Another way to exploit the housing crisis?

[reohn2]

Didn't consider it for one moment.

I hope you didn't leave yourself wide open for the possibility of accusations by being in the property with her alone?
Thin ice skating with such people.

I took notes on my small dictating recorder.

Wellat least you made an effort to record some of the meeting,though such a person could've easily claimed you switched it off.

In the late 80's.I bought a few terraced houses for refurbishing then selling on,on one occasion the estate agent I used sent a young and very attractive woman to value one of them when near completion.
I made a point of keeping my physical distance ass far as possible in a small house.
As she was about to leave I made a point of sitting down on an upturned bucket in the front living room,as she was stepping out of the front door,I asked her if she minded if I asked her something she of course said yes thinking it was business.
I asked her whether she felt vulnerable going out to value houses on her own,her shouders dropped and she said she did,she then went on to tell me she'd had a couple of incidents where she'd felt uncomfortable in houses alone with potential customers,one of which the company had been asked for a second visit,and she'd asked another valuer privately to attend for her.
She also told me she'd been afraid of her boss finding out as she felt she may lose her job if he did,and that he thought her assets were more than just professional in attracing business .
As I said,it cuts both ways.

[661-Pete]

I'd already seen that report in the BBC news last night, but I glanced over the link. When I got to this advert:

"Bedroom in return for cooking, cleaning and oral once or twice a week"

I thought of the perfect answer:

"Yes, I'll take the room. By the way, I'm a Dental Hygienist, and I'd be happy to give your teeth and gums the once-over, every week...."

[Freddie]

To many it may be unpalatable. I find it unpalatable, but it another situation (where the landlord was rich and possibly attractive), a number of women would find themselves with a new boyfriend, come husband, rather than a landlord plus extras.

In today's climate, the weight of the law would be firmly against the landlord if he tried anything untoward and probably even if he didn't, so such an arrangement whilst sleazy probably isn't as dangerous as it may seem.

Feminists recently had a win against podium girls; an attractive sort of girl (to a number of men) who stand on podiums and look pretty. This was a liberty too far for women and feminists shut it down. There was a long thread about this some time before and I don't wish to go over all the details, but I see no real problem with podium girls, much as I am not particularly bothered by The Chippendales. These are very well remunerated, adult women making choices that others wouldn't make, but it is not enough that others wouldn't make them, it has been decreed that nobody can make them. Is it possible a little jealousy hides underneath good intentions?

"He is not the only man offering rent for sex. When I log on to a popular classified adverts website, almost immediately I find dozens of ads offering rooms in exchange for “adult arrangements”.

These ads come from all over the UK, from Brighton to Edinburgh, in big cities and in small towns. I begin replying to the adverts."

These men are upfront about what they are offering. It is not sprung on girls as a surprise, yet the BBC feel the need to investigate. It is the 'women are equals but women are also dainty, delicate and need protecting from adverts that set out their terms in advance' narrative. Can't have it both ways, I'm afraid BBC.

These are the knots we tie ourselves in when we are forced to hold two contradictory ideas as equally true.

[reohn2]

Like I said 28800+ postings.

You might want to elaborate on that.
I'm member of the foum primarily to share information I have about cycling and try to help other forum members if and when I can.
I also enjoy a bit of banter whether that be political or otherwise and you won't have any effect on that enjoyment,try as you may.

If your judgement of anyone goes off post count there are a few on the forum with similar or higher post counts than me,MickF 40374,Thirdcrank 24969 to name a couple,so am I to believe that they too are to the 'nth degree catagory you deem as somehow bad and therebye warrant your scorn?
I bear you no malice just a disagreement on politics and perhaps other things who know's?
Yet you constantly and consistently attack my character for no reason even when I've been civil toward you.You've accused me of lying and of being a bigot and you have refused to aknowledge when you've been proved to be wrong to the point your posts needing being removed or moderated.
All of which,as I've posted before says more about you than it does about me.
So carry on in your unfounded accusations and slurs it's all water off a duck's back,but if the most you can come up with is my post count you're in a sorry state dear boy a very sorry state.

EDITED:- for typos

[Freddie]

Another thing, on the very same page (look down the right hand side) is a link to this article (NSFW - please be advised):

http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcthree/article/d ... 179bd4b643

Is there any wonder men are confused today? Women have endless sexual liberty; we have a borderline pornographic article on the BBC that anyone of any age can access and yet we expect men to not seek out the modern, sexually liberated woman by placing ads in newspapers.

The theme of the day seems to be:

Any display of female sexuality, however provocative = good and to be encouraged (unless they are podium girls, because they are only there for the benefit of men, apparently)
Any display of male sexuality, however modest = bad, often bordering on evil in intent (unless that display is for the entertainment of women, re: Chippendales)

This seems more having cake and eating it stuff to me.

[reohn2]

To many it may be unpalatable. I find it unpalatable, but it another situation (where the landlord was rich and possibly attractive), a number of women would find themselves with a new boyfriend, come husband, rather than a landlord plus extras.

In today's climate, the weight of the law would be firmly against the landlord if he tried anything untoward and probably even if he didn't, so such an arrangement whilst sleazy probably isn't as dangerous as it may seem.

Feminists recently had a win against podium girls; an attractive sort of girl (to a number of men) who stand on podiums and look pretty. This was a liberty too far for women and feminists shut it down. There was a long thread about this some time before and I don't wish to go over all the details, but I see no real problem with podium girls, much as I am not particularly bothered by The Chippendales. These are very well remunerated, adult women making choices that others wouldn't make, but it is not enough that others wouldn't make them, it has been decreed that nobody can make them. Is it possible a little jealousy hides underneath good intentions?

"He is not the only man offering rent for sex. When I log on to a popular classified adverts website, almost immediately I find dozens of ads offering rooms in exchange for “adult arrangements”.

