The story of the devil falling from grace has been ingrained in stories for centuries. Traditionally, the name of Lucifer carried a masculine connotation. But if the afterlife resembles modern society, one might argue that the devil must be a woman. If Lucifer were truly a man, the current digital age suggests that he likely would have found a way back up.
Despite cancel culture becoming increasingly rampant, its application has been uneven across the digital space. When a high-profile man falls from grace, the media often builds him a ramp. But when a woman slips, the consequences of the fall are frequently permanent. The public tends not to look for an explanation. Instead, they look for a shovel – not only to bury her, but to also unearth any incriminating piece of evidence to justify the burial. Whether it’s clipping old interviews or branding them in an unfavorable light, their reputational death resembles a fall from grace, with the media painting them as the unforgivable devil.
the split screen: Forgiven
Cancel culture and modern accountability pick and choose who we forgive and who we forget. Yet, there seems to be a pattern. While women are certainly not exempt from the consequences of their actions, the damage to their livelihoods often appears more heavily sustained than that of their male counterparts. In the court of public opinion, it seems as though being labeled as something as socially unfavorable as being a “mean girl” can carry more professional weight than being labeled antisemitic. Take Kanye West as an example.
In October of 2022, following a massive series of controversies, Kanye West lost nearly all of his corporate sponsorships, retail partnerships, and agency representation. In response to his antisemitic comments online, a significant number of companies severed ties and terminated their relationships with him, resulting in his net worth dropping from 2 billion to 400 million in just one week. Despite the internet’s reputation for having a long memory, he recovered in the public’s eye within four years. Recently, he hosted two comeback concerts in Los Angeles that were completely sold out. Generating an estimated earning of $33 million from those two concerts alone, it is clear that his fanbase is not just strong, but thriving.
Chris Brown has a similar story. Despite a felony domestic violence conviction and years of subsequent legal issues, he continues to win awards, book performances, and collaborate with top-tier artists.
Both artists have financially and socially benefitted from the narrative of separating the art from the artist. Kanye West and Chris Brown are living proof of careers surviving heavy scrutiny and controversy.
It is important to note that the opposite extreme is also true. Men are not entirely immune. During the 2022 Depp vs. Heard trial, it was testified that Johnny Depp faced significant professional losses amid domestic abuse claims levied by Amber Heard. It was stated that the actor lost a $22.5 million deal due to the allegations. Ultimately, both parties were found liable for defamation in the 2022 jury verdict.
The Split screen: Forgotten
In the grand scheme of Hollywood, it can be argued that forgiveness is a courtesy more rarely offered or extended toward women. With some exceptions, actresses such as Blake Lively serve as modern examples. It is true that women’s actions should not be automatically justified or minimized simply based on gender. It is important to hold everyone to the same standard of accountability. However, when compared with figures like Kanye, there seems to be a biased scale.
Despite facing no criminal allegations, many internet users consider Blake Lively’s career to be finished. With her newly established reputation of being a mean girl, backlash against Lively intensified amid the courtroom battle with Justin Baldoni. Though she is responsible for beginning and continuing the controversy, it is important to note the difference in society’s responses between herself and figures such as Kanye West. Although public scrutiny is expected in legal battles such as the one between Lively and Baldoni, the public narrative focused heavily on psychoanalyzing Lively’s personality rather than her legal choices.
This brings up a heavy conversation of how to weigh societal infractions in the court of public opinion versus actual convictions in a courtroom. For example, what is more severe? A circulating video of offensive language or being convicted of defamation? Which punishment is more severe or appropriate? Sustaining career-ending reputational damage or being sentenced to probation? These questions cannot be answered without considering how factors such as gender, class, and race influence the biases and opinions found on social media.
the public opinion’s purgatory
These patterns are not exclusive to celebrities. The culture has expanded to influencers as well. Take the difference between James Charles and Sienna Mae Gomez, for example.
James Charles was initially considered “cancelled” by the internet in 2021 for allegations of sending inappropriate messages to minors. Although he later admitted to this in a response video, within the last three years, he was able to rebuild his brand. He even rebuilt his brand strong enough to eventually launch his own line of products. His continued success on social media and in the beauty industry may suggest that his cancellation was really just a minor setback.
Conversely, Sienna Mae Gomez, who was one of the most recognizable faces on TikTok in 2020 and 2021, saw her career come crashing down in May 2021. Following sexual assault allegations involving another influencer, Jack Wright, her following plummeted overnight. Whether the public believes she is innocent or guilty, the outcome was definitive: she sustained catastrophic damage to her platform. Following a long hiatus, her attempts to regain her former reputation have been met with a wall of resistance that James Charles was able to overcome multiple times.
These cases, while only a few of many, display the broader implications of deep-seated biases within social media. The problem isn’t that we “cancel” women – it is the inconsistency of the scrutiny. If an unlikable or unfavorable persona is treated more severely than a domestic violence charge, it can be argued that our media landscape is not interested in the commitment of morality or accountability. Instead, it could be interpreted as a tool to further police women.
Therefore, we must ask ourselves this question: When is it acceptable to cast someone out for crossing a social boundary, yet forgive someone for crossing a legal one?