4 ms·

There used to be an era in America where hotels could legally discriminate, making travel for minorities extremely difficult. This is not a matter of feeling of

There used to be an era in America where hotels could legally discriminate, making travel for minorities extremely difficult. This is not a matter of feeling offended, but a matter of having equal access to resources.

Cshelton 10y ago
Private residences do not equal Hotels. If I don't want to be friends with minorities, I can choose not to be. If I do not want minorities staying in my private residence, I can refuse them staying there. Off topic...at what point do we stop calling them "minorities" when they are the majority in many regions??
- JonFish85 10y ago
  Thing is, it stopped being a "private residence" when it became a business of hospitality. Despite what Airbnb will claim, Airbnb's clients are absolutely operating as a hotel and should be governed as such (which has the nasty side effect of probably killing the business). The second they start having to obey zoning regulations, building codes, taxation & insurance the way hotels do, their valuation drops precipitously.
- gohrt 10y ago
  That's an argument you can make (except for the part about calling your publicly advertised commercial hotel a "private residence"), but I hope you don't also say "racism is past in America, everyone had equal opportunity now", because that would be logically inconsistent.
- jdavis703 10y ago
  So Airbnb wants to disrupt hotels. Assuming they successfully disrupt them, does that mean that non-white, non-heterosexual, non-cisgender groups will no longer be afforded the same guarantees that other private businesses must abide by?
  - brerlapn 10y ago
    It wouldn't take a particularly imaginative plaintiff's attorney to come up with a strong argument that Airbnb itself is culpable for enabling discriminatory behavior. AirBnB would have deep pockets, which makes them a juicy plaintiff's lawyer target, and they'd likely end up settling to include a bunch of protections for minorities in their business practices with the people who own the rental units.
- delazeur 10y ago
  > If I do not want minorities staying in my private residence, I can refuse them staying there. If they are your guests. Not if they are your customers. > Off topic...at what point do we stop calling them "minorities" when they are the majority in many regions?? We stop calling them minorities when they are no longer so heavily outnumbered by the dominant ethnic group.
protomyth 10y ago
Yes, but this is not that. AirBnB is a broker making arrangements between two private individuals. Hotels are public accommodations.
- dwaltrip 10y ago
  Specifically how do you make these categorizations? Why are hotels "public" but airbnb is not?
  - protomyth 10y ago
    Its pretty simple. AirBnB is a broker that provides a service to connect two people. Hotels are businesses that are licensed to provide lodging. They are regulated to provide the service. Their is a reason that cities have so much regulation on hotels. Just as they do restaurants. AirBnB does not provide lodging which is the cause of a lot of problems.
drzaiusapelord 10y ago
Hotels are a regulated industry. This is my home and as such, I deserve to make decisions that I believe to be morally correct. If I google the guy who wants to rent my room and he has Facebook postings criticizing the US and cheering on ISIS then I don't want him in my home. I have the right to extend my personal value system in this way. Big government should not be able to shove people into my home against my will. This is clearly a 4th amendment issue. Don't like it? Call the Best Western. We also see exemptions to non-discrimintary laws for churchs, mosques, temples, etc. Its clear that society is not a "one size fits all" thing and exemptions are morally and socially justifiable. The same way I can't get funding and entitlements like affirmative action and other race-based policies, that are 100% racist and accepted by liberals as normal.
- Cshelton 10y ago
  Thank you 4th Amendment. If this kind of thing, for some ridiculous reason, reaches any court, it should be thrown out by the 4th. However, in today's society, nothing would surprise me anymore.
- makomk 10y ago
  It's almost like Silicon Valley's attempts to "disrupt" regulated industries by replacing them with its own alternatives that don't follow the regulations is a bad thing...
  - drzaiusapelord 10y ago
    We live in a society of laws. If Congress and SCOTUS want to get rid of the 4th amendment, then certainly things will change.
    - gohrt 10y ago
      Please share with us your legal analysis that the Congress and SCOTUS are violating the 4th Amendment by passing and upholding anti-discrimination laws.
    - evgen 10y ago

Cshelton 10y ago

Private residences do not equal Hotels. If I don't want to be friends with minorities, I can choose not to be. If I do not want minorities staying in my private residence, I can refuse them staying there. Off topic...at what point do we stop calling them "minorities" when they are the majority in many regions??

