Have there been any cases where something bad has happened to either a host or a guest? (Such are the thoughts that consume my middle aged mind, I think I was more trusting when younger but never to the extent that you are). BTW, I think your attitude is great.
Yes, of course - Couchsurfing has fifteen million members and has been around nearly two decades IIRC.
Nothing has happened to me or anyone I know (or anyone I know knows.) And I don't think anyone should be afraid of things like murder, kidnapping, etc. While pretty much every high profile app/website these days has a big tragedy happen, Couchsurfing only had one - I actually think that's very low for the number of times people have Couchsurfed. (If you're thinking of Airbnb as the safe alternative, it's had far more gruesome and tragic events.)
But the thing to be careful with using Couchsurfing isn't a microscopic chance of murder, it's creepy hosts. There are always hosts that are clearly using Couchsurfing as a dating site. The way around this is just to read profiles and references.
Of course, everyone sets their own comfort level. Maybe a woman would only want to stay with other women; or maybe only with families, or with gay men. Maybe you'll only want to stay with someone if you'll get your own private room (you can filter for only those if you want.) Or only by verified profiles with 20+ references. Then there are red flags - Does a man have only references from women? That's a red flag.
That's the beauty of it: it's a completely choose-your-own-adventure kinda thing. If you want to stay with a family with kids in the mountains you can do that; if you want to join a clearly wild local on their quest to do illegal activities that will leave you with a hell of a story to tell, then that's also possible.
I would encourage anyone to still think about it no matter how old they may be - some of my best hosts got into CS late in life. It's possible to Couchsurf in a "paranoid" manner (for example only staying with families) it just takes a bit more effort and planning :)
Sure, this does happen, but it's very rare. Anecdotally the most common issue is non-violent sexual assault - e.g. guys hitting on girls. That's largely a risk for solo female travelers unfortunately. If you travel as a couple, for example, the risk is far less. On the other hand the vast majority of solo travelers, male and female, don't have any issues.
There are some safety nets in place, like you can get verified by couchsurfing for a small fee. It's a trust system, people are encouraged to vouch for each other. If you're worried, then only visit/host people who have a lot of good reviews, or who can be vouched for by someone else in the community. If you were asking from the perspective of a prospective traveler I would suggest going to local couchsurfing meetups rather than randomly finding people to stay with. Often you can get recommendations directly and gut feel is very valuable.
It's about the power dynamic. You're talking about someone who isn't from the area, who doesn't know anyone nearby, and who is supposed to sleep at your place. If you are aggressively flirting with them, they may be forced into the impression that either they sleep with you or they sleep on the street. And that would definitely be assault
They are women who have chosen to stay at a male stranger's house. Do you think women are completely naïve about how the world works? I've known two women who couch surf and it was de rigueur to have sex with their hosts.
> They are women who have chosen to stay at a male stranger's house
They are people who have chosen to stay at a stranger's house
> Do you think women are completely naïve about how the world works
No, but I don't think they want to have to take every decision based on probability of getting raped
> I've known two women who couch surf and it was de rigueur to have sex with their hosts
And I know male hosts who had sex with their male visitors. Does that mean that if I couchsurf at a man's flat I should be expecting intercourse for my bed?
You seem to be confused between what you think should be true versus what actually is true.
If you think women can afford to take the same risks as men when travelling then I just really don't know what to say to you. That's just hopelessly naïve. Attractive girls learn very early on that every man wants to have sex with them. It's just part of life for them.
> Does that mean that if I couchsurf at a man's flat I should be expecting intercourse for my bed?
No, but if I were you I would at least consider that there might be a "misunderstanding" leading to you having to find alternative accommodation.
> No, but if I were you I would at least consider that there might be a "misunderstanding" leading to you having to find alternative accommodation.
Why, on a site like couchsurfing, would there be any implied sex, or opportunity for misunderstanding around 'sex for surfing'? It's blatantly outside the standards and norms of the community.
I think he's arguing (and I would agree) that it is blatantly WITHIN the standards and norms for some dudes to complete ignore community mores and bend/break every rule imaginable to get laid. The risk is non-zero. At the individual level, everyone should acknowledge the risk, assess it, and implement control measures to reduce its potential impacts on you, personally. To fail to account for it is simply dangerously naive.
I don't think I've used Couchsurfer since....2012? Roughly the same time I discovered Tinder. I absolutely treated CS as a dating site where you had to be extremely discrete/low-key in your approach. I rarely offered my couch but did offer local tour guide-like services to cute women which was essentially a first date. I would never consider staying at a male host's place; even as a Marine I would assume the rape/murder risk too high. Maybe I'm just a misanthropic cynic but I don't trust anyone to behave themselves. I also have never seen the appeal of the "broke backpacker" travel methodology, perhaps colored by experiences living out of a backpack in the military, which usually sucks. If I have the money to fly halfway around the world, I should have the money to afford comfortable private accommodations. If I'm going to mingle, I'd prefer to mingle with the locals rather than other foreigners on a shoestring budget (or rich people PRETENDING to be on a shoestring budget).
Yes, dudes are going to be creepy. The earth is round. Some will work outside the spirit of couchsurfing. Yourself included, to a degree. Ok.
But he also was arguing, IIUC, that the sex for stay is implied for women. I get that people will use it that way, but implying that it is any sort of norm is a very perverted view of couchsurfing. One that I never experienced, or found to be normal from many people i've talked to along the way.
>>>But he also was arguing, IIUC, that the sex for stay is implied for women.
