Skip to content
Translate Ideas and Comments
Choose language:
There was an error during translation
← Safety

Constructive feedback on Safety features and workflows

Safety: Content Classification

Categories

Remove "sensitive social issues" bullet point.

Twitch should remove the "sensitive social issues" clause from Article VII of its Content Classification Guidelines. LGBTQ+ people, immigrants, and reproductive rights are NOT "sensitive social issues", they are common sense issues, where one side simply wants their liberties intact. The controversy is entirely on the other side of the argument the involves taking those liberties away.

Especially as it pertains to LGBTQ+ individuals, the notion that the discussion of their very existence is political is absolute nonsense. These people should be allowed to discuss the issues affecting them without being set behind some kind of "explicit content" label. This is a slippery slope that begins with people automatically labeling non-heteronormative lives and content as "deviant" or "degenerate", especially by grossly bad actors who want to be edgy.

Remove the final bullet point from Article VII.
38,281 votes

We're glad you're here

Please sign in to leave feedback
Signed in as (Sign out)
Close
Close

We’ll send you updates on this idea

ADameNamedAmy shared this idea  ·   ·  Report…  ·  Admin →
Closed  ·  AdminTwitchSupport (Admin, Twitch) responded  · 

Thank you for raising this. We’ve just posted a Tweet addressing these concerns.

You don’t need to label your stream with the new Politics & Sensitive Social Issues CCL if you are sharing your lived experience. Intermittent mentions of politics, politicians, or sensitive social issues also do not require the Politics and Sensitive Social Issues label. We apologize for not communicating this well initially.

If you are an LGBTQ+ streamer, for example, you do not need this label when talking about your lived experience as a member of the LGBTQ+ community. We’ve added clarifying language to the Content Classification Guidelines to better express this.
Comments are closed An error occurred while saving the comment
  • Brielated commented  ·   ·  Report

    So I'm a 'sensitive social issue' now? Am I supposed ask for permission to exist? Do I need to wear a badge if I go outside?
  • gorangock commented  ·   ·  Report

    I'm against it on both ends, being lgbt existing shouldn't be political and people should be free to say what they believe, to talk about topics, at worst you know what someone believes at best you it can open discussions to change views and correct information. yes horrible things exist, it doesn't go away by sweeping it under a rug
  • FuChanVT commented  ·   ·  Report

    My body isn't an object or political statement. My human rights are not a subject of debate. My existence isn't political

  • LevDaCosta commented  ·   ·  Report

    This proves that the LGBTQ+ especially the T part of the community is not accepted only tolerated. Tolerated so long as our existence doesn’t affect their bottom line. Now that it has. They are taking away our right and ability to talk about and defend our right to exist. Which is shameful yet not at all surprising.
  • KIngfishcakeIII commented  ·   ·  Report

    The mere existence of the LGBTQ+ and our rights are NOT a political issue. There is no debate to be had. Do better
  • turtlegirl13107 commented  ·   ·  Report

    This is just a step backwards in terms of LGBTQ+ rights. Our existence is not controversial and IS NOT ON THE SAME LEVEL OF WAR AND MASS TRAGEDIES. Fix it.
  • GirlPainting commented  ·   ·  Report

    As a transwoman myself i find that development deeply disturbing and frightening. stop this nonsens NOW
  • bealns commented  ·   ·  Report

    Lgbt is not a political ideology, being trans is not a political ideology, does a black person have to register that they are black? A trans person should not have to specify who they are to be allowed to stream.
  • GwiYeoMi commented  ·   ·  Report

    Disappointing, shameful, and absolutely unsurprising to see Twitch doing this. A bad faith policy change but I'm sure the people involved in making this decision sleep soundly at night. That's just how it is when you sacrifice moral after moral for the sake of money and shareholders, while telling brainwashing yourself into thinking that it's a good thing.
  • N3kur0_eso commented  ·   ·  Report

    Lumping trans and lgbtq rights in with war and other sensitive topics is incredibly damaging to people like myself who don't have a choice in who they are.
    As a trams person if I decide to stream I have to flag it with the same thing as someone discussing war or mass genocide feels massively offensive and incredibly upset
  • apock247 commented  ·   ·  Report

    If my mere existence is a sensitive subject, then I'm gonna need hazard pay for this.

  • Davidthehumanzee commented  ·   ·  Report

    Can people stop trying to make our existence political for 5 seconds 🙄.

  • JM_RacingFox commented  ·   ·  Report

    Just... why?! We're talking about OUR RIGHT TO EXIST here! Get that outta there!
  • Lady_Divine_Knight commented  ·   ·  Report

    Twitch literally cannot implement this properly for many reasons:

    1. It's absolutely disgusting to label any content about people simply existing as explicit.

    2. What if someone plays an older game or something on a stream and it has no description of the content in it, and it ends up talking about one of those three topics? Are they gonna ban accounts for something not their fault just because the game they were playing had any of those topics in it and didn't disclose it first? Does Twitch expect people to spoil a game for themselves by having to look up old or obscure games to see if it addresses any of these three topics because the games don't have proper labels or there's no entry for it on sites that lists what content is in it?

    Remove this bullet point, Twitch, or I'll find somewhere else I can stream games for my friends.
  • silverface_ commented  ·   ·  Report

    Y'all were never amazing to begin with, but this just feels like playing the capitalist game of doing whatever makes you more money / what feels like the "safe" bet. Which...yeah, corporations will always corporation, but it's still ******* horrifying to *see.* Queer people, racialized people, those in need of reproductive rights/services, etc. - are not "sensitive topics." They're only seen as such because some rich ******** with an agenda decided to make them so, to serve their own whims and interests.

    To any larger Youtubers and/or anyone with any money, influence, etc. who happen to be reading this: there should be a streaming platform a la Nebula, where creators *are* the owners of the platform, and share equally in its operation. I don't know how this could be set up, but at this point, there's not very many other options left for streaming.
  • bee_ph commented  ·   ·  Report

    The only thing "sensitive" about these issues are the people who feel threatened by the law treating minorities as people.
1 2 … 124 126 128 … 191 192