If you didn’t know, recently, sex workers have been protesting against Meta, claiming that hundreds of Instagram accounts have been unfairly deleted without warning. Those affected also claim that the systems for restoring their accounts are unnecessarily difficult to navigate and that no feedback is being given on why accounts and posts are being removed. In June, sex workers gathered outside Meta’s Brock Street offices in London waving red and black placards with slogans like ‘Suspended just for existing’. This isn’t the first protest of this type. Last year, sex workers projected giant images of women’s bodies onto Meta HQ to draw attention to the censorship of female and non-binary bodies on the platform.
Meta has a long history of removing content relating to sex, even when it includes no nudity or pornographic aspects that would contravene their community guidelines. A few years back, sex educators began complaining that their content was being removed – leading many into self-censorship and the creation of the now broadly understood, if mildly ridiculous, euphemism ‘seggs’. Sex toy brands also report that they are unable to advertise their products through Facebook or Instagram. And now, many sex workers feel that they are being targeted unfairly by Meta because they represent a group that is already misunderstood and often reviled by society – making them an easy target for censorship fuelled by right-wing politics. We reached out for Meta for a comment on these claims, but did not hear back.
The Sex Workers Union UK had their Instagram account suspended for three months earlier this year, and when they finally managed to get it restored, they were told the ban happened because their profile picture included the words “Sex workers union”, which was deemed “inappropriate”. “There has always been a push by society to stigmatise and remove sex workers, but right now, there are increasing shifts politically to the right across the Western world,” says a spokesperson from the union. “Right-wing politics always focuses blame on marginalised groups, on groups that are viewed as being somehow detrimental to society at large, so sex workers become an easy target because it’s easier to blame sex workers for the issues in the world than to blame capitalism or the patriarchy.”
Although sex work itself is not illegal in the UK, campaigners have been fighting for full de-criminalisation for years, saying that the current laws in the UK actively isolate sex workers and do not protect sex workers’ safety. For example, ‘brothels’ are illegal, a law that many sex workers feel prevents independent sex workers from organising into collectives for safety or finding safe locations from which to work – two sex workers sharing a flat could technically be arrested for running a brothel, for example, even if they do not work out of that space at the same time. The Sex Workers Union UK points out that Meta’s policies are vague and open-ended, rather like the law itself. “They want sex work to just quietly go away. Like solicitation laws that were brought in to push sex workers out of city centres, so that middle-class folks didn’t need to see us, Meta’s policies are also about slowly and quietly making us invisible.”
Perhaps most galling of all, the guidelines claim to be supportive of sex workers rights, stating they “allow for the discussion of sex worker rights advocacy and sex work regulation” (a claim that seems dubious given groups like the Sex Workers Union UK are experiencing account suspension). But the guidelines go on to say: “We draw the line, however, when content facilitates, encourages or coordinates sexual encounters or commercial sexual services between adults.” Claiming to stand up for the rights of sex workers while simultaneously explicitly ‘drawing the line’ at ‘commercial sexual services’ is, campaigners say, total hypocrisy.
“Meta does not recognise the validity of sex work,” says Dr Carolina Are, a social media censorship researcher at Northumbria University’s Centre for Digital Citizens. She says the guidelines are far too vague. “Meta guidelines don’t even define what ‘offering and selling sexual services’ is for them.” Carolina also points out that the way sex work is positioned within the guidelines is incredibly demonising. Sexual solicitation appears under the subheading ‘Objectionable content’ alongside hate speech and violent content. In other words, sex workers are being othered by Meta and framed in a wholly negative way.
Reed Amber is a sex worker activist and presenter of the F**cks Given podcast by ComeCurious. She has had her account deleted eight times. Reed explains that deletion has a serious impact on sex workers’ income and also their mental health. Many sex workers use the platform to build their brand and as a place to access emotional support and connect with important resources. Sometimes a rather secluded line of work, online communities are vital for sex workers. “The way that Meta makes us feel is that we’re dirty and shouldn’t be seen by the world,” Reed says, noting that she has had “countless” posts removed, “including LGBT-related posts and posts on sex education”. And this has all happened with no discussion or explanation.
What’s more, because of the way sex work is stigmatised in society, a sex worker who experiences deletion by Meta has little legal recourse to challenge this. Getting through to an actual human being at the help centre is almost impossible, campaigners say, but it is also often only the beginning of an uphill battle against prejudice. “Even if you do get through to someone, you don’t know what kind of views that person will hold. Trying to explain that your account is valid, whilst also being a sex worker, can be a hard thing to explain,” says the Sex Workers Union UK. “Ultimately, Meta controls what content exists on their platforms. They could easily choose to write protections for sex workers into their policies, though that feels like a pipe dream, really.”
“This kind of deletion impacts the way sex work is viewed by society by pushing the agenda that sex is shameful or is something that shouldn’t be seen or talked about,” Reed finishes. “Censoring sex work dehumanises us and makes it ok for other people to see us as less human.”