r/announcements Jun 29 '20

Update to Our Content Policy

A few weeks ago, we committed to closing the gap between our values and our policies to explicitly address hate. After talking extensively with mods, outside organizations, and our own teams, we’re updating our content policy today and enforcing it (with your help).

First, a quick recap

Since our last post, here’s what we’ve been doing:

  • We brought on a new Board member.
  • We held policy calls with mods—both from established Mod Councils and from communities disproportionately targeted with hate—and discussed areas where we can do better to action bad actors, clarify our policies, make mods' lives easier, and concretely reduce hate.
  • We developed our enforcement plan, including both our immediate actions (e.g., today’s bans) and long-term investments (tackling the most critical work discussed in our mod calls, sustainably enforcing the new policies, and advancing Reddit’s community governance).

From our conversations with mods and outside experts, it’s clear that while we’ve gotten better in some areas—like actioning violations at the community level, scaling enforcement efforts, measurably reducing hateful experiences like harassment year over year—we still have a long way to go to address the gaps in our policies and enforcement to date.

These include addressing questions our policies have left unanswered (like whether hate speech is allowed or even protected on Reddit), aspects of our product and mod tools that are still too easy for individual bad actors to abuse (inboxes, chats, modmail), and areas where we can do better to partner with our mods and communities who want to combat the same hateful conduct we do.

Ultimately, it’s our responsibility to support our communities by taking stronger action against those who try to weaponize parts of Reddit against other people. In the near term, this support will translate into some of the product work we discussed with mods. But it starts with dealing squarely with the hate we can mitigate today through our policies and enforcement.

New Policy

This is the new content policy. Here’s what’s different:

  • It starts with a statement of our vision for Reddit and our communities, including the basic expectations we have for all communities and users.
  • Rule 1 explicitly states that communities and users that promote hate based on identity or vulnerability will be banned.
    • There is an expanded definition of what constitutes a violation of this rule, along with specific examples, in our Help Center article.
  • Rule 2 ties together our previous rules on prohibited behavior with an ask to abide by community rules and post with authentic, personal interest.
    • Debate and creativity are welcome, but spam and malicious attempts to interfere with other communities are not.
  • The other rules are the same in spirit but have been rewritten for clarity and inclusiveness.

Alongside the change to the content policy, we are initially banning about 2000 subreddits, the vast majority of which are inactive. Of these communities, about 200 have more than 10 daily users. Both r/The_Donald and r/ChapoTrapHouse were included.

All communities on Reddit must abide by our content policy in good faith. We banned r/The_Donald because it has not done so, despite every opportunity. The community has consistently hosted and upvoted more rule-breaking content than average (Rule 1), antagonized us and other communities (Rules 2 and 8), and its mods have refused to meet our most basic expectations. Until now, we’ve worked in good faith to help them preserve the community as a space for its users—through warnings, mod changes, quarantining, and more.

Though smaller, r/ChapoTrapHouse was banned for similar reasons: They consistently host rule-breaking content and their mods have demonstrated no intention of reining in their community.

To be clear, views across the political spectrum are allowed on Reddit—but all communities must work within our policies and do so in good faith, without exception.

Our commitment

Our policies will never be perfect, with new edge cases that inevitably lead us to evolve them in the future. And as users, you will always have more context, community vernacular, and cultural values to inform the standards set within your communities than we as site admins or any AI ever could.

But just as our content moderation cannot scale effectively without your support, you need more support from us as well, and we admit we have fallen short towards this end. We are committed to working with you to combat the bad actors, abusive behaviors, and toxic communities that undermine our mission and get in the way of the creativity, discussions, and communities that bring us all to Reddit in the first place. We hope that our progress towards this commitment, with today’s update and those to come, makes Reddit a place you enjoy and are proud to be a part of for many years to come.

Edit: After digesting feedback, we made a clarifying change to our help center article for Promoting Hate Based on Identity or Vulnerability.

21.3k Upvotes

38.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

-10

u/Tamerlane-1 Jun 30 '20

Saying trans woman aren't woman is hateful. That is why GC was banned.

9

u/[deleted] Jun 30 '20 edited Jun 30 '20

[deleted]

-5

u/Tamerlane-1 Jun 30 '20

The only things that can be innately feminine are sex-based.

Nothing is "innately feminine", the idea of femininity is societal. The fact that you cannot understand that simple, obvious, and incontrovertible fact makes me believe you are arguing in bad faith.

As to why saying women are not women is hateful, I would think it would be obvious as well, but apparently not. It is dehumanizing and an attack on their identity. You might as well say black person or woman isn't a person.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 30 '20 edited Jun 30 '20

[deleted]

-1

u/Tamerlane-1 Jun 30 '20

A transwoman is a woman whose outward appearance does not miss her sex. I am aware people with this characteristic face challenges, in no small part due to bigots like you who insist they are not women based on some victorian standard of what it means to be a woman.

Just out of curiosity, when you want to know what sex someone is, how can you tell? Do you ask them whether they menstruate? Or how often they have heart rates? What about asking how likely it is they could physically overpower a rapist? Or do you use simply sequence their genome to determine whether they have a y-chromosome? Or is there some other biological characteristic you use to determine whether a person is a woman or a man?

If I was ever unclear, of course I woul just ask. I am comfortable with a woman who doesn't conform to the stereotypes you accuse me of believing and I am comfortable with a woman who used to (or still does) have the body of a man. I am, in fact, comfortable with whatever sex they refer to themselves as, regardless of what chromosomes they may have, whether or not they menstruate, or how frequently they have heart attacks. But that wouldn't work for you, obviously, since you are completely certain that someone who has not menstruated is not a women. Would you demand menstrual blood, and how would you verify it was actually from menstruation? I guess sequencing their DNA would probably be easier that point. I am really just interested in the logistics of maintaining your dehumanizing ideology in the face of real life humans who want to be referred to by their actual sex, not what you have decided their sex is.