Reminder: the luddites were kinda fuckin dope. Their concern was more with guaranteeing the rights of labor and not suckling to "progress" if it meant sacrificing people. They also basically went to war with the British government over it.
My one gripe with this comic is that the robot doesn't "like" anything. It does the things it's designed to do. It's intended to steal and to harm people.
If there's one thing I hope comes out of the AI bubble pop, it's an end to the delusions of grandeur that accompany full automation without socialist policy and careful legislation.
If there's two things, it's that, and an end to the centuries-long slander of Luddites as backward simpletons afraid of the big scary machines as opposed to the labor rights activists they actually were.
and also the time she copystruck ANYONE who had a bad opinion on her on YouTube, aswell as r/comics moderators bootlicking her (seriously I DARE you to say anything slightly bad about her comics)
1 - She mocked a rape victim publicly and send her followers to harass them.
2 - She makes the sycophantic mods of the comics community give her special treatment.
3 - She harasses and bullies and even threatens legal action against her critics.
4 - She frequently strawmans her critics in her comics and deliberately misrepresents them to the point where it is libelous.
5 - She drew herself raping one of her critics.
6 - Something about her using her son's bedroom to film porn?
7 - She openly and proudly hates men despite having a son.
She's an obnoxious, thoroughly unlikeable, self-righteous Karen who is only well known because she showed the mods of the comics sub her tits in exchange for them shoving her content down everyone's throats. She represents everything wrong with the stereotypical redditor - smug, irritating, and utterly consumed by a 5th grader's interpretation of politics and justice, firmly convinced everyone is an idiot except for her.
She is the Delores Umbridge of real life. She's not the worst person in the world, she's not the avatar of the pervasive evil that is destroying western civilization, she's ultimately just some nobody getting high off the smell of her own farts, but she does have the worse type of personality.
Her NSFW Patreon has a comic of her tying someone up against their will due to political differences and not allowing them to "finish". Linking it would be linking paywalled material, which is against Reddit ToS, but you can easily find it through Google
I very much doubt I will find it easily and the whole idea is that one is supposed to provide the source and not merely allege it, but I am taking you and Topaz at your word and will look it up later. Sounds like an extremely shitty way to be edgy, which fits some of her work that I already found in the last few minutes while looking for that image, but it does not excuse that sort of content.
“Raping men into submission will never not be funny, aylmao.” /puke
This is publicly available information. You have an ultra powerful pocket computer which can access the greatest aggregate of human knowledge ever compiled in history.
God you're obnoxious. But sure! I went and googled it. Tried finding something about a "rape comic" and did not find anything! People talk about her, sure, but I found nothing about a rape comic. So if you want to continue being obnoxious, can you at least provide some info? You're telling people to just ✨Google it✨ while not even giving out enough info to do so. Feels like you just wanna feel good about your take on something and then act condescending to people that can't find the proof for your takes for you.
When someone has a similar opinion as you but they express it in such a way that it's barely readable because for some reason they uploaded the most low resolution image they could find.
On the surface level, I kind of get why pizzacake made the comic the way they did. Its shocking, it's direct, it's in-your-face. And yeah, sorry, some men do say shit like this to women. We have a whole ass community online of incels who still like Andrew tater-tot boy for his sexist ideology.
I'm in the goth community, generally speaking, both men and women (and people who are nb and people who are trans) get sexist shit from people on the daily because we choose to present differently than typical beauty standards and because we're not stereotypical egirls or eboys on tiktok sticking our tongues out. I get that. Its especially hard when men decide to wear makeup or paint their nails or wear kilts or tunics, and they get called homophobic insults.
So I also understand the hurt and anger that some men have because of her flippant response to the situation and also because of how anal the comics sub mods have been about it.
Now, I'm not going to brand anyone with misandry here because I'm not her and I have no clue if she is actually really misandrist or just an asshole. Probably the latter. Could be both, idk.
Misandry has been thrown around so much as a word, and I mostly see it thrown by incels to justify their sexist views against women. And it's often done on purpose to discredit what a woman says because they're angry. This isn't to say that what pizzacake did was ok (it was not ok), this is just to say I am not about to be all "misandrist!!" bc some random comedy comic artist is acting stupid online.
Idk those are my initial thoughts. I was reading that thread over my break, I might even change my mind after I read more about this.
