Facebook bans “implicit sexual solicitation”, “vague suggestive statements”, and sexualized slang, a disappointing sign of how FOSTA has changed the internet
Policy rationale As noted in Section 8 … Tweets: Kris Constable / @cqwww : You can no longer ask someone on @Facebook for “nude images”, or if they “want to have a good time tonight”. You can't ask someone for their “sexual preference/sexual partner preference.” https://www.facebook.com/... https://twitter.com/... @pt : It is amazing to watch Facebook try to destroy itself. Hard to tell, but we may look back on this era as the biggest unforced error in tech since IBM/Microsoft. http://www.techdirt.com/... @uppittynegress : Cool. So I can't talk about being bi, but I still have to censor the word “bl*ck” when talking about racism, and the guys who tell me I deserve to be shot for doing sex work are still not banned. Good job keeping women safe @facebook http://twitter.com/... Jason Orne / @jasonorne : Won't someone think of the children? “Facebook said it crafted the new rules with input from third-party organizations that specialize in women's and children's safety issues.” http://www.pcmag.com/... Julianne Berokoff / @jberokoff : Groups are being permanently removed, not suspended. Mentioning your butt is out of the question. Have a sexual orientation? Keep it to yourself. Don't share your erotica, or your sex-related medical condition. This is WILD. #FacebookPurge http://www.pcmag.com/... Laura Agustn / @lauraagustin : 'Facebook's new “sexual #solicitation” policy...bans erotic art (even non-explicit), talking about kink, talking about your boobs or butt, mentioning your preferences in sexual partners, “sexualized slang,” and “vague suggestive statements.” http://uk.pcmag.com/... Darling_Nikki_Jo / @jo_bunnyxo : Crazy! First tumblr and now this. I've been locked out of my Facebook account because a man in a relationship group that I'm in asked for sexual advice with his wife and I answered! RT- let everyone know. Something tells me Twitter is next... http://www.pcmag.com/...
Context & Ripple Effects
This policy lands at the end of an arc the related coverage traces clearly: after vehemently opposing SESTA, Facebook spent September 2017 negotiating changes to the sex-trafficking bill with senators rather than fighting it, and when FOSTA passed in March 2018 Craigslist immediately pulled all personal ads, citing the risk that any tool could be misused.
The new ban on implicit solicitation, vague suggestive statements, and sexualized slang shows what Facebook's own compliance looks like once the law made platforms liable for facilitation — and it compounds an earlier move in which Facebook quietly removed the option to target ads by sexual orientation, leaving LGBT support organizations without direct reach.
First-order effects
- Users who discuss sexual preference or identity on Facebook — including bisexual people, per the reactions cited — now risk removal under rules that criminalize vagueness itself, since 'vague suggestive statements' cannot be moderated with precision.
- Sex workers and people seeking partners lose one of the last large-scale channels for such communication, following Craigslist's exit from the category entirely.
Second-order effects
- Every platform facing FOSTA exposure faces the same calculus Craigslist made explicitly — any tool can be misused — so expect copycat bans across social networks rather than tailored enforcement, because vague rules are cheaper to defend than nuanced ones.
- Smaller sites bear the cost disproportionately: they lack Facebook's moderation headcount, so the same legal pressure pushes them toward either aggressive deletion or exiting adjacent categories altogether.
Third-order effects
- As Platformer later observed at the Section 230 hearing, FOSTA — enacted with Facebook's support — produced exactly this over-moderation while hurting smaller sites, pointing toward a structure where only the largest platforms can afford to operate contested speech categories at all.
- If the pattern holds, liability-driven moderation becomes a moat: incumbents absorb compliance costs that consolidate speech onto their terms, while the long tail of the open web shrinks around legally sensitive topics.
The trend: Post-FOSTA, major platforms are systematically trading user expression for legal safety, and the resulting over-moderation is restructuring which communities can exist on mainstream services.