Yes, as I’d mentioned above:
2 Likes
One of my in-laws had a dog from Germany, who only understood German commands, so they learned them. No big deal.
It wasn’t as if they had to hold conversations with the dog in German or any other language. 
I spoke broken Italian to a sit cat, because his primary human was Italian. He also liked opera, so I played him that.
5 Likes
I’ve seen a few UK ones that were starting or ending on 25th or 26th Dec or 1st Jan. I wouldn’t be able to do these even if I wanted to as there’s no public transport on those days.
Oh, for two days there was an anonymous post on the unofficial Facebook group. Where someone asked if (s)he could put in the listing that “sitters who voted for a certain candidate” didn’t have to apply. Since they were part of a minority group and didn’t want to be excluded.
Maybe it was the same one.
I thought the same thing as what you are writing now: they themselves don’t want to be excluded by belief, race or whatever “kind of normal/ legal differences” and the first thing they do is exclude people…
I really am curious which sit it is and if they do get applicants.
On the FB group, there also were a lot of people who did find it normal to state “this boundaries” in the listing.
1 Like
@RR12345 @CreatureCuddler @Avamyst11
In my opinion we have to live and let live. And people having different opinions normally is an enrichment. I would never exclude a person of his beliefs, race, looks, different thinking.
I think in every person is something good and there always will be things I don’t like that much (maybe some even bad, but I want to be open-minded and positive and not excluded on forehand).
I think it is is fair to give everybody a chance to show himself.
Assuming you are talking about the USA, you guys just have to choose between two people (democrats or republican). And one of them gets the “power” to install all the ministers etc.
So you just have two sides to choose from…
- the total package of positions/ measures from A
or - the total package from politician B…
Whether you agree with all or not.
That’s difficult, but it will not automatical say that people ar totally fine with all the topics from person A or person B. They just don’t have more choices to choose from.
In our country there is no politician/ party with which I agree 100%. So I just have to vote for the one with whom I agree the most, or on the most important issues.
And hopefully the three/ four parties and their ministers from all those parties involved, preferable with my politician as President/ first man, will do it better than the last coalition did.
We have like 7 bigger “sides” you can take.
1 Like
If one belongs to a minority group that receives hatred from another, I can very well see why one do not want to invite them into your home.
Although I am pro-liberty of speach, democracy and such it is one thing to defend other peoples right to speak and quite another to invite home to stay people who say that they hate you, want you gone, don’t want you to be able to have a family or whatever.
7 Likes
I personally am in agreement with the old saying “If there’s a (evil person from WW2) at the table and 10 other people sitting there talking to him, then you’ve got a table with 11 (evil people from WW2)s.”
If you have someone willing to vote for someone who wants to do X, Y, and Z, even if they are voting for that person because they also want to do A, B, and C, then you have a person who thinks at the very least X, Y, and Z are ok things to do and support. If you are someone who is impacted by X, Y, or Z, it’s perfectly reasonable to not want someone in your home who is actively supporting people who want to harm you.
Do I think all people who vote one way or another are evil or bad? No. But as I said above, it makes me question their morals and judgement and lose respect for them, so that’s not someone I want to be around. People are allowed to do and believe whatever they want and I’m allowed to avoid them as a result of those decisions.
The whole ‘we should all just get along and accept other people’s opinions’ is naive. Agree to disagree works with pineapple on pizza and how to take your coffee or steak, not fundamental moral differences and views on humanity.
9 Likes
Gladly we are not talking about “evil people from WW2” who did awful things.
Same for the other person who votes for the only other available politician who "wants to do E, F and G, even if they are voting for that person because they also want to do U, V and W.
(Wanting/ shouting to do something is also something other than really doing it.
Which in a country with more than 2 political parties in the government, is difficult to establish. Because non of the individual parties can do this without support of the other parties, which have different, maybe more harsh opinions about some issues. I can imagine that in the USA this is different, with just the two opposites to choose from. And when “the winner gets the power”.)
You have all the right to avoid people: As I said, I belief in: “live and let live, respect each other’s decisions”.
I myself just am curious why they think so. So I also question it, like you. But I have the experience that if you really have an open-minded discussion, most of them have good morals. And that they are also people who respect others and deserve to be respected.
For me people are more than “just the political party/ person they vote for”.
I respect your opinion in this.
But I am sorry, I don’t agree totally with you on this one.
Off course we don’t have to get along with everybody, and have to accept others opinions.
But in my opinion: “I agree to disagree is not just for food”…How to live your life, which faith, what to belief, how to raise your kids etc. can also differ. It’s a gray area. In which I can disagree and still respect and accept the others view.
(I agree that there are boundaries on certain morals and humanity, therefore I also belief in “live and let live” as far as it is not hurting someliving being, because I think all life is to be respected)
And, having this discussion and reading a lot of it on Facebook, the news channels (which I think are not always neutral) I am more and more convinced:
I think that in this “political discussion” I am glad that I live somewhere where we don’t have to choose between just two parties from whom which “the winner” gets an awful lot of power.
