4 ms·

Airbnb Bans Host Who Dumped Guest Because She's Asian

20 points by sushobhan 10y ago

cup 10y ago
Good. Racists shouldn't be given a platform to further their hate.
- Daddy_cat 10y ago
  Inb4 the top minds of hacker news play devil's advocate
  - salesguy222 10y ago
    haha honestly this place is rather sjw you will be able to tell by my greyed out comment and the reason everyone is SJW here (or maybe just hyper politically correct) is because most people are here to get a well paying job, not share their truest most controversial opinions btw I'm anti racism myself. just sharing my impression of this particular site's audience, especially those who can downvote here
    - tachaeon 10y ago
      Littering and....
    - hiddencost 10y ago
      Nope, most people are "social justice warriors" because they actually care about other people. We're not all secretly harboring boiling resentment on the basis of race / creed / gender / etc. that we're suppressing for pragmatic reasons.
      - kefka 10y ago
        > Nope, most people are "social justice warriors" because they actually care about other people. We're not all secretly harboring boiling resentment on the basis of race / creed / gender / etc. that we're suppressing for pragmatic reasons. No. Most people are apathetic and/or do not want to get involved in others issues. I've seen it, but you need not trust what I say. Go look up bystander effect. Some people, especially on the extreme left, have developed this victim attitude where everything affronts them, no matter what. It's something I've coined, but it reminds me of the "Victim of the Week", similar to how some tv shows have "monster of the week". Certain causes are 'cooler' than others. And the worst part is if you don't keep up with what you should be affronted to, then the rest of the group will disavow and oust you as "racist, homophobic, sexist, ...." The extreme right did learn one thing: no matter how different many are (blue dog all the way to tea partier), they don't oust you for having different beliefs within their continuum. ObOnTopic: Well, they did indeed give a reason. "Asian". Yeah, it's pretty damn offensive. I certainly wouldn't do that. But I'm sitting between "Well, racism sucks. Fuck em", and "It's their right as householder to decide who comes in and who doesn't, regardless the reason." And sometimes, it's nicer to know if they are a racist. Perhaps AirBNB should put that field in there, and allow people to show their true colors. A bit of sunshine usually helps disinfect problems like that.
        sangnoir 10y ago
        > The extreme right did learn one thing: no matter how different many are (blue dog all the way to tea partier), they don't oust you for having different beliefs within their continuum. You might be forgetting/not aware of the terms 'RINO', or more recently: 'Cuckservative' which are used by the right to disparage others on their continuum. Politics is getting more polarized on the left and the right. See also: recent Freedom Caucus actions.
    - sctb 10y ago
      Please resist the temptation to make such generalizations about the community—those aren't part of a civil, thoughtful discussion.
  - hiddencost 10y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shelley_v._Kraemer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shelley_v._Kraemer
    - salesguy222 10y ago
      racists will just deny people they don't like for other reasons, like smoking weed or type of job or background check or
      - oxide 10y ago
        Which is discriminatory, what's your point? That racists are going to discriminate regardless? Well, as in other areas, there will always be abusers. Drug testing welfare reicpients, for example, is a slap in the face to small government ideals and does absolutely nothing to deter abuse. The truth is the abusers are the exception, not the norm. Regulations and legalisation are not unlike a doorlock. It might keep out those who would steal given a free pass to do so, but anyone more determined will make short work of it. You can't legislate against that kind of abuse, the abuse of a black and white law prohibiting this type of discrimination for example. It's clear to me that you can't regulate someone out of being a racist prick, an addict, etc. They just keep coming up with a new way to do whatever the fuck they please.
        kefka 10y ago
        Well, This is AirBNB's own moment of "Gig Economy goes against established law" like Uber and HomeJoy have done. Hoteliers and traditional rental agencies are not to discriminate on a list of things (now including sexual orientation and status). They have, including Trump. And they've also been sued to the gills for knowingly violating it and lost. Simply put, it's against the law to discriminate on basis of race or color; religion; national origin; familial status or age—includes families with children under the age of 18 and pregnant women; disability or handicap, or sex. (Source: http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/free-books/renters-rights-book/chapter5-2.html http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/free-books/renters-ri... ) Does that mean I'm required to let people in my home? Well, no. Just because someone shows up on my property means nothing. If they try to come in without permission, that's trespassing. If they have a weapon, in many states I'm legally able to blow them away. Castle Doctrine is the general description, with unique laws per state ( Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_doctrine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_doctrine ) But what happens when both are true, with AirBNB and someone I don't like (Muslim/Christian/Atheist/Black/Brown/Asian/gay/handicapped/dirty/poor/smelly/angry/arrogant/...)? There's the crux.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
