When satire becomes abuse: Gendered hate from media‑imitating Facebook pages
For many women in public life, satire on social media is no longer harmless humor – it has become a sustained form of sexualized harassment under the cover of satire.
Across Facebook, photocards resembling news headlines circulate widely almost daily. They feature familiar‑looking logos, formal layouts, and confident messaging paired with photographs of female politicians, actors, academics, and activists. The accompanying text often implies moral failure or sexual misconduct, framing the women as objects of ridicule.
Within minutes, these posts draw thousands of laughing reactions and hundreds of shares, and the comment sections fill with speculation, mockery, and character judgments. For many users encountering them casually, the posts appear credible. But they are not.
The posts originate from self‑proclaimed Facebook “satire” pages that deliberately imitate the names, logos, and presentation styles of mainstream media outlets. Although these pages describe their content as humor or parody, a significant portion of what they publish targets women’s bodies, sexuality, and personal lives. In many instances, what is framed as satire are plain harassment, character assassination, and online bullying.
A nearly five‑month content analysis by Dismislab of posts published by five such pages reveals a consistent pattern: more than one in every four posts about women contained sexually aggressive or harassing language. Identical photocards frequently appeared across multiple pages on the same day, amplifying their reach and impact.
While most of this content conflicts with Facebook’s own harassment policies, enforcement remains limited. Pages routinely evade moderation by labeling their posts as satire or parody.
Experts argue that when humor inflicts harm, silences individuals, or reinforces vulnerability, it ceases to function as satire. The problem is further compounded by limited media literacy in countries like Bangladesh. Many users struggle to distinguish between satirical content and authentic journalism, increasing the likelihood that misleading or defamatory posts are taken at face value, and further circulated as fact.
Bangladesh film actress Shabnam Faria and Dhaka University teacher Shehrin Amin Bhuiyan Monami have been among the most frequent targets during the course of this investigation. Both described the content circulated about them by the so-called satire pages as deliberate character assassination rather than humor or criticism of their professional work.
Faria said the posts aimed to publicly shame and discredit her, and that although she has considered legal action, the hostility in online comment sections and the fear of prolonged “media trials” have deterred her. Monami echoed these concerns, arguing that such content undermines women’s right to dignity. “If creating content is freedom of speech,” she said, “then we also have the right to live a respected life, which these contents destroy.”
Hateful content creators
In recent years, numerous “satirical” pages operating from Bangladesh sprouted on Facebook, mimicking the names, logos, and visual identities of mainstream media outlets. For this report, Dismislab selected five such pages that: 1) explicitly identified themselves as satire or entertainment platforms in their bios and, 2) had more than 30,000 followers. The pages analyzed were Prothom Aluu, Baler Kontho, GojobVision, Jamela TV, and My Bangla TV.
An examination of the pages’ transparency information reveals notable overlaps. The bios of Baler Kontho and Prothom Aluu are identical, and the two pages frequently publish similar, and sometimes identical, content. Both describe themselves as the “Leading Daily Satire Newspaper” and include a disclaimer stating their news accuracy is only “0.01%.” Likewise, Jamela TV and My Bangla TV use nearly identical bios, declaring, “Created for entertainment purposes only, do not take any post seriously.”
The My Bangla TV page stands out for repeatedly changing its name over time, with previous identities ranging from “Sexual Advice” to “Islamic Shorts.” Meanwhile, GojobVision employs the slogan “Gojob across the vision,” a play on mainstream broadcast media branding, further reinforcing the page’s imitation of institutional news outlets.
Among the five pages analyzed, Baler Kontho posted the highest proportion of gender‑based hateful content. Half of its posts involving women were classified as hateful, the largest share among the pages reviewed. Gender‑based hate posts also accounted for 33 percent of content on both Jamela TV and My Bangla TV, indicating that the pattern was not confined to a single platform but widespread across multiple pages.
Targets and patterns of abuse
To understand the nature of this abuse, Dismislab examined 4,243 posts published over four and a half months across the five pages. Of these, 23 percent (991 posts) concerned women. Among those, 28 percent (277 posts in the form of photocards) were identified as sexually aggressive or harassing and formed the basis of this analysis. These posts followed four recurring patterns:
(1) slurs and insults based on gender and sexual identity;
(2) general slurs and demeaning language;
(3) derogation and humiliation tied to ideological positions; and
(4) insults based on physical appearance, clothing, or perceived sexuality.