These ads come from all over the UK, from Brighton to Edinburgh, in big cities and in small towns. I begin replying to the adverts."

These men are upfront about what they are offering. It is not sprung on girls as a surprise, yet the BBC feel the need to investigate. It is the 'women are equals but women are also dainty, delicate and need protecting from adverts that set out their terms in advance' narrative. Can't have it both ways, I'm afraid BBC.

These are the knots we tie ourselves in when we are forced to hold two contradictory ideas as equally true.

I think it's not so much as what you're claiming but more the BBC highlighting the shortage of housing and the high cost of rented properties that people can't afford sometimes even small apartments that they have to think of selling themselves for a roof over their head.

[Freddie]

There is a shortage of housing in London and other cities. Rental in these places is expensive, but there are other places to live.

It is difficult to have a sexually liberal (libertine?) society and not expect sex to be considered as goods with which to barter. I wonder how many are forced into sex by applying for arrangements that lay out the terms in advance? Perhaps it is just men of a certain mindset seeking women of a similar mindset. It is not for me, but should it be outright banned?

If adult women want these arrangements, then should we stop adult men placing these adverts?

I think it is a bit of a stretch for the BBC to say 'there is no (cheap) housing (in London) and therefore people have resorted to selling sex'. Surely, for most men and women, it takes rather more than an absolute need to live in London (what need, when there are trains running in from all directions) to make them resort to selling their bodies.

Look at how uncomfortable the BBC reporter was with the idea. The first thought into her head was not 'free digs'. I imagine most people feel similarly.

[reohn2]

There is a shortage of housing in London and other cities. Rental in these places is expensive, but there are other places to live.

It is difficult to have a sexually liberal (libertine?) society and not expect sex to be considered as goods with which to barter. I wonder how many are forced into sex by applying for arrangements that lay out the terms in advance? Perhaps it is just men of a certain mindset seeking women of a similar mindset. It is not for me, but should it be outright banned?

If adult women want these arrangements, then should we stop adult men placing these adverts?

I think it is a bit of a stretch for the BBC to say 'there is no (cheap) housing (in London) and therefore people have resorted to selling sex'. Surely, for most men and women, it takes rather more than an absolute need to live in London (what need, when there are trains running in from all directions) to make them resort to selling their bodies.

Look at how uncomfortable the BBC reporter was with the idea. The first thought into her head was not 'free digs'. I imagine most people feel similarly.

I think it's more of a case of what I posed before,affordability of scarce housing due to demand.
As for trains into London I believe season train tickets are an arm and a leg for a start,then these people have to find affordable property on the outskirts which could be as expensive as and apartment in the city.
I don't doubt that some women don't have a problem with sex for rent hi-lighted by Bikepacker's experience,but most would rather not but are forced into it by circumstance.A parallel could be abortion where a woman finds herself backed into a corner by circumstance and doesn't really want an abortion but feels there's no other way out.
Let's not forget that men generally have all the power and for millennia always have had.
Theres a huge gap between modelling as shown in the article you linked to,podium girls,and selling sexual services for a home.

EDITED for clarity.

[pete75]

Entirely predictable that some of the most right wing posters here seem to think this sort of thing is justified along with using it for an entirely unjustified attack on the BBC.

[pete75]

The experts in all matters are here again giving ill informed comments following a BBC report from one point of view. Here is a fact about the matter: Last year I had a property vacant and was looing for a tenant. It was put to me by one very charming young lady that if I reduced the rent asked for she would give me regular sexual favours. This shows the issue is not as one sided as the BBC would like to make out. BTW the offer was rejected.

There's a great deal of difference between that and people advertising "free" accomodation in return for sex. The BBC are investigating sleasy room for sex "landlords". How on earth is that one sided?

[Cyril Haearn]

I'd already seen that report in the BBC news last night, but I glanced over the link. When I got to this advert:

"Bedroom in return for cooking, cleaning and oral once or twice a week"

I thought of the perfect answer:

"Yes, I'll take the room. By the way, I'm a Dental Hygienist, and I'd be happy to give your teeth and gums the once-over, every week...."

€€€! Dental hygiene is so expensive, seems a great deal

[Cyril Haearn]

One wonders whether some of the assertions, opinions, reports on these fora are not quite serious or true, or meant to provoke for a bit of fun, where one is sort-of anonymous, sort-of

[Freddie]

Entirely predictable that some of the most right wing posters here seem to think this sort of thing is justified...

As one of the most right wing posters here, read the first line of my first post. Personally, I would prefer a society where the vast majority of sexual conduct took place only within monogamous marriage. However, why is it people are so keen to police sexual liberty, when they were in favour of opening the door to a sexually liberal society in the first place?

If women want these kind of arrangements, who is to stop them. If men want to post such advertisements, and given full disclosure some women reply, whose business is it but that of those entering the arrangement.

Is there similar outrage from the BBC (or this forum) about young men who shack up with older women or even other men on a similar basis. I have my doubts. Are women a special case, if so why?

along with using it for an entirely unjustified attack on the BBC.

Do you think the report with pictures of women with fake hair over their genitalia is something that should be easily accessible by anyone, young children for example?

Surely it is far worse than any podium girl in a bikini (the BBC presumably think their article is positive female sexuality, as opposed to the male gaze inducing, negative female sexuality of podium girls).

How do you expect people (well, men) to have, shall we say, upright attitudes about sexuality if this kind of thing is openly advertised on the BBC for anyone, of any age, to view.

[Cyril Haearn]

I want to be a podium boy €€€!

[661-Pete]

€€€! Dental hygiene is so expensive, seems a great deal

Have you actually been to your dental hygienist, any time recently? Aaaaaarrrrggghhhhh!!!