Descrição do caso
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.
Comentários
Facebook, Meta, Instagram and all platforms owned by this conglomerate will force themselves into continuous public falsehoods if you censor women lobbying for our rights. You have already censored too much as you bend to the will of a lobbying group pretending a psychological malady, Identity-Based Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder is a medical condition requiring society to pretend sex change exists. Sex is determined at conception and cannot be changed. Sex trait modification surgeries and use of dangerous, iatrogenic hormones to alter the body do not change sex. Identity-Based Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, if approached holistically as with other OCD conditions, can be overcome and the patient will live a normal, fulfilled life. Tech companies have promoted a false agenda and are causing harm to families, women and children. Freedom of speech is the sunlight, the path of truth. Do not block users, do not engage in sex discrimination against women and girls. Stop kowtowing to a falsehood.
To begin with, when the transgender movement began demanding certain changes, the female sex were not consulted nor considered.
There were no referendums on whether the definition of 'woman' should change. Women didn't get a say on how we would be defined in law.
Very few equality impact assessments have been done to uphold sex equality.
In fact it is sex equality that is being directly attacked.
There has been no open universal debate on replacing sex with 'gender identity'. So many scientists have been threatened and deplatformed.
Women especially have been fired, threatened, assaulted and deplatformed just for talking about female rights and needs.
This authoritarianism and misogyny must end.
The female sex have every right to demand sex equality laws and policies remain. This includes female only spaces and sports. Male entitlement is not a human right.
It is not a human right to demand that people disregard sex and adopt gender beliefs which are clearly sexist and superficial. Women are not a costume.
The female sex are fully entitled to claim protections from the whole male sex and well documented male violence, aggression and predatory behaviours.
In sports, virilisation in the male sex is well documented as a 12% advantage over the female sex.
It's also proven that these advantages cannot be reversed.
Womens sports exist to provide inclusion to non virilised female athletes. It's not an open category for modified males to expand into.
The male sex already have more sporting opportunities and higher rewards.
So if META actually cares about sex equality and the well being of the female half of the population, you will keep all debate open and not censor to benefit the male sex.
This is sexist and hurts women, gays, and lesbians. Anyone has a right to reject anyone else based on their innate sexual preference, and you have trans rights advocates encouraging lesbians to accept penis as lady d--- or else their "bigots." So wrong. Either sex is immutable and biologically based, or it is changeable and based entirely on a subjective feeling. If a man can be a woman, the sex category “woman” cannot be protected in law from historic and ongoing discrimination. If these groups would #LetWomenSpeak they would understand people aren't upset about/at trans people, they're upset at the flagrant disregard for sex-based issues affecting women and girls (bodily dignity and privacy from voyeurism, rape, stalking, hidden cameras, exploitation) that men don't care about and are using trans rights issues to silence women's voices. Not to mention trans groups have somehow managed to have their issues heard and put into law in record time, almost like men get their way like it has always been, and women's issues don't matter as much because well, they don't affect men. Anyway, just my honest thoughts.
Women’s Declaration International (WDI) is a global, nonpartisan group of volunteer women dedicated to protecting women’s sex-based rights. WDI USA is its U.S. chapter.
The Declaration on Women’s Sex-Based Rights (the Declaration) was created to lobby nations to protect women and girls on the basis of sex rather than “gender” or “gender identity,” based on well-established principles of international law.
Article 1 of the Declaration reaffirms that the rights of women and girls are based on the category of sex. The inclusion of “gender identity” in a legal definition of sex necessarily replaces sex with “gender identity,” a claimed feeling based on sex-based stereotypes that harm women and girls. The conflict is unavoidable: Either sex is immutable and biologically based, or it is changeable and based entirely on a subjective feeling. If a man can be a woman, the sex category “woman” cannot be protected in law from historic and ongoing discrimination.
Article 4 reaffirms women’s rights to freedom of opinion and freedom of expression, including the right to hold and express opinions about “gender identity.” This is consistent with the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
Article 7 of the Declaration reaffirms the rights of women and girls to the same opportunities as men and boys to participate actively in sports and physical education, consistent with Article 10 (g) of the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), and with the original intentions of Title IX Education Amendments of 1972.
As Eric Vilain, a professor of human genetics at UCLA and consultant to the IOC medical commission has noted, “We separate men and women into categories because we want women to be able to win some competitions. There is a 10% to 12% difference between male and female athletic performance.” Significant differences in the average bone density, heart size, lung volume, hemoglobin levels, and musculoskeletal development of men and women, among other physical differences, result in men being able to generate higher speed and power during physical activity. Even after two years of testosterone suppression, males retain physical advantage over females, especially when it comes to speed and upper body strength.
