OnlyFans to ban adult material after pressure from payment processors

[Valmy]

I'm always surprised when businesses decide they don't want to make money any more. It's a bit like when Tumblr banned sexual content and "female presenting nipples". I also don't understand why banks care about this - I mean they must have lots of unsavoury business customers. Seems weird to care too much about porn.

I thought Pornhub had credit card payment, but I just checked, and it's crypto currency only now.

I guess it makes sense, then, that cc companies would pressure Onlyfans to remove all porn content.

I have to question how much this move to "protect the children" is not actually endangering children. People are going to get porn and consume it. So instead of allowing porn consumers to directly pay performers we are going to...what? Send all that money away from the actual performers to shadowy gatekeepers? Won't that enrich human trafficking and exploitation of sex workers instead of reduce it?

It seems highly counter-productive.

[The Larch]

Ok why the hell would we use onlyfans for not porn? We already have patreon.

Didn't it actually start out as a way for personal trainers and the like to offer online lessons?

[Valmy]

Ok why the hell would we use onlyfans for not porn? We already have patreon.

Didn't it actually start out as a way for personal trainers and the like to offer online lessons?

How exactly does one use OnlyFans for online lessons? Wouldn't I use Zoom or something where I could interact with my trainer and they could see what I am doing?

[Admiral Yi]

How exactly does one use OnlyFans for online lessons? Wouldn't I use Zoom or something where I could interact with my trainer and they could see what I am doing?

Zoom doesn't have a payment interface, does it?

[viper37]

They're all terrified of child pornography.

True - but I think OnlyFans has far more control over that because of what viper said.

They have more control, but honestly, the limit is 18 years old.  I don't think someone could manage to register under a fake name and post nude pictures/videos of 10 years old and be consistently ignored.  The problem *might* (I honestly do not know if it is a generalized problem) be 15-16 year old girls with a fake IDs posting nude selfiest to earn cash. 

I went to check and you do need a credit card for the subscription fee and a bank account for them to deposit your earnings.  However, I signed in with my Google Account, so abuse is possible, if there are no other checks beyond that.

It's also weird, I now visit this site and there's something else than porn appearing over there.

[Valmy]

How exactly does one use OnlyFans for online lessons? Wouldn't I use Zoom or something where I could interact with my trainer and they could see what I am doing?

Zoom doesn't have a payment interface, does it?

It does have more of a way to actually, you know, train people. Otherwise it is not much of a personal training but just some training videos.

[viper37]

I have to question how much this move to "protect the children" is not actually endangering children. People are going to get porn and consume it. So instead of allowing porn consumers to directly pay performers we are going to...what? Send all that money away from the actual performers to shadowy gatekeepers? Won't that enrich human trafficking and exploitation of sex workers instead of reduce it?

It seems highly counter-productive.

I don't think the payment processor cares about protecting the children that much.  But they do care about their image.  If thousands of customers per day complains they are allowing child porn producers to get rich, true or not, they might be tempted to pressure a particular source of complaint, or drop it altogether if it's smallish compared to the rest of their business.

Like, say, Disney firing an actress over some silly social media post.  It's not that they believe the actress is spreading hatred of X, but it's because they are receiving complaints and they fear for their image with this annoyance.  Like, Apple willingly using subcontractors with child labour but now fighting against pedo pornography.  It's not that they really care about their fate of other people's children, but they do care about their ultimate bottom line, and that is very dependant on their image. 

Like corporations and rich people buying green indulgence to travel by airplane all over the planet every week.  It's not that they don't know that their gift will plant a tree that will require 30 years to absorb the CO2 emission of a one-way trip. But it makes them look good to the public.
As for childporn, I don't think the majority of traffickers will pay for it, willingly, with their credit cards.  Although human dumbness should never amaze me.  I think the majority of it is traded/exchanged on the dark web, if traded, it's got to be done with cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin, or possibly more secure stuff like Monero.

[Admiral Yi]

I don't think they're worried so much about bad PR as criminal charges.

[grumbler]

I have to question how much this move to "protect the children" is not actually endangering children. People are going to get porn and consume it. So instead of allowing porn consumers to directly pay performers we are going to...what? Send all that money away from the actual performers to shadowy gatekeepers? Won't that enrich human trafficking and exploitation of sex workers instead of reduce it?

It seems highly counter-productive.

I agree, but you have to remember that, when it comes to child porn, people would rather see the innocent punished than let the guilty get away with it.  It's a vile business and nuking it from orbit seems the only way to fight it.

[grumbler]

I don't think they're worried so much about bad PR as criminal charges.

Yes.  It's extremely easy to get charged and extremely difficult to fight the charges.  Remember the people sent to prison for being Satanists performing witchcraft with children in secret tunnels far underground?

[Jacob]

I'm always surprised when businesses decide they don't want to make money any more. It's a bit like when Tumblr banned sexual content and "female presenting nipples". I also don't understand why banks care about this - I mean they must have lots of unsavoury business customers. Seems weird to care too much about porn.

They didn't have much of a choice, though, according to the article. Visa and Mastercard decided to stop processing payments, so it's a choice between a massive blow to their business or the what looks like an inability to do business altogether.

[Valmy]

And Visa told me it was everywhere I wanted to be

[DGuller]

I find it concerning that financial institutions seem to have a veto power over businesses.  Maybe you don't mind them cracking down on porn sites, but what checks are in place to keep them from imposing judgements on other kinds of businesses?  In democratic societies, I think those with monopolistic power need to be answerable to the public in some way.

[viper37]

I don't think they're worried so much about bad PR as criminal charges.

in the case of Pornhub, the criminal charges are/were a real possibility.

In the case of Onlyfans, I do not know.  From the article Garbon posted, it seems more like rumours/suspicions than a reality.  They're supposed to take some steps to insure the content actually belongs to the owner of the account, but beyond that, I do not know much.

[viper37]

I find it concerning that financial institutions seem to have a veto power over businesses.

Well, credit card companies and other payment processors have seen their power rise tremendously with the age of internet shopping.  AFAIK, you can't pay Amazon by check.

Maybe you don't mind them cracking down on porn sites, but what checks are in place to keep them from imposing judgements on other kinds of businesses?  In democratic societies, I think those with monopolistic power need to be answerable to the public in some way.

Well, all banks have tremendous power over their smaller customers.  It's nothing really new.  Back in the old days, they would have ordered a pogrom against Jews, but they're not as dominant in the banking sector as they were.