In case you're ever interrogated re alleged discrimination..
Sept 10, 2016 1:25:26 GMT
maria likes this
Post by High Priestess on Sept 10, 2016 1:25:26 GMT
I'm hoping no host I know ever ends up being "interrogated" by Airbnb over alleged discrimination...but...in case anyone is ever asked why they turned down a certain guest...here are some things I wanted to mention on this.
First, I consider it extremely inappropriate and invasive for either the government, or a private corporation, to demand to know why I or anyone else made any particular decision with regard to a particular renter. This attitude comes from my libertarian (aka my "Classical Liberal" as opposed to "modern liberal" ) viewpoint that this is a realm that is off limits to the government for inquiry, policing or snooping. That said, we have to deal with the governments and corporations as they are, rather than as we would wish them to be. And if we want to remain Airbnb hosts we have to deal with its policies and follow them.
So if anyone is ever interrogated (and interrogated is I believe the appropriate term, rather than "asked") about why they turned down a particular guest or renter, I would recommend having some familiarity with or ability to turn down guests based not on "objective" criteria, but rather on subjective, non-rational criteria, such as one's "gut sense." One of the critiques I have of nondiscrimination policies, is one that many people may never think about -- namely, that they are what I might call "ideologically sexist" or "archetypally sexist" in the sense that they very heavily favor the "masculine" archetypal elements over the feminine ones -- reason over subjectivity, logic over intuition, universal generalisms over the unique particular, thought over feeling. We have seen this sexism actually expressed as an intentional practice by Airbnb leaders like Brian Chesky, who are oriented to pushing hosts to make decisions based on "objective" criteria.
One of the assumptions at the basis of the entire nondiscrimination policy concept, is that people make decisions for reasons that can be easily/readily articulated. This is not necessarily so, and when hosts talk about "go with your gut sense" they are referring to the importance of, if not non-rational factors in decision making, at least those which are hard to articulate.
There are some phrases..."women's intuition", "women's ways of knowing", that point to the ways that people can "know" things, or make decisions, that go beyond the realm of logic and reason. Such phrases also point to the generally known fact that this realm has historically, culturally been more associated with women than men. In ancient times, it was the women who were the seers, the Oracle-givers at Delphi were priestesses, the "Volva" or seeresses of ancient Germanic tribes were women. ( tinyurl.com/qedkl7l ) And on to the present day, where in any room full of Tarot Card readers and Fortune Tellers, you'll find mostly women. The "archetype" of the seer and diviner is thus a feminine archetype, over the centuries. Thus any view which is prejudiced against non-rational dimensions of existence, or dscriminates against people using nonrational part of the psyche to make decisions, could be viewed as "archetypally sexist." Not that I want to introduce a new category to be included in nondiscrimination statements! Rather I want to show the superficiality of such and point to the complexity of existence which cannot be captured in neat, prissy little statements of rule and law.
I am a Pagan and make some of my decisions by way of divination.I use divination heavily in my daily life, and have used divination at several times to decide whether to accept a certain renter -- be they an Airbnb guest or other type of renter. Actually, divination practice is part of Pagan religious practice for myself as it is for many Pagans, (as well as for those practicing "traditional" religions such as African Traditional Religions, or Asatru/Northern Tradition) and so to suggest that we "should" be making decisions based only on "objective" criteria, is something I would consider both ideologically sexist, and also insensitive or perhaps even offensive to, those in Pagan/Traditional Religions. Thus to use any kind of force to compel people to either make decisions on renters (or anything else) based on objective criteria, or to answer to interrogations in that way, could in fact be viewed as discriminating against people who practice a certain religion -- such as Pagan Witches, or African Traditional Religions, Ifa, Santeria, and so on. As much as I dislike the whole over-focus of our culture on "discrimination", it does me some good when I can turn the tables on the bullies and show that those livid about discrimination are discriminating.
So to get to the final point -- it's my view that you have a right to state that you make your decisions about renters based on non-rational criteria, such as divination, casting lots, tarot readings, throwing bones, or using plain old fashioned "gut sense." And you have a right to insist on the right to use such methods. And one of the advantages of such methods, which I find delightfully countercultural, is that they are not as susceptible to interrogation. When you say that you declined a renter because the Tarot cards told you to do that, the police interrogators from the government or from Airbnb will, in essence, be standing there slack jawed. You will deprive them of their tools to invade your sacred space.
casting sacred space
Of course, this will be all too woo-woo and off-the-charts for some, so if that's the case for you, it's also fine to make your decisions "objectively" ...if you think you can....
