I call that discrimination against an inherently visual medium. Content is content whether it's words, images, or a combination thereof. In addition, they WILL carry it if it's a big name like Chaykin or Crepax at Comixology, but reject tiny creators like me who don't have Image or NBM backing them. Much of this stuff was published by Eros/Fantagraphics, but apparently that counts not at all.
Why? Is adult content less adult if a big name draws it? What is this but censorship and arbitrary at that? What is this but singling out a medium for censorship they could never impose on prose?
And then there's people like my colleague and friend Dale Lazarov, who's been bounced off one after another because his work is erotica--and also gay. Often they'll say (like Gumroad, who I considered putting stuff out with but didn't because they don't allow adult ANYTHING; I probably couldn't even get away with LULU Book 1) that the reason is that their payment processors will either not allow it or charge too much for it. Once it was the distributors and printers that enforced comics censorship. Now it's the payment middlemen. But given Google Wallet exists and Google is its own payment processor, isn't that irrelevant in their case? If I drew a violent comic with zombies eating people's flesh, that would be cool. Superheroes ripping people's arms off and poking their fingers through someone's face? Totally great!
People having sex? EVIL! THINK OF THE CHILDREN! Why isn't anyone else talking about this? Do we like censorship in comics now? Is everything the underground artists went through 40+ years ago now forgotten?
This should be talked about, this should be examined, and this should be stopped. ___________________
"Eternity with Beelzebub, and all his hellish instruments of death, will be a picnic compared to five minutes with me and this pencil." - E. Blackadder, 1791 Questionable
words & pictures from John Linton Roberson SUPPORT MY SINFUL WORK AT PATREON!