Considering how strongly you support her while not supporting people like Bree Larson who was attacked for using her free speech to defend feminist, I would say that your actions point to that. You might want to deny it, but statements like "people branded SJW (which I don’t think describes everyone with progressive views)." kind of show your bias in the same way that my using data, numbers and examples show mine.

Gina has been fired, just that. She can go look for a job in other places. But you make the assertion that "cancelling people is a new one." And you are wrong. It was called being "blacklisted" it usually happened to women for being "difficult" which meant expressing their opinions to the directors. Harvey Weinsein used that with Mira Sorvino:

https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-42377607#:~:text=Actress%20Mira%20Sorvino%20said%20she,following%20conversations%20with%20Weinstein's%20company.

Somehow in your "heartfell" defense of Gina, you keep ignoring the situations when that happens to the "people branded SJW (which I don’t think describes everyone with progressive views)."

I'll put it clear to you (again). YOU seem to have no problem with plenty of cancellations, not for rates (which is the one that affected Gina), not for ageing (you said is wrong but not the same), not when an actress is difficult (that fell under your radar which means you were at least not bothered). You haven't complained about the attacks gammergate have done on female videogames reporter and designers. Not on the attacks feminist receive for using their freedom of speech. That again shows that you aren't really defending freedom of speech even if you claim "even people branded SJW (which I don’t think describes everyone with progressive views)." Because anyone with minimun understanment can see you are only adding that to save face, because you won't be defending them when they are attacked for it. I mean, there was a petition for firing Bree Larson from Captain Marvel for publicly defending feminism. Paraphrasing you "surely she shouldn't be fired for using her free speech", Right? So why there is no heartfelt defense of her from you? --> This is rhetoric, by the way.

My point is very, very simple, I gave examples of the contradictions between your words and your actions. And I think you have understood that, you just lack actual arguments to support your claim so you keep repeating that it is about free speech when is clearly not.

To make even more simple to understand: Gina Carano said things that she knew would offend people. That people answered back. Since she is thin skinned, she doubled back and has a tantrum, disney warned her. She was protected, but on the line. Then she decided to be even more offensive after already being warned by her boss. Then her boss fired her. Now she decides to play the victim even if she was give opportunity after opportunity. The fact that you want to frame this as a freedom of speech attack while ignoring the real attacks on freedom of speech other people get, is not only a contradiction, identify you as alt-righter. Same ideas and same arguments, make you the same, no matter which specific label you use for yourself. I mean, many sexist people call themselves "egalitarian" because admitting that they are sexist make them look bad and have bad marketing. But if it looks like a duck, sounds like a duck...