I came across the article of the man who protested at P!nk's concert because she circumcised her son.
He protested her because a few years ago, P!nk posted a naked picture of her son on instagram, where everyone could see that he was circumcised.
That means, that not only did she ignore his consent to be photographed naked on the internet (maybe he doesn't want a picture of that floating around the web when he is an adult?), she also ignored is consent of genital integrity and altered his body permanently.
Harvey Weinstein on the other hand asked women if they want to sleep with him for a movie role. They could then say "yes" or "no" and had the chance to give or deny consent. He also didn't permanently damage their genitals. Even if he wanted too, because of his Fournier's Gangrene, it was not possible for him to enter a vagina anymore after 1999.
This post is not to defend Weinstein. He should have been cancelled for the practice of extortion a la casting couch but When I read my own post again before clicking on "post", I have to admit... what P!nk did was worse because she ignored consent not only once but twice and permanently scarred an individual without his consent.
So why does she still have a career and is not cancelled?