Thank you for making this uservoice. I hope we can get as much traction as we did from the first uservoice because they closed the original post as "resolved" before we were able to actually read through the updated CCL bullet points.

The language in question that was updated in the specified clause does not in any way, shape or form protect marginalized groups from being witch hunted, or abused. It is vague so that your corporation can continue persecuting people under the guise of labeling them as political when you see fit. "Life experience" entirely depends on how you define it and going by your track record of how you've handled things like this in the past, you are unfit to be any judge on what constitutes life experience or politics, which by the way, my life is literally made political whether I like it or not. People out there want to take my rights away and that is inherently political as is my want to live as freely as i am without entities such as yourself deeming me not advertiser friendly. Adding this clause is political itself. Its laughable that you will take money from queer creators, implement changes you somehow think are good and then in the end think you've done right by my and others communities. REMOVE THE CLAUSE FOR SENSITIVE SOCIAL ISSUES THAT YOUVE ADDED.

The "clarification" made the definition less clear. It now focuses on whether the speech is "polarizing," a subjective definition which boils entirely down to "well if someone reports it then it must be polarizing." The problem will remain the same: trans and queer folk and others targeted by the same kind of mass hate reports will be mass hate reported by organized groups of bad faith users. If Twitch wants to be a safe and usable place on the internet, it is the bad faith hate groups who need to be excluded. It does not need to police how we queer folk talk about ourselves. And if payment processors say that saying gay or trans is sexual content? FIGHT. THEM. IN. COURT. That is your OBLIGATION, Twitch, on behalf of the users who are the CREATORS of ALL the value on your platform - both the streamers AND the viewers, because the unique experience of this form of live entertainment relies on that alchemy of having both. Twitch needs us. Twitch ought to fight for our safety, not make rules that make us less safe.

Twitch has updated it’s Content Classification Guidelines in response to the previous community post titled Remove "sensitive social issues" bullet point.

They have clarified the following:

Streams focused on discussing topics like gender, race, sexuality, or religion in a polarizing or inflammatory manner

No label is required if you are speaking about your lived experiences on topics such as gender, race, sexuality, or religion.

This is still incredibly problematic due to the guidelines now preventing those not in the LGBTQ+ community from discussing issues affecting our community without having to label it. This isolates the LGBTQ+ community, and on top of that, this prevents those who are cis/het-passing from discussing issues within the community without outing themselves. Transgender people and gay people alike who aren’t out of the closet yet aren’t able to discuss LGBTQ+ issues facing them without painting a target on their back. Furthermore, viewers who aren’t out to their friends and family will be at risk for watching streamers whose content is labelled as LGBTQ+.

The current change will continue to put us at risk, not just online but in our local communities too.

Twitch needs to understand that discussions around Gender and Sexuality need to be an open topic, free of judgment. Forcing content creators to label their streams with LGBTQ+ as a tag is the digital equivalent of forcing us to wear the upside-down Pink Triangle.

Not everyone in our community is in a safe place to openly express themselves. Forcing those who aren’t safe to use a label would jeopardize their safety and could lead to very real harm to those content creators and viewers. Individuals who aren’t out to those who they live with could end up homeless or worse.

Twitch is creating a problem by preventing discussion about LGBTQ+ topics amongst those who aren’t out, aren’t ready to use a label for themselves, and those who are allies.

If Twitch truly intends to call itself “a place for people to express themselves and discuss the world around them,” they need to understand that being gay or transgender shouldn’t be polarizing. We are human too. We are just trying to live and breathe and exist like everyone else.

If Twitch wants to help protect its LGBTQ+ content creators and viewers, they must make a change to their Community Content Guidelines to allow discussion of topics and issues affecting the community without a label. Instead of forcing LGBTQ+ and allied content creators to label their streams as LGBTQ+, Twitch should focus on recognizing the LGBTQ+ Community as a protected group. Aggressive comments and threats towards individuals in a protected group should be taken seriously and dealt with at the source.

Information about the definition of Protected Groups:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_group

Fundamentally, the "sensitive social issues" do not fit the primary focus of the Content Classification Label.
Footage and discussion of military conflicts and/or elections and/or actual political debates are NOT in the same category as mentions or discussions of gender, sexuality, and race.
Conflating the two is bizarre, and will only complicate any filtering and/or moderation efforts; it is ultimately UNHELPFUL to the userbase AND advertisers for those things to be thrown into the same proverbial bucket.

Given the clarification that the label is allegedly only to be applied when content is "polarising or inflammatory", the obvious question is:
'What exactly qualifies as polarising or inflammatory?'.

What does it mean for gender and/or sexuality and/or race to be presented or discussed in a "polarising or inflammatory manner" ?
(Note: for some Queer individuals in particular, simply existing and living and presenting as one does is liable to be considered "polarising" or "inflammatory" by some.)
If a "polarising or inflammatory manner" denotes hostility and bigotry, then there should be no need for a Content Classification Label; such content should INSTEAD be being moderated in accordance with Twitch policies.

And if it ISN'T simple hostility and bigotry (which - again - ought to be moderated accordingly):
How exactly does Twitch plan to determine what qualifies as "polarising" or "inflammatory" ?
What are the defined standards here; what criteria are going to be used to make those judgements, and why are they not being made crystal clear so as to reassure and prevent abuse of said policy?
Consider:
- Is it "polarising" to suggest that a trans kid ought to be respected and listened to; that one should use whatever name & pronouns they're actually comfortable with?
- Is it "polarising" to suggest that white supremacist bigotry is built into a lot of social, political, and cultural systems and practices; through historical impacts if nothing else?

NOTE: so-called "polarisation" doesn't just pop into existence randomly; when it concerns the groups listed, it's a direct result of marginalised people being marginalised, or being intentionally politicised.
Policies such as this one falsely equate the pushback and reaction against that with the actual source of the problem.

Subjective rules like this, especially paired with automated moderation, WILL be abused to silence minority voices. This 'clarification' changes nothing. Do you think we're too stupid to realize how this goes?

Remove the clause in its entirety. State plainly that bigotry is unacceptable and moderate against it instead of both-sidesing the 'polarization' of basic human rights. If you want marginalized users to believe they're anything but unwelcome on your platform, nothing less will suffice.

Use your moderation tools to remove bigots, don't punish and police marginalized people. It's not a hard concept Twitch. It really isn't.