Meta employees have been expressing outrage over recent content moderation changes allowing users to claim LGBTQ+ identities are "mental illnesses." CEO Mark Zuckerberg recently announced the controversial move as part of a broader shift toward "free expression." LGBTQ+ employees have been reportedly feeling particularly unsupported and demoralized.
Highlights
- Meta's policy change allows claims that LGBTQ+ identities are "mental illnesses."
- LGBTQ+ employees at Meta consequently feel unsupported and demoralized by the policy change.
- Meta workers have expressed disbelief and embarrassment at the controversial policy update.
On January 7, Meta, the company that owns and operates social media platforms Facebook, Instagram, Threads, and WhatsApp, announced a series of major updates to its content moderation policies.
Alongside the announcement, Meta updated its Community Guidelines, which set rules for content allowed across its platforms.
Notable changes were made to the “Hateful Conduct” policy, particularly on topics like immigration and gender.
Meta employees have been expressing outrage
Image credits: Mark Zuckerberg
Meta now says it allows “allegations of mental illness or abnormality when based on gender or sexual orientation, given political and religious discourse about transgenderism and homosexuality and common non-serious usage of words like ‘weird,’” Wired reported earlier this month.
As a result, Meta employees have been reportedly left furious. “I am LGBT and Mentally Ill,” one post by an employee on an internal Meta platform called Workplace read, 404 Media reported on January 9.
“Just to let you know that I’ll be taking time out to look after my mental health,” the post further outlined.
Image credits: zuck
Another thread on Meta’s internal Workplace site that has several hundred comments and more than a thousand reactions read: “[feedback] Sexual Orientation and Gender as a mental illness … I’d appreciate some more detail on:
“How the decision was made to update the policy, particularly given this does not reflect any mainstream scientific consensus; How the policy reflects our values and perspectives as a company, and whether these are different to the values we’ve expressed in the past; Who (if any) LGBT groups [internal or external] were consulted as part of this change.”
Ben Good, the head of Americas for the Core Policy Team at Meta, told employees in the thread that “our core values have not changed,” 404 Media reported.
Recent content moderation changes allowing users to claim LGBTQ+ identities are "mental illnesses" sparked fury
He further wrote: “The changes to our Hateful Conduct policy seek to undo the mission creep that has made our rules too restrictive and too prone to over enforcement.
“Reaffirming our core value of free expression means that we might see content on our platforms that people find offensive … yesterday’s changes not only open up conversation about these subjects, but allow for counterspeech on what matters to users.”
Current Meta employees reportedly revealed that many fellow workers were angered about the policy changes.
Image credits: Julio Lopez/Pexels
“It’s total chaos internally at Meta right now,” one current employee told 404 Media.
They added: “The entire thread of comments shared is dissent toward the new policy, save for one leader repeating Zuckerberg's talking points.
“I’d call the mood shock and disbelief. It’s embarrassment and shame that feels self-inflicted, different than mistakes the company has made in the past.”
LGBTQ+ employees have been reportedly feeling particularly unsupported and demoralized
Image credits: Mark Zuckerberg
Another employee said: “No one is excited or happy about these changes.
“And obviously the employees who identify as being part of the LGBTQ+ community are especially unhappy and feel the most unsupported in this.
“A small number of people are taking time off and are sharing that they are considering leaving the company due to this change.”
A separate worker told 404 Media: “Morale of fellow queer employees is in the absolute sh*tter, surprising no one.”
In the thread obtained by 404 Media, Meta workers reportedly said they could not find information about how the policy was created and who was consulted, as a person asked: “Did we miss a Policy Forum where we could hear the results of any research supporting this change and opinions of all?”
To which a person replied, “I looked for one and couldn’t find it either.”
Image credits: stock.adobe
Another employee wrote: “Can the policy team also address why the company did not have a response prepared for something that would clearly have such a significant impact internally and externally on employees/users who fall into these categories?”
A worker reportedly expressed: “Changes to Meta’s policy should be done thoughtfully, with considerable consultation from policy analysts, lawyers, and other subject matter experts.
“Those changes should have documented rationale, preferably available publicly.
“At the very least, Meta should be able to tell company employees why it is now acceptable to call a large number of them mentally ill or to refer to them as ‘property’ or to refer to them as ‘it.’”
CEO Mark Zuckerberg recently announced the controversial move as part of a broader shift toward "free expression"
Image credits: PowerfulJRE
Other comments shared by Meta employees that were obtained by 404 Media include: “I wish I could resign in protest, but I’ve already resigned.”
“I find it very hard to understand how explicitly carving out which groups of marginalized people can have what we otherwise classify hate speech directed at them will be beneficial for the communities we hope to build on our platforms.”
“This change is unacceptable on all levels.”
“Someone went into this policy and not only removed protection, they actually *doubled down* and made it explicitly okay. Absolutely wild.”
Image credits: Thought Catalog/Pexels
“I had to reread the policy language many times to believe what I was seeing—a very clear statement that we’re okay with people attacking others based on their sexual orientation or gender identity.
“I cannot begin to fathom why we think this is acceptable or helpful to our community and our company’s mission.
“I’ve never felt so strongly that we’re on the wrong side of history. This is going to cause so much harm. Please reconsider this change.”
“When I first joined this company, people would criticize me for working here all the time. I defended y’all time and time again, always anchoring that in the end, we do try our best even if it doesn’t work out sometimes - but this? Appalling.”
Mark linked his perspective on masculinity to personal experiences with martial arts
Image credits: Lex Fridman
“I think it’s clear that the policy team is not open to any feedback here and is committed to an ideological project that sacrifices some of our communities in order to achieve their goal.
“Just call me a tr*nny and close the discussion here. At least it would be honest.”
Labeling LGBTQ+ identities as "mental illnesses" is scientifically inaccurate and perpetuates harmful stigma.
The American Psychological Association declassified homosexuality as a mental disorder in 1973, recognizing that diverse sexual orientations are normal variations of human sexuality.
Similarly, the World Health Organization removed transgender identities from its list of mental disorders in 2019, acknowledging that being transgender is not a mental health condition.
Image credits: zuck
These decisions are based on extensive research demonstrating no inherent link between LGBTQ+ identities and psychopathology.
Allowing statements that contradict this scientific consensus, as per Meta's recent policy change, can reinforce prejudice and discrimination, adversely affecting the mental health and well-being of LGBTQ+ individuals, according to the Mental Health Foundation.
The controversial policy change comes as Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg defended “masculine energy” and criticized the cultural rejection of masculinity in a recent interview with Joe Rogan.
During his interview, coinciding with Meta’s decision to end its diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs, Mark linked his perspective to personal experiences with martial arts, which he said fostered positive aggression and camaraderie among men.
Mark said that he wanted women to succeed but didn’t think masculinity needed to be categorized as "toxic" for that to happen
Image credits: Mark Zuckerberg
"It's one thing to say we want to be kind of like welcoming and make a good environment for everyone, and I think it’s another to basically say that ‘masculinity is bad,’ and I just think we kind of swung culturally to that part of the – the kind of – the spectrum," Mark told Joe, Fox Business reported on Saturday (January 11).
The billionaire, who reportedly grew up with only sisters and now has only daughters, told Joe that he wanted women to succeed but didn’t think masculinity needed to be categorized as "toxic" for that to happen.
The 40-year-old reportedly credited martial arts for his change of heart when it came to masculinity, telling the podcast that having something to do with his male friends where they can "beat each other" has been a "positive experience" for him.
Mark revealed: "I think having a culture that celebrates the aggression a bit more has its own merits that are really positive.”
"Time to revive MySpace," a reader commented
