Why Threads DMs Are Facing Backlash: Safety Concerns, Redundancy, and the Demand for Real Choice

If you’ve logged into Threads lately—Meta’s ambitious X (formerly Twitter) rival—you might have noticed a major change: direct messaging has arrived. For some, this was an eagerly awaited update. But for many—especially women and those concerned about online safety—the new Threads DMs rollout feels less like progress and more like a step backwards. The backlash has been swift, passionate, and full of tough questions: Does Threads really need private messaging? Are current safety features enough? And why can’t users simply opt out?

Let’s dive into what’s behind the uproar, how Meta’s decisions impact everyday users, and what you need to know before you send—or receive—your first Threads DM.

Threads DMs: What’s New, and Why Now?

Meta introduced direct messaging to Threads in early July 2025, touting it as the platform’s “most-requested” feature. The rollout wasn’t exactly a surprise. After all, private messaging is considered table stakes for modern social apps. So why the controversy?

The Promise (and Problem) of Direct Messaging

For platforms like Instagram, Twitter/X, or Facebook, DMs make sense. They power connections, private discussions, and real-time support. Threads, however, was deliberately designed without DMs—creating a space where all conversations were public and transparent.

By adding private messaging, Meta hoped to drive engagement and catch up with user expectations. In fact, Threads is built atop Instagram’s backend, so adding DMs seemed simple enough on paper. But as the backlash shows, technical possibility doesn’t always translate to user demand or satisfaction.

The Backlash: Why Safety Concerns Top the List

Women’s Voices Lead the Opposition

Almost instantly, a vocal wave of women users expressed concern and frustration:

“Women do NOT want messenger. The men use it to sexually harass us through our DMs.”

This, from a representative user, echoes a familiar refrain heard across social media platforms—from Instagram to Twitter. For many women, private DMs aren’t just a convenience—they’re a vulnerability. The absence of private messaging on Threads was, for these users, a feature, not a bug.

Why Safety Feels Compromised

Public vs. Private Conversations: Public posts foster accountability. Private DMs, by contrast, often enable harassment, unsolicited explicit images, and bullying with little oversight.
Previous Experience: On platforms where DMs have existed for years, countless accounts of harassment have gone under the radar, despite moderation and reporting tools.
False Sense of Safety: Threads was seen as a “safer” refuge precisely because there were no DMs. The new update removes that protective layer.

Here’s why that matters: When women (or any vulnerable group) lose control over who can contact them privately, the platform becomes less welcoming, less inclusive, and ultimately less successful.

Meta’s Safety Measures: Are They Enough?

To its credit, Meta didn’t roll out DMs without some guardrails:

Mutual Followers Only: By default, you can only receive DMs from accounts you follow and that follow you back.
Reporting and Blocking: Users can block or report accounts that send inappropriate messages.
Message Requests: Messages from non-followers are filtered into a separate request folder and can be ignored.

The Trouble With Reactive Safety

While these features sound good on paper, many users argue they’re not enough. Here’s why:

Reactive, Not Proactive: Users must act (block, report, remove followers) after harm is done, rather than preventing contact to begin with.
Persistent Loopholes: Determined harassers can create new accounts, find ways around blocks, or exploit mutual follow status.
Emotional Labor: It’s exhausting for users—especially women—to constantly police their own inboxes.

As Privacy International and watchdog groups have noted, platforms often “put the burden of safety on the victim rather than the system.” Read more about online harassment safety measures.

The Growing Demand: Where Is the “Opt-Out” Feature?

Perhaps the most unifying demand among frustrated users: let us turn DMs off.

Why Don’t Threads Users Have Full Control?

Currently, you can restrict who messages you by unfollowing or blocking accounts. But there’s no simple “Disable DMs” toggle. For many, that feels like a bait-and-switch—especially since Threads previously gave users the ability to prevent posts from being shared to Instagram and Facebook, setting a precedent for privacy controls.

Why This Matters

User Agency: People want to decide how, when, and if they can be contacted privately.
Precedent Exists: Meta added opt-outs for post sharing in November 2023, proving such features are technically feasible.
Trust and Retention: Robust privacy options build trust. When users feel listened to, they stick around.

User sentiment sums it up best:

“I loved Threads specifically because it didn’t have DMs. If I wanted that, I’d just use Instagram.”

The Opt-Out Feature: What Are the Alternatives?

Unfollow anyone you don’t want to message you (impractical at scale).
Block or remove problematic followers (reactive, time-consuming).
Report unwanted messages (again, after harm is done).

But none of these options offer the simple, pro-active peace of mind of a “DMs off” switch. See more on digital privacy best practices.

The Instagram Integration Problem: Redundancy and Technical Debt

A second, equally thorny complaint: why does Threads need DMs when it’s so tightly linked to Instagram—another Meta product with robust private messaging?

