Instagram shifts ban language: "sexualization of children" replaces CSE for some users

Instagram seems to be changing the language it uses when banning some users for violating its community guidelines. For many, the previous notification cited a ban due to “child sexual exploitation, abuse and nudity” or “CSE.” Now, some users are reporting a shift in terminology to “sexualization of children.” This subtle but significant change is sparking a lot of discussion and speculation among those affected by the ongoing mass ban wave.

I’ve been following this developing story closely, and it really feels like another twist in an already confusing saga. Just yesterday, I wrote about how some people are even reporting suicidal thoughts due to these bans. It’s not just a digital inconvenience for many, but a deeply personal one, especially for those who have lost precious memories and small businesses that depended on these platforms. 

For over a month now, Instagram and its parent company, Meta, have been under fire for these widespread account suspensions. Meta has largely refused to own up to the Instagram and Facebook mass ban wave, leaving countless users in the dark. It’s been a frustrating experience for so many, with a former Meta employee even stating that people should stop using Meta platforms because they don’t care about the user base.

Many users, myself included, have been trying to piece together what’s happening. I’ve found multiple threads where people are discussing this new wording. For example, on Reddit’s r/InstagramDisabledHelp community, user u/Dense-Panic7548 shared a screenshot showing that the main ban message under “Why this happened” now reads, “We’ve reviewed your account and found that it still doesn’t follow our Community Standards on sexualisation of children.” This is a direct change from previous instances where this main reason often explicitly cited “CSE guidelines.”

Concurrently, other users are seeing updates in the “Read more about this rule” section, which typically provides more detailed explanations for the ban. User u/TheHoustonGeisha, for instance, shared a screenshot of their “read more” page, where new phrases have reportedly appeared. These include specific examples such as “Sharing a sexual image with a child,” “Chatting with a child about something sexual,” and “Planning to meet a child for a sexual encounter.”

Interestingly, for users like u/TheHoustonGeisha, their main ban reason may still state a “CSE violation,” but these added, more detailed explanations are now visible in the “read more” section. This inconsistent rollout of updated messaging across different parts of the ban notification is definitely adding to the confusion. It suggests a very deliberate, but perhaps not entirely uniform, attempt to refine the language around these bans.

This change is leading to a lot of theories. One prominent thought, shared by a user named u/Zbornak3000 in the Reddit thread, suggests it could be a legal distinction. They theorize that if an account was banned simply for “engaging” with content (liking, commenting, bookmarking) that Instagram’s AI deemed inappropriate, but not for direct CSE activities that would trigger an NCMEC report, then the language might be changed to “sexualization of children.” This would avoid falsely claiming a report was made to NCMEC when it wasn’t legally required. It makes sense, given that by law, Meta is required to report suspected cases of child sexual exploitation. If their AI is banning people incorrectly, and they are not legally obligated to report to NCMEC for every single ban, changing the wording would protect them.

As one Reddit user, u/gaymerbear81, put it, “It’s probably easier to defend this stance in court.” Another user, u/Mr_Minage-a-trois, echoed this sentiment, saying, “They are rewording it to cover their asses. Still doesn’t change the fact that their bans are bullshit. Do you really think if it was serious cse cases they would change it? No. They knew they fuc**d up and had to re name it something else.” It certainly seems like damage control to some degree.

This whole ordeal continues to highlight the desperate need for more transparency from Meta. While a few days ago I wrote that some users have posted that they got their accounts back, it was only Instagram accounts and only a small batch of users. This gives a glimmer of hope, but the vast majority remain banned. The question of whether Instagram is finally working on restoring accounts from mass ban remains largely unanswered.

I can’t help but think that Meta is wholly aware of the bans, but is choosing not to shift its stance for whatever reason. I mean, there are complaints about the problem on almost everything they post online. Matter of fact, a recent announcement on X about the newly added feature to share Spotify songs to one’s Instagram Story has dozens of comments criticizing the platform for not fixing the bans. All the top comments are about the mass ban wave. Just take a look at this screenshot I captured: 

It’s not just complaints on Reddit and X, we’ve seen petitions signed and people pursuing legal action, showing the sheer scale of frustration and injustice. The continuous changes in ban wording only fuel the fire and reinforce the sentiment among many that Instagram is aware of issues with its ban process and is scrambling to adjust its messaging.

I believe there’s enough evidence to show that something’s terribly wrong over at Meta. In case you are one of the many affected users, you could use this post as a reference to tip other journalists or reporters working for popular media outlets. The more the word gets out, the higher the chances that Meta is forced to take action.