in , , , ,


Facebook expands ‘hate speech’ to include invalidation of ‘gender identity’


Social Media platforms haven’t been well known for welcoming dissenting opinions to the status quo in the past, however, in December 2019, Facebook quieting updated their ‘Hate Speech’ guidelines to include ‘statements denying existence’.

gender identity existence

This change no doubt is in response to women all over the world dissenting against the ‘Transwomen are real Women’ debate, and it seems, Facebook’s opinion has been firmly planted with the inclusion of these new rules.

Women have been facing social de-platforming, online harassment and bullying for advocating for sex-based rights over the years, and platforms are increasingly making it easier to fully ban women who do not accept Trans Advocates new definitions of what they deem to be men and women.

This level of censorship on a public platform should not be allowed and dissenting opinions should be voiced. Women now have to speak louder and call out those who wish to silence them. We don’t have much time, they are trying to remove your ability to speak, so do not sit by and let them do so. Speak now!



Leave a Reply
  1. Facebook is really on my last nerve. They claim they can publish political ads that aren’t true, now this? Also equally untruths? I was thinking of posting this but it might actually be considered hate speech. Maybe after a decade of this platform we all need to move on from Facebook and find another platform to connect on? I think they’re terribly irresponsible.

  2. Ae, Fuckerberg is such a douche; like at jack at Twatter, they’re both misogynistic arseholes. Twatter is another torture chamber full of kidfuckers, predators, wypipo supremacists, White Women’s Tears and other such fuckery. I’ve been suspended/banned there over a dozen times haha. TOR browser rules! 😉
    Mentally ill men in drag are not women. Cockfrockers have a mental illness, and I will never validate it for them. #NotNow #NotFuckingEver 1st stop should be the psychiatrist’s office, NOT validation. Self-ID is a nonce’s/predator’s charter.

    I don’t deny their existence. However, to what extent do *I* have to participate in somebody ELSE’S self-image? #NotaFuckingWhit it’s a polite fiction and I’m rude af. #GlovesOff bc I will never kowtow to the astonishing delusion that men in dresses + drugs + flaccid cock = woman. LMAO. Born, not worn.

    What I’m denying them is the right to enter women-only spaces. As they are men. #Foreverandever it won’t be the wig and handbag combo you’re buried with that’ll tell us whether you were male/female; your very bones will out FFS.

  3. Statements denying existence? Are they going to ban people for denying the existence of god, Santa Claus, the tooth fairy, and ghosts? I don’t know anyone who doubts the existence of trans people. We just don’t believe men can be women and vice versa.

  4. For the first time in my many years of existence, I went to a Republican town meeting last night and found myself squarely on the side of Republican men and women as the topic of what would be taught in health class in in public schools was discussed. Life never seems to surprise me.

    As I said there, schools need to stay away from belief. The idea that one can change their gender is predicated on the belief that gender is a real thing, rather than just a collection of social stereotypes that are used when it is convenient to use them and discarded as just a stereotype when it is convenient to do so. Not everyone believes gender is real. I personally believe that there are simply people with preferences for various things, from clothing styles and other means of outward appearance, to behaviors, art, music, career paths, etc. If we lived in a society where a man could really wear a dress, heels, makeup and not feel like he has to identify as a woman, we wouldn’t be in this hot mess we’re in now. Butch women have been doing this for decades and still call themselves women, because they ARE women. It’s just that it hasn’t been this way for men who wish to express their preferences in the same way, and I truly believe this was the forefront of the trans sweep that has sort of taken us by storm.

    Just think of the people who wouldn’t feel the need to butcher their bodies because they no longer associate dressing a certain way or having other preferences with not having a penis.

    Facebook is not only wrong in this stance, it is siding with a belief that is actually the foundation of thousands of people needlessly undergoing painful surgery to conform their bodies to something that isnt even real.

    Now tell me, who stands on the side of what is right and compassionate?

  5. But you can say bitch whore skank slut cunt bimbo gold digger. Ect ect but cant call a male a male.. I advocate for smegma. Lol look it up

  6. Is it me, or does “trans-women are women” deny the existence of actual women? Does FB have a problem with that? No? Hmmm. Just musing here. And in what way does saying that trans “women” are not women constitute a “statement denying existence” of anything? I mean…they exist. They’re just not women. The whole thing is so semantically confused, it would be funny if it weren’t so scary.

    E.K. Witherell, I’m with you re: abandoning FB, but. what are the options?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *





What do you think?


Illinois Medicaid covers Transgender procedures while allowing Women to suffer Diastasis Recti with no relief

Transwomen ‘playing period’ is misogynistic and tone deaf