(And last but not least: I love to travel in the USA, meeting and talking with al kind of Americans 
)
Thanks for sharing your thoughts and beliefs.
It enrichens me.
1 Like
I think this thread has got well off topic!!
12 Likes
Agree to disagree ends when trying to force your beliefs onto others begins. We will never agree so this will be my last response to you.
3 Likes
You are quite right.
When somebody hates you of what you are, (s)he should not apply.
So it is good that a HO states that in their listing that they have certain beliefs, belong to a minority group. I wouldn’t want to accomodate people who don’t like me.
But maybe somebody voting for politician A also hates a minority group which is targeted by politician B.
And the one who is voting for B, doesn’t
automatically hate the targeted minority group.
1 Like
Blockquote In my opinion we have to live and let live. And people having different opinions normally is an enrichment. I would never exclude a person of his beliefs, race, looks, different thinking.
I think in every person is something good and there always will be things I don’t like that much (maybe some even bad, but I want to be open-minded and positive and not excluded on forehand).
I think it is is fair to give everybody a chance to show himself.
Blockquote
Absolutely agree with this, and everything else you said. I also think the two party system in the USA (which is where I’m from) is ludicrious, and has become SO much worse in the past decade with regards to how it polarizes people. I don’t align with the “total packages” from either party, so I essentially support none of our candidates.
But absolutely, I believe that most people at their core have good essential values, and would never think of excluding them from being a friend or associate because of different thinking. I also find it strange that the person in the listing can’t see the hipocrisy in claiming to be “inclusive”, but only inclusive if you share her political views.
Regardless, thank you for sharing your thoughts, and I too enjoy a good, respectful discussion with people of differing views. It’s getting harder and harder to find anyone willing to have said discussions, and that, to me, is sad.
2 Likes
Perfect.
I agree with it.
So at the end we agree to disagree and are fine with it 
Because indeed as @temba says: we also were going of topic (thanks). This kind of discussions shouldn’t be held on this forum within this topic.
(And better: if held, better not in just written, emotionless text, but in person, with facial expressions and voice expressions)
Thanks for giving me your insights.
As I said: It enrichens me.
(And I hope you didn’t have the idea I forced you into my beliefs, because this was not my goal, just wanted to get opinions and views. And I love a good discussion)
As sitting is a private agreement between two parties, in my opinion, the term discrimination doesn’t apply.
Some people prefer single women as sitters, others prefer couples, others male single sitters, some people prefer a certain cultural background or language, certain age range, some level of fitness and energy, some people ask for fully vaccinated sitters…
As a sitter, I might also be applying those filters but it would not be noticed and criticized on a forum unless I clearly stated it.
So, yes, it sounds a bit unusual to state that you won’t accept people voting a certain candidate. It could even help attract those people, just out of spite, but as a sitter I never feel discriminated because it is the HO’s choice and the more clearly they set their criteria the less time I waste applying for unsuitable sits.
But I do enjoy a good, civilized discussion.
4 Likes
@CreatureCuddler I just busted out laughing after reading your post
Probably depends on where in the U.K., because some transit is on reduced schedules say in major cities. But yes, it’s more trouble even in such cases.
Personally, I would not travel voluntarily on any of those holidays (including Boxing Day), regardless of whether sitting or otherwise. I don’t need to celebrate any holiday to have common sense about transit and other amenities being more limited. That’s the case with travel in general — I check for local holidays even when going abroad. Many experienced travelers know to do that.
And with sits, which are plentiful during the year-end holidays, sitters can be even more selective than normal in many cases, unless they have to be somewhere specific to be near loved ones. And if so, they’re unlikely to want to arrive or depart on a holiday.
Hosts with start and end dates on holidays essentially are limiting their candidate pool even further. And that’s the case whether or not they celebrate, because of the inconvenience factor to sitters.
And of course, for those who celebrate (even vicariously as spectators, rather than believers) some holiday events are part of the purpose of sitting. Like many historic churches have holiday services and people attend, regardless of their beliefs, to partake in the festivities. Some have special choir performances, for instance.
Hosts who don’t keep potential (in)conveniences in mind for sitters come across to me as clueless, which is a key reason to avoid their sits.
1 Like
I’m not sure anyone is going to beat being asked to pee in the bushes.
(let’s leave the politics at the door)
10 Likes
Dog training should be done with hand signals and voices. Then the dog doesn’t have to speak the same language!
2 Likes
Received a last-minute invite to sit locally. In the invite, the host noted that they wanted to meet in person ahead of the sit, on the same day (or the next) that they’d sent the unsolicited invitation to sit one cat. They said their previously arranged sitter had changed plans last minute.
Noted that it was a solo sit, with a "no shoes inside, no outside guests, no gatherings, no smoking, no cooking meat, no other pets policy.”
Uh, no thanks. Not only was the invitation abrupt and unwelcoming, when I checked their listing out of curiosity, it was written like a job ad.
Wonder whether they had a falling out with their sitter.
5 Likes
Yuck! Identity politics…! 