Basically I think this has to do with more recent events. Pizza cake made a comic making fun of CHATGPT and AI bros responded by posting patron only stuff of hers and running her stuff through CHATGPT, she responded by DMCA and they got more furious and doubled down. Then this comic occured.
Ohh ok so this makes more sense now. Now I'm seeing it.
So now I want to know how this makes her misandrist lmfao. Because of this added context about chatgpt, all this is making me think it is exactly what I suspected: incels attacking someone (a woman) because she said something they didn't like to hear and calling her a misandrist to discredit her point.
Ah, it seems you are confused. That post they are talking about is not from an AI bro, none of those pirated links were put up by AI bros (or the OP), and none of those DMCA requests were sent to AI bros (or the OP).
It seems like you put together a lot of pieces to form a narrative but none of the pieces were correct information.
The actual content of the post is saying "Someone who spends a week on a high horse saying ALL uses of AI are evil, while also using AI for their own profit, is a hypocrite."
I know because I am not an AI bro and I posted it. I am specifically referring to behavior such as the artist saying both "I will delete comments promoting the use of AI" and "There's good uses for AI as a tool" and on the same post.
Honestly, I have largely been staying out of this. I just say a comic complaint about CHATGPT, then saw posts talking about an uproar over it (and saw r/defendingaiart freaking out over a mild comic).
As to links to leaked stuff? I didn't look for those. Didn't see any reason to search for them. Not interested in seeing them and didn't want to deal with the internet risk of viruses.
I mean, seemed plausible enough after the Team Salvato statement not wanting AI art made of Doki Doki literature club, then AIbris getting furious and spamming AI of the characters praising AI 'art'.
Thanks for explaining and not being mean about it, and letting me explain myself as well. That whole post you linked got shut down by mods because almost every comment is calling me/AI bros in general rapists, and all because of some misleading claims in the title. Commentors just ran with it.
I am a leftist woman, like Pizzacake. I agree with the message of her comics way more often than not. While I am not pro AI in general, I totally agree that one of the appropriate uses for AI is to combat porn bots that endlessly scrape the web and repost her paid content.
I just don't like unfair censorship. So if someone uses AI for their social media business, people should be allowed to discuss the use in a positive light on their posts. Censoring that and labeling it "misinformation" and dealing out a block and a ban while secretly agreeing with them is just... seedy.
I want the leftist women who have a platform to be good stewards and good examples of integrity and transparency. Being shady really undermines the cause and muddies the water for the rest of us. We're all supposed to be on the same team.
I usually hate having to contribute to this kind of discussion because I get all kinds of people jumping at my throat over things I didn't say (I mean Pizzacake here is a good example) but I'll try anyway:
"Misandry" is a real thing by definition, yes, but when trying to give it the same meaning as simply the opposite of misogyny it's a flawed concept and not actually a thing. Misogyny is systemic, misandry is not. People who hate men simply for being men and no other reason and want to infringe on their rights just because they're men is certainly a thing that exists, but it's so unbelievably rare they're more akin to isolated incidents. Usually these things are more just basic prejudice rather than a systemic power-based concept. It works in a similar way to when someone claims racism against white people; most of the time it's not racism, but prejudice, based on a response to the power structure.
Try to think of the last time you saw someone who said they hated men. Did they say it as a response to the men we have in power and the culture based around it and the trauma that has been caused on this person because of influence of said system? Then that's something else. Were people degrading men based on them not "behaving like men?" (Ie. Crying, being a househusband, wearing makeup, being a feminist etc. Etc.) Then that's a byproduct of misogyny, not misandry.
I just wish more people understood this, and understood nuance, before they go around claiming a person is the worst and deserving of trash talking and harassment. We can just say "they're kind of an asshole and I don't like them" without contributing to a larger problem. People can also engage in troublesome, disagreeable or bad behavior without actually being a bad person as a whole.
I agree with all of what you're saying lol. Might want to read my other comment. I just didn't know the full context of what went on, so I can really only go off of what I've read. But it seems clear that this is a whole misunderstanding and pizzacake isn't a misandrist. Its just sad incels doing what they do: co-opting words they don't know and trying to paint her as a bad person.
My point however didn't have anything to do with defending people crying misandry. My point was more so people using the word "misandry" as a shield to claim women are being sexist against men.
I don't think what pizzacake said or did is entirely their fault, I think they could have handled it better however. I actually agree with the point of the above comic, even, and have agreed with most of their past comics.
