4 ms·

I don't understand your argument at all. If you rent your house to strangers then you're obviously okay with those people having sex at your place, in your bed

• DanBC 10y ago
  The quantity of the cleanup; the increased risk of infected product; the increased risk of complaints from neighbours; the increased legal risk of running a brothel; etc. In this specific case it's not illegal for a woman to sell sex; it's not illegal for a woman to sell sex from a brothel; it is illegal to keep a brothel; or to let a property be used as a brothel.
  • yummyfajitas 10y ago
    The increased risk of disease/volume would also be true of a gay couple (statistically a vastly higher risk of HIV) with high stamina. Would you be similarly sympathetic if someone complained about such a situation? If not, this suggests your stated reasoning is faulty.
    • anjc 10y ago
      You think people should be sympathetic in the case that somebody chooses to put their health at risk via infection, just because the perpetrator is gay? Somebody has faulty reasoning here and it's not the poster you replied too.
      • foldr 10y ago
        Never thought I'd agree with yummyfajitas on anything, but you are missing his point entirely. Statistically, gay men are more likely to be HIV+ than the general population. Thus if a gay couple who were having safe sex in your apartment left behind lots of used condoms, there would statistically be a higher probability that those condoms contained HIV+ semen than with a couple chosen at random from the whole population. It has nothing to do with people deliberately engaging in risky behavior. For the sake of argument, we might say that the HIV+ person in the couple contracted HIV as the result of a date rape. (Not that I in any way endorse your judgmental suggestion that most people who get HIV somehow deserve it.)
        • anjc 10y ago
          Well it's difficult to assess something like this as a matter of probabilities and generalisations. It's completely rational to be more wary of your health when dealing with the refuse of a brothel (be it gay or not) versus dealing with the refuse of, say, your teenage son/brother/friend/whatever.
          • yummyfajitas 10y ago
            It's similarly rational to be more wary of your health when dealing with the refuse of a normal (non-prostitute) gay man. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5937a2.htm?s_cid=mm5937a2_w https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5937a2.htm?s_cid... Consider a comparable headline: "My Airbnb flat was turned into a pop-up bathhouse, because my gay renter had gay sex with a man he met on the gay app Grindr." Would this headline be deserving of a similar level of sympathy/moral weight/etc?
            • anjc 10y ago
              A person underhandedly uses somebody else's house as a gay bathhouse and the owner's upset that they have to clean up after the men? Yeah I think it's ok to be sympathetic to that situation... You're not going to make me change my viewpoint by making it about gay people
              • yummyfajitas 10y ago
                Glad to know you don't consider it acceptable for a gay person to rent a flat on AirBnB and then have gay sex in the room he rented. I think most of us don't actually think that's a bad thing.
                • anjc 10y ago
                  Bro if you will happily clean up the sweat, spit, blood and semen of people who use your house as a brothel or bathhouse then maybe there's an app idea in there for ya. Most people would not be happy doing that.
  • usrusr 10y ago
    In short: the increased risk of making your home available on Airbnb. The whole concept of "sharing economy" seems to be based in large parts on the idea that individuals who got unlucky take the damage for the herd and are somehow expected find solace in knowing that the fearsome zero star retaliation rating they gave will maybe help someone else. A bit like mixed cost calculation, where the easy customers subsidize the difficult case, but reversed: the happy path transactions reap the benefits.
    • Zak 10y ago
      I'm not sure what you're getting at here. Patronizing a business comes with a risk of defective products or bad service. Running a business comes with a risk of bad customers. Doing it in a more peer to peer fashion using a website improves the flow of information about these kinds of risks, but can't eliminate them. No reasonable person would think renting out their apartment overnight to strangers is risk-free; it's just a question of whether the risk is worth the reward.