Sexism in the BC Tenancy Market?

[Chessmistress]

I don't see references about "black renters".
I don't get the difference between "convicted of commiting crimes" and actually commiting crimes: women are 13 times less likely to be "convicted of commiting crimes" so that means women are 13 times less likely of commiting crimes.
It's fair such prejudice that against males? No, I don't think prejudices are fair, never.
But as you can see there are good reasons. As long as typical masculine behaviors (including dominance and violence) will be taught to males, they'll be generally much more likely to commit crimes than women, and some people will take their precautions.

I guess he's inferring from your conclusion that, as black people are more likely (by proportion of population) to be sentenced for committing a crime (it could be better worded), you'd support discriminating against black renters.

Totally different things: blacks - both males and women - are more likely to commit crimes (as numbers of the previous link clearly shows, usually my opinions are based on facts) because they're generally paid less, more poors, still discriminated in many ways, as a result of an historical discrimination that continues even today (even if today is far less harsh).
Males as class are NOT discriminated, it's the very opposite, but white males are still far more likely to commit crimes than white women. Explanation? They are taught to be more violent and dominant. It's the same root of rape culture and many other problems of our society. It can be resolved just only with abolition of gender, IMHO. As long as this problem will not solved, prejudices are still unfair, but have some good reasons: numbers speak louder, everybody can check it in my link.

[Parhe]

I guess he's inferring from your conclusion that, as black people are more likely (by proportion of population) to be sentenced for committing a crime (it could be better worded), you'd support discriminating against black renters.

Totally different things: blacks - both males and women - are more likely to commit crimes (as numbers of the previous link clearly shows, usually my opinions are based on facts) because they're generally paid less, more poors, still discriminated in many ways, as a result of an historical discrimination that continues even today (even if today is far less harsh).
Males as class are NOT discriminated, it's the very opposite, but white males are still far more likely to commit crimes than white women. Explanation? They are taught to be more violent and dominant. It's the same root of rape culture and many other problems of our society. It can be resolved just only with abolition of gender, IMHO. As long as this problem will not solved, prejudices are still unfair, but have some good reasons: numbers speak louder, everybody can check it in my link.

While I agree with the abolition of gender, or at least government's support of gender, the OP is about discrimination by sex not gender.

[Chessmistress]

While I agree with the abolition of gender, or at least government's support of gender, the OP is about discrimination by sex not gender.

In our heteronormative society these concepts tend to overlap, you know?

[Parhe]

While I agree with the abolition of gender, or at least government's support of gender, the OP is about discrimination by sex not gender.

In our heteronormative society these concepts tend to overlap, you know?

Tend to but not always. You're arguing a similar and related subject but it isn't the same. That's like having a discussion on the people of South Korea, where the majority of Koreans live and majority of the population is Korean ethnically, and then moving the discussion to ethnic Koreans. It excludes some of the people in the original topic while including some people originally not part of the topic.

[Galloism]

I guess he's inferring from your conclusion that, as black people are more likely (by proportion of population) to be sentenced for committing a crime (it could be better worded), you'd support discriminating against black renters.

Totally different things: blacks - both males and women - are more likely to commit crimes (as numbers of the previous link clearly shows, usually my opinions are based on facts) because they're generally paid less, more poors, still discriminated in many ways, as a result of an historical discrimination that continues even today (even if today is far less harsh).
Males as class are NOT discriminated, it's the very opposite, but white males are still far more likely to commit crimes than white women. Explanation? They are taught to be more violent and dominant. It's the same root of rape culture and many other problems of our society. It can be resolved just only with abolition of gender, IMHO. As long as this problem will not solved, prejudices are still unfair, but have some good reasons: numbers speak louder, everybody can check it in my link.

What's interesting about men and women is that men are more likely to be both at the very bottom and very top of the social ladder. This, in my opinion, is largely due to the nearly complete lack of safety net for men.

While a women's Homeless shelter can be found in nearly every county in the nation, there are only a few hundred men's shelters. This is despite the fact that a majority of the homeless are male.

So, men are both the leading class and the underclass, while women tend to occupy the middle. This combined with systematic Justice system discrimination against men, and that's the result.

[British Empire Strikes Back]

I think it is very sexist. But when it is sexism against males, no one cares. When it is racism against whites, no one cares. They act like either don't exist, but they do.

All discrimination needs to stop!

[Arcanda]

Selling a good, but restricting the good from being bought by a certain person because of their gender?
Looks like sexism indeed.

[Chessmistress]

What's interesting about men and women is that men are more likely to be both at the very bottom and very top of the social ladder. This, in my opinion, is largely due to the nearly complete lack of safety net for men.

