What this article fails to mention, is that Patreon lied about why Benjamin was banned. He did NOT violate their TOS. Patreon dishonestly tried to retroactivel

What this article fails to mention, is that Patreon lied about why Benjamin was banned. He did NOT violate their TOS. Patreon dishonestly tried to retroactively apply an amended TOS to justify banning him, after the fact. This demonstrates that Patreon is a dishonest company that will ban you because they feel like it, and then also try to take the high ground and pretend that they are just following their own rules and or trying to keep people safe, when both of those are not true. And the NYTimes calling Benjamin's awkward and poorly chosen words "hate speech" is frankly libelous. However, even if they were hate speech, Patreon specifically allows so-called "hate speech", as long as it is not on their site.