arXiv:2611.06226v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Effective content moderation depends on understanding not just what harmful content looks like, but how users perceive and respond to it. When offensive language is written in transliterated forms such as Banglish or Hinglish (Bangla or Hindi in Latin script), it may be interpreted very differently than in native scripts, with direct consequences for whether users report, ignore, or recognize it as harmful. Yet little is known about how script choice relates to user perception, or how these perceptions vary across demographic groups. To investigate these perceptions, we conducted a user study with $310$ participants ($193$ Hindi, $60$ Bangla, $57$ Bangla-Hindi bilingual speakers) who evaluated offensive posts in native scripts and transliterations. Participants provided offensiveness scores ($4.03$ for Banglish, $3.86$ for Hinglish) to transliterated posts, yet reporting fell from $20.9\%$ (native - Bangla, Hindi) to $18.2\%$ (transliterated - Banglish, Hinglish). Ignoring remained the dominant response (range $25.38\%-44\%$ overall). Women reported at higher probability than men for native-script ($23.6\%$ vs. $17.7\%$) and showed almost identical reporting probability in comparison to men for transliterated posts ($17.5\%$ vs. $17.9\%$), and younger participants ($<40$) rated Banglish content as more offensive than older participants ($\geq 40$), (Overall offensive score: $3.99$ vs. $3.78$). These findings identify transliteration as critical blind spot for moderation, underscoring the need for linguistically sensitive approaches to online safety.