I already covered this and said her explanation made zero sense.

So, just full on what was described. Remarkable.

That response from her is… nonsense.

The comic had came with additional comments and context on my Patreon page

Then why didn’t she share that? The whole response from her is “This is a ridiculous claim to make against me. There exists proof. I will not share it. I’m getting dox’d and people are giving me death threats.”

Another comment explains why.

once I saw it was getting leaked and purposely taken out of context, I decided to delete it because I didnt want to give them ammo, which then of course made me look like I was “hiding something” lol you cant really win.

Which makes very little sense. The thing is already out there, you know everyone has seen it, so you delete it and all the context proving its innocence to prevent them from getting ammo? And still after explaining that, she doesn’t explain the context that would make it better.

Her whole explanation is just “I’m getting backlash and feel terrible for it, trust me that there was a context that made it better but I’m not going to tell you.” She has every ability to provide context. She made multiple comments insisting she had context. None was provided. But I’m supposed to just take her at her word after she has DCMA’d people for making edits of her comments and leverages an entire moderator team on reddit to silence criticism? Why?

Which one is it, douchebag?

That. Now, goodbye. Not bothering to engage with you after that.

So, just full on what was described. Remarkable.

That response from her is… nonsense.

The comic had came with additional comments and context on my Patreon page

Then why didn’t she share that? The whole response from her is “This is a ridiculous claim to make against me. There exists proof. I will not share it. I’m getting dox’d and people are giving me death threats.”

Another comment explains why.

once I saw it was getting leaked and purposely taken out of context, I decided to delete it because I didnt want to give them ammo, which then of course made me look like I was “hiding something” lol you cant really win.

Which makes very little sense. The thing is already out there, you know everyone has seen it, so you delete it and all the context proving its innocence to prevent them from getting ammo? And still after explaining that, she doesn’t explain the context that would make it better.

Her whole explanation is just “I’m getting backlash and feel terrible for it, trust me that there was a context that made it better but I’m not going to tell you.”

Of course. I should have posted it at first, that is completely on me. I was distracted. My bad.

Warning: Reddit link. No one really does. She posted it on her Patreon and has been going after anyone who shared it because you needed to pay to see it. You could probably find it, I haven’t. But the whole thread is littered with descriptions of it and PizzaCakes own explanation left a fucking lot to be desired.

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?

You can come to your own conclusion. I did mine. That she is a disgusting hypocrite. It’s no comment on the comic itself, just who she is as a person.