PizzaCake posting this comic is pretty fucking wild when, a year ago, she created two comics of her straight up raping someone who was criticizing her…

Edit: It’s a reddit link, but see for yourself. If you don’t want to click it (understandable)

Ok so for all those asking for context (sadly can’t send the comic, it’s paid so that’d be copyright offense) -

The comic somehow got my way. It explicitly shows her, having a sex with a man who has no control of the situation, asking him if he still hates her now (after the sex he has no say in). He says no, mentions it’s been several hours since this started, and also asks to ejaculate. She replies that she will let him do so tomorrow, and he is horrified.

The panels themselves don’t seem violent, and actually resemble fairly innocent sex involving some bondage. The man is not her husband, nor a character I can recognize. The assumption it’s one of the commenters might be about the “hate me” comment.

The implication of the text, however, is clearly “now that I forced myself upon you, you love me?” “yes, now that you’ve raped me I do. Let me cum and go” “nah fam, you’re stuck here for at least another day. you don’t get bodily autonomy”

It seems to be purposely designed to be forgivable if you don’t think about it. It’s short, shows more skin than text, and the text can be dismissed if the reader doesn’t think about the fact they’ve been having sex for hours where they weren’t friends and the weak party hated the aggressor for these hours.

Edit: turns out there’s a continuation comic, with MC holding Guy’s member, he has ejaculated and his groin and her hand are soiled. She asks “oh dear… did I ruin your orgasm?” with a seemingly unconcerned or uninterested face. The caption also reads “poor guy (not really, he deserved it)”. So, a bit more of the same warning signs that aren’t full-blown offenses but might indicate them. Though “he deserved it” is not exactly helping.

Her explanation of the comic also provides no explanation. She claims that there is context that would justify that comic and prove everyone wrong. She doesn’t say what it is. She merely says she deleted the original post because it would have given people more ammo. This is the same artist who has routinely threatened moderators and done DCMA takedown requests over edits of her comics. She acts in bad faith so when a comic like this appears, and she claims that she is totally exonerated by some context she refuses to provide… what exactly am I supposed to think?