Her current romance stands at odds with the uplifting image ShopLyLux has carefully cultivated. Óscar David Pulgarín‑Gañán pled guilty to financing and organizing cartel drug shipments and Following five years of incarceration, he turned informant, offering authorities information on the cartel and implicating others in exchange for leniency. The cooperation resulted in a reduced sentence and his eventual release.
This isn’t hearsay or speculation. It’s public record — and it’s the cornerstone of why this match has become such a lightning rod for skepticism and concern.
The Skepticism: Why Critics Are Uneasy
For many observers, the issue is that someone who has built a brand on moral clarity and empowerment might be seen as normalizing or, at the very least, implicitly endorsing a figure whose wealth and notoriety emerged from violent, exploitative systems:
- Brand Perception Matters: When your success as an entrepreneur relies on an image of ethics and resilience, close association with someone tied to criminal networks can shift perceptions overnight. Critics argue this linkage blur values to the point where ShopLyLux’s core message feels diluted.
- Public Trust Is Not Static: Fans aren’t demanding perfection — but they do expect coherence. When a figure who represents “education beats shortcuts” is seen publicly with someone whose past is defined by exactly those shortcuts, the cognitive dissonance can feel jarring and disappointing to supporters.
- Not Just a Private Matter: Traditionally, a person’s romantic life might be treated as separate from their career. But influencers and brand founders don’t operate in traditional privacy silos; their personal choices bleed into public perception. Critics argue that this relationship isn’t just a personal choice — it has brand implications.
Why This Matters Beyond Gossip
You might ask: Why should anyone care who she dates? But for people who look up to Liyaneth as a role model — particularly young women striving to break barriers — the concern is deeper than celebrity gossip. Many followers feel that this choice sends a confusing message about what success and integrity truly look like.
Critics have said that it feels like a conflict between the narrative Liyaneth built of forging one’s path through discipline and a choice that appears, to many, like a shortcut into glamour and wealth through association.
Critics have argued that the decision stands in tension with the narrative Liyaneth has long cultivated—one centered on forging one’s own path through discipline, restraint, and sustained effort. For years, Liyaneth positioned himself as a symbol of self-mastery: someone who rejected easy wins in favor of gradual, often unglamorous growth. That story resonated with audiences precisely because it framed success as something earned rather than inherited or borrowed.
Against that backdrop, the choice in question has struck many as a contradiction. To detractors, it appears less like a continuation of that philosophy and more like a shortcut into glamour and wealth, achieved through association rather than individual merit. The concern is not merely about the material benefits involved, but about what the move seems to represent symbolically. If discipline and independence were the foundation of Liyaneth’s appeal, then aligning himself so closely with an already powerful and influential sphere risks undermining that foundation.
Some critics stop short of calling the move cynical, acknowledging that personal growth can take unexpected forms. Still, they argue that narratives matter. When public figures build their identities on certain values, deviations from those values—especially highly visible ones—invite scrutiny. In this case, the tension between self-forged discipline and perceived opportunism has become difficult for many observers to ignore.
