Description du cas
These two cases concern content decisions made by Meta, on Facebook and Instagram, which the Oversight Board intends to address together.
In the first case, a Facebook user in the United States posted a video of a woman confronting a transgender woman for using the women’s bathroom. The post refers to the person being confronted as a man and asks why it is permitted for them to use a women’s bathroom.
In the second case, an Instagram account posted a video of a transgender girl winning a female sports competition in the United States, with some spectators vocally disapproving of the result. The post refers to the athlete as a boy, questioning whether they are female.
Both posts were shared in 2024 and received thousands of views and reactions. They were reported for Hate Speech and Bullying and Harassment multiple times, but Meta left both posts up on Facebook and Instagram, respectively. After appealing to Meta against the company’s decisions, two of the users who reported the content then appealed to the Oversight Board.
Following the Board’s selection of these cases, Meta considered both posts under its Hate Speech and Bullying and Harassment policies and concluded that neither violated its Community Standards. Both posts remained up. Meta’s Hate Speech Community Standard prohibits direct attacks targeting a person or group of people on the basis of protected characteristics, including sex, gender identity and sexual orientation, with “exclusion or segregation in the form of calls for action, statements of intent, aspirational or conditional statements, or statements advocating or supporting [exclusion].” The Hate Speech policy does not include misgendering as a form of prohibited “attack.” Misgendering means referring to a person using a word, especially a pronoun or the way in which they are addressed, that does not reflect their gender identity. Meta informed the Board that neither post violated its Hate Speech policy, adding that even if the post in the first case could constitute a call for exclusion, it would still be kept up under the newsworthiness allowance, given “transgender people’s access to bathrooms that correspond to their gender identity is the subject of considerable political debate in the United States.”
Meta’s Bullying and Harassment Community Standard prohibits “cognizable attacks and calls for exclusion” targeted at a private minor, private adult (if reported by the targeted person) or an involuntary public figure who is a minor (including statements advocating or supporting exclusion of a person). The public-facing language of the Bullying and Harassment policy does not consider misgendering a person to be a cognizable attack or call for exclusion. Meta informed the Board that the content in the first case did not violate the Bullying and Harassment policy as there was “no explicit call for exclusion present in the post and because the post was not self-reported by the person depicted in the video.” The company stated that although the second post targeted a minor who Meta considers to be an involuntary public figure, it did not contain a “cognizable attack or call for exclusion” so did not violate this Community Standard. Meta explained that the company allows “more discussion and debate around public figures in part because – as here – these conversations are often part of social and political debates and the subject of news reporting.”
In their statement to the Board, the user who appealed the post in the first case explained that Meta allowed what in their view is a transphobic post to stay on its platform. The user who appealed the post in the second case said that the post attacks and harasses the athlete with language that in their view violates Meta’s Community Standards.
The Board selected these cases to assess whether Meta’s approach to moderating discussions around gender identity respects users’ freedom of expression and the rights of transgender and non-binary people. The cases fall within the Board’s Hate Speech Against Marginalized Groups and Gender strategic priorities.
The Board would appreciate public comments that address:
- The impacts of Meta’s Hate Speech and Bullying and Harassment policies on freedom of expression around gender identity issues, and the rights of transgender people, including minors.
- Technical challenges in enforcing bullying and harassment policies at scale, the effectiveness of self-reporting requirements and their impacts on people targeted by bullying or harassment, and comparisons to alternative enforcement approaches.
- The sociopolitical context in the United States concerning freedom of expression and the rights of transgender people, especially for access to single-sex spaces and participation in sporting events.
As part of its decisions, the Board can issue policy recommendations to Meta. While recommendations are not binding, Meta must respond to them within 60 days. As such, the Board welcomes public comments proposing recommendations that are relevant to these cases.
Commentaires
Correctly stating a person's biological sex is NOT hate speech and should not be classified as such. In fact, what would be a serious denial of human and civil rights is to prohibit people from stating simple and true facts. Moreover, many biological males (who, as well, were raised and socialized as males) are doing tremendous harm to women while claiming to be trans. It's unfortunate that this ends up reflecting on trans people in general, who of course should not be judged by what these destructive biological males are doing. But the solution isn't to silence people from being able to name and publicize the wrongs that are being done!
You seem to be saying, for example, that someone can be silenced and banned from Meta for accurately reporting on rapes committed in women's prisons by biological males (a very real and well-documented set of atrocities). Is Meta saying that it's going to provide cover for violent males as long as they simply assert that they are women? That's what you appear to be saying.