All five pages employed these forms of attack in varying degrees, pointing to a consistent pattern of gender‑based abuse rather than isolated lapses in judgment. Of the 277 harassing photocards, the highest 183 (66 percent) contained gender‑ or sexuality‑based slurs. General insults accounted for 25 percent of the content, while the remaining 9 percent involved ideological humiliation or mockery of women’s bodies and attire.
Taken together, the distribution and repetition of these categories indicate that the abuse was structured and systematic, relying on sexualization, moral judgment, and personal degradation to undermine women’s credibility under the guise of satire.
Analysis also shows that in most cases, the pages used women’s photographs — often drawn from recent public appearances, statements, or ongoing news events — and repurposed them into fabricated quotes or mocking messages designed to invite ridicule and humiliation.
The entertainment industry was the most frequently targeted sector. Of the 277 abusive photocards analyzed, 161 focused on actresses, models, or other media personalities. Actress Pori Moni emerged as the most targeted individual, appearing in 62 photocards, the highest number for any single person in the dataset.
Women active in politics and public policy were also recurrent victims. A total of 103 posts focused on political figures, including former interim government advisor Syeda Rizwana Hasan, ousted prime minister Sheikh Hasina, late former prime minister Khaleda Zia, and several members of the Dhaka University Central Students’ Union (DUCSU). Among them, Dr. Tasnim Jara, a former National Citizens Party (NCP) leader and independent candidate in the February election, was the most frequently targeted political figure, appearing in 17 photocards.
The remaining 13 posts targeted women from other public spheres, including Bangladesh Cricket Board Director Rubaba Dowla and author Taslima Nasrin, indicating that the harassment extended beyond entertainment and politics.
Gendered slurs
The most prevalent form of harassment identified in the analysis involved slurs and insults rooted in gender and sexual identity. These posts primarily aimed at character assassination, portraying women as morally corrupt or sexually promiscuous. Across the pages examined, women were repeatedly described using sexually suggestive or degrading terms, including references equating them with sex workers (*khan**) or implying sexual availability (*baro**).
On February 8, the page GojobVision posted a photocard featuring Shehrin Amin Bhuiyan Monami, a teacher at the Department of Public Administration at Dhaka University. The text inside the photocard falsely attributed a statement to her, reading: “I am a part‑time teacher and a full‑time handmaid for Shibir [Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami’s student wing].” The accompanying caption claimed that the remarks were made in response to a journalist’s question, although she made no such comments. Similarly, on October 4, My Bangla TV posted a photocard stating that actress Apu Biswas had “regularly provided pleasure to Awami League party leaders in illicit hotels.” The post offered no context, attribution, or factual basis, relying solely on sexual insinuation to demean the individual.
Author Taslima Nasrin, now in exile in India, was also targeted using explicit gender‑based slurs. In a post by Jamela TV, the page claimed that “seeing female RU students wearing burqas has set the whorehouse on fire,” using sexually derogatory language to frame Nasrin’s ideological positions and to incite ridicule.
Derogative statements
Beyond explicit sexualized slurs, a significant number of posts involve general insults and demeaning language to attack women. These included comparisons to animals, the use of derogatory labels, and the application of negative or humiliating adjectives intended to belittle professional credibility and personal character.
In one example, My Bangla TV posted a photocard featuring actress Pori Moni. Both the caption and the text within the image implied that she had earned money through sexual acts rather than professional work: “I never earned money with my beauty, whatever I earned was through my hole — Hole Actress Pori Moni.”
Similarly, the page Baler Kontho published an edited photocard targeting Dr. Tasnim Jara. In that post, the independent candidate was compared to a cow: “The Dhaka-17 constituency is about to witness a fight between two bulls taking responsibility for one cow.” In effect, the imagery and language reduced the candidate to an object of dominance rather than treating her as a political leader in her own right.
Insults over clothing
A further category of harassment involved demeaning women based on physical appearance, body type, or clothing. Across the five pages, these posts framed ordinary clothing choices as indicators of moral character, reinforcing misogynistic stereotypes.