Mk-0 10y ago
Huffington Post.
tabeth 10y ago
This situation is the biggest problem with Airbnb. Furthermore, these types of service should be double blind, and effectively anonymous for everyone but Airbnb (arguably them too, but that's not really possible given payment information). People are inherently racist [1], are forced to behave in ways to may (or may not) promote sexism(not necessarily in that they hate men/women, but are forced to follow the norms) [2] etc. to varying extents. Anonymity is the solution. Why do you need to even know the name of the person who's staying? You don't. [1] There's plenty of research on this highlighted in this article: https://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/28/opinion/nicholas-kristof-is-everyone-a-little-bit-racist.html https://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/28/opinion/nicholas-kristof-... [2] http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/cou-cou0000176.pdf http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/cou-cou0000176.pdf
- hubert123 10y ago
  I wouldn't rent to people that I can't screen at least by looks first. If you think that I'll let a bunch of hobos or gypsies rent my place just so I don't appear racist then you must be out of your mind. Profiling works. End of story. Oh and I am fully aware that I'll probably get a shadow/ban for this, but it's worth it.
  - sctb 10y ago
    We've banned this account for repeatedly violating the guidelines after we've asked you many times to stop.
- random_rr 10y ago
  Disagree. My girlfriend and I have have turned down a few potential AirBnB people because they looked like street kids in their profile pictures. One had a gun (?????) prominently displayed in his profile pic. No thanks. As long as I'm letting people into my home, I'd like to get a quick look at them first.
  - tabeth 10y ago
    Why exactly does it matter?
ntaylor 10y ago
But really, $50 a night on Big Bear, in mid February? That's a steal!
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
Spooky23 10y ago
I don't endorse racism by any means, but there's an overarching concept that a persons home is their castle, and you have broad discretion to control who and what goes on in your home. In most jurisdictions, you have a broad legal right as a person renting out your downstairs or a room to turn down tenants for any reason. Airbnb wants to have it both ways. They demonstrate their contempt for the law by pushing accountability for illegal renting to their "hosts", but where they have a messy situation where there is bad PR for them, all of the sudden they care about how "hosts" follow rules about discrimination that may or may not even apply to them. This is yet another example of why AirBnb is a ridiculous business that shouldn't operate as it does. Dealing with the issue in a way that would be compliant with the law would require that they acknowledge that many "hosts" are really running as hoc hotels, so they roll over the individual homeowners or tenants subletting their homes.
- vorotato 10y ago
  It seems like the because of the broker aspect the law might apply to them, however I'm not a lawyer. It's certainly I would think, a bad idea to say I'm not renting to this person because of their race. You're basically inviting a racial discrimination lawsuit. "The Fair Housing Act covers most housing. In some circumstances, the Act exempts owner-occupied buildings with no more than four units, single-family housing sold or rented without the use of a broker, and housing operated by organizations and private clubs that limit occupancy to members."
  - Spooky23 10y ago
    Is it housing or a short term rental? Is it a room in your home or your home, or a second house? I agree with you that behaving like this is a generally bad idea -- and in the specific case of this poor woman it is reprehensible. But the broader context is important too. Why is AirBnb making itself the arbiter of what laws need to be followed and what do not? Why is discrimination a bright line that cannot be crossed, while fire code violations in multi-unit AirBnb quasi-hotels are not? We end up in these troubling scenarios where we allow companies and individuals to pick and choose what rules are ok.
vorotato 10y ago
Why is this not a crime under fair housing act? At best this is a loophole which will be closed via precedent. A quick google shows that it looks like some Airbnb hosts are already being taken to court over violating the fair housing act so it sounds like the loophole is already being closed.
jacknews 10y ago
The piece seems rather "tailored" to deliver a message, and I suspect there is much more to the story than is being reported. Perhaps the guest actually didn't pre-arrange the extra friends, and then got pushy when the host wanted to charge for them. I'm guessing the "One word says it all. Asian" comment was being used to stereotype the guest's actions/attitudes, rather than as a statement of "You're not welcome, because you're Asian". Which in itself is of course deplorable, but not quite what is being reported. The host posssibly deserve a ban just for the racist comment, and if things are as reported, they most certainly deserve the ban, but the reporting seems very "framed".
rainhacker 10y ago
Why is this post flagged ?
- grzm 10y ago
  The short answer is that enough users have flagged it for it to display the [flagged] tag. Why they have could be they don't think the post is appropriate for HN, or that the resulting discussion hasn't been or is no longer constructive for the site.

