My Property, My Rules… Or Not?

Here’s an article which got me thinking.

Investigation finds Facebook is STILL letting housing advertisers exclude by race, religion, and even disability.
Facebook allows advertisers to discriminate by race in housing ads, allowing advertisers to filter out certain ethnic groups from seeing their ad… [and]¬†advertisers could still discriminate by race, as well as other categories such as mothers of high school children, people who require wheelchair access ramps, and even expats from Argentina.

My initial reaction: so fucking what? If I’m advertising for a room mate, isn’t it my right (under the Constitution, First Amendment, freedom of association etc.) to decide with whom I want to associate?

I’m sick of the negative implication that’s been applied to the word “discrimination”, by the way. If one is said to have discriminating tastes, that’s okay; but if I don’t want to rent my house to college students (reason: noisy, drunken all-night parties etc.), adherents of Santeria (reason: animal sacrifices in the basement) or cripples (reason: no handicapped access or facilities) then all of a sudden, according to government, I’m discriminating in a bad way?

I thought that the essence of “private property” (the protection of which is one of government’s few legitimate functions) is that one may use it as one wishes. So if I don’t want to share a house with a Catholic, vegan or [gasp!] a Chinese woman, isn’t that my right?

I know, I know; discrimination against people of other races, religions and cultures etc. is supposed to be wrong — and it is, when practiced by government or public entities. Government can’t say that only Protestants can apply for a government job, and cab drivers can’t refuse service to a blind person with a guide dog (because of their anti-animal religion) because the cab service is a government-licensed activity.

But as an individual, I’m supposed to be able to practice any kind of discrimination as long as it doesn’t actually harm other people. And no, not wanting to share your living space with a Black gang member is not causing him harm — except that according to the modern liberal mindset, it is.

These groups are protected under the federal Fair Housing Act, which makes it a federal offense to publish ads that indicate a preference for or discriminate against people based on race, color, religion, gender, handicap, family status or national origin.

What bullshit.

The only blessing I can see arising from all this nonsense is that I don’t have a Facebook account and am unlikely to ever have one. (So in that regard we can both breathe a sigh of relief.)


Update: Uh huh. Never saw this one coming:

Facebook could soon lock you out of your account unless you’re willing to upload a ‘clear’ selfie to verify your identity

The “Winner”

There were really only two houses of the foul excrescences (listed here) in which I would live. Most of my Readers got it right: the runner-up was Edinburgh Road, but it failed simply because it looks like a shed and is too close to a main road (although the sea view is lovely).

But the only (grudging) consideration I would give is to Ness Point:

The reason I don’t mind Ness Point is simple: for once, the architect actually took the ambience and scenery into mind, and instead of inflicting his “vision” (i.e. egoistic bullshit statement) on the world, he created something which actually looks like it belongs there. Note the grass roof:

…but the interior (which I call “corporate whiteboard”) would be repainted in some human-friendly color, with curtains, bookshelves and comfortable furniture installed — you know, so I could actually live there.

I’d still prefer something more in keeping with the other houses, of course ( thus shutting up the neighbors’ whining), but at least I wouldn’t call for massive amounts of dynamite to rid the world of the place — unlike the others on the list, which should all be blown to smithereens along with their architects.

 

Here We (I) Go Again

I know, some people are getting sick of me sounding off about crap architecture. And this little article shows a whole bunch more that are detested not only by me, but by the people forced to live next door to them. Here’s a sample picture:

But read the whole thing, because I have a surprise for you. One of those houses, in my opinion, isn’t so bad — in fact, I could see myself living in it, albeit with vastly different furniture and decor.

Which is it? As they appear:

  1. 6 Wood Lane
  2.  South Steet
  3. Ness Point
  4. Redshank
  5. Edinburgh Road

I’ll reveal which one next week. Your guesses in Comments.

 

Excessive Baggage

I very seldom look at anything regarding members of the Kardashian coven, but the other day this particular pic caught my eye:

…and my immediate thought was: good grief, she’s got a fat ass. If she and that Lopez woman are responsible for women today going for butt imp[lants, she has a lot to answer for.

Only later did I notice the horrendous dye job. I will grant that as a brunette, this woman has a reasonably-pretty face (if you’re into that look). But as a blonde, she somehow manages to make herself even more trashy than she normally appears.

No man should. Ugh.