Yes, Airbnb can do what they want with their property, namely their website and business. If you don't like it then they even outline what you can do in the linked article.
This knife cuts both ways.
This knife cuts both ways.
"If you cancel your account as a guest, any future reservations you have will be refunded according to the hosts' cancellation policy."
So, if you don't agree to this demand by AirBnB that wasn't on the table when you agreed to your booking, then you just lose your money.
If AirBnB was fair about this then it would let the user off the hook and pay out any cancellation fees/compensation out of its own funds. It's not like many people aren't going to agree anyway.
Yes indeed, Airbnb can do what they want with their property, namely their website and business, and their customers property is not their business.
> if you don't like it then they even outline what you can do in the linked article.
Yes, you can ignore it, or you can move to a competitor and so on. Airbnb simply is not in a position to force anybody to accept guests they do not want to entertain for whatever reason, that's the way they set things up because that is the easiest for them. To now retro-fit a requirement that you can't discriminate is there to look good, not for you to stop discriminating. The only way they could enforce that is by forcing Airbnb hosts to accept all guests without the ability to refuse any of them and that will never happen.
They offer a service with terms, you either accept those terms or you don't no one is forcing you to use their service.
On the matter of enforcement, I agree this would be near impossible to enforce in all but the most obvious of cases of discrimination.
http://www.nytimes.com/1993/08/14/nyregion/times-adopts-a-ne...
This is a typical case of CYA.
It's improper and intolerant of them to make these kinds of demands. In fact, it's a form of totalitarianism to not do business with anyone who doesn't think exactly like us.
As an airbnb guest, I'm respectful of the fact that I'm a guest in someone's home. Their home, their rules. It seems like airbnb is trying to change that dynamic. Now, anyone who wants to be a rude guest can complain about unspecified group think violations. Sad.
I don't see a problem when a company says "if you're a racist you're not allowed to use our service".
For Germany, start with http://www.zwischenmiete.de . Cheaper, better, less obnoxious than AirBnB. Good riddance.
I don't see the problem with a company just being tolerant.
That's why this gets people's bristles up, because it reeks of the "reverse racism isn't real" and "racism requires structural oppression" dogma that has jumped the gap from post modern academia to tech by way of HR departments, always enforced by carefully worded but unmistakably our-way-or-the-highway totalism. If someone wants to be an arbiter of what is right without considering what happens when they are wrong, it's not justice they're after.
Outside of the Anglo Saxon sphere, this isn't such a big issue... Yet.
Similarly, here you are speaking about your disdain for calling someone racist, and no one's saying you're trying to excuse your own racism for it. Where is this sentiment coming from?
I literally don't see people's bristles up because of "dogma". It's mostly you using his very strong language and then throwing up very significant claims without evidence, such as that post modern academia has invaded tech with totalism circulated around the supposedly untrue ideation that reverse racism isn't a thing and that racism involves structural discrimination. A large chunk of this thread is talking about how Airbnb is toeing the line between ownership of property (i.e. deciding what can be done with it) and business decision (i.e. refusing to allow your services to be used by those who discriminate).
> I agree to treat everyone in the Airbnb community—regardless of their race, religion, national origin, ethnicity, disability, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, or age—with respect, and without judgment or bias.
This requirement cuts both ways. A woman who fears rape cannot prevent a young man from staying in her apartment. A Jew or black must accept someone into their home who looks like a skinhead. Someone from the Ukraine must allow a Russian to stay with them, even in spite of the ongoing conflicts. A host living in a 3rd floor walk-up must allow a guest in a wheelchair.
I would never have a reason to refuse someone for these reasons, but that in itself is a privileged position to be in. This policy doesn't only protect the vulnerable; it also puts the vulnerable at risk.