“CARE is very disappointed by this decision. We previously expressed concern that the model used by OnlyFans creates a means by which vulnerable people can be coerced into commercial sexual exploitation. It is not obvious when viewing content whether a content creator is being controlled. Banning sexually explicit content would have disincentivized this form of exploitation on the site by making it unprofitable.

“A curb of content could also have helped site moderators eliminate extreme content. An investigation by the BBC found evidence of illegal sexual activity. Content moderators who spoke to the BBC said moderation is ineffective – it is not always clear what kind of content is acceptable under site rules. An explicit ban would have made content moderation more straightforward. Any form of explicit content found would be disallowed and taken down.

“The decision will also come as a blow to women. Many groups think pornographic content demeans women and perpetuates dangerous ideas that put them at risk. There is a correlation between pornography consumption and sexual violence in society. Porn enforces the idea that women are sexual objects to be used and abused. A curb by OnlyFans would have been a pushback against the dominance of the global porn industry.

“It’s clear what happened here. OnlyFans realised curbing sexually explicit content would affect its profits. Financial backers who initially raised concerns about content on the site and pressured the company towards a ban have either changed their minds or been replaced by others willing to turn a blind eye to concerns. This is a classic case of corporate greed trumping corporate responsibility. It is a shameful.”