Thinking of getting a lodger

Red-Squirrel_2

Comms69 wrote: »

Sorry totally forgot- all men are rapists.

I wonder when the last news headline was “man and woman interact and nothing happens!”

Fact is, women are at much higher risk of harm from men than they are from women.

So are other men actually.

Peter_Brown_2

Comms69 wrote: »

As a private individual it’s fine.

I could say no whites, blacks, Asians, disabled, etc. - I wouldn’t just to be clear!

You may well be right.
But when it comes to political compliance, I usually tread very carefully.
The laws can change at any time.

Comms69

Red-Squirrel wrote: »

Fact is, women are at much higher risk of harm from men than they are from women.

So are other men actually.

Indeed, but that is a significant minority ( in both genders ).

Statistically speaking the difference is negligible.

Comms69

sevenhills wrote: »

Its an interesting point, I do a little gardening on the side and have had a lodger, surely HMRC thinks its a business?

The gardening yes, the lodger no ( under rent a room anyway )

Comms69

Peter_Brown wrote: »

You may well be right.
But when it comes to political compliance, I usually tread very carefully.
The laws can change at any time.

Well not really. I mean laws take months if not years to pass and are then subject to overriding laws.

I’m not saying anyone should discriminate, but if you want to that’s your choice ( and I will judge you for it )

Peter_Brown_2

Red-Squirrel wrote: »

Fact is, women are at much higher risk of harm from men than they are from women.

So are other men actually.

Not all men are rapists, but most rapists are men.
I would agree it's sensible for a lone woman to only pick a female lodger, if that's what makes her comfortable.

But I wouldn't openly state it on the advertisement, as that may not be compliant. Just find other reasons not to accept a man.

But one point to consider, is that if you pick a male lodger, his girlfriend is the unknown. If you pick a female lodger, her boyfriend is the unknown.

Peter_Brown_2

Comms69 wrote: »

Well not really. I mean laws take months if not years to pass and are then subject to overriding laws.

I’m not saying anyone should discriminate, but if you want to that’s your choice ( and I will judge you for it )

But no one will inform you of any law change.
The liability is completely yours.
ie the old saying "ignorance is no defence".

Laws can also be retrospective. So an act that is legal today may become a crime in the future. Even if the act was committed prior to the law change.

Red-Squirrel_2

Comms69 wrote: »

Statistically speaking the difference is negligible.

No its not. 2 or 3 women are killed by men each week, many more are hurt.

You as a man don't have any right to tell a woman she shouldn't consider her own safety when considering the gender of the lodger she takes in.

Comms69

Red-Squirrel wrote: »

No its not. 2 or 3 women are killed by men each week, many more are hurt.

You as a man don't have any right to tell a woman she shouldn't consider her own safety when considering the gender of the lodger she takes in.

Yes I do; I have the right to say whatever I like- except incite violence.

But just to be clear that’s not what I was saying. Instead of judging gender, have you tried simply judging the individual?...

Peter_Brown_2

Red-Squirrel wrote: »

No
You as a man don't have any right to tell a woman she shouldn't consider her own safety when considering the gender of the lodger she takes in.

I wouldn't worry about whether an unknown person on the internet is a man or a woman.
But I would worry about being politically compliant with the law.

These kind of issues are all the rage at the moment. It's common sense to avoid common sense!

Our opinions are of no relevance. The government make the laws and they are supported by the mainstream media. Any whiff of non compliance and they'll be all over it like the proverbial...