In the United States, the internet is a vital resource for LGBTQ+ youth to meet their sexual and reproductive health information needs, especially those who cannot receive necessary information from family, healthcare providers, and classrooms. In this dissertation, I present three papers that connect content moderation policies and their impacts with access to comprehensive sexual and reproductive health information. Participants in all three studies developed goals and expectations for social media, which became difficult to achieve in their respective information contexts. Through ingenuity, persistence, and algorithmic folk theorization, participants developed strategies to resist platform policies and attempt to achieve their goals. This dissertation's first paper is an interview study further exploring how LGBTQ+ youth seek sexual and reproductive health information online. LGBTQ+ youth participants occupied existing online spaces not explicitly related to health information but would naturally encounter relevant information online in these spaces. These information encounters led participants to shift their information seeking behaviors to intentional sexual health information seeking. Participants explained social media's importance in sexual health and reproductive health information seeking, although many expressed concerns about information credibility. In the second paper, I interviewed healthcare providers and sexual health educators who create sexual and reproductive health content on social media. I explore how experts created accurate health content that users like the LGBTQ+ youth participants might encounter online. Providers and educators overwhelmingly felt that content moderation policies restricted their abilities to share comprehensive and medically accurate sexual and reproductive health information. Participants developed, tested, and shared algorithmic folk theories to make sense of their experiences as content creators. Shadowbanning was a particularly troublesome content moderation experience for participants. For the final paper, I used qualitative surveys and interviews with social media users who experienced content moderation to further understand how they make sense of what they believe to be shadowbanning. Participants used strategies similar to the providers and educators for understanding their content removals and perceived changes in social media engagement and metrics. I propose algorithmic altruism as one such strategy where users collectively understood and resisted how they experienced platform moderation algorithms. Although shadowbanning is difficult to define and platforms typically deny its existence, participants believed it happened to them and used strategies to "prove" that it happened to them. This dissertation extends previous research on content moderation, affordances theories, and algorithmic folk theories. Sexual and reproductive health information on social media provides a unique context for considering how these three research areas coalesce. Social media's imagined affordances influence what participants think they can achieve online. I argue that participants use resistance strategies such as algorithmic folk theories to still use the social media affordances they imagine are possible, especially when experiencing unclear content moderation practices. Opaque content moderation policies shift the burden to users making sense of their online experiences and evading shadowbanning or content removals. In this sexual and reproductive health context, this shift means that providers and educators struggle to share comprehensive and accurate information with potential viewers like LGBTQ+ young people. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://bibliotheek.ehb.be:2222/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.]