Friends who have been online for a while may remember that around 2019, the well-known adult website Pornhub was at its peak—first launching trendy brands and selling fashion, having models wear brand logos on the New York Fashion Week runway, later engaging in charity, not only shooting short films to raise funds for the Giant Panda Foundation but also offering free breast health checks for women.
It seems they are transforming into a cultural giant, moving from underground to mainstream.
But in just one year,Pornhub's collapse.
Not only did the originalOver 10 million videos were taken down, and even users wanting to upload or download had to pass identity verification. After all this hassle,,revenue was halved, then sold off to cut losses, ultimately falling into the hands of new owner"Ethical Capital"Ethical Capital's hands, operating it into the current "half-dead" state.
The reasons for Pornhub's decline are complex and varied, difficult to elaborate fully. But one key reason was that in late 2020,a statement issued bycredit card companies like Visa and Mastercard issuedstatement of termination of cooperation. This statement,causingcausing Pornhub's revenue to halve for a long period.In other words, payment platforms cut offPornhub's revenue.
And last week,Steam urgently removed a batch of erotic games.
But unlike before,Steam updated its terms of service, with the latest Article 15 statingclearly states:"We will not go out of our way for adult game developers,to confront the moral regulation of payment platforms." Associating this clause with Pornhub's experience immediately sparked widespreadanxiety.
Please note that the regulatory organization mentioned in the terms is"payment platforms"—In other words, payment platforms have the power to freeze payments at any time. Imagine if you were an e-commerce merchant, happilyselling things legally and compliantly, only to suddenly be told that users cannot use"Alipay" and "WeChat Pay" to send money, does that mean if the payment platform says east, you dare not go west?
Vendors benefiting from electronic payments are, in fact, being held hostage by electronic payments.
Yoko Taro, producer of "NieR: Automata,"regarding"the issue of "payment companies refusing to process payments for legal adult content," expressingconcern:"Although the publishing industry has always faced regulation beyond the law, in fact, a payment processor involved in content distribution infrastructure can decide such matters on its own—in my opinion, this could lead to even more serious consequences.."
Based on the community's past impression of regulatory groups, they would likely act like Sweet Baby Inc., using public opinion to condemn game companies while sending members to work as consultants at major studios. The tactic resembles moral extortion, aimed at collecting protection money.
However, payment platforms"cross-border" intervention in game content. This approach is not only unprofitable but also damages their own transaction fee income. Such a "self-harming" move, is clearly contrary to common sense, naturally leading people to suspect that other organizations are exerting influence behind the scenes.
Sure enough, ononOn July 19, afeminist organization named Collective Shout claimed responsibility for the action. They stated that they had previouslyvarious payment companies'CEO sent an open letter,The open letter directly targeted major credit card companies, condemning them forprofiting from providing payment services for "sexual exploitation" content on Steam.
At the same time, they demanded that various payment companies stop supporting these games, which led to the subsequent removal of the games.
Collective ShoutTranslated literally, it means"Collective Shout"—so what kind of group is it exactly?
Opening the official website, its "Support" section calls on visitors to donate to support the organization's actions against large corporations. The homepage scroll displays their specific achievements or goals: demanding Musk ban adult content, calling on newsstands to boycott "Playboy,"and threatened investors to sell off"Playboy" stocks.
Furthermore,also includes criticizingAI, criticizing sexualized dolls—Theyupholding a thoroughly anti-pornography stance.
Naturally, the most proud achievement of the "Collective Shout" organization,was precisely what brought downPornhub—it was them who united withthe US National Center on Sexual ExploitationNCOSEand other organizations, prompting news media and relevant departments to startpressuring Pornhub, followed by a joint boycott from credit card companies, delivering the fatal blow.
Their ultimate goal isto makePornhub completely shut down.
More accurately, they want tocompletely eliminate all sex-related industries.
Win! Win! Win!
So radical, why can it act like a cyber pope, threatening excommunication to command various payment platforms to organize"Anti-Porn Crusaders"?
Some in the community believe that as a civil organization, "Collective Shout" finds it difficult to morally blackmail credit card companies. A more likely reason is backing from relevant Australian authorities—and what credit card companies truly fear is being banned in Australia.
It's not strange to have such speculation. Australia has always been the country with the strictest censorship in the West. For example, among those presentAs everyone knows,"games streaming green blood" and "forced name censoring",have all occurred in Australia, even "Fallout3" and "RimWorld"were all banned from sale in this country. And in order to let"The Witcher2:King Assassin passed censorship,CDPR had to adjust the romantic content in the game, once turning Geralt into an ascetic old man who responded to all advances with: "Thanks, but no thanks."
This leads to a rare phenomenon: although "Collective Shout" claims to be a feminist organization, neither the gaming community, nor game media that once supported feminism, norsexual minorities'KOLs, have expressed different views on "Collective Shout".To some extent, they have even united with male players.
As some have pointed out, "Collective Shout"founder and manager"Tankard·Lester" (61 years old), has publicly opposed abortion on multiple occasions.This stance,Clearly contradicts what mainstream Western feminism advocates regarding"Bodily Autonomy", runs counter to this—especially in extreme cases involving pregnancy resulting from rape, where its absolute anti-abortion stance appears even more stringent and controversial.
