That strikes me as unconvincing as the clear motivation of many is to ban pornography most anywhere. Doing it on one or two that are successful is precedent to make it more widespread. Then when it is more widespread is anyone going to make your argument even half seriously that free speech isn't being limited? At that point the prudes just tell us porn is not free speech, which is their agenda all along, and your talking points become completely meaningless. Indeed, your argument is really just a milder version of theirs anyway... it'd be more honest just to have a discussion about the desirability of porn on social media rather than this creeping censorship approach. Basically it mostly comes down to whether hot naked women should be performing sex acts on camera. And whether people really think that is a bannable activity. All things considered I mostly think women doing this is awesome so I say it isn't. In some sense it should even be encouraged that they do it. And making it accessible on Gab or some other active site would make it safer elsewhere. There isn't usually enough attention given to the contentious content at issue in these speech issues. It's often reduced to people rationalizing censorship by claiming it isn't what it is. That's bad enough - but the content itself isn't even a big deal. At least no more certainly than talk or advocacy of drugs, or even drinking or smoking in a way that normalizes its use - which is allowable on these platforms in a way that isn't controversial. Or any of a number of other questionable things that aren't banned. We're just mostly dealing with moralists that are offended by nekkid ladies and sexual content and want to ban it for those that aren't. Pretty much as simple as that.