Article 8 of the Declaration, reaffirming the need for the elimination of violence against women, asserts that “violence against women is one of the crucial social mechanisms by which women as a sex are forced into a subordinate position compared with men as a sex,” and that single-sex provisions should include those that “promote the physical safety, privacy and dignity of women and girls.”
Allowing males, including school boys, into designated female-only spaces such as public restrooms, changing rooms, showers, spas, and so forth, has disastrous consequences for the safety, privacy, and dignity of women and girls, including voyeurism, exhibitionism, filming women while using facilities, sexual assault, and rape.
As to the rights of “transgender people,” nobody is “transgender.” The men and boys who call themselves “transgender” claim to be what they are not, and thereby demand access to women’s public bathrooms and women’s and girls’ sports; they are, however, men and boys, based on objectively verifiable and immutable reproductive biology. Men and boys have the protection of all of the laws and policies of the federal, state, and local governments – as men. Humans cannot change sex. Women and girls, along with all other citizens, should have the right to reject the lie that some men are women, without being censored. “Hate speech” policies that prevent people from referring to a man as a man are dangerously anti-democratic. Free speech must not be curtailed because a man’s feelings might be hurt by being called a man. If we cannot tolerate hurt feelings, we cannot tolerate democracy.
WDI USA's comment:
Women’s Declaration International (WDI) is a global, nonpartisan group of volunteer women dedicated to protecting women’s sex-based rights. WDI USA is its U.S. chapter.
The Declaration on Women’s Sex-Based Rights (the Declaration) was created to lobby nations to protect women and girls on the basis of sex rather than “gender” or “gender identity,” based on well-established principles of international law.
Article 1 of the Declaration reaffirms that the rights of women and girls are based on the category of sex. The inclusion of “gender identity” in a legal definition of sex necessarily replaces sex with “gender identity,” a claimed feeling based on sex-based stereotypes that harm women and girls. The conflict is unavoidable: Either sex is immutable and biologically based, or it is changeable and based entirely on a subjective feeling. If a man can be a woman, the sex category “woman” cannot be protected in law from historic and ongoing discrimination.
Article 4 reaffirms women’s rights to freedom of opinion and freedom of expression, including the right to hold and express opinions about “gender identity.” This is consistent with the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
Article 7 of the Declaration reaffirms the rights of women and girls to the same opportunities as men and boys to participate actively in sports and physical education, consistent with Article 10 (g) of the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), and with the original intentions of Title IX Education Amendments of 1972.
As Eric Vilain, a professor of human genetics at UCLA and consultant to the IOC medical commission has noted, “We separate men and women into categories because we want women to be able to win some competitions. There is a 10% to 12% difference between male and female athletic performance.” Significant differences in the average bone density, heart size, lung volume, hemoglobin levels, and musculoskeletal development of men and women, among other physical differences, result in men being able to generate higher speed and power during physical activity. Even after two years of testosterone suppression, males retain physical advantage over females, especially when it comes to speed and upper body strength.
Article 8 of the Declaration, reaffirming the need for the elimination of violence against women, asserts that “violence against women is one of the crucial social mechanisms by which women as a sex are forced into a subordinate position compared with men as a sex,” and that single-sex provisions should include those that “promote the physical safety, privacy and dignity of women and girls.”
Allowing males, including school boys, into designated female-only spaces such as public restrooms, changing rooms, showers, spas, and so forth, has disastrous consequences for the safety, privacy, and dignity of women and girls, including voyeurism, exhibitionism, filming women while using facilities, sexual assault, and rape.
As to the rights of “transgender people,” nobody is “transgender.” The men and boys who call themselves “transgender” claim to be what they are not, and thereby demand access to women’s public bathrooms and women’s and girls’ sports; they are, however, men and boys, based on objectively verifiable and immutable reproductive biology. Men and boys have the protection of all of the laws and policies of the federal, state, and local governments – as men. Humans cannot change sex. Women and girls, along with all other citizens, should have the right to reject the lie that some men are women, without being censored. “Hate speech” policies that prevent people from referring to a man as a man are dangerously anti-democratic. Free speech must not be curtailed because a man’s feelings might be hurt by being called a man. If we cannot tolerate hurt feelings, we cannot tolerate democracy.
