I hear what you're saying, @Suzanne302, but scamming guests aren't going to give two hoots about anyone's dog rules. The problem is, by the time a host can establish that the guest's furry friend is definitely not a bona fide assistance animal, the damage will almost always already have been done. And by then, it's too late. Shutting the living room door after the emotional support miniature horse has bolted, so to speak. But if a proper, balanced framework had been put in place by Airbnb to equally protect the rights of all parties involved, then the vast majority of negative or destructive incidents involving bogus "assistance animals", would never even arise.
It's a fact that Airbnb's policies on any sort of discrimination go above and beyond that which is required by law in most jurisdictions, under the mantle of noble intention. However, by forcing hosts to accept conditions that are surplus to legal requirements, and failing to put in place clear and strong parameters, they've ultimately created a serious imbalance between the rights of the pet or assistance animal owner, and the rights of the homeowner - as evidenced by the farcical policy that I posted earlier in the thread. (which states that, in the event that the animal is out of control or craps all over the house, the host must still allow the guest to continue their stay... without the "assistance" animal! You can't get much more jaw-droppingly biased against the host than that, can you?)
Every right-minded person is fully behind the right to fair, respectful treatment and adequate accessibility for genuine service animal handlers. That goes without saying. However, Airbnb's current fuzzy-warm, virtue-signalling, booking-boosting interpretation of a coherent "assistance animal" policy, is unworkable, untenable, and needs to be completely revised, in order to afford hosts at least some measure of protection in their own homes, against damage, losses and scammers.