opinions on separating the art from the artist?

i used to be one of those people who was completely unable to look past when an artist did something bad, i couldn't listen to their music and i would refuse to interact with people who did. 

now... idk. i saw something in a reddit thread recently that said, "the media you do or do not consume does not define your morality" and it's just kinda stuck with me. 

it got me thinking a lot and i think i've gotten to a point where my opinion about separating the art from the artist has shifted a bit.

still, i'm unsure. this is an extremely nuanced topic. 

where should the line be drawn with what is and is not unacceptable? is there even a line? should it be case by case? is listening to an artists music really indictive of if you endorse their behavior or not? can you truly separate the art if by consuming their art you're giving them money? with how many artists/bands are problematic, is it even worth it to care? 

artists like led zepplelin, the beatles, and red hot chili peppers all have some pretty terrible controversies (two of which are p3do allegations) tied behind them but the actions of the band members are essentially excused by the general public because they're "just too good." do allegations only matter if the band isn't super popular/mainstream?

let me know what you think. i've seen every side of the argument but i think it'd be an interesting discussion :)