First, I consider it extremely inappropriate and invasive for either the government, or a private corporation, to demand to know why I or anyone else made any particular decision with regard to a particular renter. This attitude comes from my libertarian (aka my "Classical Liberal" as opposed to "modern liberal" ) viewpoint that this is a realm that is off limits to the government for inquiry, policing or snooping. That said, we have to deal with the governments and corporations as they are, rather than as we would wish them to be. And if we want to remain Airbnb hosts we have to deal with its policies and follow them.
So if anyone is ever interrogated (and interrogated is I believe the appropriate term, rather than "asked") about why they turned down a particular guest or renter, I would recommend having some familiarity with or ability to turn down guests based not on "objective" criteria, but rather on subjective, non-rational criteria, such as one's "gut sense." One of the critiques I have of nondiscrimination policies, is one that many people may never think about -- namely, that they are what I might call "ideologically sexist" or "archetypally sexist" in the sense that they very heavily favor the "masculine" archetypal elements over the feminine ones -- reason over subjectivity, logic over intuition, universal generalisms over the unique particular, thought over feeling. We have seen this sexism actually expressed as an intentional practice by Airbnb leaders like Brian Chesky, who are oriented to pushing hosts to make decisions based on "objective" criteria.
One of the assumptions at the basis of the entire nondiscrimination policy concept, is that people make decisions for reasons that can be easily/readily articulated. This is not necessarily so, and when hosts talk about "go with your gut sense" they are referring to the importance of, if not non-rational factors in decision making, at least those which are hard to articulate.
There are some phrases..."women's intuition", "women's ways of knowing", that point to the ways that people can "know" things, or make decisions, that go beyond the realm of logic and reason. Such phrases also point to the generally known fact that this realm has historically, culturally been more associated with women than men. In ancient times, it was the women who were the seers, the Oracle-givers at Delphi were priestesses, the "Volva" or seeresses of ancient Germanic tribes were women. ( tinyurl.com/qedkl7l ) And on to the present day, where in any room full of Tarot Card readers and Fortune Tellers, you'll find mostly women. The "archetype" of the seer and diviner is thus a feminine archetype, over the centuries. Thus any view which is prejudiced against non-rational dimensions of existence, or dscriminates against people using nonrational part of the psyche to make decisions, could be viewed as "archetypally sexist." Not that I want to introduce a new category to be included in nondiscrimination statements! Rather I want to show the superficiality of such and point to the complexity of existence which cannot be captured in neat, prissy little statements of rule and law.
I am a Pagan and make some of my decisions by way of divination.I use divination heavily in my daily life, and have used divination at several times to decide whether to accept a certain renter -- be they an Airbnb guest or other type of renter. Actually, divination practice is part of Pagan religious practice for myself as it is for many Pagans, (as well as for those practicing "traditional" religions such as African Traditional Religions, or Asatru/Northern Tradition) and so to suggest that we "should" be making decisions based only on "objective" criteria, is something I would consider both ideologically sexist, and also insensitive or perhaps even offensive to, those in Pagan/Traditional Religions. Thus to use any kind of force to compel people to either make decisions on renters (or anything else) based on objective criteria, or to answer to interrogations in that way, could in fact be viewed as discriminating against people who practice a certain religion -- such as Pagan Witches, or African Traditional Religions, Ifa, Santeria, and so on. As much as I dislike the whole over-focus of our culture on "discrimination", it does me some good when I can turn the tables on the bullies and show that those livid about discrimination are discriminating.
So to get to the final point -- it's my view that you have a right to state that you make your decisions about renters based on non-rational criteria, such as divination, casting lots, tarot readings, throwing bones, or using plain old fashioned "gut sense." And you have a right to insist on the right to use such methods. And one of the advantages of such methods, which I find delightfully countercultural, is that they are not as susceptible to interrogation. When you say that you declined a renter because the Tarot cards told you to do that, the police interrogators from the government or from Airbnb will, in essence, be standing there slack jawed. You will deprive them of their tools to invade your sacred space.
casting sacred space
Of course, this will be all too woo-woo and off-the-charts for some, so if that's the case for you, it's also fine to make your decisions "objectively" ...if you think you can....