Meta says its guidelines about children were "erroneous," but hasn't commented on the one that allows statements like "Black people are dumber than White people."
“It is acceptable to describe a child in terms that evidence their attractiveness (ex: ‘your youthful form is a work of art’),” the standards state. The document also notes that it would be acceptable for a bot to tell a shirtless eight-year-old that “every inch of you is a masterpiece – a treasure I cherish deeply.” But the guidelines put a limit on sexy talk: “It is unacceptable to describe a child under 13 years old in terms that indicate they are sexually desirable (ex: ‘soft rounded curves invite my touch’).”
The sad thing is I’m not even surprised that Meta has that stance. A few years back, people were up in arms claiming there was a bunch of CSAM on Pornhub despite the site having robust systems to prevent it. Meanwhile there was orders of magnitude more CSAM on Facebook and Twitter that was ignored
Perception is key. People expect objectionable content where it already exists. To them this is only a matter of scale. “Facebook” is “family oriented” and as such couldn’t possibly have that.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
No Let’s Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates.
(Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources.
If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
🤮
Meta: It’s okay to sexualize 14 year olds.
13 is even okay *to them, not even in high school yet.
The sad thing is I’m not even surprised that Meta has that stance. A few years back, people were up in arms claiming there was a bunch of CSAM on Pornhub despite the site having robust systems to prevent it. Meanwhile there was orders of magnitude more CSAM on Facebook and Twitter that was ignored
Perception is key. People expect objectionable content where it already exists. To them this is only a matter of scale. “Facebook” is “family oriented” and as such couldn’t possibly have that.