Kickstarter is forced to ban adult content by payment processors
396 points
• 5 days ago
• Article
Link
Kickstarter 更新了内容指南，禁止多类 NSFW 内容——包括"暗示性行为"、"MILF/DILF"、"暗示裸露"，以及对"女性乳头 / 乳晕、生殖器"和"肛门"的描绘，甚至连"臀部"也被列为禁项。 Kickstarter 和其支付处理商 Stripe 暂未就此置评。 Stripe 部分由 Palantir 董事长 Peter Thiel 和 X 所有者 Elon Musk 持股，这一变化似乎受到其影响。
据艺术家兼作家 Mike Wolfer 所述，Kickstarter 最早在 2026 年 3 月就开始向创作者发送邮件，告知 Stripe 将对任何包含成人或 NSFW 内容的项目进行独立审查。报道还称，Stripe 有权在众筹项目进行中乃至项目成功融资后将其下架。这一突变尤其引人注意：Kickstarter 在 2025 年 9 月刚推出旨在展示成人向优质项目的通讯"Kickstarter After Dark"。
如果这些变化确系由 Stripe 推动，那并非支付处理商首次左右数字平台的内容政策。 2025 年，在 Visa 和 Mastercard 等银行合作伙伴与支付处理商的压力下，Steam 和 Itch.io 被迫下架大量 NSFW 游戏。澳大利亚反色情组织 Collective Shout 宣称对此次审查负责，但更大背景是金融公司在收紧对线上买卖与分享内容的监管范围。
Kickstarter 此次的限制较其此前仅禁止"色情内容"的规定发生了显著变化。新规在禁止条目上更为具体、范围更广，远超传统意义上的色情内容，这使依赖平台为成人向项目筹资的创作者，尤其是漫画和游戏领域的从业者深感担忧。
这一事态凸显了支付处理商对在线内容的日益影响力。作为金融中介，Stripe 、 Visa 和 Mastercard 等公司通过威胁切断支付通道，实际上能决定数字平台上什么可以买卖、什么不可以。这迫使平台要么接受金融公司的要求，要么冒着无法运营的风险。
对创作者而言，即便平台愿意托管成人内容，负责处理交易的支付方可能仍不同意。这种局面对创作表达产生了寒蝉效应：创作者不仅要遵守所用平台的内容政策，还要应对那些往往不透明且不断变化的金融标准。结果是，成人内容越来越被边缘化，原因更多是几家强势金融中介的决策，而非法律或公众需求。
Kickstarter has updated its content guidelines to prohibit various forms of NSFW content, including "implied sex acts," "MILF/DILF" content, "implied nudity," and depictions of "female nipples/areolas, genitalia," and "anuses." The platform has even banned content featuring "buttocks." This shift appears to be driven by pressure from its payment processor, Stripe, which is partially owned by Palantir Chairman Peter Thiel and X proprietor Elon Musk. Kickstarter and Stripe did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
According to artist and writer Mike Wolfer, Kickstarter began emailing creators as early as March 2026 to inform them that Stripe would conduct its own review of any projects featuring adult or NSFW content. Stripe reportedly reserves the right to shut down crowdsourced projects while they are live or even after they have been successfully funded. This sudden shift is particularly notable given that Kickstarter launched its "Kickstarter After Dark" newsletter in September 2025, which was designed to showcase the best adult-oriented projects on the platform.
If Stripe is indeed behind these changes, it would not be the first time payment processors have influenced content policies on digital platforms. In 2025, both Steam and Itch.io were forced to remove numerous NSFW games from their platforms following pressure from banking partners and payment processors like Visa and Mastercard. The Australian anti-porn group Collective Shout claimed credit for the censorship, but the move appears to be part of a broader trend among financial companies to crack down on what can be bought, sold, and shared online.
The restrictions on Kickstarter represent a significant change from the platform's previous guidelines, which simply prohibited "pornographic content." The new rules are far more specific and expansive in what they ban, covering a wide range of content that goes well beyond traditional pornography. This has raised concerns among creators who rely on the platform to fund adult-oriented projects, particularly in the comics and gaming communities.
The situation highlights the growing influence that payment processors have over online content. As financial intermediaries, companies like Stripe, Visa, and Mastercard have the power to effectively dictate what can and cannot be sold on digital platforms by threatening to cut off their ability to process payments. This creates a situation where platforms must either comply with the demands of these financial companies or risk losing their ability to operate.
For creators, this means that even if a platform like Kickstarter is willing to host adult content, the payment processors that handle the transactions may not be. This creates a chilling effect on creative expression, as creators must navigate not only the content policies of the platforms they use but also the often opaque and shifting standards of the financial companies that power them. The result is a landscape where adult content is increasingly marginalized, not necessarily because of legal requirements or public demand, but because of the decisions made by a handful of powerful financial intermediaries.
