Free Speech Woman
vs.
Zuck the Cuck: Round II
Photograph Source: Anthony Quintano – CC BY 2.0
Ding!
I, “Free Speech Woman,” am entering the ring for Round II of my epic legal fight with Meta, parent company of Facebook and Instagram, owned by Meta multi-owned by Meta multi-billionaire “Boy-in-the-Bubble” CEO and avid Jiu-Jitsu Blue Belt Mark Zuckerberg.
To recap: I contend that when Meta’s AI “content moderation” bots censored and deactivated my Facebook profile and IG account – unfairly, arbitrarily and without warning – Meta breached its own contracts. READ MY BRIEF/S
Meta contends that I’m nothing more than a wanton whore, unworthy of any protection from harm or even the courtesy of being treated like a human being.
Section 230: The Internet’s Iron Dome
Meanwhile Billionaire Bubble-Boy Zuckerberg is shielded from his own massively destructive mistakes and power-drunk misdeeds by his protective “bubble” – a virtual Iron Dome – enabled by an algorithmic army of bots and fortified by a cavalry of highly paid attorneys, complicit arbitrators, corrupt politicians and an obscure portion of the Communications Decency Act, 47 USC 230, known simply and ominously as “Section 230.”
In the legal world, Silicon Valley-friendly interpretations of Section 230 have given social media moguls like Zuckerberg that Iron Dome-like protection, letting them groom and doom, exploit, censor, ban and deny many of us our right to free speech, our access to the “digital town square,” even our right to communicate with loved ones in times of need.
My own Facebook profile was deactivated shortly before my beloved husband of 32 years, Maximillian R. Lobkowicz di Filangieri, had a major ischemic stroke, shattering our lives. Meta may not have caused Max’s stroke, but it certainly didn’t help that, besides deactivating my Facebook profile, Mark Zuckerberg also vaporized my Facebook Messenger and WhatsApp, making it all the more difficult to get in touch with loved ones during this cataclysmic crisis.
That’s Zuckerberg Family Values for you. Since 2008, Meta had groomed me and my relatives to communicate via Facebook, then doomed me to deactivation and the rest of us to zero communication.
When I asked Meta to restore my wrongfully deactivated accounts, I was greeted with stony silence, followed by a barrage of defamatory lies. On the advice of counsel, I took Meta to arbitration. However, thanks to Section 230’s protective bubble around Boy-Lord Zuckerberg, buoyed by a paid-by-Meta arbitrator’s unsubtle coaching of Meta’s Mayer Brown lawyers, my so-called “case” was unceremoniously and erroneously awarded to Meta without allowing me – the plaintiff – to utter a word.
Such is the sinister way of the megalomaniacal Markie Z’s Meta megalopoly.
Algorithmic Ignorance & Sexual Services
In attempting to defend their indefensible actions and to keep my mouth gagged shut with fabricated scandal, Meta lawyers falsely accused me of being a sex worker (i.e., prostitute) providing “sexual services” via Meta sites. Just to set the record straight: I am not now, nor have I ever been a sex worker, nor did I ever provide “sexual services” through Meta sites or anywhere else. I am a therapist providing sex therapy, as I was prepared to prove if I had been permitted to present my case.
Though I’ve often expressed my political views that consenting adult sex work should be decriminalized, and I have had many wonderful sex workers as guests on my show, I myself have never been one. Nevertheless, Meta’s lawyers and the paid-by-META arbitrator conspired to defame me with the Scarlet Letter of “sex work” – on top of depriving me of my rights – to punish me for blowing the whistle on Meta’s fraudulent “contracts of adhesion” and its destructive, AI (Artificial Ignorance)-based censorship.
Yes indeed, Brothers and Sisters, Lovers and Sinners, wake up and smell the censorship! It stinks of dumb bots droning your posts and maybe your whole, carefully curated account.
Like so many other innocent Meta users posting about sex, politics, health and other debatable topics, I am the victim of an algorithm that identified buzz words on my profiles and incorrectly labeled me as being in violation of platform policies. Rather than bothering to even try to be fair, Facebook and Instagram just adopted the algorithm’s conclusion as gospel. No human beings even looked at my profiles until I requested arbitration, and then it was Meta’s lawyers, who simply sought to ratify the algorithm to avoid a cascade of claims against the two platforms for relying solely on these faulty algorithms to police content from people’s profiles. Because the fact of the matter is, as many studies have shown, these powerful algorithms are notoriously faulty.
