I’ve had problems with roommates on the spectrum that I rent out to who seem to think that they should ask for explanations of rules as a way of trying to argue. Normally I’d assume they’re just trying to be jerks and look for backdoor ways of arguing or “concern trolling,” but I’m open to the slim possibility that they don’t actually understand or this is their way of trying to discuss it.
They also try to argue and play lawyer games when it comes to guilt. If I see a plate in their room, they’re getting fined for eating in there. It doesn’t matter if it was someone else because they allowed it.
It occurred to me that they might genuinely not understand what is going on.
Why is the rule there? That is the question you need to think about and does the answer follow a logic or personal path. Is the rule there “just because” or a problem with a previous tenant? Might be time to review the rule.
A no eating in a room might be there to prevent an infestation of bugs, but why should that stop a tidy eater eating in their room?
Does no eating in a room extend to a bag of sweets? Why would you restrict someone from having a snack in their room while watching someone in bed or on their personal devices?