Scroll To Top

What LGBTQ+ people should know about Meta’s new rules

photo illustration frustrated person negative experience online

Roman Samborskyi/shutterstock creative

Exploring the consequences of rolling back Instagram and Facebook’s content moderation policies.

Cwnewser

Meta, the parent company of Instagram, Facebook, and Threads, has announced drastic changes to its content moderation policies, sparking widespread criticism from LGBTQ+ advocacy organizations, including GLAAD. The new policies significantly weaken protections for LGBTQ+ users and other marginalized groups, allowing hateful and dehumanizing rhetoric to thrive on its platforms.

Keep up with the latest in LGBTQ+ news and politics. Sign up for The Advocate's email newsletter.

What is Meta doing to rules that protect against hate speech toward LGBTQ people?

Meta’s changes to its Hateful Conduct policies explicitly allow for previously prohibited rhetoric targeting LGBTQ+ people, women, and immigrants. The new guidelines now permit language that excludes or insults individuals based on sex, gender, or sexual orientation, citing topics like transgender rights, immigration, and homosexuality as justifications for social discourse. Joel Kaplan, Meta’s chief global affairs officer, defended the changes, writing, “We’re getting rid of a number of restrictions on topics like immigration, gender identity and gender that are the subject of frequent political discourse and debate. It’s not right that things can be said on TV or the floor of Congress, but not on our platforms.” Meta now claims its policies are “designed to allow room for these types of speech,” despite the potential harm such rhetoric poses to vulnerable communities.

Related: Mark Zuckerberg announces Facebook & Instagram will be more like X in second Trump term

The revised rules also allow for arguments limiting military, law enforcement, and teaching jobs based on gender or sexual orientation if framed within religious beliefs. Additionally, content advocating for excluding individuals from restrooms, sports leagues, or health and support groups based on gender or sexual orientation is now permitted. Perhaps most alarming, GLAAD points to Meta as explicitly allowing claims of mental illness or abnormality tied to gender or sexual orientation, referring to such statements as part of “political and religious discourse.” The use of terms like “transgenderism,” a right-wing neologism frequently used to delegitimize trans identities, is now codified into Meta’s policies, the advocacy group warns. Women may now be referred to as property.

Is Meta removing bans against dehumanizing language?

Meta has eliminated multiple safeguards against dehumanizing rhetoric, leaving historically marginalized groups increasingly vulnerable, according to GLAAD. Protections against comparing women and LGBTQ+ people to inanimate objects, such as referring to transgender individuals as “it,” have been eliminated. Similarly, statements denying the existence of protected groups or asserting that they “shouldn’t exist” are now permitted under the revised guidelines. Prohibitions on statements of inferiority, expressions of disgust, and calls for exclusion have also been replaced with vague references to “insults,” which GLAAD says significantly weaken enforcement mechanisms.

In addition, Meta has removed its clear definitions of slurs.

Is Meta really getting rid of fact-checking to move toward a "community notes" model?

Yes. Meta’s decision to end its partnerships with third-party fact-checkers and replace them with a “Community Notes” system has raised significant alarm among experts and advocates. This new system relies on user-generated context to flag and address misinformation, but critics warn it is vulnerable to manipulation and ill-equipped to combat hate speech and disinformation.

Meta has also announced plans to reintegrate political posts and news content into user feeds, a stark reversal of its previous strategy to reduce the visibility of civic and political discourse.

GLAAD president and CEO Sarah Kate Ellis voiced grave concerns about the implications of these changes. “Zuckerberg’s removal of fact-checking programs and industry-standard hate speech policies make Meta’s platforms unsafe places for users and advertisers alike,” Ellis said. “Without these necessary hate speech and other policies, Meta is giving the green light for people to target LGBTQ people, women, immigrants, and other marginalized groups with violence, vitriol, and dehumanizing narratives. With these changes, Meta is continuing to normalize anti-LGBTQ hatred for profit — at the expense of its users and true freedom of expression. Fact-checking and hate speech policies protect free speech.”

What other troubling policy changes are coming?

Meta has also transitioned from using the term “hate speech” to “hateful conduct,” a linguistic shift that GLAAD argues downplays the severity of harmful content. The company has removed prior acknowledgments that hate speech fosters intimidation and exclusion or promotes offline violence. Restrictions on paid content have also been loosened, raising concerns about advertisers potentially amplifying divisive rhetoric. These changes coincide with Meta’s decision to relocate its trust and safety operations to Texas, a state with a history of enacting anti-LGBTQ+ legislation. Advocates fear this move signals an alignment with conservative ideologies that could further endanger marginalized communities.

Can LGBTQ+ still report and block?

Although Meta’s new guidelines have weakened safeguards, users can still access tools like reporting, blocking, and muting to help manage their online experiences.

If users encounter posts or comments that violate Meta’s Community Standards, they can use the platform’s reporting tools to flag the content.

Blocking accounts that engage in harassment or hate speech can help reduce exposure to toxic interactions. Similarly, muting specific words, phrases, or accounts allows users to filter their feeds and limit exposure to triggering or harmful content.

What is an alternative to Meta if it becomes like X?

Platforms like Bluesky are emerging as viable alternatives to Meta’s platforms or Elon Musk’s X (formerly Twitter) for users seeking a safer, more inclusive online environment. Bluesky, a decentralized social media platform, offers features prioritizing user control, transparency, and accountability. Unlike Meta’s recent rollback of protections, Bluesky has community guidelines explicitly designed to prevent harassment, hate speech, and the spread of harmful narratives.

Others have moved to Mastodon, which previously saw an increase in users following Musk's takeover of Twitter.

From Your Site Articles