Years ago, when Patreon really started cracking down on "immoral" content and forcing devs to edit their games or heavily alter their ongoing projects, I remember thinking not just how dubious, intruding, and arbitrary it was, but also how obviously hypocritical and potentially unfair it would be.
For example, I guess pretty much everyone is familiar with George R. R. Martin's work, either through his books or the very popular TV adaptation of A Song of Ice and Fire. Both the books and the show include not one but several incestuous relationships. Those are not casual, background occurrences involving minor characters—they are an integral part of the main plot and pivotal elements for several main characters' narrative arcs. Non-consesual sex and (very) underage relationships are also hinted at and sometimes explicitly exposed. There are several passages that are actual medieval fantasy porn worthy of being included in any game available on the F95 zone. In essence, I think we could assume George is quite the perv.
What's interesting to me is thinking of Patreon, say, trying to contact Martin's representatives if he happened to desire to use the platform to kickstart one ASOIAF short story collection, calendar, etc. It's unlikely that might be needed, of course, but let's assume it could happen. Would Patreon go like: "Hey, George, you know that stuff about the Targaryens, man? Yeah, well, it has to go. You see, payment companies, banks and such. Could you make those siblings, dunno, roommates or somethings? Like, please?" I don't think so.
It's not just Patreon—I know Kickstarter bans people for even less (just for political sympathies, in some cases), and Indiegogo, wich seemed a safer alternative, has started to indulge in such shenanigans too. These platforms are both hypocritical and servile, strong and unrelenting with the weak, and pliant and subservient to the powerful.
