PizzaCake | Bluesky
TW: Sexual Assault

Transcript
7 Panel Comic
Panel 1: White text on blood red background “TW: Sexual Assault”
Panel 2: A guy holds down a semi-conscious naked girl. Her eyes are closed and tear stained. Her mouth in an expression of pain. Around her are more reaching hands.
Jane Doe: This hurts….there’s too many people here…
I can’t breathe…
Panel 3: Beside the girl lays an empty liquor bottle and an empty pill bottle. Hands press down on her head and chest.
Jane Doe: I’ve got the spins
What’s happening
Who’s touching me?
I don’t want to do this anymore
Panel 4: A group of naked men laugh as they enjoy themselves
Jane Doe: I’m scared…
… if I say stop…
…will they get mad?
I can’t talk anyway…
Panel 5: Blood runs between her thighs. Her legs are bruised.
Jane Doe: Ow! Stop grabbing me!
I think I’m bleeding…
…I want to go home…
Just….gonna….shut….down….
Panel 6: The girl wraps her arms around her legs and closes her eyes as she listens to the barrage of insults, vitriol and victim blaming after coming out with what was done to her.
You can’t cry ‘rape’ whenever you regret sleeping with someone!!
Bitch
Maybe don’t hang out with guys!
Your fault for getting drunk!
Whore
You said yes at first! You can’t take it back!
Why didn’t you push them off?!
Slut
She just wants money!
Stop trying to ruin their lives!!
Attention seeker
Panel 7: “Why are they mad at me?”
Christians must condamn rapists toward their god, but support and defend them toward society. For them accusing someone of having comit a rape is wrong and bad:
Matthew 18:6–7
6 But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea. 7 Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!Luke 17:1–2
1 Then said he unto the disciples, It is impossible but that offences will come: but woe unto him, through whom they come! 2 It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones.For christians, the one victim of rape have the duty to shut up, and let society live in peace without knowing about it. And them denying the victime’s claim is the consequence of their faith.
Of course, christian faith isn’t the only cause, but in western society, we won’t get progress against rape without get rid of this poison.
That’s a bit reductive, isn’t it? Are you saying that all christians would blame someone for speaking up? It feels like it, regardless
Faith is not the evil here, staying hung up on what some people said centuries before us without giving second thought is. And some people do think it over when thinking about their faith. I don’t think it’s fair to them to say that their own faith is the cause of such hate and sedentarism
Excuse me, of course all christians do not behave exactly as the bible says. On that point either. They are also told to do not kill nor rape, and some do it anyway, so even if they are told to blame those who speak up, some disobey and support them instead.
Yet most of them behave according to the principles they have learnt, most of the time. And when a scandal that doesn’t conrcern them directly spread in the news, it usually iritate them, and their position on the topic usually starts against those who speak up.
This, in one form or another, can be said about all religions.
Ban all religions
I saw only panel 1 (just the title in a box). I thought it was brilliant. Like, the first comment would be “that’s not funny.” and response would be “you are correct.” then i realized there were more panels. either way it works.
Sorry. Typically I post the 4 panel versions when artists do the combined uploads, but this one didn’t have that and I usually try to respect the medium and titles the artists give to their work. I thought about giving this one a couple different titles but ultimately settled on leaving the authors comment as is. As the content would be upsetting for many readers I decided to bury the main content in a spoiler warning to avoid a NSFW tag and respect the original post.
Don’t be sorry, this way was so much more impactful.
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.
Removed by mod
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.
You got a link to that?
Found it on r34, matching the description (NSFW, obviously): 1, 2, 3.
Also, response from the author herself: https://www.reddit.com/r/characterarcs/comments/1kt8vxr/comment/mtuzi47/
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.”
The first paragraph specifically says
The comic in question was 100% intended to be kinky, consensual rope play/teasing stuff.
That’s pretty clear, isn’t it?
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.
Thanks for the link
Of course. I should have posted it at first, that is completely on me. I was distracted. My bad.
No worries :)
I am going to preemptively say that if you decide to comment and say anything remotely victim-blaming or stir up any drama against the artist or fellow community members, your comments will be removed, up to and including being banned.
Please consider using the spoiler markdown if you feel the need to go into detail.
:::spoiler Some title suggesting Trigger Warning (TW) <your experience> :::We are all adults here, and can objectively (AND RESPECTFULLY) have difficult conversations when needed. Not everyone has the same experiences, nor the same reactions, and their traumas are very real regardless of what you may see or know about them.
What about sealing? https://vger.to/lemmus.org/comment/20070879
You can’t really say you want to encourage difficult conversations while at the same time threaten to just block and ban people. That’s not having a conversation. That’s just surrounding yourself with people who only share your opinion. Even if your opinion is probably the moral one.
In order to be tolerant, you have to be intolerant of the intolerant.
Believe it or not, yes I can, and I will. As for what I’ve seen so far, most all comments are in line with being both respectful and thoughtful. This is the type of discourse this topic deserves. There have been one or two comments that fell out of scope and they were dealt with accordingly. This is how moderation works.
I’m sure it has been that way. You prefaced it with banning anyone who’d say otherwise.
I’m surprised I got here before the pizza cake haters.
Woman told Cornell investigators she ‘felt like bait’ during alleged gang rape
JFC, this is the first I’ve heard of this story. Shit like this is why all frats need banned from every university. They’re all shit
Nothing against the message itself. Just how it’s being presented itself. The author put a TW upfront, followed by multitude of well-drawn panels, only to censor the important words at the end? It’s like a boxer preparing their stance and their whole weight on their fist to launch a punch only to hold back right before it lands.
if the artists intent had been lost on some of the audience, i could see this argument. like if they’d used some of the internet acronyms that made it so some readers couldn’t tell what they were trying to say, then some meaning would have been lost.
but as this is, there is no question what those words are supposed to be. i had no trouble understanding the message and feeling the weight of it.
i understand your frustration but i feel like you’re diminishing or dismissing the impact that’s clearly still intact based on a distaste for something the clankers have forced many artists into to prevent being censored.
The artist feels it’s more important that the message is able to be shared widely.
Normally I might agree with you, but I think this is a good example of talking about the problem being viewed more harshly than the problem itself. I don’t know if that was part of the “artistic vision” but think it’s fairly appropriate to the topic.






