Framing Britney Spears

[Retinend]

Anyone else seen this? It advances the theory that Britney is being kept in his father's custodianship ("conservatorship") against her will and that she is trying to encode secret messages in her instagram posts to say that she is a prisoner.

The first half of the documentary is really well done - I learned to appreciate just what a toll the papparazzi took on her mental health. I think anyone would go crazy under those circumstances. What's more, I think that it exposes that the media gaslit her with baseless accusations that she had cheated on Justin Timberlake, or that she was a bad mother for, for example, driving out of a petrol station with her child in her lap. They were, collectively, goading her into slipping deeper and deeper into depression, and doing so as if it was her just deserts for being so beautiful and idolized in her prime.

But in the second half, I just don't see what these "Free Britney" activists are on about - her father took her back into his custody after she was financially exploited by the svengali Sam Lufti. This much, the anti-father documentary admits. But then it is supposed that Britney's father is enriching himself or is merely a control freak. Where's the evidence? It seems like these activists - with all their podcasts and street demos and twitter/instagram research - are expressing their love for Britney with these acts, and not really thinking through the accusation they are making towards Britney's father.

What's more, they are unable to see what the rest of the world sees when they scroll through Britney's instagram - a woman who is, frankly, not all there any more:

https://www.instagram.com/britneyspears/?hl=en

I'm not trying to be mean, but she doesn't exactly act like most women her age (39), does she?

[phantom_power]

I didn't think it was a theory, but a fact (apart from the Instagram stuff maybe)

[Retinend]

What's the evidence for it? The documentary simply asserted it.

edit: on second thoughts it seems harsh to say the doc had no evidence, but I found most of it circumstantial, such as the fact that she simply performs and goes home these days - no fan or press interaction. The activists take this as evidence that she is a prisoner, when it's nothing of the sort.

Then there's the brother's assertion that she wants out of the conservatorship system - but the way he was saying it made it sound as if, A). she says this casually and not with conviction, and B). that in spite of what she says, he couldn't imagine her out living on her own yet. And this matches what you can see from her Instagram account: a woman who is in a state of arrested development and is obviously prey to svengalis such as Lufti (who continues to try to communicate with Spears).

[Dex Sawash]

Farming Britney's Pears [\tag/glitch edit]

[Pink Gregory]

Only half-watched it, but the negative press attention that she got for doing anything would have broken most people in half.

That dickhead paparazzo saying "She only ever said to leave her alone FOR TODAY." is a bit chilling.

[phes]

Got half hour in then felt like I was just paying into the whole sordid shitshow.Too bleak innit. Child abuse. Build em up, tear em down. She 'clawed' her way into the industry from nothing. Yes officer, the ten year old clawed her way into county lines through sheer perseverance

[Ptolemy Ptarmigan]

The first time I felt sorry for her was when she was 19 or 20 on Frank Skinner's show and he was asking her about her virginity. He was 25 years older than her (and quite possibly still is) and it seemed pointlessly creepy.

[El Unicornio, mang]

That would be pointlessly creepy to ask even if he was also 19 or 20.

[Ptolemy Ptarmigan]

Of course. But I think she'd been quoted before as saying she wanted to wait until she was married - quite possibly a made-up quote by her people - and that had blown up ridiculously.
I think Skinner should have been mature enough to steer clear of it. If I remember right, he seemed to approve (his Catholicism talking?) which just made it creepier.

EDIT - I haven't seen the doc yet in case the virginity quote is covered in it and my recollection is off.

[Custard]

I like Skinner, but for me his low point was when he commented that Sophie Ellis Bextor had "smashing pumpkins" as they were presenting an award to, yeah you guessed it

Though maybe I dreamt that, as I can't find any proof of it on Google. It does say he welcomed her on stage with "why the wide face?", But I'm not sure if that's better or worse

[Retinend]

Got half hour in then felt like I was just paying into the whole sordid shitshow.Too bleak innit. Child abuse. Build em up, tear em down. She 'clawed' her way into the industry from nothing. Yes officer, the ten year old clawed her way into county lines through sheer perseverance

Child stars, or children raised to be stars, are almost always messed up in later life. Are there any exceptions to the rule?

[bgmnts]

Fair play its hard not to feel sorry for Britney Spears.

[phes]

Child stars, or children raised to be stars, are almost always messed up in later life. Are there any exceptions to the rule?

I dunno, but this was one of the things that sparked me to switch it off. It was when we arrived at the 'messed up' bit. Like, all this messed up stuff, they were literally just showing a playing-out of exactly what you would expect, almost to the degree of it being pre-programmed, from someone in a situation and under extreme duress, the foudations of which were built when they were a child.

She shaved her head and smacked his car with an umbrella and started behaving erratically? No shit sherlock. She was taken as a child and commodified (though i'm sure many had positive intentions). Her life was sold to other people before she was an adult.

[phes]

Child stars, or children raised to be stars, are almost always messed up in later life. Are there any exceptions to the rule?

Maybe sportspeople? Do they count?

Ronalado. He keep score first and seems a happy old lad. Messi? Maradonna though... total Britney

[Alternative Carpark]

Child stars, or children raised to be stars, are almost always messed up in later life. Are there any exceptions to the rule?

Richard O'Sullivan?

[phantom_power]

There are exceptions to the rule. Drew Barrymore and the various Culkins seem to be reasonably well adjusted but I think they have had their rough patches. Haley Joel Osment as well

[Bad Ambassador]

Daniel Radcliffe seems to be on the straight and narrow after a wobble about ten years ago.

[Retinend]

There are exceptions to the rule. Drew Barrymore and the various Culkins seem to be reasonably well adjusted but I think they have had their rough patches. Haley Joel Osment as well

Daniel Radcliffe seems to be on the straight and narrow after a wobble about ten years ago.

