Sex for Rent - Raised in the Dail as issue of major concern

Assetbacked

https://www.thejournal.ie/sex-for-rent-dail-coppinger-4814013-Sep2019/

I fail to see how this warrants being raised in the Dail, let alone with Gardaí. Maybe it is because I am a man, but if given the option for free rent in exchange for sleeping with the female landlord (assuming roles are reversed) I would absolutely take that opportunity. I certainly wouldn't feel the need to raise it with the Gardaí or my local politician if I didn't actually want to do it.

Keyzer

This is going to go well...

One eyed Jack

Assetbacked wrote: »

I fail to see how this warrants being raised in the Dail

It’s Ruth Coppinger, should be enough said tbh :rolleyes:

Feisar

This isn't a housing crisis issue, it's a dirty bastard issue.

Ruth Coppinger is an attention seeking clown.

riemann

Feisar wrote: »

This isn't a housing crisis issue, it's a dirty bastard issue.

Ruth Coppinger is an attention seeking clown.

Plenty of dirty bastards, always has always will be.

She's an embarrassment of a politician.

Of all the actual issues in the country so has to resort to this horse**** to get her name in the headlines.

Strange how she is usually quiet on issues that may require some research and a bit of work.

YFlyer

The issue was that the offer was only for females.

biko

Assetbacked wrote: »

if given the option for free rent in exchange for sleeping with the female landlord (assuming roles are reversed) I would absolutely take that opportunity.

Don't reverse the roles.
You are both men.
Would you still go ahead?
If no, why not?

Or make the landlady 85 years old.
Would you still go ahead?
If no, why not?

Charles Babbage

YFlyer wrote: »

The issue was that the offer was only for females.

Did Coppinger feel excluded?

JohnnyFlash

There’s something so grubby about Coppinger.

Feisar

biko wrote: »

Don't reverse the roles.
You are both men.
Would you still go ahead?
If no, why not?

Or make the landlady 85 years old.
Would you still go ahead?
If no, why not?

First one I couldn't as I'm not gay, that'd be stomach churning/I can't live with myself type stuff.

Second option, I dunno, thinking back to being in college and skint... It'd involve some social lubricant (Guinness) but yea it could be a yes.

Assetbacked

biko wrote: »

Don't reverse the roles.
You are both men.
Would you still go ahead?
If no, why not?

Or make the landlady 85 years old.
Would you still go ahead?
If no, why not?

A man? No.
An 85 year old woman? It depends what the rent is.

Either way, I have the ability to trade sex for cash and, as men, this is not something we get to do generally in the same way as women. My point is that, as a guy, if the roles are reversed it is just not an issue. Therefore, I'm trying to understand how this could be as big a deal as to warrant raising it in the Dail.

weldoninhio

biko wrote: »

Don't reverse the roles.
You are both men.
Would you still go ahead?
If no, why not?

Or make the landlady 85 years old.
Would you still go ahead?
If no, why not?

Man, no, i'm not gay.

85yo, would depend on the rent. But if it was a 2 pumps and an apology type scenario, why not?

Overheal

riemann wrote: »

Plenty of dirty bastards, always has always will be.

She's an embarrassment of a politician.

Of all the actual issues in the country so has to resort to this horse**** to get her name in the headlines.

Strange how she is usually quiet on issues that may require some research and a bit of work.

You mean people elect lazy seatwarmers that just specialize in making quips and soundbytes? Utter shock

James Brown

If it were a male landlord? What if he grabbed your arse and told you you looked very pretty?
Not a stones throw from the aul' 'Rape? sure who wouldn't like surprise sex?' theory with that OP

Eric Cartman

Matt Barrett wrote: »

If it were a male landlord? What if he grabbed your arse and told you you looked very pretty?
Not a stones throw from the aul' 'Rape? sure who wouldn't like surprise sex?' theory with that OP

a man offered a woman free rent in exchange for sex politely, she declined and that was the end of it, no physical contact or threat of it and no coercion or duress.

"BuT wHaT iF A mAlE LaNdLoRd GrAbBeD YoUr ArSe, RaPiSt"

Nothing anything like it at all.

chap asked a bit of a creepy question, was told no, there we are now , case closed.

osarusan

If there was an element of 'I'll evict you unless...' it would be more serious (in terms of a link with exploitation because of accommodation shortages), but that doesn't seem to be there, just somebody chancing his arm.

I can imagine that being an issue in a housing crisis, with landlords feeling emboldened to such a degree, and that kind of behaviour has been documented before, but the case needs to be made that it is the case here.

padd b1975

The daft mare could have touched up her grey roots.

B0jangles

So someone who has keys to your home, who can make you homeless if you make trouble suggests you should become his personal prostitute and that's ok?

