David and Brittany's home is lovely and very well-kept. However, my experience was sullied by the discovery that David and Brittany do not allow assistance animals. At least according to their offered explanation - that future guests might be allergic to the animals - this is a violation of Airbnb's anti-discrimination policy, which only allows you to exclude assistance animals if there is a health or safety issue with respect to the host, not future guests. (An exception for the latter would threaten to swallow the rule - any host could argue that unknown, future guests might have an allergy. And their concern that they will be sued by guests with allergies because their listing says "no pets" does not seem legally sound - "no pets" does not mean "no assistance animals" and the reasonable guest would be aware of Airbnb's nondiscrimination policy.) David and Brittany did not indicate that they were willing to make "reasonable accommodations" for assistance animals (e.g. their home has no carpeting, which makes allergies less of a problem, especially when the animal is hypoallergenic) as Airbnb's policy requires. Instead, when they found out the day of my check-in that I had an assistance animal, they said they would make an "exception" to their bright-line rule and allow me to stay. But people with disabilities are not supposed to be "exceptions" - being viewed as an "exception" rather than a member of the Airbnb community who will be reasonably accommodated equally to others is stigmatizing and undermines the goals of Airbnb's nondiscrimination policy. One solution would be for David and Brittany to update their listing to be more accurate -- "we do not follow Airbnb's non-discrimination policy when it comes to assistance animals." That makes me cringe, but at least folks with assistance animals wouldn't have to go through what I did. The downside is that a more accurate listing will artificially lower the number of violations that David and Brittany commit and prevent them from ever being sanctioned by Airbnb. That is to say, Airbnb assesses hosts a fee if they cancel a reservation because they discover their guest has an assistance animal (assuming the official exceptions do not apply). And if they cancel reservations enough times, they will no longer be able to use the Airbnb platform. But if potential guests avoid this home based on a more accurate description, there will never be a reservation to cancel in the first place and David and Brittany's failure to follow the nondiscrimination policy will never be flagged. One solution might be for potential guests to go ahead and book anyway, i.e. become test cases. But that takes time and energy that people should not have to expend while planning their vacations. tl;dr the place was very cute but I felt uncomfortable the whole time knowing I was an "exception" and that fellow travelers with disabilities might not get even the benefit of being an "exception." I strongly urge David and Brittany to conform to the...