MetaChat - Why I am worried about Britney.

MetaChat is an informal place for MeFites to touch base and post, discuss and chatter about topics that may not belong on MetaFilter. Questions? Check the FAQ. Please note: This is important.

04 February 2008

Why I am worried about Britney. I was never a fan, but still...→[More:]

Here's the deal.

Chick has pretty bad bipolar. Chick is also in the music biz, where her success has been based more on looks than voice.

In order for her to get stable, she will have to take some pretty heavy duty meds. Some of these meds can cause tremendous weight gain. Some (like depakote) can make your hair fall out. Lithium can make a person have pretty bad acne ( I never took it but knew a former stewardess that did. ) And for most if not all of these drugs, one should NOT consume alcohol.

To top it all off, one of the worst things for a bipolar is an unstable personal life.

Now, just how likely do we think it will be that Britney will be treatment compliant and do the things she needs to do to be sane?

I am seriously terrified for this young woman.

post by: bunnyfire at: 10:16 | 45 comments

For the first time in a long time, it looks like things are moving in the right direction for Britney (parents/courts in charge; Sam Lufti out of her life). It'll be a long time before she should be thinking of her career.

posted by ThePinkSuperhero 04 February | 10:21

I don't wish suffering on anybody, but...why should I care about Britney at all? I don't know her and I hate her music. But the media won't shut up about this dingbat.

posted by jonmc 04 February | 11:17

Jonmc, if she is as sick as I think she is, it's kinda not fair to call her a dingbat. And it's not like I care about her career either-but I care about a life. I don't want to see a young woman die, and bipolar can and does kill people.

And TPSH, I agree with you that she should not be thinking of career, but what she SHOULD do and what she WANTS to do might be two different things. Besides, you know how she gets mocked publically for weight gain and bad skin as it is...

I don't want to see another Anna Nicole. And remember, I know from bipolar. I know what a bitch the disease can be. And what I had was the common cold compared to what she has, apparently.

posted by bunnyfire 04 February | 11:26

bunnyfire, illness or not, based on every utterance I've heard issue forth from Britney's head, she's a dingbat. The girl's about as sharp as a bowling ball.

Besides, I refuse to get tied up in knots over celbrities and their problems. These people get too much attention as it is. There's plenty of non-famous people with this illness, too, but I don't see this much attention lavished on them. And Britney's success is one of the main reasons for the sorry state of popular music these days.

posted by jonmc 04 February | 11:32

Media coverage of celebrities and their famous diseases, it seems to me, often brings attention to everyone that's suffering from the same conditions.

posted by box 04 February | 11:42

Maybe. But I'm fairly sure that a large percentage of the populace glued to their sets over Britney wouldn't be as interested if she was an unattractive homeless person with the same disease.

As for Sam Lufti, why do I even know this guys name? He's right up there with Kato Kaelin in terms of people who can't even fill their alloted 15 minutes.

posted by jonmc 04 February | 11:50

Maybe. But I'm fairly sure that a large percentage of the populace glued to their sets over Britney wouldn't be as interested if she was an unattractive homeless person with the same disease.

No, but it might make that homeless guy's family or friends realize that he has a disease that made him act in ways that damaged his life, rather than doing so out of stupidity, and that there's help available, so maybe they should try to get him some help rather than continue to write him off.

posted by occhiblu 04 February | 11:56

Again, maybe. But it's incredibly infuriating that when something happens to a famous, attractive, wealthy person, it suddenly becomes 'important.' That just reinforces some of our society's more warped values.

posted by jonmc 04 February | 12:06

Well, just because someone is famous or attractive or wealthy, or all of the above, doesn't mean they don't feel pain or hurt.

Those things aren't always blessings. In fact, usually, not, when it comes right down to it.

And remember, jonmc, when those of us who aren't so photogenic go thru hell we don't have a paparazzi up our rear end documenting our humiliation on a minute by minute level.

If Britney's negative publicity succeeds in causing real information about these illnesses to get to the general unwashed public, she has done us a real public service. And whether you believe it or not she is paying a really awful price to do that. This has nothing to do with the idiocy and horribleness of the music industry;remember, I'm a songwriter who definitely has opinions on that end.

This is about a fellow human, period. Some of her other fellow humans with this live under bridges, and some of them post on Metafilter. None of them, none of them deserve to have suffer with this hell between the ears. And hell, it is.

posted by bunnyfire 04 February | 12:14

This is between her and her doctors and her family. It's none of my business; there's plenty of stuff I need to be thinking about besides this.

I see the argument about helping raise awareness about mental illness, addiction, and the like, but there are so many more respectful ways of doing that. When stars have had some treatment and then do the talk-show and magazine-article circuit once they're stabilized, the same effect may be had without the vulture-like public obsession. And there's a much higher chance that, in those scenarios, people will hear about real treatment options, see a number to call or hear a name to look up, and see that there is reason to hope for an improved life. Meanwhile, the star is allowed to represent him- or herself in telling their own story.

There's no way the degree of interest about this mess is honest concern that people who need treatment for mental illness learn about their options for help. It may be a helpful side effect of this sort of coverage, but it's not why the coverage exists. The coverage exists because it pulls eyeballs to media outlets and generates ad revenue.

posted by Miko 04 February | 12:18

Given that, when it comes to showbusiness drunks/drug addicts, it's mostly the talented ones who end up dead -- another reason to think there is no God -- I think Spears is pretty safe. Her career in music is very likely over, obviously, but as an already non-willowy mother of two with bad eating habits, her days as half naked MTV diva were already kind of over anyway. And no sane person actually cared about the way her music sounded anyway.

