Even if you aren’t well versed in the mainstream or social media aspect of life, chances are you’ve come across the phrase “he’s/she’s/they're canceled” before. Cancel culture appears to be a new phenomenon linked to the modern century but has surprisingly always existed throughout human culture. Before the modern era, cancel culture existed through shunning, shaming, and sometimes even banishment. Of course we’ve come along way from these previous acts but what is the point of it all ? The aim of cancel culture is to show that bad decisions, harmful intentions, and mistakes still have variousconsequences regardless of social status. From your average nine to five person to A-list multi millionaire celebrity, nobody gets a pass to skip out on accountability. Some would argue that the public has grown sensitive and overreacts to certain situations or disputes that don’t personally involve them, however, whats the point of having a voice if you aren’t going to use it to speak out against obvious injustice? If you have a platform capable of affecting millions and spreading awareness, why not capitalize on that to move society in a more inclusive direction ? One can still maintain their own individuality and opinions without defaming the rights, existence or cause of different communities. It’s one thing to disagree with controversial opinions but people fail to differentiate a controversial opinion from human rights/obscenity and that’s where cancel culture comes into play. There is no valid opinion on human rights, everyone should have them, everyone should be protected and respected with equal rights and awarded moral equity. Rights are not something that should be earned they should be a given. Recipients of “cancellation” usually provoke a group of people or approach a controversial subject with a level of ignorance that either puts those effected in harms way or downplays the threat of serious circumstances. When someone is now deemed “cancelled”, their work is boycotted, rejected, avoided, and the multiple privileges/opportunities they could of had are at risk of being lost along with their potential or already formed fan base. The main demographic affected by cancel culture is mostly made up of celebrity figures. Celebrities hold most of the public’s attention and adoration therefore are more subject to scrutiny if they make a mistake. Cancel culture has the ability to keep harmful ego’s from forming and stop the spread of hurtful influence, however, it isn’t perfect. The endgame goal is to reform, educate, and promote others to take responsibility for their actions. What most people forget and where cancel culture takes a rather negative turn is the lack of forgiveness and empathy for people who make fixable mistakes. Humans aren’t perfect, celebrities aren’t perfect, celebrities are still human, everyone is bound to make mistakes or be misinterpreted. The luxury we have is that most of our mishaps happen and maybe only ten to twenty people know. When celebrities make a mistake that’s usually the first thing you see trending and making headlines. When celebrities apologize and make strides to change their behavior or take part in reparations (without engaging in performative activism) its a practice on equity and inspires others to do the same. This results in a more inclusive and empathetic influence which moves society in a safer place for the groups affected by the initial harm. When celebrities feel attacked or cornered they could issue backhanded damage control or become the victims of situations (they usually created) causing loyal fans to confuse and clash with those who are seeking justice versus those who are going too far. So is cancel culture a necessary evil ? When done right it has the power to remind public figures of their humanity and make prominent strides in unifying different communities. When uncontrolled it creates an atmosphere of mass bullying, furthering any option for reconciliation. The only way to combat this is too gauge the threat of the offense from the offender and approach it morally instead of with personal bias.
On August 7th of 2020 all social media outlets turned their heads to the release of rapper/songwriter Cardi B’s W.A.P music video, featuring fellow rapper/songwriter Megan Thee Stallion. The abbreviation “W.A.P” stands for “Wet Ass Pussy” ( Heard repeatedly throughout the song, along with other sexual innuendos and incantations ) which has earned it a claim of over the top vulgarity and obscenity. However, following the mass criticism and harsh critiques the true problem within, not just the music industry but society as a whole, reared its ugly face. Sexism, Misogyny, Insecurity, Dependency, Ego, and Masculinity v.s Femininity.
