Facebook’s hate speech policies censor marginalized users

[Noomz]

https://www.wired.com/story/facebook...nalized-users/

It is almost like rules are great for some but not for others.

I think that maybe they should stop trying to "reclaim" words that have never been anything but offensive.

[Zandalarian Paladin]

There's no censorship here, just people who don't understand the rules.

[Ivanstone]

I think that maybe they should stop trying to "reclaim" words that have never been anything but offensive.

Maybe. Some don't want to reclaim anything but its almost like the world is composed of free-willed individuals with varying opinions.

Words are important and have meaning but the intent behind those words are even more important and harder to define.

I've never heard Trump use racist, homophobic or transphobic language but I absolutely think he is all those things because he uses "politer" language and because of his actions.

[Underverse]

Wow.

Also, LGBT people as a group are not really marginalized in developed nations any more. There are sporadic events, yes, but I don't think we should be making the argument that all members of a group experience the same degree of inflicted bias. Once the law is on your side, you have all the avenues you need to confront biases that negatively affect you in a material way.

[BuckSparkles]

Wow.

Also, LGBT people as a group are not really marginalized in developed nations any more. There are sporadic events, yes, but I don't think we should be making the argument that all members of a group experience the same degree of inflicted bias. Once the law is on your side, you have all the avenues you need to confront biases that negatively affect you in a material way.

Not marginalized, but they will claim victimhood as long as it gets them benefits.

[Beardless Man]

Makes me real glad that this shit keeps biting people back.

Either all of it is okay, or none of it.

[Freighter]

Wow.

Also, LGBT people as a group are not really marginalized in developed nations any more. There are sporadic events, yes, but I don't think we should be making the argument that all members of a group experience the same degree of inflicted bias. Once the law is on your side, you have all the avenues you need to confront biases that negatively affect you in a material way.

They certainly are in many places. Singapore explicitly makes it illegal for men to engage with men sexually, societal attitudes to it is pretty dire too.

[Mister Cheese]

[Underverse]

Not marginalized, but they will claim victimhood as long as it gets them benefits.

Some will, some won't. Don't strike back with your own generalizations.

- - - Updated - - -

They certainly are in many places. Singapore explicitly makes it illegal for men to engage with men sexually.

Yeah, there are exceptions.

[Freighter]

Yeah, there are exceptions.

I don't think it's exceptions. I think it's instead very mixed how accepted they are.

[turboether]

How dare they want to use words they don't deem offensive. Don't they realise it's just internalised hetero-normative patriarchy that allows them to think and make decisions for themselves? They should get with the times and only think and say what the righteous social crusaders deem right for them to.

But something something private company whatever.

[Underverse]

I don't think it's exceptions. I think it's instead very mixed how accepted they are.

Not really in Europe and North America. Moreso in East Asian countries, most of which I would not consider developed.

[Ivanstone]

Not marginalized, but they will claim victimhood as long as it gets them benefits.

Except for those areas where they can be fired for being LGBQT. For example, there are many states within the US where this can happen.

[SherriMayim]

Oh look.

It's cancer complaining about cancer.

[BuckSparkles]

Except for those areas where they can be fired for being LGBQT. For example, there are many states within the US where this can happen.

Bull. If somebody fired somebody for being gay you can't tell me they wouldn't scream and get every LGBQTQQDHSIORM group to burn the place down and holler discrimination.

[Ivanstone]

Bull. If somebody fired somebody for being gay you can't tell me they wouldn't scream and get every LGBQTQQDHSIORM group to burn the place down and holler discrimination.

See all those grey areas on the map? No legal protections whatsoever. The other areas have varying protections, mostly only concerning government employment.

One political party explicitly runs on a platform of denying LGBTQ people legal protections. Guess which one?

[Super Kami Dende]

Well, how would you like being called a nerd or a geek?
Yet, you wouldn't have any qualms using some of/all these words to describe yourself, now would ya?

Same concept: owning the term, but not letting outsiders use it as they have absolutely no idea what it entails.

I don't call myself anything I wouldn't want others to call me, and I couldn't give a shit if someone called me Nerd or Geek lol.

In honesty I don't really care what people call me, I'm not really a little bitch when it comes to hurt feelings over words.

- - - Updated - - -

They use the words because they are taking back the language that was used to oppress them. Its a way of disempowering the language and using it for self-empowerment. Not every individual within a minority group agrees with this tactic but some obviously embrace it.

This isn't hard to figure out.

If it's about disempowering it, why have people become much more butthurt about words in the last few years when even less people are saying it??

I always hear the bullshit excuse of "BUT ITS DISEMPOWERING IT" but then the same people cry a river when someone still uses the word.

[Ivanstone]

If it's about disempowering it, why have people become much more butthurt about words in the last few years when even less people are saying it??

I always hear the bullshit excuse of "BUT ITS DISEMPOWERING IT" but then the same people cry a river when someone still uses the word.

Some people will be butthurt. The operative word here is "some".

Also who is that "someone"? There's a world of difference when some stereotypical black gang-banger drops an N-bomb then when some stereotypical redneck does it. That difference is sometimes called "intent".

[Dextroden]

Some people will be butthurt. The operative word here is "some".

Also who is that "someone"? There's a world of difference when some stereotypical black gang-banger drops an N-bomb then when some stereotypical redneck does it. That difference is sometimes called "intent".

Intent, shmintent. White people can say nigger without being racist.

[Mistame]

Whether intentional or not, these moderation fails constitute a form of censorship.

Technically, it is a form a censorship, but policies have no obligation to recognize context. It's either one or the other. Period. Sorry, kids.

And just like Facebook’s dangerous and discriminatory real names policy

One can pretty much stop reading here.

They use the words because they are taking back the language that was used to oppress them. Its a way of disempowering the language and using it for self-empowerment. Not every individual within a minority group agrees with this tactic but some obviously embrace it.

This isn't hard to figure out.

Sorry, but "reclamation" is an irrational concept. If you want to "disempower" a word, stop using it and/or stop taking offense at it. Trying to claim a word that's historically been used as a slur is now "acceptable" but only within the group it targets does nothing but perpetuate victimhood and ignorance.

Also who is that "someone"? There's a world of difference when some stereotypical black gang-banger drops an N-bomb then when some stereotypical redneck does it. That difference is sometimes called "intent".

You're right, intent and context are important. What they're not is exclusive to any group of people. That's simply not how words work.