Next Legal Move – Motion to Vacate
Bullied but not beaten, I am taking Zuck the Cuck’s “bull” by the horns, filing a Motion to Vacate their deeply flawed Arbitration Award, in pro per.
My motion maintains that not only was the Arbitrator biased, prejudicially squeamish about basic sex education, ignorant of algorithmic error rates and disingenuous about Facebook’s vast and unique social media power, he was also “without legal authority” to rule on my case based on Facebook’s and Instagram’s contracts.
There are so many reasons why this Arbitration Award must be vacated – but will the judge agree? Or will that palm beneath his robes be greased by Meta’s own Silicon?
Free Speech Woman vs. Zuck the META Cuck
One of our most valuable rights as Americans is Freedom of Speech. Most nations don’t grant Free Speech to their citizens, but we Americans (supposedly) do. It’s as close as our secular government gets to sacred. In 1789, We the American People received the 10 Amendments of the Bill of Rights, rather like Moses receiving the 10 Commandments. Our First Amendment right to Freedom of Speech has been revered by the world, but it has long been under attack from both the Right and the so-called Left – now on a Meta-scale.
Whether you’re talking about sex, politics, equality, health or Palestine, power-drunk social media moguls like Mark Zuckerberg and Elon Musk pervert the very phrase “free speech” by twisting it into its Orwellian opposite, literally getting away with digital murder every day.
But enough is enough. This past Halloween, I summoned the spirit of “Free Speech Woman” within me to give me the power to hold – or at least try to hold – Mark ‘Zuck the Jiu-Jitsu Cuck’ Zuckerberg down on the Mat of Truth, holding him accountable for censoring our speech, exploiting our desires, stoking our divisions, flattening our relationships and banning us from our own communities and the Internet’s public square.
Mark the Meta-Megalopolist knows this better than anyone, referring to his Facebook “fiefdom” (so-called by others) as “the digital equivalent of the town square,” and boasting meta-magnanimously that “our platforms are for everyone.”
Really – “for everyone”? More for every paying advertiser and useful government power broker. But what about Meta users? What about ‘We the People’ who make Meta great? What about me? What right does Mark Zuckerberg have to ban me from the ‘digital equivalent of the town square’ – to banish me from my own communities, even from my own family(!) – just because his faulty algorithms ascertain that my politics, religion or sex-positive values might offend a Meta advertiser or the head of the House Energy & Commerce Committee?
Free Speech vs. Empire
While I venerate the creators of the Bill of Rights – including Max’s 18th century Italian ancestor, Gaetano Filangieri – who was freedom-loving pen pals with Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson (though Filangieri didn’t own slaves) – Zuckerberg exalts a different kind of role model (who owned lots of slaves): the first emperor of the Roman Empire, Augustus Caesar, aka Gaius Octavius, known for making the world safe for ruthless dictators.
Now Mark “Silicon Caesar” Zuckerbucks and his army of bots has more unchecked power over our everyday lives than any single human on earth.
The Greek prefix “Meta” means “beyond,” and Zuck’s Meta has gone beyond the pale, metamorphosing into a Meta-menace to democracy.
The Pro-Bonobo Way
“Zuck the Cuck needs to be clocked!” I declare, brandishing my cherry red boxing gloves as Free Speech Woman, fighting to win my Motion to Vacate the Award with a knock-out punch, taking down Zuck-the-Cuck – well, actually it’s just a blow-up doll effigy, but it looks about as human as the real thing, sharply attired in a snappy “Meta Über Alles” white T – to the Mat of Truth.
Tell the truth, Zuck! You’re a censor.
Then, like a bonobo matriarch, I spank Zuck the Cuck’s sorry rubber butt with The Bonobo Way: The Evolution of Peace through Pleasure and a Motion to Vacate, gently but firmly holding him responsible while holding him down on the Mat of Truth between the Bill of Rights and my pointy-toed, high-heeled cowgirl boots, as a couple of bonobo apes make peace through pleasure nearby.
Like the bonobos, I’m a lover not a fighter. I prefer negotiation, but Meta refuses to negotiate, so Free Speech Woman to the rescue! Cage match!
