Excuse me while I climb onto this soapbox atop a high-horse.....

We need to be careful not to become too reactionary. I understand that the comic is using a similar vehicle as other comics touting hateful And fallacious SJW logic, but let's actually tie it back to the original situation and comments intent before we jump all the over it and downvote anyone with a different take than our own.

As has been stated the original situation was a female interviewer asking Scarlet Johansen a question about her weight in preparation for a film after asking her male counterpart a more in-depth question. Her reply was directed to RDJ "why do you get the existetial question and I get the rabbit food question" a reasonable response that was done tactfully that got her point across.

The comic reframed the whole situation by changing the gender of the interviewer and the wording of the response. Putting the word sexist into the response directly provides the reader with a motivation for the reply and implies that sexism is the reason for the question to begin with.

In the actual situation things weren't so clear. Scarlet could have been making a statement about how she is seen as a paragon of beauty and expressing annoyance at the fact that that is what is most important to people all the time. The interviewer could have any number of takes on the (all so serious) avengers movie that made her find that the role of black widow was less difficult to prepare for than the (oh so complex emotional battlefield that is) Tony Stark.

After looking at the differences it seems to me that the comic changes the situation so much that the original incident has no bearing anymore, except as an analysis of the comic's author's mind set. From what I have seen she does hold the view that asking a woman this question ever is sexist, that much is clear.

In light of this opinion criticism about how men are asked these questions too is a perfectly normal reaction, and one that is incredibly relevant. Answering that criticism or quantifying it is necessary to furthering the critique or defense of this comic.

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that people place more of an emphasis on SJ's looks than RDJ's. In light of this opinion it seems more likely to me that they would naturally want to know about the up keep of the trait they care about most. With RDJ the thing he is known for is his cocky attitude and smooth demeanor so asking how he as able to convey weaker emotions through all that is a natural question too. If the questions had been asked of Susan Surandon and RDJ I could see the reason for the hooplah. If it was the case though I imagine they would ask SS "how did you convey care for others through the tough exterior of said character" or something like that. If they had SS and Hugh Jackman in a room they might ask her that question while leaving the workout questions for the beef cake wolverine.

The problem here is not a symptom of sex, but of Beauty. If you are a hunk or hottie naturally people will care about that the most. I feel for SJ cause she has a lot of other traits that make her a great actress but, until she gets ugly most people will still care about her looks more. That goes for Hugh Jackman as well.

So back to the comic. It sucks and so does its message. It misses the mark with its commentary, and fails to make any statement beyond reinforcing stereotypes about sex relations and fomenting anger.