This meme¹ made the rounds here on Lemmy some days back.
And NSFW artists in the Furry fandom will often talk about how payment processors give them guff.
It holds true in lived memory, but like…
… Why?
I actually understand it for Google Ads and the like – Google, Metabook, Bytedance et al. are really just advertisement companies with a side-gig in providing online services, and if you’re an advertisement company, then “how other corporations perceive you” is what you live and die by, which forces the whole “corporate sanitisation” thing down on the users. – So like. It does make sense, even if it’s hateable.
But for the likes of Visa, and Master Card, and whatnot – It doesn’t? As I understand it their whole thing is they transfer money between parties and take a cut of the transactions. (and also give credit and charge interests on that and such) – Why the fuck would they care what those transactions are about, so long as people are… Transacting, and thus giving them their cut?
¹ Reuploaded as an image because I couldn’t be fucked to find it again.
FOSTA-SESTA is at the heart of it, as I understand. I don’t want to elaborate much more because I don’t know nearly enough about the situation, but adding this search term helped make it make a little bit of sense to me.
Edit: not that I’m lumping these different ideas together, but that the prudish folks could theoretically use this legal framework to throw allegations that Visa/MasterCard would rather not have to defend against.
If anyone else was curious.
Credit card companies have been against adult content further back than 2018 AFAIK