>>149045808 (OP)There are a lot of layers of engagement farming going on here. This could be a random nobody's post buried deep in the replies for all we know but you'd have to dig it up to find out. The timestamp makes it look like it's perpetually recent which means it'll be easier to reuse later well after the original posting from June 15. The flippant tone of the reply taken out of context also makes it easy to project bigger meaning and controversy to what might just be a throwaway reply.
There are also layers of engagement farming in the original post and account that's being replied to. A look through their other posts reveals they make heavy use of sex appeal, IP mashups, and vaguely controversial referencing or implied situations. The art is competent, I'll give them that, but overall this account has the feeling of an engagement chasing account. I get no sense of whoever this person or group is beneath the shotgun blasts of pop culture characters.
This is the fucking human centipede of social media engagement we all live in now.