————
Gender is a construct: costumes, stereotypes, images and caricatures of whatever a person and/or society deems fit. Sex is real, immutable and infallible. Without our 1st Amendment Protections we have nothing.
I find it very concerning that any ideology be regarded as beyond reproach, and while I understand what gender identity models represent to many others, they ARE predicated on an ideological framework. Gender theory is just that- a theory. It was overlaid upon the medical phenomena of transsexuality in very recent history, and there is still contentious debate even among experts on whether or not the integration of gender theory helps or harms trans people. Any theory should be free to critique, although I understand a distinction between critiquing gender theory and harassing a trans person. To call a trans woman a man is a rejection of ideology, but if you were to bully them by saying something like "everybody knows you aren't a woman and you never will be," it would be cruel, harassing, and yet another expression of intolerance for those who don't share the same beliefs. If it is considered harassment to reject the tenets of gender ideology (man/woman are identities rather than sexes, and sex is less important than gender when it comes to sports and prison placements), it should also be considered harassment to reject the tenets of Christianity, Islam, Judaism, atheism, biological determinism, feminism, and every other ideology we have been thus far free to express support or rejection of. I think some basic critical analysis will lead to the understanding of how gender has been exalted as an unquestionable social construction and why this is illogical, unequal, and ultimately detrimental to the fight for real trans rights. Support for the LGBTQ+ community has declined even among Gen X, and from all the discourse I've engaged in, this seems to be why.
Women’s Declaration International (WDI) is a global, nonpartisan group of volunteer women dedicated to protecting women’s sex-based rights. WDI USA is its U.S. chapter.
The Declaration on Women’s Sex-Based Rights (the Declaration) was created to lobby nations to protect women and girls on the basis of sex rather than “gender” or “gender identity,” based on well-established principles of international law.
Article 1 of the Declaration reaffirms that the rights of women and girls are based on the category of sex. The inclusion of “gender identity” in a legal definition of sex necessarily replaces sex with “gender identity,” a claimed feeling based on sex-based stereotypes that harm women and girls. The conflict is unavoidable: Either sex is immutable and biologically based, or it is changeable and based entirely on a subjective feeling. If a man can be a woman, the sex category “woman” cannot be protected in law from historic and ongoing discrimination.
Article 4 reaffirms women’s rights to freedom of opinion and freedom of expression, including the right to hold and express opinions about “gender identity.” This is consistent with the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
Article 7 of the Declaration reaffirms the rights of women and girls to the same opportunities as men and boys to participate actively in sports and physical education, consistent with Article 10 (g) of the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), and with the original intentions of Title IX Education Amendments of 1972.
As Eric Vilain, a professor of human genetics at UCLA and consultant to the IOC medical commission has noted, “We separate men and women into categories because we want women to be able to win some competitions. There is a 10% to 12% difference between male and female athletic performance.” Significant differences in the average bone density, heart size, lung volume, hemoglobin levels, and musculoskeletal development of men and women, among other physical differences, result in men being able to generate higher speed and power during physical activity. Even after two years of testosterone suppression, males retain physical advantage over females, especially when it comes to speed and upper body strength.
Article 8 of the Declaration, reaffirming the need for the elimination of violence against women, asserts that “violence against women is one of the crucial social mechanisms by which women as a sex are forced into a subordinate position compared with men as a sex,” and that single-sex provisions should include those that “promote the physical safety, privacy and dignity of women and girls.”
Allowing males, including school boys, into designated female-only spaces such as public restrooms, changing rooms, showers, spas, and so forth, has disastrous consequences for the safety, privacy, and dignity of women and girls, including voyeurism, exhibitionism, filming women while using facilities, sexual assault, and rape.
As to the rights of “transgender people,” nobody is “transgender.” The men and boys who call themselves “transgender” claim to be what they are not, and thereby demand access to women’s public bathrooms and women’s and girls’ sports; they are, however, men and boys, based on objectively verifiable and immutable reproductive biology. Men and boys have the protection of all of the laws and policies of the federal, state, and local governments – as men. Humans cannot change sex. Women and girls, along with all other citizens, should have the right to reject the lie that some men are women, without being censored. “Hate speech” policies that prevent people from referring to a man as a man are dangerously anti-democratic. Free speech must not be curtailed because a man’s feelings might be hurt by being called a man. If we cannot tolerate hurt feelings, we cannot tolerate democracy.