Ok, I see the distinction you are making but....I think all women should operate under the assumption that if a man invites you into a private residence, for ANY reason, sex is on the menu. At least that way one is never (negatively) surprised. If I have daughters I think this is an important thing to drill into their heads. A guy says he wants to show you his collection of Warhammer 40,000 figures, at 1pm? You still won't be taken aback when he's suddenly pantsless.
>>>implying that it is any sort of norm is a very perverted view of couchsurfing. One that I never experienced, or found to be normal from many people i've talked to along the way.
I think my experience is just the opposite, but about 95% of my social circle is manwhores, the other 5% are males who aren't manwhores, but wish they were (a mix of younger, inexperienced officers or civilian IT/engineer guys). But this is why I'm on HN, to step outside of my bubble and exchange experiences with people with radically different backgrounds and perspectives.
LOL @ warhammer. I understand the sentiment, and the reason one might prepare one's daughter. I think that is healthy, in preparing them to deal life. But that doesn't mean it should be accepted, tacitly or otherwise.
>I think my experience is just the opposite, but about 95% of my social circle is manwhores
I get ya. Been there. I just feel we need to move from is implied consent. Couchsurfing and implying consent means the women either puts up with it (leveraged consent is ugly) or ends up on the streets. That is not good, and can be avoided if people are just more forward, even tactfully so. I suspect that this leverage is exactly why they choose the couchsurfing, and that mixed without transparency is ... eeesh, imo.
I'm not apart of the "tinder" generation per se, but I think the (at times gross) honesty is largely positive. People who scoff at the screen shots of people openly discussing sex are being prudish and don't understand that merely being transparent is a net positive.
I didn't mean it was sex for stay, just that for many people the whole experience was very much sexual. I mean, for crying out loud, it's a young, attractive woman going to stay at some dude's bachelor pad. Some people here must think women are so stupid. They know exactly what's going on.
Sorry I kinda jumped subjects mid-post from Couchsurfing to backpacking, after reading some comments of how many CS guests are just trying to get a dirt-cheap roof over their head and don't interact much with their host. I don't recall many "local single woman hosting single guy" posts back in 2011-12 when I used CS anyway, not for places I was considering (Eastern Europe and SE Asia).
No. But if you host on CS in order to make advances towards women, that is creepy behavior and not what the site is intended for. If you want to get laid, use Tinder etc. instead.
A girl I met on Tinder used CS to find interesting people and have sex with them. It seems like something men and women have been denying but engaging in for centuries.
I couchsurfed throughout my 20s and it wasn't uncommon to hook up with the host/guest if they were cool. Any app that's geared toward meeting people is going to be like that, regardless of one's puritan views. That's exactly part of the human connection that the site is intended for, like it or not.
It's no less of a potential hookup app for women as it is for men. You don't think women want to me interesting guys to fuck? Else women wouldn't even stay with men. They already avoid the guys with bad reviews.
The moral flaw "the crowd" made was that it was men attempting to coerce sex from other men. Lot wanted to solve the problem by throwing his virgin daughters into the crowd.. which was apparently a perfectly righteous thing to do.
And anyways, that's why you shouldn't get your morality from an ancient book from a very different culture. Please don't throw any of your family members into crowds of rapists, it's not polite.
There is a similar story in Judges 19–21, the story about The Levite's Concubine[0]. The main difference is the lack of supernatural elements in this story. Instead the outcome is civil war among the Israelites.
You're making a common mistake seen in these discussions by creating a tautology by defining "hitting on" as always a gross violation of hospitality. Or something that obviously makes someone uncomfortable.
Let's not forget that hitting on someone is a continuum that ranges from flirtatious banter that you can enjoy with anyone to one's twisted idea of what hitting on someone entails that makes all their guests uncomfortable. Like asking "wanna fuck?"
Yes, hitting on someone in a way that makes them uncomfortable does make them uncomfortable and makes you a bad host. But I worry that you have an unhealthy understanding of flirting if you don't think it's something you or anyone can do without making someone else uncomfortable.
In some contexts, yes it can be. If that involves, for example, unwanted physical contact. A broader term is harassment, but either is bad. IANAL, and the legal definition may vary by location and situation.
I have to wonder how much of this thread is just stereotypically sheltered programmers not realizing that you can have consensual sex without any rigmarole, and that many women are actually looking for it if you're a cool guy that they like, even if they pick you as the house they want to sleep in while traveling, which in my experience often involves some beers with the host.
One clue is that it's just focused on men flirting with women that's inappropriate here.
All I can gather is that some HNers need to find a new way to low-key flirt with people that doesn't make them(self) think "oh, this must be sexual harassment, this is bad".
I think people are just pointing out there’s a distinction between:
1) hosting someone with no expectations, hitting it off and consensually getting together
2) hosting someone with the uncommunicated expectation they will sleep with you and pressuring someone alone in your house in a strange country until they consent.
The programmers brain easily gets stuck on a thought loop similar to the _categorical imperative_; in which if something is true, it must be applicable in _all_ circumstances.
Human life however is not an infinite array of possibilities, but stay in very specific zones for most of the time.
Think about it; exponential behavior would propably be deemed bad for most things out there in code, but if you knew the iterations never peaked above 3, it doesen't apply. Much like in real life, you have concrete real values that never really change, unlike the abstract unknowable problems you're used to dealing with.
I've participated in couch surfing for years when I was younger (single/childless) & the worst that happened (I hosted a lot more than I surfed) was that some people are just not that nice/interesting. I had many more positive experiences.
Keep in mind I'm a pretty big, able-bodied guy & at the time I was in my 20s. If I was a small woman living alone I may have skipped hosting single men.