My concern is not that trans people are violent or abusive. My concern is that violent or abusive people -- mostly males -- can easily claim to be trans, and this is exactly what's happening, especially with regard to requesting assignment to women's prisons.
You're going to silence debate and discussion and investigation about these crucial issues.
I'm male, by the way, and am the author of the largest-selling book in history on domestic violence, "Why Does He Do That?". Are you planning to silence me from discussion these issues on Meta?
1.We need to be able to differentiate between people born and socialised as men, and people born and socialised as female or women. Women have every right to female only spaces (including non-binary people who are vulnerable by being born women and thereby part of the female sex class).
2. We must be able to share, discuss and debate different points of view- pur society is extremely tribal right now and there is real danger to those who challenge dominant narratives or beliefs. People have rhe right to their beliefs (as long as they are not threatening violence).
3.In parts of Australia and the UK, people born male can 'self-identify' as female and change their birth certificate to say they were born female- this is without ANY surgery or hormones. This is highly contested and there are large movements opposing this as it has legitimised male bodies being in women and girls spaces (toilets, prisons, sports, changing rooms, DV shelters).
3. This decision will turn many religous folks against the LGBTIQ+ movement- this is already occurring, particularly within Muslim and Christian communities, and is causing harm to the LGBTIQ+ community.
Given anyone can declare anything about their fauxgender identity at any time, and "gender identity" and "gender expression" are said to have no necessary correlation, it seems ludicrous to expect people to be able to read these "gendered" people's minds about what gender they think they are in order to avoid "misgendering" them. What if they're dressed like a woman, but identify as "cloud gender"? What if they identified as "cloud gender" 2 minutes ago, but being "genderfluid", now they're a "non-binary trans fem cat boi" and want "Xe, Xir" pronouns? Humans are mammals who evolved to quickly and instinctually recognize the sex of others of our own species, and "gender identity" is a made-up, unscientific batch of nonsense that has no business displacing sex-accurate pronouns and language.
Sex is objective and factual, while gender is socially constructed and is both harmful and oppressive to women and girls.
By not allowing people to name the problem, you become a silencing tool. Not a good look for Meta.
The First Amendment right to free speech is the precursor of all human rights. The first mark of a fascist regime is censorship. It's pretty rich that FB apologized to Congress for censoring Americans. The idea that you would force gender ideology down the throats of Americans, the majority of whom do not accept it, and compel speech is a gross violation of the First Amendment. I believed your apology to Congress, I don't anymore, because this action proves your real intent. Indoctrination. You may be able to get away with this, but I and many will boycott FB over this, just like we boycotted Bud Light. Americans can innovate, we will find other ways to gather in the public square. What I hope is that we will look at yourselves in the mirror and think about who your audience is. The minority of radical gender activists won't float your boat. But more importantly, Americans have every right to debate this contentious issue.
The impacts of Meta’s Hate Speech and Bullying and Harassment policies on freedom of expression around gender identity issues, and the rights of transgender people, including minors.
The topic title shows the inherent bias. What about women's rights? Or gay rights? Or children's rights to be kept safe from harm? Or everyone's rights to free speech? Gender identity is a belief system and should not take precedence over others' beliefs or rights. Biological sex is a reality and should never be denied. There is nothing more important than the truth and the right to tell it.
Technical challenges in enforcing bullying and harassment policies at scale, the effectiveness of self-reporting requirements and their impacts on people targeted by bullying or harassment, and comparisons to alternative enforcement approaches.
As long as no one is inciting violence or harassing individuals, people should be able to speak freely. Disagreement is not harassment.
The sociopolitical context in the United States concerning freedom of expression and the rights of transgender people, especially for access to single-sex spaces and participation in sporting events:
This topic title shows Meta's bias in that rights for transgender people are prioritised and women's rights are erased. Single sex spaces and sports must be protected. Sex is a material reality and gender identity is a belief system. Someone's subjective feeling about who and what they are should not impact on another person's rights based on what or who they actually are
Stating a persons biological sex is not hate speech. Truth corresponds with observed reality. There is nothing hatful inherently associated with stating observed reality.
If the Oversight Board decides to ban these videos, this will mean that correctly stating the sex of trans-identifying males and disapproving of males in women's spaces qualify as “Bullying and Harassment.” Correctly identifying a stranger's biological sex is inbuilt and helps to keep women safe from predatory men.
