I've been following OJST since pretty much the beginning. I can't see what you "don't trust" about her or what she needs to "apologize" for. She talks about sex and talks about it honestly. All sorts of body types, preferences, likes, dislikes, and messiness. And she does it straight up, without pandering. Maybe that's why she's the one Planned Parenthood supports rather than, say, your work. Does she have personal preferences? Of course, and she's up front about that. So do you. So do I.
Her art style is quirky and idiosyncratic. Not everyone likes it, but the same can be said for any artist's work even, (say it ain't so) Jeph's.
Other commenters are correct. "Problematic" is a passive-aggressive weasel-word used to arbitrarily dismiss and silence while trying ineffectively to appear even-handed.
I think you're being unfair to Spider. She explained why she doesn't care for Erika Moen with relevant links and it has nothing to do with style, preferences or the general nature of her content. The
fetishization of trans men, as far as I am concerned, is reason enough for Spider to be wary of her content. And suggesting that her partnership with Planned Parenthood invalidates Spider's concerns just because Spider isn't also a comic creator is just intellectually dishonest. If it were a valid argument, none of us could reasonably talk about QC because we aren't all successful artists like Jeph.
And to clarify because I've seen it a few times, Spider never called Moen problematic. She called Moen's
work problematic (well, she said she didn't want to spark a debate about what's problematic and I interpret that as relating to the cited works). And I understand why "problematic" has become
problematic in its own right, but Spider
did provide links to three specific issues that she's had with Moen's work in the past. Moen created work in the past that Spider found hurtful or potentially dangerous and does not fully trust Moen not to do so again.
*addendum*
I see now that Thrillho did call Erika problematic, but I believe the use in this context remains valid as a criticism of her body of work.