If you have the abilities to provide a life for your child where they wouldn't have to hustle just to stay a float, should that be deemed bad parenting ? Are children lazy because they’re well provided for ? Is the goal of being a parent NOT to gain generational wealth, give your kids a better life than yours previous, and make them a better version of themselves ? In society there’s always been a drastic divide on how older generations look down at younger generations. The memories and traditions that become outdated, reformed, or forgotten sparks mini disputes between the two constantly. Older generations feel as though their childhood was superior and more hands on, younger generations retort with “okay boomer” and go about their lives uncaring of strangers opinions, but both fail to see each other’s perspectives. It’s true, older generations were more hands on and outdoorsy, having to produce a ton of manual labor to earn the things they had but that was their normal. Older generations ( Generation X: 1965-1980, Millennials: 1981-1996 ) quality of living didn't host the same technological advancements or financial comfortability younger generations ( Gen Z: 1997-2015, Generation Alpha: 2016-2025) have. Where one generation might of had to open a lemonade stand to earn a small income, another might play video games and have a YouTube channel. Where one generation might bare scuffed knees and bruises from playing outside, the other might have a sore back from hunching over there devices. Where one generation might of had to pick up three jobs, the other might have a parent that makes a high six-figure salary and sits comfortably in their room at sixteen. Where the “lazy” line is drawn truthfully lies within how much kids use tech and how their parents make their quality of living. If a child does not have to “hustle” because their parents can provide them with their wants and necessities they’re quick to be deemed undeserving and overly privileged. The confusion in that claim is in regard to mixing “provided for” and “spoiled”. Being provided for, means those child’s basic needs are met and their wants and passions are usually given and encouraged with slight filters. To be spoiled is to get everything you want with minimal effort put in; giving someone a sense of entitlement/unhealthy relationship with the word “no”. Being spoiled is damaging no matter what generation someone was born into and it seems the older generations feel every person younger than them is spoiled because they haven’t lived the same as they did back in the day. What is the obsession with wanting kids to be placed in vexing environments when they don’t have to be ? It’s not all kids and I definitely wouldn’t say the majority have a more lackadaisical life (especially in minority demographics) but more kids currently have guardians that can provide an extremely comfortable way of life now then prior. There’s a phrase I’m pretty sure we’re all familiar with, “I work hard so you don’t have to” and it’s usually said in the voice of loved ones and care takers so why is there so much disdain when that phrase is lived up to ? Just because a younger person is well provided for does not make them a spoiled brat or any less deserving of an opportunity. Just because their way of life and experiences growing up are different doesn’t mean they lack discipline. So why are we so quick to judge someone, kids, based on their positive living conditions ? Could it be a possible inferiority complex/hidden jealousy because the latter grew in a more stable and fortunate circumstance ? That’s an answer this article can’t provide, that answer is for introspection. Though it may seem the kids now have little to worry about they actually have the most to worry about. With climate change, political corruption, and global unrest, the younger demographic have to turn into activist and fight to change the consequences of actions they never committed. Another way in how they’re berated is being told they’re “Sensitive”. Sensitive because they have higher spouts if morality and don’t tolerate negative and offensive comments ? Are they sensitive because they want a world where everyone feels included and equal ? Is it sensitive to be empathetic towards another human being ? Younger generations are quick to correct behavior and learn right from their previous wrong which is taken harshly from generations that are stuck in traditional “tough skinned” mindsets. Where the younger generation fails to see the perspective of the older generation is not acknowledging what they had to go through. Currently, kids, teenagers and young adults are commonly use to instant gratification. That’s something the older generation never had the privilege of expierencing, everything was a slow burn that took time to reach a payoff. In-person interactions were prioritized and lead to moderate social skills where as social media makes quality time almost rare, with kids growing up on it slightly more unsociable. Topics like respect and appreciation now have to be earned from the younger crowd where formerly those things were just given on the simple basis of someone being older than you. When a way of life someone grew up on starts to change it’s just apart of their natural instincts to question if this “new” is right or wrong but that’s where the conflict arises. It’s not a matter of “right and wrong”. One generations normal will never be another generations normal. The failure to understand where one generation came from and where one is going will continue to incite conflicts between the two. For as long as there’s this failure to see the perspective of each other’s lives and make a push for understanding and common ground, the war between childhoods will carry on.