private businesses, arguing that all business conducted interstate commerce and as such fell under federal jurisdiction. So a private business cannot fire someone for being a member of a protected class within the equal rights amendment, the civil rights act or the americans with disabilities act. No business can refuse service to anyone in a protected class. No landlord can refuse to rent a private dwelling to someone based on being in a protected class, clarified further in the fair housing act. Now of course all of these things happen, but it is illegal. What is not illegal is for a private citizen to say they wont shop at a certain store because it is owned by a black man. Or for a private citizen to refuse to rent a house because the landlord is a woman. Private business falls under all federal laws on civil rights, whether they are traded on a stock exchange or not. Does that make sense to you?

[+]thetrollking -6 points-5 points-4 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

One element that determines public v. private is the size of the business and there are all sorts of loopholes to get around this like fulltime v. parttime workers and contractors v. employees.

Here is a link, and I didn't know it was that small I thought it was more like 50 employees but apparently 15 is the number. http://www.privatebusinesslaw.com/html/employment_lawsuits.html

and here is another link, to the same site: http://www.privatebusinesslaw.com/html/terminations.html

Now even if the person has more than 15 employees they can still make up a reason, like he was lazy but not because he was a he. I have heard of some reasons that were kinda mean spirited, like being complained about for Body Odor or hygiene when the person unloads trucks in the summer.

Now, I don't remember exactly what the numbers were to distinguish a private v. public business but after you reach so many employees you have to go public. I do remember that I thought it was interesting that you needed over a hundred, I think maybe 3 hundred or something, before you are even considered a medium sized business and you have to be a large company with a certain number of employees before you legally have to become a public company. But, I think that even as a public company you don't have to trade stocks on the market but instead can do it privately. IDK, I am tired and it has been years since I took business and marketing classes.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII)

Application: 15 or more employees

Overview: Prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, sex, religion, national origin, age, and disability in hiring, employment (all terms, conditions and benefits), and termination; also prohibits retaliating against an employee who files a charge.

If a complainant is successful in a Title VII cause of action, available remedies may include reinstatement, back pay, damages for future loss of earnings, emotional pain and suffering, mental anguish, and attorneys' fees.

So, since this is a for profit business....the renting of the house is presumably a for profit business which means it is not a hobby which means they take in, what was it when I ran my own...., I think it is more than 5k per year in profit that means you have to get a business license and file monthly tax returns but to be honest I don't know if there is a clause for houses that exempts this and again it has been years since I owned my own business or even studied this afterwards....

Then as long as the landlord doesn't have more than 15 employees and are a small private business then they are exempt. Again, there may be exemptions and loop holes for landlords but if this were a giant apartnment or condo complex then this may or may not be different. The last place I lived had hundreds of apartments with 2-4 tenants each and they only had 3 people that worked there and contracted out everything else....I really don't know if that type of place would be held under these rules.

[–]aaomalley 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Ok, you are really confused and I think I see why. First, you are correct that businesses with less than 15 employees are not made to comply with many federal workplace regulations (ADA is absolutely one the you do). That being said, even a business with only 10 employees cannot fire someone for being in a protected class. The exemptions for small business have never been held to extend to workplace discrimination. Of course rarely is this law tested because 1) people rarely choose to sue because a company can make up any reason for firing in an at will employment state and the chances of winning a law suit are almost nill and 2) proving any discrimination took place, especially in hiring, is near impossible. But, unless you can show me a citation that states that small businiesses are exempt from workplace discrimination laws, I will consider you to be incorrect. The reason is that I was trained in human resource law and ethics and these laws were made crystal clear to me in those classes. Like I said, small businesses are in a seperate class and exempt from many laws, but not discrimination laws at all.