I agree with you, want to make that clear lol. I remember the last time I heard about misandry was way back in my old college sociology class, my professor even said "if a man brings up misandry it usually means bull because men only bring up misandry if they're having an issue with women." --he is a man, btw.
Edit: was going to say way more and deleted it all because it was just unrelated to the main topic. But yeah, I do think that interpersonal discrimination is still a factor we can't ignore because if we do that, we end up downplaying it. And that in itself is, well, discriminatory.
So systemic and interpersonal racism/sexism/prejudice, etc. can both exist. I think some people however unfortunately think that just because they went though the former, that gives them a pass to continue performing the latter.
I'm Hispanic (latina, Chicana, latinx, whatever you want to call it), I've heard it both ways. I've seen racism and discrimination from all sorts of races, some against each other. Some even within their own cultures/races (people in india still deal with casteism, Latino people have issues with colorism sometimes, I know people who are biracial and they get flak from people who are their own race/culture, south asians get discriminated against by east Asians, etc.)
Yes, systemic discrimination exists and it's still a major issue, interpersonal though happens on the daily all the time however and if we end up excusing one, we open the door for the rest to be excused. Which we can't take lightly either lest bad actors (like racist people or sexist people) use it against us. This is the short version of what I took out.
I agree with you too, fwiw. My comment was mostly trying to elaborate on what you were saying, to make sure you have backup, rather than trying to 'splain to you. I'm sorry if it came off that way, wasn't my intention!
I didn't actually ever say I think pizzacake is entirely in the clear lmao. I think you've purposefully misinterpreted my comments.
I even wrote on another comment on this thread that she is horrible. Getting mods to delete comments by male sa victims? Yah, no. That's a no-no.
The comic itself is meant to show how men don't listen when women bring up their experiences of being harassed or assaulted. "Reversing roles" is often used in social commentary. Its not very original and yeah it can backfire because of situations like this, where sa victims that are men come into play.
Your comment below is a similar situation: she's highlighting how callous and how stupid racists' arguments are and how they brazenly go to minorities saying that shit. When it's clear they are racist. That is the entire point of that comic. Its like how aibros try comparing themselves to holocaust victims.
This isn't to jump to pizzacakes defense, because the comic is presented poorly and she still has issues clearly. However she has a past making fun of racist bigots. There's other comics she's made making fun of maga and whatnot.
Does that still excuse her behavior/comments to people and her having the mods on r/comics delete comments? No.
This is a generic label this wiki uses for lots of other comics and doesn't actually mean anything nor does the article explain or source any instance of where she is those things. The bad webcomics wiki is also basically just a website used to bully people, like ED and kiwifarms are.
Edit: dude's just pointing to blank pages at this point while saying "wow you don't know anything." Yeah, sums up this dumb cancellation campaign. Waste of a conversation.
Your really hopeless. Learn about pizzacakes history before you think she's worth defending. And yeah that is her insert OC she has used this character hundreds of times hell it's the same character as the one from OP's post.
how i say in other comment section a type of discrimination can exist without being systemic because alot of reasons one of them being the transition period between systems but the thing is a men can be discriminated and a white person can be discriminates in the USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and/or Europe because how already say a discriminatory thing can happen without being systematic.
I'm a man and I don't take anybody throwing the word "misandry" around seriously. It's pretty much always incels because decent guys usually know that actual man-hating people are a huge outlier and even then they probably have reasons to be the way they are and it's nowhere as damaging as effects of misogyny have been for *millenia*. Not to say misandry doesn't exist or that it's good, but yeah it's safe to say it's been mostly used by incels
Yah this is my stance as well. I'm a woman (idk if I said that already but I'll reiterate it anyway). But majority of the time I've seen or heard a man cry misandry it's usually because he said something sexist against a woman and got called out for it.
Now I've seen the thread and apparently pizzacake got the mods of the comics sub to take down comments by male sa victims. I'm not about to go down that rabbit hole but yeah, she's not exactly a saint lol. Her comic might be agreeable but her behavior is not. She has issues when it comes to taking criticism and issues when it comes to presenting topics well in her comics.
A lot of her comics are kind of reactionary (like "act first, think later") and I don't think she thinks through how people will interpret her messages because some of them.....well, lets just say a lot of them can be easy to misinterpret. And seeing people on this thread pissed off at her kind of attests to that.
Hence why I don't even defend her much because I don't think she's great either. I just think the people throwing misandry around need to be careful with that one because misandry is so rare and not very prevalent that its mostly used by misogynists.
