“It is not intended to harm or provoke anyone… Any harassment that follows the release of this document is not supported nor condoned by those writing said document, nor those featured within it.”
So begins a six-page treatise that includes usernames, social media accounts (active and inactive), screenshots of private messages, public comments, and anything else you might need to harass one Emily Arant, also known by her YouTube moniker, LupisVulpes.
Emily has racked up over 200,000 followers and earned enough money to put herself through college, all thanks to her animated animal characters.
That all changed this summer when the mob came for her.
In June, Emily politely declined a request to draw a transgender flag as part of a commission. Emily even apologized and offered a full refund, but the customer elected to continue with the request, even without the flag. And happily so…
“alright ty!!^^ i was hoping to get it in the drawing but thats okay!!”
Problem solved. We live in a pluralistic society and understand that others may not share our beliefs. Life goes on, right?
The customer—who has since changed their username and locked their tweets presumably to avoid harassment—decided to instead make a public example of Emily after the fact. And with surprising swiftness, the cancellation of Emily Arant had begun.
Accusations as far back as 2015 surfaced as people began to chime in about every gripe they could possibly dig up. The complaints were compiled by unknown authors into a cloud document “not intended to harm or provoke,” outlining grossly exaggerated claims of cultural appropriation, emotional abuse, unprofessionalism, “tracing” her own original art, and plenty more.
Often, the screenshots presented as evidence contain no actual text from Emily herself, and many of the complaints are simply personal attacks.
But in the age of cancel culture, that matters very little.
Jack Phillips might know this better than anyone. He is in court for the third time since politely declining to create a custom wedding cake celebrating a same-sex marriage back in 2012. He’s been harassed for the last eight years, first by government officials in Colorado, then by an activist attorney, even after the U.S. Supreme Court’s 7-2 decision in his favor condemned the “clear and impermissible hostility toward [Jack’s] sincere religious beliefs....”
Amidst the death threats and hate mail, Jack has lost significant revenue—all because he tried to run his businesses according to his beliefs. He’s spent nearly a decade of his life defending his expressive decisions, spending time on lawsuits that he should be free to spend creating art, all due to the rampant intolerance shown by those who only disagree with his views.
The creator of the six-page doxing would have you believe they do not wish Jack’s fate on Emily. The document “not intended to harm or provoke” was released with the hope that “Lupis will recognize what she has done wrong so she can make amends with those she has hurt.”
But the answer to disagreement on issues of conscience is civil discourse, not publishing a polarizing document aimed at personally attacking those with whom you disagree.
Regardless of the attempts to convince themselves otherwise, the author of Emily’s criticism lit the match. They would do well to remember that the one who starts the fire is responsible for the destruction left in its wake.
Far more so than the wind that spreads the flame.
Join with Thousands of Others and Stand Against Cancel Culture
Right now, we need a recommitment to the principles of free speech and civil discourse. Today, you can help preserve these cornerstones of American’s freedom by signing the Philadelphia Statement!
Religious FreedomWould You Trust California with Handling Private Donor Information?
Everyone deserves a voice, not merely those able to weather abuse.
Religious FreedomIdeological Opponents Band Together to Protect Freedom of Association
A large majority of Americans feel that their ideological disagreements with others revolve around core American values. But, as it turns out, there are still some core values around which ideological opponents can unite.
Religious FreedomHow You Can Pray as ADF Defends Donor Privacy at the Supreme Court
As oral arguments approach, we ask that you please join with us and pray over the Thomas More Law Center case in the following ways.