Scoundrel

Typical of the entitled scum who would become a landlord

Eric Cartman

B0jangles wrote: »

So someone who has keys to your home, who can make you homeless if you make trouble suggests you should become his personal prostitute and that's ok?

what I took from the conversation is that she had already left the current house , keys handed back and he was off to a new flat. No duress or continued uncomfortableness, and he was as polite as could be in asking the question and his responses after she says no.

strikes me more as "I'm in to you and now that we're not flatmates I can say it" rather than "you're out on your ear if you don't"

YFlyer

Charles Babbage wrote: »

Did Coppinger feel excluded?

She probably was.

B0jangles

Eric Cartman wrote: »

what I took from the conversation is that she had already left the current house , keys handed back and he was off to a new flat. No duress or continued uncomfortableness, and he was as polite as could be in asking the question and his responses after she says no.

strikes me more as "I'm in to you and now that we're not flatmates I can say it" rather than "you're out on your ear if you don't"

The article has:

When she said she couldn’t afford to stay and keep paying the rent, Coppinger said the landlord replied: “Are you coming to live with me in my house?”
The woman replied asking if he was being serious, and the landlord said he was and suggested she pay half the rent and the pair go for dinner together to “see what happens”.
When she refused, Coppinger said the landlord replied: “I’ll make you a better offer. You can stay here for free until Christmas if we can agree something.”

SO she was still living there, was in financial difficulties and the landlord, knowing this, suggested she 'pay' her rent in sex.

Ruraldweller56

Eric Cartman wrote: »

what I took from the conversation is that she had already left the current house , keys handed back and he was off to a new flat. No duress or continued uncomfortableness, and he was as polite as could be in asking the question and his responses after she says no.

strikes me more as "I'm in to you and now that we're not flatmates I can say it" rather than "you're out on your ear if you don't"

I think the point here is the precedent that could theoretically be set. Although I'm still on the side that says someone went away off into 'FoneZRus' yesterday and brought 2 burner sim cards to create a WhatsApp conversation.

Suttree

Eric Cartman wrote: »

a man offered a woman free rent in exchange for sex politely, she declined and that was the end of it, no physical contact or threat of it and no coercion or duress.

"BuT wHaT iF A mAlE LaNdLoRd GrAbBeD YoUr ArSe, RaPiSt"

Nothing anything like it at all.

chap asked a bit of a creepy question, was told no, there we are now , case closed.

Without knowing the woman's full situation, the landlord attempted to take advantage of a position of power (having accommodation) over someone vulnerable (someone not in a financial position to remain in the accommodation, in the context of a pretty vicious private rental market) - what if the woman had lost her job, or had a dependent child? It's already to exploit that to get sexual gratification?

There are elements of modern day feminism that really do leave me baffled, but not half as much as some of the entitlement and stupidity I've seen on this thread.

El_Duderino 09

Assetbacked wrote: »

https://www.thejournal.ie/sex-for-rent-dail-coppinger-4814013-Sep2019/

I fail to see how this warrants being raised in the Dail, let alone with Gardaí. Maybe it is because I am a man, but if given the option for free rent in exchange for sleeping with the female landlord (assuming roles are reversed) I would absolutely take that opportunity. I certainly wouldn't feel the need to raise it with the Gardaí or my local politician if I didn't actually want to do it.

It's sexual exploitation. Selling sex in an unregulated market in exchange for something as basic as a roof over your head, is a serious issue and it's very much a government issue.

I've no issue with sex work if it's regulated. But this is just exploitation.

It's government's job to keep housing stocks within reasonable bounds and they're failing at the moment.

If you can't separate the issue from the politician who raised it then that's really just a problem for you.

jimgoose

This is abuse of young women and should not stand. In the interests of full disclosure, note that I personally think Coppinger is a dirty-looking tramp possessed of questionable politics.

Eric Cartman

Eric Cartman wrote: »

what I took from the conversation is that she had already left the current house , keys handed back and he was off to a new flat. No duress or continued uncomfortableness, and he was as polite as could be in asking the question and his responses after she says no.

strikes me more as "I'm in to you and now that we're not flatmates I can say it" rather than "you're out on your ear if you don't"

I wonder did she report it to the Gardai or run straight to Ruthless?

B0jangles

OSI wrote: »

The guy is a lecherous prick, but nowhere in the texts does it she state: "she couldn’t afford to stay and keep paying the rent"

Presumably the person in question told Ruth Coppinger that the reason she was leaving in the first place was because she couldn't afford the rent.

She doesn't explicitly say that in the messenger convo, but why would she? It'd be pretty weird if the conversation opened with a complete rehash of the whole situation - that would look pretty fake to me.

Chris_Heilong

As long as they are all adults there is no need for anyone to white knight here, it is a dirty act indeed, hell they even made it a porn genre itself, I have heard of this happening to one girl I know and I would say the old guy tried it a few times with others but they can just say no, it is a different story if was under duress.

Wayne Jarvis

Feisar wrote: »

First one I couldn't as I'm not gay, that'd be stomach churning/I can't live with myself type stuff.