While a women's Homeless shelter can be found in nearly every county in the nation, there are only a few hundred men's shelters. This is despite the fact that a majority of the homeless are male.

So, men are both the leading class and the underclass, while women tend to occupy the middle. This combined with systematic Justice system discrimination against men, and that's the result.

It's not due a "system discrimination", it's due the fact males are taught to be violent, dominant, competitive and risk-taking: that means they rise and fall more easily. That's why they're both at the top and at the end of society. Women's typical behavior is on the whole better, IMHO, for an advanced society: it allow the creation of a more stable and fair society.

[Socialist Tera]

I guess he's inferring from your conclusion that, as black people are more likely (by proportion of population) to be sentenced for committing a crime (it could be better worded), you'd support discriminating against black renters.

Bingo. Black people make up 39.6% of the prison population, but only 13% of the general population.

EDIT: Mea culpa, just checked, 13%

It's because the police target black people. White people commit more crime than black people.

[Galloism]

What's interesting about men and women is that men are more likely to be both at the very bottom and very top of the social ladder. This, in my opinion, is largely due to the nearly complete lack of safety net for men.

While a women's Homeless shelter can be found in nearly every county in the nation, there are only a few hundred men's shelters. This is despite the fact that a majority of the homeless are male.

So, men are both the leading class and the underclass, while women tend to occupy the middle. This combined with systematic Justice system discrimination against men, and that's the result.

It's not due a "system discrimination", it's due the fact males are taught to be violent, dominant, competitive and risk-taking: that means they rise and fall more easily. That's why they're both at the top and at the end of society. Women's typical behavior is on the whole better, IMHO, for an advanced society: it allow the creation of a more stable and fair society.

What do you call it when men are sentenced 67% longer for the same crime, throughout the Justice system, and it takes a higher standard of evidence to convict a woman than a man?

[Galloism]

Bingo. Black people make up 39.6% of the prison population, but only 13% of the general population.

EDIT: Mea culpa, just checked, 13%

It's because the police target black people. White people commit more crime than black people.

Uh... hard to say really.

[Glorious KASSRD]

What's interesting about men and women is that men are more likely to be both at the very bottom and very top of the social ladder. This, in my opinion, is largely due to the nearly complete lack of safety net for men.

While a women's Homeless shelter can be found in nearly every county in the nation, there are only a few hundred men's shelters. This is despite the fact that a majority of the homeless are male.

So, men are both the leading class and the underclass, while women tend to occupy the middle. This combined with systematic Justice system discrimination against men, and that's the result.

It's not due a "system discrimination", it's due the fact males are taught to be violent, dominant, competitive and risk-taking: that means they rise and fall more easily. That's why they're both at the top and at the end of society. Women's typical behavior is on the whole better, IMHO, for an advanced society: it allow the creation of a more stable and fair society.

No. Men are at the top and bottom because they have it easier to get higher, but also much easier to fall. It has nothing to do with "unstable behavior".

[Socialist Tera]

It's not due a "system discrimination", it's due the fact males are taught to be violent, dominant, competitive and risk-taking: that means they rise and fall more easily. That's why they're both at the top and at the end of society. Women's typical behavior is on the whole better, IMHO, for an advanced society: it allow the creation of a more stable and fair society.

What do you call it when men are sentenced 67% longer for the same crime, throughout the Justice system, and it takes a higher standard of evidence to convict a woman than a man?

That's the patriarchy to blame for that. Women are seen as weak defenseless victims and when they do crimes, there must be something wrong with them while males are seen as just scumbags. We need to stop seeing females as weak.

[Galloism]

What do you call it when men are sentenced 67% longer for the same crime, throughout the Justice system, and it takes a higher standard of evidence to convict a woman than a man?

That's the patriarchy to blame for that. Women are seen as weak defenseless victims and when they do crimes, there must be something wrong with them while males are seen as just scumbags. We need to stop seeing females as weak.

Probably, but it's still systematic discrimination against men in a real and palatable way.

[Parhe]

That's the patriarchy to blame for that. Women are seen as weak defenseless victims and when they do crimes, there must be something wrong with them while males are seen as just scumbags. We need to stop seeing females as weak.

Probably, but it's still systematic discrimination against men in a real and palatable way.

And is also the same system that sees Black Americans as more violent.

[Reploid Productions]

I'm of two minds on it. On the one hand, when it comes to renting houses/apartments, there should be no "X group only." On the other hand, while it's a dick move, I can understand and appreciate why people renting out rooms of their own homes would want to restrict who they'll accept.