Threads’ Origin: A Rush to Market

Threads was built in just five months, essentially as an “Instagram clone” for text-based posts. By piggybacking on Instagram’s backend, Meta achieved rapid scale—100 million users in five days—but also inherited a host of architectural limitations.

The Redundancy Issues

Duplicate Messaging: Why send a DM on Threads when you already have Instagram DMs with the same people?
Account Management Headaches: You can’t delete your Threads account without also deleting Instagram—a technical quirk that frustrates privacy-conscious users.
Inconsistent Messaging Ecosystem: You can only DM mutual followers. If someone follows you on Threads but not on Instagram, communication breaks down.
Technical Debt: Meta engineers now admit they must “rewrite business logic and back-end stack” to truly differentiate Threads.

Here’s the kicker: many users question the very purpose of Threads when its features so closely mirror what Instagram already offers. As one user put it:

“Why does Threads exist if you can already post long text, stories, or reels on Instagram?”

For a deep dive on Threads’ technical architecture, see TechCrunch’s analysis.

The “Enshittification” Effect: Is Meta Losing Its Way?

There’s a growing feeling among early adopters that adding DMs is part of a broader trend—what some call “enshittification”—where platforms become bloated, less user-friendly, and dominated by growth-at-all-costs thinking.

What Is Enshittification?

Coined by writer Cory Doctorow, the term describes how digital platforms often start off user-friendly, then gradually morph into something less appealing as they chase new users, ad revenue, and data. The result? A once-loved app loses its unique identity.

How Threads Fits the Mold

Feature Creep: By adding every “expected” feature, Threads risks losing what made it fresh and appealing.
Ignoring Core User Base: By pushing DMs without sufficient safety or opt-out options, Meta appears tone-deaf to the people who made Threads a success.
Chasing Metrics: Engagement is up, but sentiment is down—a recipe for long-term decline.

Learn more about “enshittification” in digital platforms.

What Can Meta—and Users—Do Next?

For Meta

Add a true Opt-Out: Users need the ability to fully disable DMs, not just filter them.
Prioritize Safety Features: Invest in proactive solutions, not just reactive tools. This might include AI-powered moderation, robust reporting, and default privacy settings.
Clarify Threads’ Purpose: Is it an Instagram clone, a Twitter alternative, or something else? Lean into unique strengths.
Transparent Communication: Proactively explain design decisions and listen to user feedback.

For Users

Review Your Privacy Settings: Make sure you know who can message you, and update your follow lists accordingly.
Don’t Hesitate to Block or Report: Harassment should never be tolerated. Use built-in safety tools.
Speak Up: The recent backlash shows that user voices matter. Meta has made changes in response to feedback before—persistent, collective advocacy can create real change.
Stay Informed: Follow updates from Meta’s newsroom and reputable tech outlets.

FAQs: Threads DMs and Controversy

1. Can I completely turn off DMs on Threads?

Currently, no. You can control who messages you based on mutual follows, but there is no universal off-switch for direct messaging. Many users are calling for this option.

2. What safety measures does Threads offer?

Threads restricts DMs to mutual followers by default, lets users block and report messages, and filters requests. However, critics say these measures are not enough to prevent harassment before it happens.

3. Why do users say Threads DMs are “redundant”?

Because Threads is built on Instagram’s backend, with much of the same functionality, users question the need for a separate DM system—especially when Instagram DMs already exist.

4. What does “enshittification” mean in this context?

It refers to the process where platforms degrade over time by adding unwanted or poorly implemented features, chasing user growth at the expense of quality and user trust.

5. Can I delete my Threads account without deleting Instagram?

As of now, you cannot. Deleting Threads also deletes your linked Instagram account, though deactivation is possible.

6. Is Meta addressing the backlash?

Meta has acknowledged user feedback and says it is working to improve safety and privacy features, but as of this writing, no opt-out for DMs has been offered.

7. Where can I report harassment on Threads?

Inside the app, use the “Report” function on messages or user profiles. For more resources, check Meta’s safety center.

The Takeaway: Moving Forward With Eyes Wide Open

Social media platforms are constantly evolving—and not always in ways users want. The Threads DMs rollout is a textbook example of how “most-requested” features can sometimes undermine what made a platform special.

If you’re on Threads, stay vigilant: review your privacy settings, advocate for the options you need, and don’t hesitate to speak up. For Meta, the message is clear: user trust matters more than feature checklists.

Curious about the future of Threads and social platforms? Subscribe for more insights—or dive deeper with these trusted tech news and digital privacy resources.

Let’s keep the conversation public, safe, and user-first—just like Threads was meant to be.

Discover more at InnoVirtuoso.com

I would love some feedback on my writing so if you have any, please don’t hesitate to leave a comment around here or in any platforms that is convenient for you.

For more on tech and other topics, explore InnoVirtuoso.com anytime. Subscribe to my newsletter and join our growing community—we’ll create something magical together. I promise, it’ll never be boring!

Stay updated with the latest news—subscribe to our newsletter today!

Thank you all—wishing you an amazing day ahead!