20 points by sushobhan 10y ago

cup 10y ago

Good. Racists shouldn't be given a platform to further their hate.

Daddy_cat 10y ago
Inb4 the top minds of hacker news play devil's advocate
- salesguy222 10y ago
  haha honestly this place is rather sjw you will be able to tell by my greyed out comment and the reason everyone is SJW here (or maybe just hyper politically correct) is because most people are here to get a well paying job, not share their truest most controversial opinions btw I'm anti racism myself. just sharing my impression of this particular site's audience, especially those who can downvote here
  - tachaeon 10y ago
    Littering and....
  - hiddencost 10y ago
    Nope, most people are "social justice warriors" because they actually care about other people. We're not all secretly harboring boiling resentment on the basis of race / creed / gender / etc. that we're suppressing for pragmatic reasons.
    - kefka 10y ago
      > Nope, most people are "social justice warriors" because they actually care about other people. We're not all secretly harboring boiling resentment on the basis of race / creed / gender / etc. that we're suppressing for pragmatic reasons. No. Most people are apathetic and/or do not want to get involved in others issues. I've seen it, but you need not trust what I say. Go look up bystander effect. Some people, especially on the extreme left, have developed this victim attitude where everything affronts them, no matter what. It's something I've coined, but it reminds me of the "Victim of the Week", similar to how some tv shows have "monster of the week". Certain causes are 'cooler' than others. And the worst part is if you don't keep up with what you should be affronted to, then the rest of the group will disavow and oust you as "racist, homophobic, sexist, ...." The extreme right did learn one thing: no matter how different many are (blue dog all the way to tea partier), they don't oust you for having different beliefs within their continuum. ObOnTopic: Well, they did indeed give a reason. "Asian". Yeah, it's pretty damn offensive. I certainly wouldn't do that. But I'm sitting between "Well, racism sucks. Fuck em", and "It's their right as householder to decide who comes in and who doesn't, regardless the reason." And sometimes, it's nicer to know if they are a racist. Perhaps AirBNB should put that field in there, and allow people to show their true colors. A bit of sunshine usually helps disinfect problems like that.
      - sangnoir 10y ago
        > The extreme right did learn one thing: no matter how different many are (blue dog all the way to tea partier), they don't oust you for having different beliefs within their continuum. You might be forgetting/not aware of the terms 'RINO', or more recently: 'Cuckservative' which are used by the right to disparage others on their continuum. Politics is getting more polarized on the left and the right. See also: recent Freedom Caucus actions.
  - sctb 10y ago
    Please resist the temptation to make such generalizations about the community—those aren't part of a civil, thoughtful discussion.
- hiddencost 10y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shelley_v._Kraemer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shelley_v._Kraemer
  - salesguy222 10y ago
    racists will just deny people they don't like for other reasons, like smoking weed or type of job or background check or
    - oxide 10y ago
      Which is discriminatory, what's your point? That racists are going to discriminate regardless? Well, as in other areas, there will always be abusers. Drug testing welfare reicpients, for example, is a slap in the face to small government ideals and does absolutely nothing to deter abuse. The truth is the abusers are the exception, not the norm. Regulations and legalisation are not unlike a doorlock. It might keep out those who would steal given a free pass to do so, but anyone more determined will make short work of it. You can't legislate against that kind of abuse, the abuse of a black and white law prohibiting this type of discrimination for example. It's clear to me that you can't regulate someone out of being a racist prick, an addict, etc. They just keep coming up with a new way to do whatever the fuck they please.
      - kefka 10y ago
        Well, This is AirBNB's own moment of "Gig Economy goes against established law" like Uber and HomeJoy have done. Hoteliers and traditional rental agencies are not to discriminate on a list of things (now including sexual orientation and status). They have, including Trump. And they've also been sued to the gills for knowingly violating it and lost. Simply put, it's against the law to discriminate on basis of race or color; religion; national origin; familial status or age—includes families with children under the age of 18 and pregnant women; disability or handicap, or sex. (Source: http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/free-books/renters-rights-book/chapter5-2.html http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/free-books/renters-ri... ) Does that mean I'm required to let people in my home? Well, no. Just because someone shows up on my property means nothing. If they try to come in without permission, that's trespassing. If they have a weapon, in many states I'm legally able to blow them away. Castle Doctrine is the general description, with unique laws per state ( Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_doctrine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_doctrine ) But what happens when both are true, with AirBNB and someone I don't like (Muslim/Christian/Atheist/Black/Brown/Asian/gay/handicapped/dirty/poor/smelly/angry/arrogant/...)? There's the crux.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

