It was heavily promoted by Exodus Cry, an organisation that seeks to completely ban porn, strip clubs and any type of sex work: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exodus_Cry

This whole thing has lead to a lot unintended consequences that has significantly hurt, or impacted sex workers negatively, such as the MasterCard changes that made Onlyfans try and get rid of sexual content.

Their authority is just rule by fiat. They are not answerable to the people like an institution in a democracy.

What Mastercard/Visa are doing is not a proper way to run a country, let alone the world.

The other unfortunate reality of sex work is that women "busted" by law enforcement are of course going to claim their trafficked when it gets them out of a legal bind.

The root cause of all this a puritanical western society using the power of the state to impose their morals on others. What consenting adults do among themselves, even if for compensation, is nobodies business besides those involved ... and CERTAINLY shouldn't be illegal. So many of us are still conflating sex work with "human trafficking" ... and are party to the PERCEIVED problem by not understanding it can be legitimate work.

Women who consent is out of topic. Although how much some of this consent is meaningful is another can of worms.

> If you sign a contract, you've signed a contract and need to abide by it. I'm of course against non-consensual stuff, but don't cry "I was a victim" later on because you've had a change of heart.

So what kind of evidence do you need that a woman has been raped? Can there be such evidence that can’t be disputed by you or someone else? Can we ever say that a woman has been raped?

I’m seriously curious how you’re reasoning here.

> The root cause of all this a puritanical western society using the power of the state to impose their morals on others.

The West is hardly puritanical, porn and prostitution in general are large industries. The laws are not puritanical, Pornhub got a slap on the wrist relative to what they’ve done. Maybe it’s too puritanical for you, I don’t know.

> So many of us are still conflating sex work with "human trafficking"

That’s a straw-man. It can be argued that an increase in prostitution is positively correlated with an increase in sex trafficking. But that’s not like saying that they are one and the same, no one here is arguing that they are.

That is the legal system working. Taking payments away for someone who has lost in the legal system, on the censorship scale is probably more acceptable even to someone who's very pro free speech.

It's another thing when visa and mastercard ban forums or subscriptions for people who are voicing their personal political opinions. That becomes a slippery slope very quickly. What court or jurisdiction or due process to visa and mastercard have to decide what is acceptable or not? Is being anti immigration acceptable, or is that racist? What about anti illegal immigration? What about feminists worried about trans rights? What about covid vaccinations? Youtube has blanket banned pro and anti vaccination content. Should mastercard follow? What about anti climate change discussion? What about anti green tax discussion, does that count as anti climate change?

We are on this slippery slope already IMO. And it's not looking very good good for free speech.

Right-wing talk about free speech usually just sounds like people want to make being a right-wing bigot a protected class. I've heard a reasonable argument that it's really just a largely unrecognized ethnic group of Scots-Irish evangelicals. From that point of view, it makes a little sense.