Second, you seem to have a very strange view of this public vs private company thing. The only thing that being a public company means is that you sell shares of your company to the public through a stock exchange, there are also different levels of public. There is no requirement under any law in the US to become a public company. There are many companies that are very large that maintain their private statusout of choice. Now most large companies do go public because it is a great way to raise capital for expansion, but it is not required by an US law. You state it is, so show me the law, because the idea of that is absolutely insane, the government doesn't force business to see ownership which is what gokng public is. I also think you have severe misunderstandings on the difference in for-profit and non-for-profit businesses, but I can't seem to figure out what you really think about that.

Next, in the case of a landlord, I am blown away at how ignorant you seem to be, it is almost like you are just making it up to prove your point. Landlords are governed under different, specific laws than businesses. A landlord does not have to get a busniess license unless they have employees (like apartment complexes) because they are not a business, I know this because I have rented before. Also, as stated in my original post, landlords are held to the law ib the "fair housing act" which spells out special protections against housing discrimination. If you are renting a private dwelling (house, apartment, private "mother in law suite", trailer/rv, etc) you cannot discriminate against who you rent to based on race, gender, religion, sexual orienentation, disability, and some others I forget. You can discriminate based on income, criminal record, cedit score, rental history and that kind of thing. Again, what to remember is landlords aren't businesses and renters aren't employees so the workplace discrimination laws don't always apply, but the do if the landlord does have employees.

Honestly, I am on my phone and can't see your qhole post, but I know there are points I forgot to address. Basically for anything else you wrote, just assume you were wrong about it, seeing how your were wrong about almost every other assertion in your post. I might come back and edit this with reasons why, but in the meantime try researching some of this stuff.

[–]Arelius 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]thetrollking -3 points-2 points-1 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Look up the law man. I may be wrong but I think it is a company size issue. If this woman owns one one bedroom house then she doesn't have enough employees and may not even make enough in a year from renting it out to even qualify as a business owner which means she would be exempt. Now maybe there is some law specifically relating to one bedroom houses owned by little old ladies but from my understanding most real estate and tenet based laws apply more to large apartment building and housing developments and condos and so on because they are actual businesses which mean they make more than the specified amount per year to not be seen as a hobby. If you sell collectibles and make more than x (I think 5k or maybe 2.5k I forget) in one year then that means you are considered a small business by the IRS and you have to get a business liscense and pay monthly taxes. Even if this woman is making more than that and this is a small private business then she would have to have more than 15 empoyees before she could be sued for descrimination. Now, what is the difference between a employee and a tenant? One does labor for you and is paid and the other pays you or rents and often does some maintenance. Now anyways, my comment to celda was with regard to businesses and employees and not so much about rental properties and tenents.

And yes, a small business owner can refuse service to anyone for any reason. With reason and it depends on many different factors http://www.wikilaw3k.org/forum/Law-Ethics/Does-a-business-in-the-US-have-a-right-to-refuse-service-to-anyone-for-any-reason-472440.htm

http://www.legalzoom.com/us-law/equal-rights/right-refuse-service

[–]aaomalley 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Did you even read your link? The only response on that wikilaw link that said that businesses could refuse servce to literally anyone for any reason was the person that was asking the question. Every other response correctly identified that a business can refuse service to anyone, except if that refusal is based on the person being a member of a protected class. Businesses can't refuse serives to someone simply because they are black, or because they are male.

The exception to this is if the business is specifically designed to cater to one group and the inclusion of other groups would damage that business. The example is Curves gym, which only allows women. Likewise I could open a man spa that only allowed men because it creates a safe space where the inclusion of women would make customers uncomfortable. Now if I did open a man only spa and turned women away it would make national news and receive protests and probably death threats, but that is because of the social double standard and not the law

[–]Arelius 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]radeky 20 points21 points22 points 15 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]anon715 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]130bpm 9 points10 points11 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]radeky 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]anon715 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]radeky 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]anon715 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 15 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]TaggartBBS 12 points13 points14 points 15 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 15 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]masonmason22 13 points14 points15 points 15 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]masonmason22 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]spleeyah 3 points4 points5 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]alexunderwater 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]GoatBased 6 points7 points8 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]funkymoose 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]SenorSpicyBeans 4 points5 points6 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]WikipediaBrown 3 points4 points5 points 15 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]KronktheKronk 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]numb3rb0y 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]jugzurtdgll 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]kronso 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It is probably against the law, but I can think of an instance where the law might go too far.