As Eric Vilain, a professor of human genetics at UCLA and consultant to the IOC medical commission has noted, “We separate men and women into categories because we want women to be able to win some competitions. There is a 10% to 12% difference between male and female athletic performance.” Significant differences in the average bone density, heart size, lung volume, hemoglobin levels, and musculoskeletal development of men and women, among other physical differences, result in men being able to generate higher speed and power during physical activity. Even after two years of testosterone suppression, males retain physical advantage over females, especially when it comes to speed and upper body strength.
Single-sex provisions should include those that promote the physical safety, privacy and dignity of women and girls.
Allowing males, including school boys, into designated female-only spaces such as public restrooms, changing rooms, showers, spas, and so forth, has disastrous consequences for the safety, privacy, and dignity of women and girls, including voyeurism, exhibitionism, filming women while using facilities, sexual assault, and rape.
As to the rights of “transgender people,” nobody is “transgender.” The men and boys who call themselves “transgender” claim to be what they are not, and thereby demand access to women’s public bathrooms and women’s and girls’ sports; they are, however, men and boys, based on objectively verifiable and immutable reproductive biology. Men and boys have the protection of all of the laws and policies of the federal, state, and local governments – as men. Humans cannot change sex. Women and girls, along with all other citizens, should have the right to reject the lie that some men are women, without being censored. “Hate speech” policies that prevent people from referring to a man as a man are dangerously anti-democratic. Free speech must not be curtailed because a man’s feelings might be hurt by being called a man. If we cannot tolerate hurt feelings, we cannot tolerate democracy.
Losing the freedom to use sex-based speech when discussing biological sex and the realities of sex-based differences between men and women would be speech-policing of Orwellian proportions.
It would:
- Cripple women's abilities to organize around sex based protections, thereby stripping us of rights we have fought for for decades.
- Erode the very meaning of women's progress in sports, business, and other achievement-based activities by supplanting women with male individuals who can identify out of the historically oppressed female class at will, have male bodies, male lived experiences, and therefore male advantages (regardless of how they subjectively feel about themselves).
- Impair longterm tracking of sex-based differences in areas like employment, education, leadership roles, commerce behaviors, crime patterns, and more.
Reality matters and words matter. Humans, like all other mammals, cannot change sex, and therefore saying that a biological man is always male is to state a scientifically accurate, biologically real fact. It's possible some people could get their feelings hurt by that, but we don't live in a world where 'not getting our feelings hurt' is a right. Free speech IS a right, however, and describing objective reality is never bullying or harassment, nor is it an attack. It is simply the truth with no inherent value tied to it.
If someone gets their feelings hurt by facts, they need new feelings, not new facts. And they should certainly not be given the right to silence the person stating that fact. Not by Meta or anyone else. Should we not be allowed to call the earth a globe for fear of flat-earthers feeling attacked? Should we not be able to call the Bible a historical document written by men because that might make Christians feel bullied?
You may think these examples are too different from the issue at hand, but I assure you they are not. Just like flat-earth theory is based on a spiritual concept of the cosmos, and Christianity is based on the spiritual belief in the holy trinity, so trangenderism is based on the spiritual belief in a gendered soul. It can't be verified, is completely subjective, and is not permanent. Faith shifts as our lived experience shifts.
Transgenderism is also a recently invented concept. While there have always been transvestites who get paraphilic sexual enjoyment from dressing as the other sex, and transsexuals who genuinely strive to pass and live as the opposite sex but still retain the knowledge that they can't actually change sex, the idea of transgenderism - that someone can actually become the other sex just by thinking they are - is new.
There is no test to verify that someone is or isn't trans. It is also not a static feeling. My daughter was "trans" for several years, indoctrinated by influencers online and peers, and 100% certain of her "boyhood" until suddenly she wasn't. Underlying mental health conditions, neuro-diversity, and discomfort with puberty made her a perfect target, but as she matured, she realized it wasn't real, and she is now happy and healthy in her own skin.
It is, in fact, doing a disservice to people with gender and body discomfort to police talking about the reality of sex and the dire mental, physical, and societal consequences of social and medical transition. With young people especially at risk of being turned into lifelong medical patients by this new concept of switching genders, if anything we need to be able to talk more about what "trans" is and isn't, and without anchoring the conversation in accurate sex-based speech, we can't do that. Meta should stand for free speech, not "no debate" which is a lazy, virtue-signaling way of avoiding hard topics.
It is my firm belief that Meta would lose all credibility by creating such an ideologically based policy, especially at a time when more and more voices around the world are raised about unfairness in women's sports, the decrease in safeguarding our children, and the weak quality of the research underpinning much of the so called "gender affirming" care.