On October 7, actress Shabnam Faria shared a photograph on her personal Facebook profile. Within hours, multiple satire pages (1, 2, 3, 4, 5) repurposed the image into photocards, attaching sexually suggestive captions and fabricated contexts. One page, Prothom Aluu, posted a photocard claiming that Faria was “waiting at night in front of a residential hotel on the streets of Sri Lanka while wearing half‑pants.” Another page, Jamela TV, depicted the same image with a caption suggesting that she was roaming in such clothing due to financial hardship after marrying an unemployed man.
Similar patterns were observed in posts targeting other actresses. Jamela TV published a photocard mocking actress Tasnia Farin, using a crude analogy involving underwear to comment on her outfit. In another post from the same page, actress Runa Khan was targeted with imagery and language that likened her appearance to a supernatural figure meant to frighten children.
Attacks for political beliefs
Another recurring pattern involved attacks framed around women’s political positions and ideological stances, which were then sexualized through innuendo. This pattern was particularly visible in posts targeting Sheikh Hasina. Referring to her stay in India, one post stated: “A massive amount of gold recovered from Sheikh Hasina’s private parts. Sources say that because it was too heavy, Sheikh Hasina left her gold and fled to India.” Similar posts (1, 2, 3) repeatedly focused on her location and political status.
Other female politicians were subjected to comparable treatment. My Bangla TV posted a photocard involving Rumeen Farhana, a Member of Parliament, falsely claiming that she would be denied a party nomination unless she married before the election. The card read: “Rumeen Farhana will not be given a nomination unless she marries before the election – Tarique Rahman.” In another case, GojobVision targeted Mansura Alam, a Chhatra Dal leader, using sexually explicit metaphors and writing: “Take the leader’s greetings, vote for the sheaf of penis: Chhatra Dal leader.”
Collective amplification
The analysis also revealed a pattern where multiple satire pages published similar sexually suggestive photocards on the same topic within a short time frame. For example, on November 25, 2025, following reports that 832 bhori of gold jewellery was found in bank lockers linked to Sheikh Hasina, several satire pages simultaneously posted near‑identical photocards (1, 2, 3). The text inside the photocards read, “A massive amount of gold has been recovered from Sheikh Hasina’s private parts.” Similar posts (1, 2, 3) were repeated by the same pages again two days later, reinforcing the narrative through amplification.
This collective behaviour extended beyond political events. During the “16 Days of Activism against Gender-based Violence” campaign in November-December, several female celebrities posted photographs with numbers written on their hands or faces as part of the awareness initiative. Shortly afterward, multiple satire pages (1, 2, 3, 4, 5) republished the images after digitally altering the writing to display sexually suggestive phrases, effectively transforming a campaign against gender‑based violence into material for insults.
A similar trend emerged around electoral developments as well. On October 30, after the Election Commission announced a new party symbol (Water Lily Bud), multiple satire pages published photocards (1, 2) targeting female candidates associated with the symbol. One such post by Baler Kontho read, “The bud turns into a flower just by inserting it into the special part and twisting it. Samantha [an NCP leader] is satisfied with the new ‘invention’.” Meghna Alam, a candidate for the Dhaka‑8 constituency, was also attacked. Multiple satire pages simultaneously published photocards (1,2,3) mocking her campaign, using identical wording that combined political ridicule with gender‑based slurs.
Platform policy violation
Most of the posts analyzed for this report violate Meta’s policies on hate speech. However, enforcement remains inconsistent, largely because the pages describe their content as satire or parody in their profiles. This self‑designation has allowed many posts to avoid moderation despite containing sexually degrading language and gender‑based attacks.
Before 2025, Meta’s Hateful Conduct policy imposed strict limitations on satire and parody pages. Under those rules, it was explicitly prohibited to compare individuals to objects, property, or non‑human entities based on protected characteristics such as gender or sexual identity. Referring to women as household items or as someone’s property — even in satirical contexts — was considered a direct violation. The use of slurs or derogatory language targeting protected groups was also prohibited, regardless of claims to humor.
Since mid‑2024, however, Meta’s approach began to shift following a series of rulings by its Oversight Board, which found that the platform’s automated systems were often misclassifying political discussion and benign satire as hate speech. In response, Meta initiated a policy review, leading to a change announced on January 7, 2025, under an initiative titled “More Speech, Fewer Mistakes.”