Suppose there is house with an extra room to let. The owner is a single woman. She doesn't want a male tenant, as that would be uncomfortable for her. She shouldn't be forced to take a male tenant, IMO.

OTOH, for renting an entire house, or an apartment out of a building, that is when the law should not allow gender discrimination.

Realistically, as a tenant, it isn't bad to hear "girls only" or whatever. You probably wouldn't want that person as your landlord/landlady anyway. You need your landlord to think of you as more than a rent check. When various matters come up, you want to have a good, even friendly, working relationship with your landlord. You can eliminate all the "girls only" landladies from consideration because, in the event that you successfully rented from one of them, they would be looking for an excuse to make your life hell, or get rid of you anyway.

[–]shortywannaride 6 points7 points8 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]thebestwes -3 points-2 points-1 points 15 years ago (50 children) | Copy Link

[–]Arlieth 13 points14 points15 points 15 years ago (49 children) | Copy Link

[–]curious_bi-winning 9 points10 points11 points 15 years ago* (15 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 15 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]curious_bi-winning 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]mmca -1 points0 points1 point 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]3825 -1 points0 points1 point 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 15 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]curious_bi-winning 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Arlieth 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]curious_bi-winning 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It would seem one can prevent discrimination in theory but not always in practice. Thinking about it, she's discriminating against more people by just choosing her friends (unless she's Tom from Myspace), rather than just discriminating against one sex. Yet, it's still legal even if it's more discriminatory.

Should we then say that to combat this discrimination, everyone should be entitled a chance to become her friend? That can't be enforced, and friendship criteria can be conflicting: If I'm Caucasian and I have plenty of Caucasian friends but somehow no Hispanics, Asians, etc. and I don't want to add anymore Caucasians because I want to be more culturally aware and diverse, who would want to stop me? But now I'm discriminating against all Caucasians even though I'm allowing for an immense amount of diversity. That's a tricky situation.

[–]Arlieth 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Arlieth 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]thetrollking 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]curious_bi-winning 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]thebestwes 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Arlieth 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]thebestwes -1 points0 points1 point 15 years ago* (22 children) | Copy Link

I don't care about the laws we currently have. If you own a building, shouldn't you be able to decide who to rent it to?

Interestingly, the person who gave me this mindset was black and talking about how someone who had full ownership of a business should legally be able to discriminate against her if he wanted. She'd just go elsewhere.

EDIT: Even if it was me that was being discriminated against I would still believe this. I think someone should be able to kick me out or refuse to do business with me just because they "didn't like my style" or whatever. I don't even think they need a reason. After all, nobody forces them to rent out their building. They might say "well, I'll rent it out, but only to my friend Bob". That's perfectly fine, and that's discriminating against everybody who's not Bob.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]thebestwes 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]zipzo 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Arlieth -1 points0 points1 point 15 years ago* (18 children) | Copy Link

No individual can truly "own" property.

The problem with the full-ownership mindset is that you are basically granted the right to conduct business and own property under the jurisdiction of the sovereign territory that you are in. Unless you outright own the country, you will be subject to those laws. "Real estate" is derived from the Spanish "Royal" (Real) which means that owning Real Estate is really more like a privilege granted by the Crown, which is how the concept of paying property tax continues to this day. (Edit: Which also means you have to care about those laws.)

Renting out to a friend is perfectly fine. Making it a policy not to rent to blacks, or to the disabled, or to women, isn't much on a small, individual scale. However, if you were to eventually own several complexes or an entire neighborhood of apartments and made it your policy not to rent to such a class such as blacks, you are dangerously close to tyranny. If you weren't the only one that did this in a city, and you were in a majority, congratulations: You just achieved apartheid.

