The scheduled performance of contemporary R&B American musician Chris Brown has caused a split among South Africans, with some raising concern that given his past of abuse, his music should not be supported, while others beg to differ.
The artist, set to perform in the country's biggest stadium, FNB Stadium, on December 14, reportedly sold out his concert within two hours of the ticket system opening — showing how popular he is in the country. While some went on social media to celebrate having secured the prized tickets, it sparked a conversation about whether people accused of crimes should be supported in their work.
This begs the question: what is cancel culture? When is it successful and impactful and can we tell when it's jungle justice or it's being misused? How does Brown's coming to South Africa affect this method of boycott? Essentially, do we as a society need it? Are the thousands of people who bought his tickets wrong to support him? Does cancel culture take into consideration people's atonement? Has Chris Brown atoned? Why is he so enthusiastically embraced in the face egregious acts of abuse against him? Or is that a sign cancel culture doesn't always succeed?
This form of activism became popular as a means of giving a voice to the voiceless. Stars such as Terry Crews of Everybody Hates Chris and Old Spice fragrance fame were emboldened to come out about years of rape that he survived. Something that was only preceded by the likes of Aubrey O'Day of Making the Band fame, who spoke out against the crimes of the then infallible Sean Combs in the early 2010s.
In striking contrast to his first visit in 2007 which was set around learning about South Africa and a cameo on Generations, Brown has become a divisive name as a cancelled star for his continued misdemeanours.
Some of cancel culture's greatest successes have been seen in how gender activists have shifted societies to rather believe rape victims first as a means of creating a safe enough space for victims to come out about reporting perpetrators. Whether it's on social media or to the relevant authorities.
Much like animal rights activists, climate change warriors or sustainability soldiers, well-meaning forms of activism experience an expiry date. Even sentiments seen in Black Lives Matter which morphed into a moneymaking scheme for its founder have come to lose their meaning over time.
Cancel culture is no exception. Naturally, discourse on social media is not modulated. Anyone with a smartphone can, without guidance or limitations, spew bile comforted by the limited anonymity social media accords them.
On local shores, #MenAreTrash became a response to the growing number of gender-based violence (GBV) cases that saw conversations around the topic provoke a conversation around toxic masculinity.
This would spiral into conspiracy theories that would excuse the likes of cancelled celebs like Bill Cosby who refused to account for the 60 women who came forward about his crimes against them. Michael Jackson and R Kelly continued to benefit from the legacy of being sex icons and rousing writers despite the atrocities committed on their young and old victims.
Misdirected hate has seen the likes of Colin Kaepernick, Chrissy Teigen and Beyoncé being threatened with cancellations for not behaving as expected.
In 2021, South African star, Thuso Mbedu, landed in hot water for tweeting words of thanks to podcaster MacG, who received backlash for transphobic comments. The reaction was to cancel the flourishing Hollywood star, who even after deleting her words of thanks was accused of expecting too much from the queer community in educating her on where she went wrong.
Rather than a movement for the marginalised, cancel culture now works hand in hand with the misinformation and hysteria trends that dominate the news cycle on social media. It perpetuates doom scrolling that sees unhealthy methods of communication. We also feed the toxic fandoms or radicals who use the internet for lateral violence.
Calls to cancel Brown's concert run the risk of embodying all of these elements. There are “haters” who simply do not understand why Brown needs to fill up stages and receive forgiveness from South African audiences before reformed local acts like Sjava are ignored.
Then, some look back at Chris Brown as a man who dressed up as a terrorist for Halloween to break his restraining order against Rihanna. His assault of singer Frank Ocean in a homophobic-charged attack in 2013.
With his multiple rape accusations and random acts of violence at night clubs, rehab and treatment facilities, it's no surprise that countries like Australia have previously refused Brown entrance into their country for these reasons.
As a country that is famed as the rape capital of the world, perhaps South Africans should consider that the refusal of Brown is not a win for cancel culture.
It's a stance in solidarity against a man who repeatedly shows he will continue his violence against women and any man who stands against him.
That said, we live in a free country where the rule of law is sacrosanct. This means while it may be understandable that some want Chris Brown's show cancelled, the rights of those who disagree must equally be respected.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.