Under the revised anti-hate speech policy, Meta now allows certain content that would otherwise violate its Community Standards. According to the updated guidelines, such content may remain on the platform when policy‑violating elements are used to ridicule or criticize, or when they are clearly attributed to another subject. The policy revision has drawn criticism from civil society groups and researchers, who warn that it creates greater exposure for women and other vulnerable groups.
Research published by the European Observatory of Online Hate found that immediately after the January 2025 policy change, the volume of gender‑based hateful messages on Facebook increased by 30 to 40 percent. Critics argue that the policy shift has widened the grey area between satire and harassment, making enforcement more subjective and uneven.
In addition to content moderation, Meta’s Impersonation policy prohibits users from posing as real individuals, brands, or organizations, or from creating campaigns that imply institutional endorsement. For satire pages, the policy requires that a page’s name, username, and bio clearly signal its satirical nature so that viewers can readily distinguish it from authentic media outlets. Despite this requirement, pages that closely mimic the visual identities of mainstream news organizations continue to operate.
Addressing the boundary between satire and harassment, Simu Naser, founder and editor of earki, one of Bangladesh’s most prominent satire platforms, said that freedom of expression does not extend to targeted degradation. “Raising questions or highlighting issues is part of free speech,” he said. “But deliberately using derogatory language to corner or silence someone is harassment.” In his view, focusing on how many times a woman has married, how her body looks, or how she dresses cannot be justified as satire.
Naser acknowledged that humor often relies on discomfort or incongruity and may not always be politically correct. “But once someone is harmed by it, once a group is damaged or made psychologically vulnerable, that space stops being humorous,” he said. He added that misogyny remains deeply embedded in social media discourse in Bangladesh, often manifesting most aggressively when women occupy visible public roles. According to him, this form of targeting functions as an effort to push women out of public space.
He also pointed to structural limitations in content moderation, noting the lack of effective tools for moderating satire and hateful content in the Bengali language — a gap that allows abuse to persist unchecked.
The reputational impact on legitimate media organizations has also emerged as a concern. As part of this research, Dismislab examined Jamela TV, a satire page modeled after Jamuna TV, and spoke with Rubel Mahmud, New Media Editor of Jamuna TV. Mahmud said that gender‑based attacks carried out under the guise of an organisation’s name or identity often cause immediate and serious harm, particularly to the mental well‑being, sense of safety, and professional comfort of those targeted.
Media literacy is a critical factor as well, said Rajib Ahmed, deputy head of reporting at Prothom Alo. “Many readers cannot distinguish between satirical items and real news content. When people cannot tell the difference, they are easily misled,” he said. Even when the confusion does not produce immediate consequences, he added, it creates indirect reputational harm for media institutions.
Methodology
For this report, Dismislab examined content from five Facebook pages that publicly identify themselves as satire or entertainment platforms in their bios. Each page has more than 30,000 followers and explicitly states that its content is intended for humour or satire rather than factual reporting. Pages were selected based on their use of names, logos, or visual identities closely modeled on mainstream Bangladeshi media outlets, typically achieved through lexical alterations of well‑known news brands. The five pages analysed were:
· Prothom Aluu, modeled after Prothom Alo (over 94,000 followers)
· Baler Kontho, modeled after Kaler Kontho (over 37,000 followers)
· GojobVision, modeled after Banglavision (over 41,000 followers)
· Jamela TV, modeled after Jamuna TV (over 143,000 followers)
· My Bangla TV, modeled after My TV (over 46,000 followers)
To assess the nature and extent of content targeting women, Dismislab analyzed all posts published by these five pages over a four‑and‑a‑half‑month period. Posts were first identified as being related to women, after which they were reviewed to determine whether they contained gender‑based hate, harassment, or sexually aggressive language. These posts were then categorised based on recurring patterns and forms of abuse, forming the basis for the findings presented in this report.
These posts followed four recurring patterns-
- Slurs and insults based on gender and sexual identity: Direct attacks using derogatory terms specifically aimed at a person’s gender expression or sexual orientation.
- General slurs and demeaning language: Broadly offensive words and disrespectful phrasing meant to belittle the target regardless of their specific background.
- Derogation and humiliation tied to ideological positions: Mockery and belittling comments are designed to attack and shame someone for their political, social, or personal beliefs.
- Insults based on physical appearance, clothing, or perceived sexuality: Superficial attacks targeting how a person looks, dresses, or appears to present themselves to the world.