The facts are - face lifts don’t actually make a person younger, tanning doesn't actually turn a white person black, putting in opaque contacts does not actually mean a seeing person becomes blind, and a man putting on a dress and makeup and taking estrogen, does NOT actually turn him into a woman.
And if he's not actually a woman, it is not hate speech to say he's a man EVEN IF he is uncomfortable with his maleness.
I've watched the "trans" phenomena grow online with alarm. As a lifelong supporter of gay and lesbian rights, to see this "force teaming" with a nebulous category that insists that one's body must match stereotypical behavior is insidious. I support the rights of males and females to dress and behave the way they like, that which comes naturally to them. I completely reject the idea that anyone is "trapped in the wrong body." Some boys like dresses. Some girls like short hair and sports. No mistake was made when they were born.
Why has this very simple and tolerant opinion become taboo? It certainly didn't happen organically. It was a project of powerful men and powerful industries, including the medical and pharma industries.
I have a right to say that cutting off healthy body organs is wrong. I have a right to say that pornography can not turn a male into a woman. I have a right to say that males, no matter what they say, should not be incarcerated with women. Rape victims should not have to pretend the men that raped them are women because them men have a sexual fetish.
Women are adult human females. They are not fake boobs, makeup, and stereotypical prancing. I don't care if men want to dress up as women. However, enforcing their fetish fantasies is wrong.
I have seen a huge number of young females decide they want to be boys. After all, their other choice is to be property (a trad wife) or parts (a chest feeder or bleeder). I think they don't want to be boys, I think the want to be humans.
I want to use your platform to tell young woman that their bodies are sacred, their identity is real and they have a right to physical and emotional safety.
I am not hateful, but I am scared of a sexualized movement that has gained the power to call me a monster because I don't comply.
Civil debate about transgender issues should never be classed as “hate speech.” Open discourse on the topic is of particular importance to women’s rights, gay rights, medical research, and the ethics of pediatric medicine. The debate cuts across political lines and is of enormous interest all over the world. The near-total silence (until very recently) on transgender issues in the MSM has been incredibly harmful and I hope Meta will not collude in keeping that silence going.
This is not an issue about "transgender" people - it is an issue of men attempting to silence women. The bulk of discourse on this issue is focused on men who identify as women, not transgender individuals. The fact that the loudest voices in opposition are men is telling, and just as telling is that our social media platforms cater to the language and desires of those men, and not the women and girls whose lives are impacted by their insistence on erasing our sex, our language, and our right to gather without men.
Women have a right to speak about the issues that affect them - this is not a hateful act. Ask yourself why there is such a violent push to erase our voices from social media. It is the one place where women can speak without fear of physical violence, and where we can gather in numbers without fearing the physical intrusion of those that would have us sit down, shut up, and capitulate. Silencing women who are impacted by a movement that bullies them to ignore their own eyes and experiences and to give up trying to protect their privacy, autonomy, and safety IS the hateful speech. Telling women that they are not a descrete sex is an attempt to erase reality. Telling us that men may retain their private spaces, but women must accept them in their spaces, too, is a throwback to a time where misogyny was the accepted norm. Women have a right to speak.
The fact is that men are pushing platforms like yours for the destruction of women's boundaries, effectively destroying any right that women have to gather and speak about issues important to them because they know that sunlight is the best disinfectant. Allowing only those men to speak on the issue is to create a dangerous echo chamber. Never has Facebook, Instagram, or the like taken such a stand against the sexualization and harrassment of women on its platforms, but men upset that women correctly identify them *as* men is informing your consideration of erasing women's free speech? One can see how overtly sexualized and "NSFW" the posts on Reddit became after silencing those who want open debate on women's rights.
Mark Zuckerberg spoke about “feel[ing] strongly that we should not compromise our content standards due to pressure from any Administration in either direction — and we’re ready to push back if something like this happens again.” Are you going to push back against the people trying to silence others now?
Don't capitulate to those that would have women sit down and shut up and forget that they ever had any rights. We don't want to see our girls groomed into silence by a money grab. Don't make Meta synonymous with misogyny.
