>>41134620>it's not about puritans but sex slave trafficking including child trafficking.I get the feeling this is just a convenient excuse, given they use it as justification even when they're banning hentai and other fictitious material that has no physical acting component. When pressed on that, they mumble something about how "fictional depictions create demand for the real thing" and refuse to discuss the matter further.
I also very much doubt most of that activity is handled through legit banks. That shit creates a paper trail that's very easy to follow, so I'll bet only amateur, unorganized criminals would make use of them so blatantly. And if they do manage to genuinely hide the true nature of their activities from the banks, I doubt the banks can be held liable for it.
>>41135063>And that's why adult transactions are under high scrutiny, easily frozen and held forever even to this very day. And yet, they will aggressively deny service to anyone who tries to fill the hole they’ve purposely left unfilled in the market. You could argue any payment processing they’d have to do with companies catering to adult shit puts them at risk, sure, but it’s clear there’s demand for such services and times have changed enough for the old rules to no longer apply. I don’t see why they couldn’t just argue in court they had no knowledge of wrongdoings if it so happens that one of their clients turns out to be dealing in highly illegal shit, I’m pretty sure it happens with other industries all the time. Why single adult industries out, even with the historical baggage, when it’s clear there’s a lot of money to be made these days and people hateful of their censorship by service denial with each new instance of it?
I guess we won’t really know for sure whether it’s malice or incompetence until someone takes them to task legally over it. I get the feeling, though, that the courts are going to side with the banks whether they’re in the right or not.