It is an overreach for Facebook to enforce a definition of a man or woman. This is an ideological debate on what is means to be a man or a woman, philosophically and sociologically. One side believes there is an objective reality; anyone born female a woman. The other camp believes only inner reality/feelings matters; being a woman is a feeling. They also assert womanhood is "cultural", so anyone who wears a dress is a woman.
Calling a natal male a man is not a hate crime or harassment. Just because the masses isn't agreeing to Judith Butler's or postmodern gender theorists' school of thought is not a crime. Their goal is to emotionally guilt tripping the masses into believing transwomen are exactly the same as natal women, and sex does not exist. Only gender expression. This is Orwellian.
Greetings,
I wonder if you could get much more Woke, Meta?
I will not be told, by anyone, that the emperor has clothes on.
Women are Women, Men are Men, and theat is an indisputable fact that can never be changed will not tolerate being told to bow down and accept that Men pretending to be women are to be called Women, are allowed to invade Women's spaces, and have to be addressed as Women(or all their other made-up, pretend, free-changing pronouns either(. This must be not allowed
Speaking the truth about someone’s biological sex is never hateful. It is factual. If someone does not like these kinds of factual statements they should not engage in social media or social discourse of any kind. Meta has the responsibility to uphold the laws around actual threats of violence or slanderous statements. Otherwise, it cannot and should not become the “speech police”. It is a role that cannot be carried out without innumerable pitfalls.
The ability to believe one's eyes and to correctly label the phenomena of the world are crucial for our understanding of each other and to respond to the world and to others. Claiming that this is hate speech is gaslighting.
Please drop this proposed measure as it will make Facebook even more aggressively anti-women.
Facebook is not a real place but bathrooms, locker rooms, dressing rooms, prisons and other lockdown facilities are. They are places where persons with vaginas (women) can be vulnerable to rape, attack, sexual abuse, and other forms of violence by people with a penis and testicles (men).
“Transgender” is an umbrella term that includes an ever expanding list of subgroups (transvestite, transsexual, gender queer, etc) and also anyone who wants to self ID in that umbrella group. This identity is difficult to unpack and understand even in a gender studies program let alone on Meta.
At the Stride gender transitioning clinic of the St James Infirmary of SF where I was the ED for 7 years, we used precision language.
We need to be able to use precision language when discussing gender and sex-based violence and also reality.
Unfortunately this topic has become so confusing for the average person in part because the AP guidelines dont allow for precision language. Women with vaginas need to have genital privacy from people who have a penis and testicles. Respect our modesty and privacy. “I have a vagina and if I ever go to jail, I dont want a cavity search by a person with a penis”. Is an example of precision language
The concept of misgendering and gender special behaviour is already getting massive pushback because recent stats show that community perpetrates 30x more sex based violent crimes than any other on Earth. But yeah, why not kneecap your platform, lose all profit and business and shut down? It really works for every other company so far, clearly.
Stating a person’s gender at birth is not hate speech or bullying.
Hello and thank you for facing this important issue,
Language based on reality cannot be considered "hateful" or "disrespectful".
The creation of the artificial concept of "transphobia" muddles the perspective on things. It's clearer if we compare it with homophobia. It is not homophobic to state that homosexual people are same-sex attracted. That is just plain truth. Homophobia would be referring to them in derogatory terms, but describing accurate reality cannot be considered out of order.
The same way that homosexual people are same-sex attracted per definition (that is the characteristic that defines being homosexual), anyone that considers themselves as "trans" is not the sex they claim to be. Otherwise they wouldn't assign themselves the category of "trans". Therefore, stating their correct sex cannot be considered hate, as it is the plain truth.
"Trans" is a category some people believe in; they believe there is an innate essence that defines who is a man and who is a woman, with total independence of their sexed body. Many people don't believe that there is any essence inside people, but that sex is the category that defines who is a man and who is a woman. In fact, the very definition of man and woman is sex-based. Anyone defining man or woman as "someone who identifies as a man or a woman" are incurring in circular definitions that are infinite loops, since the very word that should be defined and explained (man or woman) is never defined. Circular definitions are useless.
Freedom of belief is a characteristic of free countries. Totalitarian or religious regimes force people to believe only a certain set of "allowed" topics.
Therefore, in any free country people should be free to believe they have an inner essence (like a soul), which, in turn, would necessarily mean that some other people should also be free to NOT believe in such an essence. Not in themselves, not in other people.
Freedom of belief and freedom of expression demand that all beliefs and expressions are allowed, and that all enjoy the same level of protection.