The issue of women's equality safety and fairness must not be compromised by contraveneing the basic human right of free speech. Women and girls equality safety and fairness must be protected against those who would erode that. It is not hate speech to say that you do not subscribe to another persons opinion. The high court in UK decreed that a man saying he is a woman is a personal belief, and it is not discriminatory, nor hate speech to say you subscribe to biological fact. It is illegal and unethical to force a personal belief on another individual or society. This is in a court of law and comes under the human rights act. It would be illegal to support any system or organisation that flouts that
Using sex-based pronouns does not equate to harassment. In order to uphold women's rights, we must be allowed to use clear language with respect to biological sex. If any person can identify into the female sex class, the rights of women and girls do not exist. Women and girls deserve safety, dignity, and comfort. We require female-only restrooms, change rooms, shelters, prisons, and all other spaces where women are particularly vulnerable if males are present. If we are prohibited from using clear language to highlight the issues at hand, we are unable to advocate for our rights, or even to accurately describe the matter.
Further, to insist on using "preferred pronouns" rather than correct biological sex, is to urge girls to ignore their innate instincts to be wary of males in certain situations. A male does not suddenly become less likely to harm a woman or girl because he is wearing a dress or a wig. 99% of sexual assaults are committed by males, and 91% of victims are female. For this reason, women and girls require protection from men and boys, regardless of how they identify.
Voyeurism and indecent exposure are among the most common of sex crimes. These crimes can no longer be reported if the perpetrator claims a trans identity. In fact, if a woman does report such an instance and the male claims such an identity, the woman can expect to be vilified and shamed as a bigot. There have already been countless examples of males using a trans identity to gain access to vulnerable females. Self-identification laws and the broad acceptance of "preferred pronouns" has placed women and girls in danger and stripped us of our safety, dignity, and peace of mind.
Regarding sports, there can be no doubt about the advantages males have over females. This is the reason for the female sports category. Testosterone levels are not the only advantage to consider. Males are taller on average, they have larger hands and feet, far more upper body strength, larger throats and lungs, larger hearts, more fast-twitch muscles, and lower body fat. In the spirit of fairness and equity, females must be afforded opportunities separate from males. Again, if we are prohibited from using accurate language to describe biological sex, we are robbed of the opportunity to advocate for our rights.
Language is descriptive, while "gender identity" is a subjective inner feeling that requires others to ignore their basic human instincts. Women speaking up about our rights are not bigots, and we are not hateful. All over the western world, the rights of women and girls are being eroded. It is imperative that we retain the right to use language to advocate for ourselves, our daughters, and all females.
https://www.womensdeclaration.com/en/declaration-womens-sex-based-rights-summary/
When somebody is genetically man, it is mad to call him as "she". And vice versa.
Concerning videos and texts about people who claim a transgender identity (or whatever different gender identity) it is very important that it is possible to name and to describe reality. It violates women’s rights for safety and dignity, if it is not even possible anymore to discuss if a “transgender women” should use a female bathroom, or if a “trans girl” should play in girls’ sports: If it is called “hate speech” to discuss these matters and to express our opinion, freedom of speech doesn’t exist anymore. Nobody should be discriminated against - but it must be allowed to discuss, in which situations sex should matter, and in which gender identity does play a role. Thank you for considering my opinion!
My opinion is that clips mentioned in this case are not againts community guidelines. People acting in them does not perform harrasment or bullying. Instead I view their actions as defence and fight for their rights. When a person in competetive sport has XY chromozomes present, they simply can not compete in a woman category. And when woman is visiting toilets for women, she expects meeting women there. People can pretend to be whatever they want, but discrimination and supressing rights of majority of people can not be called free speech. And I am willing to support those, who are really bullied and harrased, for example people willing to speak about things in freedom even if it means they will be supressed by authorities and progressive media. I am talking about those commenting situation around corona epidemic all around the world and also about those writing statuses on Facebook about Mr. Biden Jr. Those are people who talked and were only expressing their opinion, similarly with those people on two mentioned clips. One of them were silenced down, the other ones are being falsely accused of hurting somebody.
Free speech is a human right and should be respected except for instigation of violence or murder. It must be allowed to criticize or offend because "hate speech" is the arbitrary concept of cancelling free speech. So it must be allowed speaking the truth like to call a man a man and to state obvious scientific facts like that there are only two biological sexes.
It is not hate speech to call someone the right name. I don´t have to accept a change in gender. The person may identify as he/she wishes, but no one can force me to pretend the same.
Same, as it is when an old lady has a esthetic surgery to look younger - I don´t have to address her as "young lady". Or when a teenager dresses up like an granfather - I don´t have to sell him alcohol either.
Let us get back to common sense. Let´s keep women spaces for women only.
Thank you.
Zuzana