Second option, I dunno, thinking back to being in college and skint... It'd involve some social lubricant (Guinness) but yea it could be a yes.

Having sex with an 85 year old woman would also require actual lubricant too one would have to assume.

James Brown

Deleted User wrote: »

I wonder did she report it to the Gardai or run straight to Ruthless?

Quality as usual Maryanne :rolleyes:

screamer

Depends on your viewpoint, would homelessness be worse than prostitution? To some, perhaps to others not. I don’t see that it’s an issue for the dail. What Ruth fails to see here is that if you turn this country into a nanny state, the gubberment will be expected to sort out all our issues.... they can’t even sort out the ones we currently have, so this really is just a moot point to grab some headlines.

Rubberchikken

coppinger doesnt mean anything to me as a politician. am not aware of anything shes done or said.

but how low does the human race have to go?
sex for rent, regardless of sexual orientation is pathetic.

that it even has to be raised as an issue shows how useless and predatory some people are.

give me strength*sigh*

ELM327

Eric Cartman wrote: »

a man offered a woman free rent in exchange for sex politely, she declined and that was the end of it, no physical contact or threat of it and no coercion or duress.

"BuT wHaT iF A mAlE LaNdLoRd GrAbBeD YoUr ArSe, RaPiSt"

Nothing anything like it at all.

chap asked a bit of a creepy question, was told no, there we are now , case closed.

More nonsense from the loony left here, coppinger and her ilk should be ashamed of themselves.
If it was an offer which was rejected and left at that, nothing wrong with that.

James Brown

ELM327 wrote: »

More nonsense from the loony left here, coppinger and her ilk should be ashamed of themselves.
If it was an offer which was rejected and left at that, nothing wrong with that.

Nothing to see here?

Just read the report, she was using it to point out how bad things are getting in the rental sector, the loon. Nothing to see their either :rolleyes:

Ginger83

What if the tenant proposed it

Lux23

Ginger83 wrote: »

What if the tenant proposed it

Still pretty grubby.

Ginger83

Lux23 wrote: »

Still pretty grubby.

Would it get as much attention?

Odyssey 2005

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

There’s something so grubby about Coppinger.

James Brown

Ginger83 wrote: »

Would it get as much attention?

Zero in the context of the rental market, which is what this is actually about. Female landlord, male tenant? Maybe, maybe not.

Matt Barrett

Matt Barrett wrote: »

If it were a male landlord? What if he grabbed your arse and told you you looked very pretty?
Not a stones throw from the aul' 'Rape? sure who wouldn't like surprise sex?' theory with that OP

Well that's a new level of whataboutery.

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

I bet there’s plenty of women who would take a free gaff for sex.

If the bloke looked like brad pitt, there'd be a queue.

A lad made somewhat of an indecent proposal, woman rejected it. Where is the harm?

suicide_circus

no woman in the history of the world has ever used her sexuality to get what she wants

El_Duderino 09

screamer wrote: »

Depends on your viewpoint, would homelessness be worse than prostitution? To some, perhaps to others not. I don’t see that it’s an issue for the dail. What Ruth fails to see here is that if you turn this country into a nanny state, the gubberment will be expected to sort out all our issues.... they can’t even sort out the ones we currently have, so this really is just a moot point to grab some headlines.

If you don't see the link between the housing situation, sex in exchange for housing and the government's role keeping the housing stock within reasonable bounds, then I don't think you really know what government is actually for.

The fact that the housing situation is turning homelessness or sexual exploitation for rent as a serious option, is very much a government issue. Get up the yard with your nanny state guff.

El_Duderino 09

[Deleted User] wrote: »

A lad made somewhat of an indecent proposal, woman rejected it. Where is the harm?

The harm is in the fact that the housing market is in such a state that people are having to pay with their bodies.

You know the way people say it's a landlord's market? Well this is just an extension of exactly the same thing. Housing (wealth) is more and more expensive while wages (labour) are static. That's a government issue. Obvs.

padd b1975

Guy Person wrote: »

Having sex with an 85 year old woman would also require actual lubricant too one would have to assume.

Gandhi's flip-flop.

Feisar

Your momma sure does care about your schoolin, son.

gwalk

Hunky Monster wrote: »

I bet there’s plenty of women who would take a free gaff for sex.

Sure they do when they have kids they cant afford to get on up the housing list

The Margaret Cash effect

James Brown

suicide_circus wrote: »

no woman in the history of the world has ever used her sexuality to get what she wants

What's your point, people lie sometimes? Ground breaking.

James Brown

Deleted User wrote: »

Well that's a new level of whataboutery.

Answering a direct question 'whatboutery' now? Yes, that would be a new level :rolleyes:

Deleted User wrote: »

If the bloke looked like brad pitt, there'd be a queue.

A lad made somewhat of an indecent proposal, woman rejected it. Where is the harm?

It's being used as an example of how bad the rental market is. The harm would it being the behaviour of a scumbag I suppose and having to deal with it.