Due to the "rough patches" and "wobbles" you intimate, I'd count them all as examples, not exceptions... but that's my fault because I said most child stars are "messed up in later life". I'd amend that to say "messed up when they reach adulthood", if I could.

[Blumf]

Cirroc Lofton (Jake Sisko in DS9) seems to have managed growing up on the show okay, doesn't seem to have gone wobbily.

[phantom_power]

I am not sure the stated examples had any more "issues" than the usual ones people have growing up. They certainly aren't the wrecks that a lot of child stars become

[Retinend]

Wasn't Drew Barrymore addicted to cocaine as a teenager?

And, even worse, she was actually married to Tom Green for a short while 😞

[JesusAndYourBush]

I saw all this as it played out in late 2006/early 2007.  In Dec  2006/Jan 2007 it'd been nearly 3 years since the end of her last tour, she wasn't appearing on TV much and interest in her had waned.  She'd been in & out of rehab to try and get a grip on her drink binges and excessive partying for which she seemed to have no control over.   Then TMZ camped on her doorstep and started to post videos of the results.  At the very start of this it seemed like she was enjoying it, after all she was now getting the attention which she'd been craving, but once the videos started to appear online nightly a bunch of hangers-on started to join the baying mob, some of these others had cameras although it seemed to only be TMZ which was posting videos, the others were just there as rubberneckers.  They'd call her name until she came out.  Sometimes she'd just stand there awkwardly while they took photos.  You could see she was getting pissed off by this obligation to 'perform' for these dickheads with cameras every night, but rather than stay in, turn the volume up and ignore them she continued to come out of the house for them.  Sometimes she'd traipse off to a local shop to buy something with a huge crowd of parasites following her, a literal baying mob.  Then came the head-shaving incident in mid-February.  In shaving her head I think perhaps it was her attempt to destroy the thing which they idolised, by changing her appearance, plus with an element of "You want a story? here's your fucking story!"  Still they didn't leave her alone and around a week later there was that incident where she attacked a car with an umbrella.

I think those incidents changed the way paparazzi behave.  Before that they'd keep their distance.  So for example you'd get a celeb going shopping and you'd see photos taken from across the street or taken through the shop window looking in. After that they no longer kept a distance like they used to and would get right in peoples faces to an extent they hadn't done before.

[Zetetic]

Due to the "rough patches" and "wobbles" you intimate, I'd count them all as examples, not exceptions...

I am not sure the stated examples had any more "issues" than the usual ones people have growing up.

Yeah, I think part of the problem with trying to evaluate this is that most people have rough patches, but don't tend to have them as publicly or with the financial and other resources to enable them at the sort of scale that a child star might.

[Zetetic]

And this matches what you can see from her Instagram account: a woman who is in a state of arrested development and is obviously prey to svengalis such as Lufti (who continues to try to communicate with Spears).

I suppose I wonder if this (as presented in your post alone) would be enough to obtain deputyship over someone in Wales or England. I assume not, and I think I'm glad about that.

[phantom_power]

Yeah, I think part of the problem with trying to evaluate this is that most people have rough patches, but don't tend to have them as publicly or with the financial and other resources to enable them at the sort of scale that a child star might.

I am not saying that people don't get royally fucked up by becoming famous and rich at an early age, as well as the systemic abuse that a lot of them have to go through. I just think the stated examples got through it pretty well all things considered

[Retinend]

I suppose I wonder if this (as presented in your post alone) would be enough to obtain deputyship over someone in Wales or England. I assume not, and I think I'm glad about that.

Nooo - that's just evidence for believing she needs the conservatorship.

The evidence for the legal decision surely relied on all kinds of evidence (not in public hands) of Spears being unable to look after herself. One huge example we already know: she was under the spell of the svengali Sam Lufti. There are probably numerous examples, that her father collected, of her spending her wealth in ways that were not in her best interest.

Yeah, I think part of the problem with trying to evaluate this is that most people have rough patches, but don't tend to have them as publicly or with the financial and other resources to enable them at the sort of scale that a child star might.

Most people aren't addicted to cocaine in their pre-teen years!

[Zetetic]

One huge example we already know: she was under the spell of the svengali Sam Lufti. There are probably numerous examples, that her father collected, of her spending her wealth in ways that were not in her best interest.

Right, but "spending her wealth in ways that were not in her best interest" is quite a long way from deciding that someone lacks the mental capacity (or whatever concept you like) to make those sorts of decisions.

The evidence for the legal decision surely relied on all kinds of evidence (not in public hands) of Spears being unable to look after herself.

Oh, absolutely. But given that I've no idea what this evidence is, I can only look at what is in public hands and how that's framed, and - very vaguely - wonder about that.

[Retinend]

Now I read that Britney has recently been speaking through her lawyers making strong statements like:

https://www.nbcnews.com/pop-culture/celebrity/britney-spears-loses-bid-remove-father-conservatorship-refuses-perform-n1247425

"I am afraid of my father"
"I will not perform again if my father is in charge of my career"

This of course changes everything. Perhaps I was not paying attention but I didn't at all understand the nature of the court case from how it was presented in the documentary. I suppose I'm now on the #FreeBritney side. The fact that she even has a legal team and is in conversation with them is what clinches it for me. What more evidence of self-possession does one need? Legal battles in general, never mind legal battles with your own father, are very mentally taxing things to undergo.

I just don't understand why the court would take the side of the father, after Britney has shown so much self-possession in hiring a legal team expressly to regain her financial freedom. And why isn't she using her social media platforms as platforms to voice her own presence of mind compos mentis? The content of her instagram feed (very whimsical, childlike and oblivious - unlike any other major celebrity's instagram content) cast serious doubt on her mental health for me, but the fact of her hiring a legal team makes me see it in a totally new way.