Cited by 21

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Misgendered During Moderation: How Transgender Bodies Make Visible Cisnormative Content Moderation Policies and Enforcement in a Meta Oversight Board Case

Mayworm, Samuel, Albert, Kendra, Haimson, Oliver L.·2024·The 2024 ACM Conference on Fairness Accountability and Transparency

Abstract

Transgender and nonbinary social media users experience disproportionate content removals on social media platforms, even when content does not violate platforms’ guidelines. In 2022, the Oversight Board, which oversees Meta platforms’ content moderation decisions, invited public feedback on Instagram’s removal of two trans users’ posts featuring their bare chests, introducing a unique opportunity to hear trans users’ feedback on how nudity and sexual activity policies impacted them. We conducted a qualitative analysis of 83 comments made public during the Oversight Board’s public comment process. Commenters criticized Meta’s nudity policies as enforcing a cisnormative view of gender while making it unclear how images of trans users’ bodies are moderated, enabling the disproportionate removal of trans content and limiting trans users’ ability to use Meta’s platforms. Yet there was significant divergence among commenters about how to address cisnormative moderation. Some commenters suggested that Meta clarify nudity guidelines, while others suggested that Meta overhaul them entirely, removing gendered distinctions or fundamentally reconfiguring the platform’s relationship to sexual content. We then discuss how the Oversight Board’s public comment process demonstrates the value of incorporating trans people’s feedback while developing policies related to gender and nudity, while arguing that Meta must go beyond only revising policy language by reevaluating how cisnormative valu…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3630106.3658907

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Vague platform policies often affect queer and trans users, who experience extensive content removal even when respecting a platform's guidelines.

    “These vague policies often affect queer and trans users, who experience extensive content removal even when respecting a platform's guidelines (Haimson et al. 2021;Mayworm, Albert, and Haimson 2024).”

    From Staring Back at the Surveillance Gaze: The Resistance of LGBTQ+ Users on Social Media (2026) · cites this paper as Mayworm, Albert, and Haimson 2024

  • This regime of visibility heightens the scrutiny of queer communities, impacting their possible evolution within counterpublic spaces operating outside the cisheteronormative system.

    “This creates a regime of visibility that heightens the scrutiny of queer communities, which greatly impacts their possible evolution within counterpublic spaces operating outside of the cisheternormative system (Haimson et al. 2021;Mayworm, Albert, and Haimson 2024;Monea 2022).”

    From Staring Back at the Surveillance Gaze: The Resistance of LGBTQ+ Users on Social Media (2026) · cites this paper as Mayworm, Albert, and Haimson 2024

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 44

  1. 10.2139/ssrn.3805210 · DOI
  2. 10.1145/3411764.3445091 · DOI
  3. 10.1215/23289252-9475495 · DOI
  4. 10.1177/1461444815621527 · DOI
  5. 10.1080/23268743.2021.1947883 · DOI
  6. 10.1177/01634437211027106 · DOI
  7. 10.1016/j.neucom.2016.03.099 · DOI
  8. 10.15406/iratj.2017.03.00075 · DOI
  9. 10.1177/14614448211031031 · DOI
  10. 10.21428/96c8d426 · DOI
  11. Michael Ann DeVito. 2022. How Transfeminine TikTok Creators Navigate the Algorithmic Trap of Visibility Via Folk Theorization. (2022). · DOI
  12. Natasha Duarte, Emma Llansó, and Anna Loup. 2018. Mixed Messages? The Limits of Automated Social Media Content Analysis. In 2018 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. https://cdt.org/files/2017/12/FAT-conference-draft-2018.pdf
  13. Niki Fritz and Amy Gonzales. 2018. Not the normal trans story: negotiating trans narratives while crowdfunding at the margins. International Journal of Communication 12 (2018), 20.
  14. 10.1177/1461444820912540 · DOI
  15. Tarleton Gillespie. 2017. Governance of and by platforms. In The SAGE Handbook of Social Media. SAGE, New York, 30.
  16. Tarleton Gillespie. 2018. Custodians of the Internet: Platforms, Content Moderation, and the Hidden Decisions That Shape Social Media (illustrated edition ed.). Yale University Press, New Haven.
  17. GLAAD. 2023. Social Media Safety Index 2023. Technical Report. GLAAD. 44 pages. https://assets.glaad.org/m/7adb1180448da194/original/Social-Media-Safety-Index-2023.pdf
  18. 10.1177/08912432211029393 · DOI
  19. 10.1145/3415195 · DOI
  20. 10.1080/14680777.2019.1678505 · DOI
  21. 10.1145/3479610 · DOI
  22. 10.5210/fm.v21i6.6791 · DOI
  23. 10.1145/3610169 · DOI
  24. Anna Hoffmann and Anne Jonas. 2016. Recasting Justice for Internet and Online Industry Research Ethics. In Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age: New Cases and Challenges, Michael Zimmer and Katharina Kinder-Kurlanda (Eds.). Peter Lang Publishing, 27.
  25. 10.1177/01968599211040835 · DOI
  26. 10.1145/3359294 · DOI
  27. 10.1007/s11042-022-11968-3 · DOI
  28. 10.2139/ssrn.3760098 · DOI
  29. 10.1111/j.1460-2466.1996.tb01486.x · DOI
  30. Brandeis Marshall. 2021. Algorithmic misogynoir in content moderation practice. Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung European Union (June 2021). https://eu.boell.org/sites/default/files/2021-06/HBS-e-paper-Algorithmic-Misogynoir-in-Content-Moderation-Practice-200621_FINAL.pdf
  31. 10.1145/3632741 · DOI
  32. 10.7551/mitpress/12551.001.0001 · DOI
  33. 10.33621/jdsr.v5i4.162 · DOI
  34. 10.1145/3593013.3594078 · DOI · Paper page
  35. Oversight Board. 2023. Meet The Board. https://www.oversightboard.com/meet-the-board/
  36. 10.1145/3593013.3594134 · DOI
  37. Audacia Ray. 2007. Naked on the Internet: hookups, downloads, and cashing in on Internet sexploration. Seal Press, Emeryville, CA. OCLC: ocm82367813.
  38. Sarah T. Roberts. 2019. Behind the screen: content moderation in the shadows of social media. Yale University Press, New Haven. OCLC: on1055263168.
  39. 10.1080/00918369.2022.2042664 · DOI
  40. Salty. 2019. Exclusive: An Investigation into Algorithmic Bias in Content Policing on Instagram. https://www.saltyworld.net/algorithmicbiasreport-2/
  41. 10.1145/3274424 · DOI
  42. 10.1145/3392866 · DOI · Paper page
  43. Julia Serano. 2016. Whipping girl: a transsexual woman on sexism and the scapegoating of femininity (second edition ed.). Seal Press, Berkeley, CA. OCLC: ocn920728057.
  44. Shakira Smith, Oliver L Haimson, Claire Fitzsimmons, and Nikki Echarte Brown. 2021. Censorship of Marginalized Communities on Instagram, 2021. Salty (Sept. 2021). https://saltyworld.net/product/exclusive-report-censorship-of-marginalized-communities-on-instagram-2021-pdf-download/

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Mayworm, S., Albert, K., & Haimson, O. L.
Affiliations
  • School of Information, University of Michigan, United States of America
  • Harvard University, United States of America
Venue
The 2024 ACM Conference on Fairness Accountability and Transparency
Publisher
ACM
Published
2024-06-03
Pages
301-312
Cited by
21
References
7
Funders
National Science Foundation (1942125)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review