emiliawyk
patreon
IG下架的3分鐘出浴片😅
🕑 Added 2025-12-16 07:34:28 +0000 UTC咁就俾IG delete咗了，大家話，我仲點樣討論性別議題呢？係嘅，可能我講嘢，係唔需要配合擦邊片，但以擦邊片嚟講，我呢條嘅尺度又算得上有幾大呢？點解IG不斷容許更大尺度嘅存在，然後我就動輒得咎呢？
以下係我send俾oversight board嘅上訴內容：
Discussion on the rationale behind stigma of sex work as a social issue shouldn’t be flagged as encouraging so, marginalising the community
I believe my content was misinterpreted when assessed outside of its full context.
The post in question consisted of a spoken commentary discussing the social stigma surrounding sex work, gender norms, and power dynamics in a patriarchal society. The purpose of the content was educational and critical, not sexual or promotional. My intention was to analyze how misogyny and stigma operate, and to advocate for greater respect and reduced violence toward marginalized groups, including sex workers.
While the accompanying video had a mildly sensual aesthetic, it did not contain nudity, exposed genitals, nipple exposure, explicit sexual acts, or close-up shots intended to arouse sexual interest. The visual presentation was a creative choice meant to align with the subject matter being discussed, not to solicit sexual attention or promote adult services.
Importantly, the post did not encourage viewers to purchase sexual services, subscribe to adult platforms, or engage with me in any sexual or commercial manner. I was not advertising or offering sexual services, and I am not using Instagram as a platform to do so.
I am a gender-issues advocate, and discussions around sexuality, stigma, and power are an essential part of addressing social inequality. Silencing these conversations risks reinforcing the very discrimination and violence that platforms like Instagram seek to prevent. Content that critically examines sexual stigma serves a public-interest and harm-reduction purpose, rather than violating community safety.
I respectfully ask that the review of this post consider:
Context and intent — the content was social commentary and advocacy, not sexual exploitation or solicitation.
Visual compliance — there was no prohibited nudity or explicit sexual content under Instagram’s definitions.
Public and educational value — the post aimed to promote understanding, respect, and reduced harm toward marginalized communities.
For these reasons, I believe the removal was a misclassification, and I kindly request a reconsideration of the decision.
Thank you for your time and for reviewing this appeal.