285 comments • Comments Link
讨论集中在支付处理平台和 Kickstarter 等平台为何限制或禁止成人内容。参与者围绕这些限制是否出于财务、法律、意识形态或多重因素进行了辩论。
- 主要的财务理由是，成人内容的退单率较高，原因包括所谓的"善意欺诈"（即购买者被伴侣发现后否认购买）或未成年人未经授权使用信用卡。但多位业内人士对此表示怀疑，认为支付网络通过退单手续费获利，真正的成本由商户承担，而非支付处理方。
- 许多评论者指出，推动力来自右翼宗教团体的游说，例如 Exodus Cry 、 Morality in Media（现更名为 National Center on Sexual Exploitation）和 Collective Shout 。这些组织公开要求清除色情内容，并成功向金融基础设施施压；在 FOSTA-SESTA 通过后，他们的行动更加积极。
- 声誉与监管风险被认为是主要因素，尤其对 Visa 、 Mastercard 和 Kickstarter 等主流公司而言。与成人内容挂钩可能引来国会审查、与非法内容相关的诉讼或公关危机，因此禁掉整个类别往往比逐项审核更省事。
- 讨论中也提到大型成人平台与小型机构之间的差别。 Pornhub 、 OnlyFans 等大型平台能承担更高的费用和法律开支，因为成人内容是它们的主营业务；而小公司和众筹平台则难以承受合规负担与风险。
- 加密货币，尤其是 Monero，被提出作为规避传统支付限制的选项。但也有人指出，加密货币面临采用难度、监管不确定性以及公共区块链缺乏隐私等问题。
- 关于言论自由的讨论亦有涉及，有人澄清第一修正案只限制政府行为，而非私人公司。有人建议可从反垄断或公共事业的角度处理，但也有人指出，即使是政府运营的系统也会面临政治压力。
- FOSTA-SESTA 的影响也被讨论：一些人认为该法案增加了平台对性相关内容的责任；另一些人则认为这是反色情组织刻意设计的，用以制造寒蝉效应，并作为推进金融审查的跳板。
- 对于想支持成人内容的平台，提出了 ACH 转账、支票或二维码支付等替代方案，但这些方式被认为便利性差，且缺少信用卡所提供的消费者保护（例如退单机制）。
- 更广泛的金融审查趋势也被强调：支付处理商不仅对成人内容，亦对其他所谓"高风险"或有争议的类别（如枪支、电子烟与加密货币）行使道德把关，通常以品牌风险为理由，而非基于实际欺诈数据。
讨论揭示了表面财务理由与潜在意识形态动机之间的张力。许多参与者对退单率这一说法持怀疑态度，并指出存在可查证的游说活动。大家一致认为支付处理的集中化赋予了这些机构执行道德标准的权力，但在解决方案上存在分歧：有人主张监管，有人支持替代支付系统，也有人认为应尊重私人公司制定条款的权利。 The discussion centers on why payment processors and platforms like Kickstarter restrict or ban adult content, with participants debating whether the reasons are financial, legal, ideological, or a combination.
• The primary financial justification offered is that adult content has high chargeback rates due to "friendly fraud," where purchasers deny making a purchase when discovered by partners, or due to unauthorized use of cards by minors. However, several industry insiders challenge this, arguing that payment networks profit from chargebacks through fees and that the real cost falls on merchants, not processors.
• Multiple commenters assert that the true driver is lobbying by right-wing religious groups like Exodus Cry, Morality in Media (now National Center on Sexual Exploitation), and Collective Shout. These groups have openly campaigned to eliminate pornography and have successfully pressured financial infrastructure, with their efforts intensifying after the passage of FOSTA-SESTA in 2018.
• Reputational and regulatory risk is cited as a major factor, especially for mainstream companies like Visa, Mastercard, and Kickstarter. Being associated with adult content could lead to congressional scrutiny, lawsuits over illegal content, or public relations crises, making it easier to ban the entire category than to moderate it.
• The distinction between large adult platforms (Pornhub, OnlyFans) and smaller entities is noted. Large platforms can absorb higher fees and legal costs because adult content is their core business, while smaller companies and crowdfunding platforms find it impractical to handle the compliance burden and risk.
• Cryptocurrency, particularly Monero, is proposed as an alternative that avoids traditional payment processor restrictions. However, others point out that crypto has its own challenges, including adoption barriers, regulatory uncertainty, and the fact that public blockchains lack privacy.
• The free speech argument is debated, with clarification that the First Amendment restricts government action, not private companies. Some suggest antitrust or public utility frameworks might apply, but others note that even government-run systems would face political pressure.
• The role of FOSTA-SESTA is discussed, with some claiming it increased platform liability for sex-related content, while others argue it was intentionally designed by anti-pornography groups to create a chilling effect and has been used as a springboard for further financial censorship.
• Practical alternatives like ACH transfers, checks, or QR-based payments are suggested for platforms wanting to support adult content, but these are seen as less convenient and lacking the consumer protections (like chargebacks) that credit cards offer.
• The broader trend of financial censorship is highlighted, with payment processors acting as moral gatekeepers not just for adult content but for other "high-risk" or controversial categories like firearms, vaping, and cryptocurrency, often citing brand risk rather than actual fraud data.
The discussion reveals a tension between stated financial justifications and perceived ideological motivations, with many participants skeptical of the chargeback narrative and pointing to documented lobbying efforts. There is consensus that payment processing concentration creates power to enforce moral standards, but disagreement on whether the solution lies in regulation, alternative payment systems, or accepting private companies' right to set terms.