Zuck the Cuck vs. Elon the Chicken
Elon the Chicken won’t fight Zuck the Cuck, but I will.
Elon talks big, thanks to his own almost limitless Free Speech, but I’m willing to fight for love.
Sure, Zuck is a more experienced fighter than me, with his own personal team of high-priced Jiu-Jitsu trainers and Mayer-Brown lawyers, but I have fighter role models too, like Muhammad Ali (whom I met at a 1996 wrap party after one of my HBO specials); the “People’s Champ” could “float like a butterfly, sting like a bee,” and had the courage not to fight in the Vietnam War.
I also picked up some fancy fight moves from actor Dave Bautista, when he was a guest on my showin his WWE Champ “Batista” days, demonstrating the “Batista Bomb.”
Drop Batista Bombs – not real bombs! Let’s make peace like bonobos, not baboons, and put the brakes on this runaway train of corporate censorship running roughshod over Free Speech!
Ironically and most unfortunately, I’m getting some real-life wrestling training by taking care of my darling husband Max (whose stroke occurred in the middle of the “META Arbitration That Wasn’t”), involves practicing the “Caretaking Jiu Jitsu” martial art of gently but firmly wrestling his one good, remarkably strong, sometimes rambunctious left hand away from yanking out his life-saving – but oh-so-yankable – G-Tube.
Even if Meta/Zuck wins this round (justice is not always blind), Free Speech Woman will not give up the fight, and I will continue to press my case, mounting a new lawsuit against META in pro per, chasing Zuck the Über Cuck, like the cartoon villain he is, through the Halls of Justice.
Human Being vs. Machine on Trial
It’s a long shot, but putting my case in front of a jury of human beings could have long-reaching effects on how people and our increasingly powerful machines interact. One day those machines may well have the equivalent of human emotions and judgment. But today they do not, and we cannot (or at least should not) permit them, at this time, to rule over our constitutional rights – no matter how many Zuckerbucks AI saves Meta stockholders.
Sure, Meta has the legal right to control content on its platforms, but that control must not be left exclusively to error-riddled AI. There must be checks and balances. My day in court is just such a check and offers a reasonable and absolutely necessary balance between human being and machine on this sensitive issue of censorship. If we do not strike that balance now while we still can, the thought of what future publications might be censored is chilling.
This is not my first round in the Free Speech Ring, nor my first pro-bonobo lawsuit in pro per, punching up (never down) against an overly powerful authority stomping on my First Amendment Rights. I successfully sued the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) back in 2002 when they unjustly raided my studio, for which I won a large enough settlement from the City of Los Angeles for me to create Bonoboville in real life and on the web.
Zuck’s a different kind of fight, of course, but, in a way, he’s already crying uncle…
True Confession: Zucky Feels Guilty
Some will call it a pure coincidence, but shortly after my case against Meta was kicked out of the Kangaroo Court of Arbitration, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg released a letter to the U.S. Congressional Judiciary Committee on the subject of Meta’s overly zealous, government-coerced censorship, aka “content moderation on online platforms.”
“Senior officials from the… White House repeatedly pressured our team for months to censor [content]… I believe the government pressure was wrong, and I regret that we were not more outspoken about it…”
Sounds like Zuck the Cuck feels guilty for censoring us!
As well he should. But don’t get me wrong. There’s nothing bad about cuckolding, as long as it’s between consenting adults, and Zuck’s cuck guilt (if he has any) is a private matter between him, Priscilla, their bull and their therapist.
But Zuck the Cuck doesn’t feel guilty for cuckolding. He feels guilty for censoring us! And considering Meta’s beyond-the-pale power, poor little Billionaire Bubble Boy Zuck’s problems wind up hurting us all.
Meta is censoring us per Mark Zuckerberg’s obeisance to certain government officials, advertisers and the power of his own Meta-Bot AI Army. These bots are so powerful, they even subjugate Zuck himself – like Victor Frankenstein conquered by his own Monster – as they stealthily and relentlessly obliterate all of our rights to speaking freely.
Markie Z’s Meta-Megalopoly
“We’re about promoting speech and helping people to connect in a safe and secure way,” Zuck prattles on in his usual robot-programmed-to-sound-human style.
