What the Celebrity Cancel Trend Reveals About Our Relationship With Success

What the Celebrity Cancel Trend Reveals About Our Relationship With Success

There’s a growing movement in society to “cancel” celebrities and public figures—and while I agree that cleansing toxicity from industries like Hollywood is necessary, I’m also seeing something deeper and more concerning in this trend.

As someone who works with high-achieving women, I’ve noticed how this cultural hostility toward success can create deep shame for those who naturally strive to rise, whether in business, sports, or the arts. There’s an unspoken message forming: maybe no one should stand out too much. But the world needs leaders. It thrives on excellence—and on the courage to pursue mastery.

Are We Trying to Eliminate Leadership?

I keep asking myself: do people really believe no one should rise above the collective? Should leadership be replaced by group consensus alone? That idea feels depressing—especially for those who find joy and purpose in healthy competition, growth, and excellence.

Ambitious, heart-centered women often end up internalizing guilt just for wanting more. Let’s be clear: your drive to succeed, to serve, to create abundance—none of it makes you wrong. Ambition isn’t toxic; shame is.

The Deeper Reality: Success and Trauma

Part of this conversation also touches the idea that “success is a trauma response.” And sometimes that’s true. Many people, myself included, experienced trauma early in life that fueled a heightened need to achieve in order to feel safe. I was diagnosed with PTSD at 15, so I understand that drive intimately.

But there’s a big difference between healing through success and being defined by trauma. Growth can evolve from both pain and purpose. Some high achievers—celebrities included—worked their way to the top as a way to survive. That doesn’t make their success invalid or wrong. It makes them human.

Toxic Systems vs. Human Excellence

Yes, Hollywood and other industries have “toxic grids.” But name any system that doesn’t. Every community, every organization, every economic structure has its shadows. Instead of tearing individuals down, maybe we should redirect energy toward reforming the systems—like tax structures or corporate models—that create inequality in the first place.

We can challenge systemic imbalance without destroying the spirit of excellence. Otherwise, we risk building a society where nobody’s allowed to rise, compete, or stand out—and that’s not liberation. That’s stagnation.

The Psychology of the “Crabs in a Bucket”

What’s happening right now feels like collective protection psychology: when someone climbs higher, the others pull them back down for safety. It’s instinctive—but if we’re not conscious of it, we end up suppressing innovation, artistry, and leadership.

High achievers, artists, and visionaries are statistical outliers—less common by nature. That doesn’t make them “better”; it just means they’re wired differently. The same people fighting for diversity in race, gender, and neurotype should recognize this too: diversity in drive and ambition matters just as much.

Rethinking How We Handle Inequality

If our frustration is truly about economic disparity, then let’s direct that energy toward structural change, not personal attacks. Raising tax equity or redistributing resources through policy is far more productive than shaming individuals who embody excellence.

Because if we lose our freedom to rise, we also lose the beauty of human potential—the incredible athletes, artists, and leaders who inspire us all to be more.

Let’s detox the toxicity, yes—but not the brilliance.

👑 Until next time... SHINE all the way bright, My love!

Gina