At the same time, some have pointed out that those who once worked closely with "Collective Shout"the US National Center on Sexual Exploitation (NCOSE),NCOSEand other organizations have a tradition of oppressing sexual minorities. Therefore, the LGBT community worries that these people will impose their conservative values on everyone.
Therefore, this developer stated"If we don't stand up againstthey,LGBT games will be the next victims."
Since then, we have seen this image emerge: "Collective Shout" opposes all erotic content, "Collective Shout" wants to control women's bodies, and "Collective Shout" also causes anxiety among sexual minorities. Therefore,Compared to the previous"feminist organizations," the community believestheymore like stubborn"Evangelicals" or "Puritans."
It doesn't matter if you don't understand these two terms, because you can largely treatitstreated as a Christian version of"obsessed parents,"willin the name of protecting children, againstthemselvesthe monsters in their eyes with a heavy hand.
To be fair, however, despite the subsequent intimate exchanges with players, "Collective Shout"organization called players"erotica maniacs," butitsso-calledmost actions of "anti-sexual exploitation" are morally unproblematic.
likePornhub got into trouble because its lack of self-regulation led to extreme content, thus giving others leverage against it.
Similarly,this timeThe batch of games removed from Steam also mostly featured niche fetishes as selling points, were poorly made, and already operated in a gray area, so few felt pity for their ban.
The real issue is that the content censorship initiated by these moral groups is not genuine game rating—so it's hard to say what standards they use to determine which kinks are reasonable and which are vulgar and pornographic. Or is Everythinggj judged solely based on their own values, followed by coercing platforms to remove related content?Then is this law-evading"trial," should it be considered a form of lynching,ora form of cyber dunking?
Just last month, the virtual content platform Fansly also updated its terms—Notably, this change was also made to comply with"requirements from payment platforms."Among them, prohibited content includes hypnosis, alcohol consumption, wrestling, and furries.
Furry means beast girls
Banning alcohol and hypnosis might be understood as tightening regulations, but banning furries... leaves people baffled. Originally, Fansly had many streamers operating with furry avatars; this blanket ban effectively means collective unemployment.
Even more absurdly, wrestling itself was deemed illegal"kink." The platform's bizarre rule, which allows professional wrestling but prohibits two-person fighting, raises the question: how exactly is it supposed to be enforced?
From this, we can see:not justPornhubAs Steam faces moral regulation beyond the law,In factofall content platforms have recently felt increasing pressure from moral censorship.
Perhaps this is also why OnlyFans' boss quickly cashed out and ran—This world's largest adult content platform has an annual revenue as high as$1.3 billion, yet only sold for $8 billion.
Originally, benefiting from the US Communications Decency Act (CDA)'s safe harbor principle, platforms were not liable for user behavior. However, the EU's Digital Services Act (DSA) has completely changed the game—meaning that since last year, platforms must fulfill their responsibility to protect minors, including strict content moderation, and are required to publish a detailed report on their content moderation procedures annually.
AlsoIt is precisely for this reason that, includingpayment platforms like Visa and PayPal have had to take pressure from "moral organizations" seriously.
What worries players, however, is that if furries and wrestling have grounds for being banned, thenhow many games on Steam can confidently say they are in the safe zone?
Keep in mind, this claim regardingresponsible for Steam's terms updateThe organization "Collective Shout" once demanded that Detroit: Become Human be removed from Australian store shelves. Their reasoning was that the game promoted "child abuse" and "domestic violence." But players familiar with the game know that these accusations seriously distort the facts.
And its allies even condemned Animal Crossing: New Horizons as an erotic game due to fan creations within small circles.
Naturally, the player community has fallen into a state of panic—because, judging by the aggressive, paranoid, and control-freak standards of that group, today they ban poorly made weird games, tomorrow they might ban Baldur's Gate 3" like thisgames with more liberal fetishes, could Nintendo's titles potentially offend God the day after tomorrow?
Steam's announcement also failed to clarify what standards were being applied, only stating that they must comply with the moral reviews of payment platforms.
And so, a familiar scene unfolded:Just as we wrote about last week"Stop Killing Games" movementsame, playersonce again needing to collect 100,000 signatures to confront thoseorganizations with "connections in high places."
As a massive industry with output exceeding the combined totals of books, music, and film, the legal framework for managing video games has always lagged behind. However, while relevant protective measures are not yet sound,players seem to have to"fortunately" face the gaming industry's "Prohibition" due to the controlling desires of another group of "Puritans."
We can acknowledge"Alcohol" is harmful, and "erotica" should also be regulated. But given that there are already clear legal provisions providing some regulation, yet such an absurd scenario has emerged:
A group shouting"anti-abortion" Australian parents, a monopolistic payment platform alliance, is worldwidewantonlyexercise the power of moral regulation.
On what basis do these people possess power that transcends laws and borders?
References:
1.CollectiveShout official website
2.Vice: The organizations behind Steam's censorship policies have powerful allies and target popular games with bizarre rhetoric
3.Vice: This virtual streamer just raised $780 for the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).
4.Negative Review: The World's Largest Adult WebsiteOnlyFanssold themselves out, and it turns out they were only worth this much?