reactionary comics

“its satire” is not and never has been a defence of a piece of work. what you should be saying is “it is a satirical take on…” and then explaining the theme of the piece, bearing in mind the fact that the idea of satire is;

Satire is a genre of literature, and sometimes graphic and performing arts, in which vices, follies, abuses, and shortcomings are held up to ridicule, ideally with the intent of shaming individuals, corporations, government or society itself, into improvement. Although satire is usually meant to be humorous, its greater purpose is often constructive social criticism, using wit as a weapon and as a tool to draw attention to both particular and wider issues in society.

and to explain it further, the difference between satire and teasing;

Teasing is the reactionary side of the comic, it limits itself to a shallow parody of physical appearance; the side-effect of teasing is that it humanizes and draws sympathy for the powerful individual towards which it is directed. Satire instead uses the comic to go against power and its oppressions, has a subversive character, and a moral dimension which draws judgement against its targets.

so stop defending your exploitative faux-edgy pandering bullshit with “it’s satire!!” because art and media that plays up to society’s already overwhelmingly held views and punches downwards is not satire, it’s enforcement. And even if you did decide to be forgiving and let it be classified as satire, it’d be a pretty shitty example of the medium.