All right, I'll put it another way. The entire comic is Ishida's attempt at criticizing people for downplaying the damage of prostitution. I'll go row-by-row, then tie it back into where I have a disconnect with one of Essay Mod's conclusions.
Row 1: It has the euphemisms and oversimplifications that equate prostitution to any other job with customers
Row 2: I literally have no idea what confused message is going on in the left panel because I don't know the character. The right panel is the unbearable feminist character, with hostility thrown at her, which we understand is for her opposition to sex work solely because we know her character.
Row 3: Reality breaking through the euphemisms (business version) as you go from left to right, ending with an excuse to replace the arguments that were presumably defeated.
Row 4: Reality breaking through the euphemisms (positive-sex feminism version) as you go from left to right, ending with a dismissal to replace the arguments that were presumably defeated.
The whole of the comic can be boiled down to Ishida saying, "If you're pro-sex work, you're making shit up to sell it or willfully ignoring reality."
Regardless of if you agree with that message, I'm not seeing how someone can conclude that bold-facing "SWERF" means Ishida is wearing it as a badge of honor. Which, incidentally, is the bit I was asking about. Essay Mod could be right, if there's something in this comic that's an external reference, or if Ishida declared something and Essay Mod conflated that into the comic. That's why I was asking if he'd drawn that conclusion from something like a thread or comments section thing he just didn't repost here. The comic itself doesn't appear to be about Ishida at all. It seems to be totally about a specific movement he disagrees with.