With renting a house/apartment, each renter has their own discrete, secure housing unit, their private space, without access to other tenants' private spaces. When you're renting out your spare room, you are inviting a stranger into YOUR private space. Most of the time, if you're renting a spare room, you are giving someone access to your entire house, as most houses are not built into isolated secure suites. On those grounds, I think it is the homeowner's right to restrict who they are willing to rent to. While the "male/female" restriction is probably the most common and the least unreasonable/stupid, I also think that the homeowner should be able to restrict who they rent that spare room to for whatever other (frequently stupid) reason they want. If they can't find a willing renter that meets their requirements, then they lose out on that income; and the more stupid and unreasonable the requirements, the less likely they are to find someone willing to rent from a sexist/bigot/religious fanatic/etc.

So for me, it's less to do with whatever discrimination/biases a homeowner with a spare room has, and more about "I need to be able to trust whoever I share my secure space with, because I'm not there 24-7 and a housemate will be able to get into my stuff."

[Socialist Tera]

Probably, but it's still systematic discrimination against men in a real and palatable way.

And is also the same system that sees Black Americans as more violent.

Yes, it shows how flawed the current system we live today is.

[Galloism]

Probably, but it's still systematic discrimination against men in a real and palatable way.

And is also the same system that sees Black Americans as more violent.

Yep, although in the last thread on the subject we determined the sexist discrimination is greater than the racist one (black men, suffering both gender and race discrimination, undoubtedly have it worst, while white women have it best, getting the benefit of both forms of discrimination).

[Chessmistress]

What do you call it when men are sentenced 67% longer for the same crime, throughout the Justice system, and it takes a higher standard of evidence to convict a woman than a man?

The judgments do not rely just only on the type of crime but also on the level of cruelty within the crime. Being males more violent (so they are taught to be, the fault is not theirs), often the crimes committed by them are more heinous.
There's no such thing as higher standard of evidence to convict a woman.

[Galloism]

What do you call it when men are sentenced 67% longer for the same crime, throughout the Justice system, and it takes a higher standard of evidence to convict a woman than a man?

The judgments do not rely just only on the type of crime but also on the level of cruelty within the crime. Being males more violent (so they are taught to be, the fault is not theirs), often the crimes committed by them are more heinous.
There's no such thing as higher standard of evidence to convict a woman.

I want to see proof of this assertion: that in the comparison study, they completely ignored "level of cruelty" and, if considered, would justify a 67% longer sentence for the same crime.

And, although de jure the level of evidence is the same, keep in mind juries are made up of people with the same sexist assumptions as the rest.

This results in women being acquitted at higher rates based on their gender.

[Parhe]

What do you call it when men are sentenced 67% longer for the same crime, throughout the Justice system, and it takes a higher standard of evidence to convict a woman than a man?

The judgments do not rely just only on the type of crime but also on the level of cruelty within the crime. Being males more violent (so they are taught to be, the fault is not theirs), often the crimes committed by them are more heinous.
There's no such thing as higher standard of evidence to convict a woman.

Could the both of y'all post some evidence about the claim? That men are sentenced longer for the same type of crimes, men are cruelest and more violent, and that women do or do not need more evidence.

[Independent State AF]

The judgments do not rely just only on the type of crime but also on the level of cruelty within the crime. Being males more violent (so they are taught to be, the fault is not theirs), often the crimes committed by them are more heinous.
There's no such thing as higher standard of evidence to convict a woman.

Could the both of y'all post some evidence about the claim? That men are sentenced longer for the same type of crimes, men are cruelest and more violent, and that women do or do not need more evidence.

I would agree, but considering who is arguing you are very unlikely to get a source, or if you're realllyyy lucky, and unbiased one.

[Chessmistress]

I want to see proof of this assertion: that in the comparison study, they completely ignored "level of cruelty" and, if considered, would justify a 67% longer sentence for the same crime.

You miss to show the link that an higher evidence standard is need to convict a woman, you know?

[Galloism]

I want to see proof of this assertion: that in the comparison study, they completely ignored "level of cruelty" and, if considered, would justify a 67% longer sentence for the same crime.

You miss to show the link that an higher evidence standard is need to convict a woman, you know?

I didn't see it since you edited it in, so I edited it in above.

[Glorious KASSRD]

What do you call it when men are sentenced 67% longer for the same crime, throughout the Justice system, and it takes a higher standard of evidence to convict a woman than a man?

The judgments do not rely just only on the type of crime but also on the level of cruelty within the crime. Being males more violent (so they are taught to be, the fault is not theirs), often the crimes committed by them are more heinous.
There's no such thing as higher standard of evidence to convict a woman.

Can you please prove that men are more violent and cruel?