To Think This Isn't Discriminatory - Really Shocked

[IceCreamSurprise]

I am advertising a room in my house for rent (i.e. a lodger) and specified "females only". Facebook Marketplace has removed the listing because it is discriminatory. I am sure the Equality Act permits exceptions to the discrimination rules where accommodation is provided in your own home.

I have been literally plagued by dodgy men demanding to view, no discernable proper names or photos, refuse to provide any form of ID and keep demanding to view and sending messages until I block them. I suspect I missed blocking one of these men and he reported me out of spite.

I appealed the decision and it came back immediately that my appeal was refused, I was being "discriminatory" and breaching their rules.

Now Facebook isn't that important to me (although responses received on other mediums haven't been much better) but am I being unreasonable to think this is shocking of FB. I just want to protect myself against being in a vulnerable position in my own home with a stranger, FGS!

You are allowed to be selective for your own home. If you refuse anyone you do not have to give a reason (I think).

Ha, oh god I've seen similar discussions on Twitter. Especially amongst the women with penises brigade.

YABU, but not about the decision - about putting too much faith in Facebook.
Facebook decisions are AI, they're not going to have a human understanding and making decisions on specific rules and exemptions - use a proper site.

I think this is the section. Single sex exemptions.
www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/notes/division/3/16/20/7

I think Facebook are correct, my interpretation of the Equality Act is that the exception does not apply if you advertise the room as available.

So you could legitimately decide to only let the room to women, but by advertising it you've relinqished that right.

"Proper sites" have proved just as bad, if not worse. One of the benefits of Facebook is that you can usually check a person's profile or at least photos, and if they have no profile photo or a cartoon character, or photos showing violence, etc, or an obviously fake name, exclude them. I use Facebook to check out potential lodgers even when they use another site to apply.

I have successfully let out the room in the past, its just this time around the responses have been uniformly awful, rude and disrespectful.

Thanks. This is from the guidance to the Equality Act.

734.Single sex services are permitted where:
...
they may be used by more than one person and a woman might object to the presence of a man (or vice versa)

This is my own home and there is only one bathroom. I don't see why advertising so as to use this exception should be discriminatory when the exception is not discriminatory. That would infringe my right to use the exception!

They're wrong, you're wrong.

And OP, you mean WOMEN. Not females

If we are now in a place where a woman can't decide she only wants another woman as lodger in her own home that is very sad. You don't need to be brain of Britain to understand that men's superior physical strength puts women at a disadvantage. Of course most men aren't intimidating bullies but why should anyone have to take the chance in their own home if the don't want to. You can filter men out at the application stage by simply choosing a women, but why have to waste everyone's time when a simple women only advert clarifies things for everybody concerned. It shouldn't be an issue to be able to say what you intend on an advert in these circumstances.

I also want to discourage men from contacting me in the first place, because I've had some seriously dodgy responses.

I worry for more niaive women, because they might allow themselves to be persuaded into letting a man view, and put themselves at risk as a result. At least by stating no men, it acts as a visible deterrent that you can point to when dealing with these responses.

I don't think posters realise what some of these men responding can be like. They will literally send multiple messages trying to argue with you if you say no politely. Yes I block them but sometimes I can't do it quickly enough if I'm at work. I had one over the weekend (I suspect the one who reported me) who sent me 18 different messages trying to persuade me to let him have the room for £300 including all bills, when the real cost is nearer £550 and its advertised for more than that with bills not included. Another made suggestive comments regarding "coming to a mutually acceptable relationship with regards to the rent"!! Its also the time of year when there are students from all over the world arriving looking for accommodation, most of whom are difficult to trace.

Really disgusted by Facebook and their attitude towards women trying to keep themselves safe.

Ffs, of COURSE you have every right to say females only, and it is DEFINITELY legal for you to do so. Loads of women only want to share with other women, and for extremely good reasons. Facebook is far too simplistic in its policies.

YANBU as it's not discrimination

But those are facebooks policies, to use their site you need to follow their rules.

Use spare room or any of the other sites set up for this where you will be able to post with restrictions

The world has gone mad!

Just use Spareroom. You can specify the type of tenant

Of course women can choose who they live with

That doesn't mean FB has to allow those posts to be live if it doesn't fit their policies on the issue

All these people quoting UK equality law - irrelevant.

Facebook is a American company, based in California. Californian law governs their site. No idea what the law/rules there are about lodgers.

CA law doesn't govern their site

They need to ensure their policies don't break CA law but their sites policies often go above and beyond what's merely in law.

For example it's perfectly legal to take a photo of someone's child in the park and post it on my FB, in both CA and the U.K.

But if I saw this photo of my child and reported it to FB they'd remove said photo as it breaks their site rules.

I think Facebook can make up any rule it wants to about what they allow to be advertised and how. I agree that you should be allowed to specify women, but if FB can't manage this then they are not the platform to use for this purpose.

It's just so insidious, this interpretation of "equality" at all costs, without taking into account the fact that, unfortunately, statistically, men as a whole pose a disproportionate and significant physical threat to women's safety, where the reverse simply is not true. So true "equality" would seek to protect women from that extra threat that women face, that men don't face from women, which sometimes does involve measures that may to the lazy eye look like "discrimination" against men. But how can anyone halfway sensible suggest that "discriminating" against a man by not allowing him to live in your home is anywhere near as harmful as the harm that could potentially be caused to you by letting the wrong man live in your home?

And the effects of this sort of broad-brush interpretation of "equality", that pretends there are no statistical differences in male and female behaviour, are sure to convince many women, especially younger women, to put down their guard, and possibly get into sticky situations because they didn't listen to their instinct but instead tried to be "fair" and "kind".

Many posters in here are reading far too much into this to fit into their 'won't someone think of those of us born with ovaries' mentality..

Facebook marketplace isn't discriminating against women's safety, it's a crude AI on a global platform that looks out for key phrases as a way of managing the site. Everyone on Facebook marketplace receives pushy responses or the usual 'is this available ' then ghosting, or offering a daft price. That's the internet. It's no different whether you're advertising a room or selling a £5 bag of kids clothes. Facebook doesn't claim to offer any protections around this, and how could it really, given its a global site?

At the moment the cost of living crisis means some people will chance at trying to get a room for whatever they can afford. A (male) friend of mine had to insist several times he wasn't going to rent the spare room in his 2 bed flat to a couple + child. His ad was very clear he was in his twenties, gay, and looking for someone who he could party with!

I have advertised for housemates/lodgers many times and it is annoying, but honestly if you can't deal with the filtering process I would question your resilience to deal with a lodger if there were issues about boundaries, differences of expectations etc. Online you can say no, then ignore or block. Much easier than dealing with people living with you.

This is for businesses 🙈 what type of service do you think the op is providing

Have you stated "no men" or was the advert worded differently? Like "women only apartment" or similar. Might help

IIRC I wasn't able to specify sex when I was advertising for a roommate on spareroom.com a few years ago.

I didn't think too much of it to be honest, I just ignored any emails I had from men as I only wanted to live with another woman (based on previous bad experience I hasten to add).

YANBU. However, if sites won't let you specify women only in your ad, then I would get around the stress of strangers badgering you on the phone by getting a PAYG sim card and only using that number in ads. Check it once a day and that's it. Then you won't have to give strangers your real number.

Over-reactive algorithm I guess - but yes, you are entitled in this case to specify a female lodger.