Renting out only to your friends might be considered nepotism, but it's not nearly as harmful as actual discrimination based on class because everyone has friends, and realistically your circle of friends who could pay the bills on time wouldn't scale to your ownership of several apartment complexes if it came to that. It's self-limiting.

[–]curious_bi-winning 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Arlieth 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]curious_bi-winning 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That's true. With like-minded individuals, they wouldn't be hurt financially. On the other hand, it wouldn't mean more open-minded competition in the public and private sector would not exist already at that point and be able to increase over time.

I wonder how long it will take to make particular religions more accepting of people. I would think that with owners who are afraid of gays currently, if they hold such strong opinions, they still are not renting out to gays even if the law says it's illegal. They are weeding them out in the interview process along with everyone else who does not get accepted. But I'm not sure how we would know either way.

“There are many humorous things in the world, among them the white man's notion that he is less savage than the other savages”-Mark Twain.

I love that guy.

[–]thebestwes 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]Arlieth 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

This is assuming the landlord is purely an economic machination and relies 100% on logic. They're human, just like you and I.

And just like any human, landlords can mix up association with causation and make a general determination that "Black people will drive down my property value" and thus ethnically discriminate against them for economic purposes. There is also statistically significant proof that minorities have been discriminated against in terms of getting home loans, despite meeting the economic criteria to qualify, precisely because minorities (Blacks in particular) moving into a white neighborhood would drop surrounding property values.

So yes, if you're large scale and you're after profits instead of principles, you CAN alienate your clientele and make plenty of money.

Anyways, I think I've railroaded this discussion from Men's Rights far enough. What the landlady in OP's case did was discriminate against him on the basis of sex. Maybe she's a feminist, maybe she just had significantly better experiences with female tenants than male tenants. Maybe her male tenants in the past partied too much and/or caused too much property damage, thus giving her an economic incentive to discriminate. But the OP still had a right to be considered as a tenant despite her prejudices against male tenants.

[–]thebestwes 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]Arlieth 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]thebestwes 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]Arlieth 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]thebestwes1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Arlieth1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]thebestwes1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Arlieth1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]thebestwes1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Arlieth1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]thebestwes1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Arlieth1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]thebestwes1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 15 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]curious_bi-winning 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]DiggSuxNow 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Arlieth 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Arlieth 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]curious_bi-winning 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

"You can't reason someone out of that which they weren't reasoned into."

Laws made by illogical humans won't necessarily change the beliefs and behaviors of other humans that are illogical. People discriminate all the time, despite what the law says. The law says all of these drugs are illegal and bad, yet it doesn't stop people. Hell, even when everyone knows about the harmful effects of legal cigarettes, people still take up smoking in high school or college (like my friends). That, particularly, is mind boggling.

So how would you correct problems such as discrimination? That's a very good question. If people still discriminate and smoke pot even though laws tell them not to, and if humans are illogical even though we throw reasoning at them (such as with cigarettes), I suppose we can't really win. But if neither option is perfect, I would choose the one that would grant me more freedom. But not the freedom to harm others.

[–]Arlieth 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]3825 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]AnnArchist 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]bloog -12 points-11 points-10 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]glassuser -14 points-13 points-12 points 15 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Brimshae 9 points10 points11 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]glassuser -4 points-3 points-2 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Brimshae 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]Defly -20 points-19 points-18 points 15 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]mmca 4 points5 points6 points 15 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[+]Defly -7 points-6 points-5 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Arlieth 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]getthefuckoutofhere 8 points9 points10 points 15 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]Defly -10 points-9 points-8 points 15 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]getthefuckoutofhere 8 points9 points10 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Defly -3 points-2 points-1 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]getthefuckoutofhere 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]A_Nihilist -6 points-5 points-4 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]the_misogynist 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Title	Female Tenants
Author	[deleted]
Upvotes	809
Comments	309
Date	May 28, 2011 5:22 AM UTC (15 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/hm2aa/female_tenants/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/female-tenants.1039358 https://theredarchive.com/post/1039358

Comments