JonFish85 10y ago
Thing is, it stopped being a "private residence" when it became a business of hospitality. Despite what Airbnb will claim, Airbnb's clients are absolutely operating as a hotel and should be governed as such (which has the nasty side effect of probably killing the business). The second they start having to obey zoning regulations, building codes, taxation & insurance the way hotels do, their valuation drops precipitously.
gohrt 10y ago
That's an argument you can make (except for the part about calling your publicly advertised commercial hotel a "private residence"), but I hope you don't also say "racism is past in America, everyone had equal opportunity now", because that would be logically inconsistent.
jdavis703 10y ago
So Airbnb wants to disrupt hotels. Assuming they successfully disrupt them, does that mean that non-white, non-heterosexual, non-cisgender groups will no longer be afforded the same guarantees that other private businesses must abide by?
- brerlapn 10y ago
  It wouldn't take a particularly imaginative plaintiff's attorney to come up with a strong argument that Airbnb itself is culpable for enabling discriminatory behavior. AirBnB would have deep pockets, which makes them a juicy plaintiff's lawyer target, and they'd likely end up settling to include a bunch of protections for minorities in their business practices with the people who own the rental units.
delazeur 10y ago
> If I do not want minorities staying in my private residence, I can refuse them staying there. If they are your guests. Not if they are your customers. > Off topic...at what point do we stop calling them "minorities" when they are the majority in many regions?? We stop calling them minorities when they are no longer so heavily outnumbered by the dominant ethnic group.

protomyth 10y ago

Yes, but this is not that. AirBnB is a broker making arrangements between two private individuals. Hotels are public accommodations.

dwaltrip 10y ago
Specifically how do you make these categorizations? Why are hotels "public" but airbnb is not?
- protomyth 10y ago
  Its pretty simple. AirBnB is a broker that provides a service to connect two people. Hotels are businesses that are licensed to provide lodging. They are regulated to provide the service. Their is a reason that cities have so much regulation on hotels. Just as they do restaurants. AirBnB does not provide lodging which is the cause of a lot of problems.

drzaiusapelord 10y ago

Hotels are a regulated industry. This is my home and as such, I deserve to make decisions that I believe to be morally correct. If I google the guy who wants to rent my room and he has Facebook postings criticizing the US and cheering on ISIS then I don't want him in my home. I have the right to extend my personal value system in this way. Big government should not be able to shove people into my home against my will. This is clearly a 4th amendment issue. Don't like it? Call the Best Western. We also see exemptions to non-discrimintary laws for churchs, mosques, temples, etc. Its clear that society is not a "one size fits all" thing and exemptions are morally and socially justifiable. The same way I can't get funding and entitlements like affirmative action and other race-based policies, that are 100% racist and accepted by liberals as normal.

Cshelton 10y ago
Thank you 4th Amendment. If this kind of thing, for some ridiculous reason, reaches any court, it should be thrown out by the 4th. However, in today's society, nothing would surprise me anymore.
makomk 10y ago
It's almost like Silicon Valley's attempts to "disrupt" regulated industries by replacing them with its own alternatives that don't follow the regulations is a bad thing...
- drzaiusapelord 10y ago
  We live in a society of laws. If Congress and SCOTUS want to get rid of the 4th amendment, then certainly things will change.
  - gohrt 10y ago
    Please share with us your legal analysis that the Congress and SCOTUS are violating the 4th Amendment by passing and upholding anti-discrimination laws.
  - evgen 10y ago