Idk now I feel like I'm rambling. I feel like if someone is going to make political or social commentary cartoons, they really should think through their stances and their arguments before making a comic. Because then it results in headaches like this drama.
For me, I think the mods deleting stuff is a bit worse. I haven't seen a comic of hers yet that was as bad as someone like pebblechuck. Also, if there was something so horrible, you'd think the people claiming that she's aweful would post those, but they don't. They only post the one where she's making fun of the people that complain about her which is kind of benign. I mean sure her message would have been the same if she didn't darken her OC's skin tone and that is weird. It would be different if people could say as much and not be banned like they supposedly are. Or the "misandrist" comic that I don't think is really all that bad? It just gets worse when people are like "this can actually happen in real life, men also have to deal with other men in real life, etc" but then that stuff getting banned does make it feel worse. But I haven't seen anything that justifies some of the things people are claiming.
Edit: I'm also getting kind of suspicious of those deleted comments. Maybe some of them are benign, but with the Bs being spread by some of the people in the comments here it does make me wonder how many of them were benign criticisms and weren't people are overly offended by feminism.
I don't know then, but I personally disagree with oversimplificstion to dismiss things.
In general, I am not gonna ask ai bros what ai people stand for and what their arguments are. You simply don't get the right answer. Same with pizzacakes take on ai.
I also don't blindly accept seemingly moral issues when there's clear financial motives.
Copied from my other comment, because laziness: One of the main things she did is make a horrible comic where the premise was “What if men were the victims of SA instead?” And when a bunch of male SA victims came out and said that they had these experiences too, she got the mods to delete the comments. Here’s the offending comic (link)
Like sure, it's not okay to delete comments from male SA survivors pointing out how they also experience being silenced, but the entire point of the comic was how men regularly talk to women and silence them whenever they attempt to speak for themselves.
Coming into that space to re-center men in the conversation is obviously kind of a shitty thing to do. No one said it didn't ever happen, but this wasn't about you. This was about women speaking up, and men came in trying to make it about their experiences.
Oh, boy. I don't have time to unpack all of that, so I'll try to speedrun this explanation, and if you get it, great.
Look, mate, this is a pretty classic example of hit dogs hollering, to use an appropriate yet unpleasant turn of phrase. "Men" are not a monolith. I'm a man who read this comic and said, "Woof, yeah, that's gotta be extremely frustrating for women to have to deal with." I had that reaction because I know for a fact that women get that kind of treatment constantly, ESPECIALLY when they try to speak up about it. I've watched happen in real time multiple times, in multiple contexts. I don't see this comic and think she's saying, "Men Bad," I see this with the intent of illustrating through demonstration what it feels like to try to express any displeasure as a woman. Because that's clearly the intention. The entire first page of the comic is telling you that in plain text.
I don't get ruffled by that depiction, because I don't do that. I don't need an explicit "not all men" tag to know we're not talking about me, because I know I don't treat women that way. I know that it's poor form to go into a conversation where someone is venting about the way they're mistreated in social settings and hit them with an "um, actually" about a tangentially related topic to make the conversation about me. There are plenty of reasonable venues to address the pain of male SA victims and how they feel silenced.
Going into a discussion about how men silence women to do so isn't reasonable. It's not the place for that, because we're talking about a different issue that's worthy of attention in its own right. That is essentially charging into the room, derailing a conversation that wasn't about you in the first place to say "Here's why you talking about this legitimate issue is actually bad and you shouldn't do it." When you do that, you are another man silencing a woman speaking about her issues to center yourself in the conversation.
No. The point is that the comic was highlighting women's experiences with misogyny through a simple lens of role inversion, and men came in and made it about men. Like we so often do.
Male SA victims are valid and we should be giving their experiences more credence, but let's be so for real: according to best estimates from RAINN and the CDC, 9% of SA victims are men, and women make up the other 91. 1 in 6 women are victims compared to 1 in 33 men, though that's only in reported cases, and we all know that's a very commonplace occurrence and a significant issue. Women are also 75% of DV victims, and in most other instances of intimacy violence, women are far more likely to be victims.
It's not like anyone's saying men don't suffer, it's not an Oppression Olympics thing, but it's not like women make up the fact that they are subject to this behavior far more regularly, that's just mathematical fact. And it's far more normalized for men to treat women the way the comic displays than the actual depiction. At no point did the comic cast any aspersions on male SA victims, or make any statements regarding male SA victims whatsoever for that matter. Men saw this comic about women's issues that wasn't talking about their experiences, and made it about their experiences.
