[EpicEng]

>we're subject to American censorship policies. Tumblr / Facebook / YouTube being most notable in their filtering of LGBT content and suspending accounts of LGBT users, because of the American governments stance on human sexuality

No, you're subject to corporate censorship policies. Let's not pretend that individual platforms regulating content is the same as government censorship. Please show me how their policies are related to "the American governments stance on human sexuality".

Also, doesn't Canada have a few laws on the books regarding how people are allowed to address other people, specifically, LGBTQ people?

[freeone3000]

Those aren't being enforced, either! It's not hard to find tweets deadnaming or misgendering a person.

They're taking a fully US-centric approach, treating abortion as a political topic - see https://business.twitter.com/en/help/ads-policies/restricted... . You can't advocate for abortion in Canadian ads. Which is insane, considering abortion is fully legal here. Going down that list, it's "things that are controversial in America". It's absurd to apply the same policy globally.

[triceratops]

> Also, doesn't Canada have a few laws on the books regarding how people are allowed to address other people, specifically, LGBTQ people?

Not really. Canada prohibits hate speech and discrimination against LGBTQ people. The whole "using the wrong pronouns is now a criminal offense" meme was made up by someone looking for something to be offended about/sell books about how PC culture is ruining everything.[1]

People can be sued for discriminating on the basis of gender identity or expression. Repeatedly using the wrong pronoun can be used as evidence of that, but probably has to fit into a larger pattern of behavior. And that's the kind of thing you could credibly sue an employer or business for in the US as well.

1. https://factcheck.afp.com/no-canadians-cannot-be-jailed-or-f...

[LudwigNagasena]

Let’s not pretend a monopoly regulating content is much different from government.

[joyeuse6701]

Oh it is when the entity with a monopoly also has a monopoly on violence a.k.a government. A Uighur detention center, U.S. concentration camp etc. can only enforce their views with threat of violence. It is on an entirely different level of cardinality. To equate them would be to undermine the misery that those that suffer under such extreme regulations of content/thought.

[tanilama]

> corporate censorship policies

Which in a large part with preference tailored to US

[cortesoft]

Yeah, but not the US government.

[vkou]

Why should a Canadian, or European care about the difference between US government laws affecting the services and media they consume, versus US corporate policies doing the same?

It's a distinction without a difference. They don't have any redress, or ability to influence either US corporations, or the US government, much like how Americans have no ability to influence the CPC.

[cortesoft]

Would a Canadian have more of an ability to influence a Canadian corporation? I guess I am just confused why it being a US corporation changes the equation verse a corporation from anywhere else.

[lonelappde]

Yes, Canada has bans on targeted gender-based harassment against individuals, not bans on LGBT content.