We need freedom of expression to say that there is a flagrant contradiction between the concepts of sexual orientation and “gender identity”. “Gender identity” nullifies the concept of sexual orientation, for it turns homosexual couples into heterosexual ones and vice versa if one of the members of the couple decides to “change their gender”.
Lesbian women are being pressured to accept intact males as partners, when those males claim to have a “female gender identity.” Those males claim lesbians are being transphobic for “not validating” their “gender identity”, but in fact they are homophobic (lesbophobic, in fact) for trying to force lesbians to be in a heterosexual relationship. Lesbians don’t have penises, neither like them. That is the very definition of being a lesbian (homosexual woman).
Meta should allow its users to have freedom of expression in their posts. The opposite of freedom of expression is censorship, which is the characteristic of tyrannies, not of democracies. Stating plain truths in plain language is not hate. We need language to describe the reality of the world we live in.
As for sports, nothing prevents people that consider themselves “trans” to participate in sports, provided that they do so in the category of their sex, which is the only way to ensure a fair competition. Male puberty gives men a huge advantage over women, not only because of higher levels of testosterone but also for greater bone density, lung capacity, heart size, bigger size and weight, which on top make them dangerous for women in contact sports, for the possibility and severity of injuries increase dramatically for women. Fairness is destroyed when males compete against females, same way as it would happen if weight categories in boxing were removed. Categories are created to allow equal opportunity within the participants in that category, and they are based on real and objective characteristics such as age, weight, sex or disability. Able bodied people don’t (or shouldn’t) compete against disabled people (even though Italian Petrillo does), same as adults don’t compete against children or young people against old people.
On top of the issue of fairness and safety, privacy and dignity are also compromised if we allow males into female lockers and changing rooms. Women have the right to their privacy, and that without taking into account that the presence of men in female spaces could be devastating for all those women who were survivors of violence, including sexual violence. Being alone with or being forced to shower with a male could be very traumatizing (or retraumatizing) for women athletes.
The Declaration on Women's Sex-Based Rights reaffirms women and girls' sex-based rights, and challenges the discrimination we experience from the replacement of the category of sex with that of “gender identity.”
We reaffirm motherhood as an exclusively female status.
We reaffirm women's and girls rights to physical and reproductive integrity and oppose their exploitation through surrogacy and related practices.
We reaffirm women's rights to freedom of opinion and expression, peaceful assembly and association, and political participation.
We reaffirm women's rights to fair play in sports.
We reaffirm the need to end violence against women and girls, and to protect rights of children.
We oppose all forms of discrimination against women and girls that result from replacing "sex" with "gender identity" in law, policy, and social practice.
More information on https://www.womensdeclaration.com
Telling the truth should not be considered hate speech or bullying. Using facts should not be considered hate speech or bullying. Referring to matters of scientific record should not be considered hate speech or bullying.
Calling a man in a dress a male is not 'misgendering', it's telling the truth, using facts, referring to scientific terms.
Please be sensible and stop being fooled by those who wish to deceive, inveigle and obfuscate.
Women should have a right to discuss issues that involve only women.
We should not be accused of "hate" for being concerned about our rights and discussing them.
This is NOT settled in law or in the culture. And contrary to the narrative, it is settled in Medicine with new research that this is BAD FOR CHILDREN.
Too many women get harassed by men who identify as women reporting them already.
Your proposal is unclear as you do not provide a definition of Gender, Gender Identity, or Misgendering.
Men should not be in women's sports, even if they identify as transwomen.
Men should not be in women's locker rooms either. Men in women's Sports and in Locker rooms is under public discussion, and is an active issue in courts in the United States. Women must be able to discuss this also in what has in essence, become a "public square."
Correctly describing someone's sex is not misgendering and is crucial for women to be able to protect themselves. Otherwise we are silenced women and we are erased women. The rate of male violence (over 90% of all violent crime) does not change with "transitioning." In fact, transwomen offend in the same pattern as Men.
Correctly identifying someone's sex is not hatred. If Meta wants to compel it's users to strictly use *preferred* pronouns, I will be deleting my accounts on all services. I'm not a validation prop for mentally ill people being abused by the medical industry.
When the word WOMAN is used by men no matter how they identify then the word WOMAN becomes meaningless. Women become meaningless.
A Transgender WOMAN is a subset of men. A man who calls himself a Transgender WOMAN is a biological man wearing female gendered clothing. Women are erased if we cannot say the truth. He is still a man no matter how he identifies.