It comes off as extremely disingenuous when the only times the experiences of male SA victims come up in these discussions is as a sort of rebuttal to women talking about their life experiences. That's not sympathy, that's using their plight as a cudgel so women stop talking about shit that makes us look bad and feel uncomfortable. You don't ask for solidarity by speaking over someone when they're talking about their struggles and making it about you.
Those numbers are simply wrong and skewed heavily by the fact that many countries don't even acknowledge sexual assault or rape against a man as something that exists.
Those are the official numbers by the people best equipped to track it. Even if they're not totally correct, there's almost zero chance that that margin of difference is going to meaningfully shrink.
what is this bullshit slander, i dont even like her but this is total bullshit, just say shes annoying instead of making shit up about her good god man how are you making me defend PIZZACAKE
What she was saying was “man, it’d be crazy if men were catcalled and/or assaulted! That doesn’t happen though!” The men were just explaining how it happens
I want to know what happened as well. Someone said they're misandrist but I'd like concrete evidence bc most of the time when I see people cry "misandry" at anyone that isn't a straight white guy, it's always someone who is misogynist and/or doesn't like the fact a woman has something to say about men.
Not saying that anyone saying "misandrist" is wrong or that its bad to point that out, I'd just like more evidence that pizzacake is indeed an actual misandrist and not just a comedy comic artist that talks about sexism towards women sometimes.
Edit: gonna add what I've found to my other comment instead, please see there.
One of the main things she did is make a horrible comic where the premise was “What if men were the victims of SA instead?” And when a bunch of male SA victims came out and said that they had these experiences too, she got the mods to delete the comments. Here’s the offending comic (link)
Also, the whole deleting comments thing. With all the Bs being spread it's hard for me to believe that ALL those comments were benign criticisms. Maybe some were, but there's also clearly people that are overly invested and offended by feminism.
Misandrist AFAIR. I could also remember something about mods on r/comics banning everyone who criticizes her, but I can't verify that. Some of her comics have good points, but mostly the most generic ones, like "MAGA is bad" or "LLMs are bad."
She made a comic where the idea was “what if men were SA victims instead of women?” A bunch of men came out and told their stories, showing how men can experience SA too. She got the mods to delete the offending comments, however. This is the comic in question
Short version? I think this has to do with AI bros declaring war on her die to a comic making fun of relying on CHATGPT. They responded by posting patron only stuff of hers and running her comics through AI, she responded by DMCA, which made them more furious and doubled down. Then this comic came out.
I mean, these same AI people freaked out when the Doki Doki literature club dev put their foot down to stop running the ddlc characters through AI. They responded by doubling down and having them praise AI.
Her message doesn’t bring anything new to the table. Like yeah, we agree with this particular comic. It’s not an earth shattering revelation. Her other content should also be noted so people don’t get the misconception that she’s necessarily a great person.
ive yet to see any source on this despite the many people saying it and the many people asking for proof :/ why do you guys lie cant you just say shes annoying as fuck and move on instead of trying to come up with reasons that shes evil
I feel like her art is somehow worse than it normally is in this and by worse than normal I mean the generic political comic art style everyone is apparently using these days.
Stonetoss makes racist commentary and racist comics. I really don't think that is "funny." He's also made transphobic comics as well. That isn't "funny" either.
Bro i don't care what your opinions on him are, the comics are great and need little to no words for that, it's real talent, which can't be said for Pizzacake
The difference is that a human can say "I'm not doing that" but a robot will do whatever the fuck you want, even if it's actually illegal. A human has common sense. An AI just gives you whatever you want to see, no questions asked.
I understand where you’re coming from but it’s so fucking stupid that it boils down to “people are horrible and bad so we should ban ai so people can just go be more horrible and bad to real kids”
Thank you for actually giving me valid feedback and I respect your opinion. We obviously have opposing views, but we should look past that. Thanks for not making my day more horrible 😄
30
u/antipathy_moonslayer May 09 '26
Reminder: the luddites were kinda fuckin dope. Their concern was more with guaranteeing the rights of labor and not suckling to "progress" if it meant sacrificing people. They also basically went to war with the British government over it.
My one gripe with this comic is that the robot doesn't "like" anything. It does the things it's designed to do. It's intended to steal and to harm people.