But what about promoting my speech? What about helping me to connect in a safe and secure way? I was not safe or secure when Mark Zuckerberg groomed me for over 15 years of participation, and then doomed me in a nano-second to deactivation– all duly exploited by Markie Z’s Meta-megalopoly.
So, “Free Speech Woman” here, slugging it out in the Meta Ring not only for my rights, but the rights of all users on Meta and “beyond.”
Sure, I’m slugging it out in the Meta Ring in hopes of having my accounts restored, though this isn’t just about my rights, of course, but the rights of all Meta users and “beyond.” It’s also about honoring my beloved Max’s pre-stroke wish that no single corporation, person or amateur Jiu-Jitsu-fighting Augustus-Caesar-wannabe have the unchecked power to banish us – with zero accountability – from the “digital town square”… and beyond.
Apple’s Cash Grab From Patreon Harms Journalism, Advocacy, and Art
Photo source: Duophenom, via Pexels/Canva
Subscriber support through Patreon is a lifeline for independent artists, researchers, advocates, and journalists. I’m among the people who rely on monthly subscriptions to produce the kind of writings that don’t get aired through mainstream media, academic gatekeepers, or well-funded nonprofits.
Now comes Apple’s App Store, rolling out 30% fees for new subscriptions. This affects each new Patreon subscription started on Apple’s iOS, from this month on.
Subscribers want to contribute to independent journalism, art and advocacy. They get no tax breaks for supporting independent creators on Patreon. They’re not signing up to fund a billionaire’s company.
As for the creators, we’ve agreed to stomach Patreon’s (much smaller) fee for a presence on the platform. We duly pay income taxes on the funds we receive. But we didn’t expect to have to cover the Apple tax.
Patreon CEO Jack Conte expressed frustration over Apple’s move, and urged creators to hike rates for new subscriptions, given that Apple will take a 30% cut from what we’d have received from new supporters who use Apple’s app system. Some option! When subscriptions cost more because of corporate fees, creators get less of their subscribers’ support.
Most creators earn just a few hundred dollars a month on the platform. Typically, independent artists and writers earn about 40% of their total income from Patreon subscriptions.
In contrast, Apple was first on the stock market to cross the $3 trillion market cap line. For this giant, siphoning money from creators is just another corporate prerogative. At the end of the day, Apple’s new cut will make it harder for independent artists, writers, performers, educators, and advocates to survive, let alone flourish.
Here is how Patreon is trying to make sense of this to us. TL;DR: Never mind the App Store; use Patreon’s own website (even from your phone), or Android, to commit support to creators on Patreon.
Why Acquiesce?
Patreon CEO Jack Conte is a musician, one who has personal experience with Big Tech extracting money from independent artists. Patreon started up as a rebellion to this sort of exploitation. So, can’t Patreon walk away from Apple? It’s complicated, I suppose. Without the little P logo on people’s screens, Patreon would lose something that nudges iPhone owners to check out creators.
Conte says they’re going along with this because iOS is the “most-used platform” for supporter engagement on Patreon. So Apple got its hooks into this platform, and now it’s calling the shots. It’s just as Ben Norton says. “Now that U.S. Big Tech monopolies are deeply embedded into the fabric of the global economy, with no real competitors, they’ll jack up rents.” Apple is a private digital utility that should be publicly owned, Norton declares, with its services provided as public goods.
In Europe, the Digital Markets Act is forcing Apple to let innovators offer apps that Apple doesn’t control—without paying Apple 30%. But the Apple barons vow to introduce new fees and restrictions when people download alternative apps.
The Studio for the Art of Animal Liberation I built on Patreon is about exploring the human identity. It’s about what we can become in relation to other living communities and our Earth. If the high-tech era is more interested in replicating exploitive economics than abiding by fair exchange, how can we expect to nurture supportive cultural values regarding other-than-human beings?
I don’t know how many future supporters will subscribe to my work through the Apple App Store. I don’t know how many will be put off because of the exorbitant rates. I’ll never know how much Apple has got and I have not. Nor will any of the 250,000+ writers and creators who’ve come to Patreon’s platform seeking community and sustenance.
I do know we can’t do art, advocacy, and independent research when trillion-dollar companies regard us as fuel to dig up and feed to their profit machines. We have to take on capitalism, and the Apple-Patreon drama offers 250,000 new reasons why.