Mk-0 10y ago

Huffington Post.

tabeth 10y ago

This situation is the biggest problem with Airbnb. Furthermore, these types of service should be double blind, and effectively anonymous for everyone but Airbnb (arguably them too, but that's not really possible given payment information). People are inherently racist [1], are forced to behave in ways to may (or may not) promote sexism(not necessarily in that they hate men/women, but are forced to follow the norms) [2] etc. to varying extents. Anonymity is the solution. Why do you need to even know the name of the person who's staying? You don't. [1] There's plenty of research on this highlighted in this article: https://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/28/opinion/nicholas-kristof-is-everyone-a-little-bit-racist.html https://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/28/opinion/nicholas-kristof-... [2] http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/cou-cou0000176.pdf http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/cou-cou0000176.pdf

hubert123 10y ago
I wouldn't rent to people that I can't screen at least by looks first. If you think that I'll let a bunch of hobos or gypsies rent my place just so I don't appear racist then you must be out of your mind. Profiling works. End of story. Oh and I am fully aware that I'll probably get a shadow/ban for this, but it's worth it.
- sctb 10y ago
  We've banned this account for repeatedly violating the guidelines after we've asked you many times to stop.
random_rr 10y ago
Disagree. My girlfriend and I have have turned down a few potential AirBnB people because they looked like street kids in their profile pictures. One had a gun (?????) prominently displayed in his profile pic. No thanks. As long as I'm letting people into my home, I'd like to get a quick look at them first.
- tabeth 10y ago
  Why exactly does it matter?

ntaylor 10y ago

But really, $50 a night on Big Bear, in mid February? That's a steal!

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

Spooky23 10y ago

I don't endorse racism by any means, but there's an overarching concept that a persons home is their castle, and you have broad discretion to control who and what goes on in your home. In most jurisdictions, you have a broad legal right as a person renting out your downstairs or a room to turn down tenants for any reason. Airbnb wants to have it both ways. They demonstrate their contempt for the law by pushing accountability for illegal renting to their "hosts", but where they have a messy situation where there is bad PR for them, all of the sudden they care about how "hosts" follow rules about discrimination that may or may not even apply to them. This is yet another example of why AirBnb is a ridiculous business that shouldn't operate as it does. Dealing with the issue in a way that would be compliant with the law would require that they acknowledge that many "hosts" are really running as hoc hotels, so they roll over the individual homeowners or tenants subletting their homes.

vorotato 10y ago
It seems like the because of the broker aspect the law might apply to them, however I'm not a lawyer. It's certainly I would think, a bad idea to say I'm not renting to this person because of their race. You're basically inviting a racial discrimination lawsuit. "The Fair Housing Act covers most housing. In some circumstances, the Act exempts owner-occupied buildings with no more than four units, single-family housing sold or rented without the use of a broker, and housing operated by organizations and private clubs that limit occupancy to members."
- Spooky23 10y ago
  Is it housing or a short term rental? Is it a room in your home or your home, or a second house? I agree with you that behaving like this is a generally bad idea -- and in the specific case of this poor woman it is reprehensible. But the broader context is important too. Why is AirBnb making itself the arbiter of what laws need to be followed and what do not? Why is discrimination a bright line that cannot be crossed, while fire code violations in multi-unit AirBnb quasi-hotels are not? We end up in these troubling scenarios where we allow companies and individuals to pick and choose what rules are ok.

vorotato 10y ago

Why is this not a crime under fair housing act? At best this is a loophole which will be closed via precedent. A quick google shows that it looks like some Airbnb hosts are already being taken to court over violating the fair housing act so it sounds like the loophole is already being closed.

jacknews 10y ago

The piece seems rather "tailored" to deliver a message, and I suspect there is much more to the story than is being reported. Perhaps the guest actually didn't pre-arrange the extra friends, and then got pushy when the host wanted to charge for them. I'm guessing the "One word says it all. Asian" comment was being used to stereotype the guest's actions/attitudes, rather than as a statement of "You're not welcome, because you're Asian". Which in itself is of course deplorable, but not quite what is being reported. The host posssibly deserve a ban just for the racist comment, and if things are as reported, they most certainly deserve the ban, but the reporting seems very "framed".

rainhacker 10y ago

Why is this post flagged ?

grzm 10y ago
The short answer is that enough users have flagged it for it to display the [flagged] tag. Why they have could be they don't think the post is appropriate for HN, or that the resulting discussion hasn't been or is no longer constructive for the site.