These "singers" are essentially models who lip synch. And models careers are by definition short. Esp if you don't have Naomi Campbell's DNA and metabolism.

The girl's about as sharp as a bowling ball

I laughed.

posted by matteo 04 February | 12:20

I understand that, bunny and FWIW, I hope she gets better. But put it to you this way. The other day, I had a street person try to sell me a load of books that looked like a herd of sled dogs had been at them. The dude looked like Vincent Schiavelli on a crank binge, smelled like a dumpster full of dead fish and babbled incessantly about great the books were then said (and I quote) 'It's tough to get a job, yknow, even though I got two college degrees 'cause I got emphysema and bipolar disorder, y'know.'

No TV pundits are wringing their hands about that guy, mainly because he's not a blonde 'singer,' with big boobs and a publicist. That's what I'm angry about.

posted by jonmc 04 February | 12:25

from what i've gathered from people I know who are active in the bi-polar/mental health field, the exposure of Brit's illness is a mixed blessing. For one thing, the gossip mags (well, People at least) are writing good, informative articles about bi-polar so there is an increase in awarness. The problem is that people will start to paint bi-polar as "what Britney has" and not realize that it's a very broad brush, covers many individuals, and people suffering bi-polar while not buying BMW's for their "friends" might not seek treatment because they're "not like Britney".

If we're lucky, Britney will get on the right drugs immediately and her 14 days in the hospital will help. But that's probably not going to happen and I'm hoping she'll be in for at least 30 days. But it'll be a few years before she decides to change and she's going to need to learn that she'll never be cured and that she'll need to take those drugs every day. So the Britney-economy will be marching on for quite some time.

posted by stynxno 04 February | 12:26

There's no way the degree of interest about this mess is honest concern that people who need treatment for mental illness learn about their options for help. It may be a helpful side effect of this sort of coverage, but it's not why the coverage exists. The coverage exists because it pulls eyeballs to media outlets and generates ad revenue.

I would totally agree with that.

And MetaChat's occasional references to Britney Spears are the only times I ever hear about what's going on with her, so I'm neither particularly informed about the media circus nor particularly at a saturation point. For me, it's been more an evolution from "Why the hell can't that girl get her life in order?" to "Oh, that's why," and I think that evolution of thought can be helpful.

And I can see that there might be something a bit more personally resonant in watching the actual process of someone crashing and burning than in hearing about someone's crash and burn after the fact, but I agree that media coverage of a crash-and-burn in-progress tends to be anything but helpful or respectful to the person going through it, and likely it worsens an already-bad situation; and, of course, all in all, it'd be nicer if we didn't crash and burn at all.

posted by occhiblu 04 February | 12:55

I agree that media coverage of a crash-and-burn in-progress tends to be anything but helpful or respectful to the person going through it, and likely it worsens an already-bad situation

Agreed.

posted by ThePinkSuperhero 04 February | 13:16

it'd be nicer if we didn't crash and burn at all.

Neil Young offers a dissenting opinion.

posted by jonmc 04 February | 13:23

actually, here is the dissenting opinion

posted by jonmc 04 February | 13:25

posted by chewatadistance 04 February | 13:41

Uh...whoops. how about, I [heart] Neil Young, and I'm adding that bowling ball comment to my portfolio.

posted by chewatadistance 04 February | 13:42

(give credit where credit is due. I stole it from Peter Farrelly's novel Outside Providence.)

posted by jonmc 04 February | 13:45

I was figuring you'd use it in your future novel. :D

posted by chewatadistance 04 February | 14:06

Don't hold your breath, there won't be one forthcoming. Fiddling around online is enough literary endeavor for me, when all is said and done.

posted by jonmc 04 February | 14:17

But it'll be a few years before she decides to change and she's going to need to learn that she'll never be cured and that she'll need to take those drugs every day

Yes, and the reason I made the original post is that I am truly scared that this particular poptart will be stone cold dead before that happens. Right now most media is treating this like entertainment.

This isn't entertainment. This is someone literally teetering on the edge of a very steep cliff before our eyes. And I can't take my eyes away because I know that except for the grace of God, there go I.

posted by bunnyfire 04 February | 14:19

(I do heart Neil Young.)

posted by bunnyfire 04 February | 14:21

She should still be financially well-insulated. To the extent that I care, my wish for her is to quit show business, get well, and live whatever normal life is left to her.

But then, fame and glamour are all show knows, and it must feel to her like dropping out of the public eye would be worse than death.

posted by danf 04 February | 14:55

I think that we're collectively at fault for Britney's breakup. The press intrusion is reflective of a greater public desire to keep watching her. As a society, we've hounded her into madness, and as a society we should feel bad for what's happened to her.

Individually, some of us may have done nothing to cause her to break down, but I'm not sure that we shouldn't still carry the blame. A collective failure makes us all guilty despite what we personally did or did not do.

I do like her music though. "Toxic" is as good a pop song as has probably been written by a group of people and given to a girl to sing.

The girl's about as sharp as a bowling ball.
I take exception to the implication that her IQ should in some way affect how we feel about her. We should just care about the clever pop-stars now?

The coverage exists because it pulls eyeballs to media outlets and generates ad revenue.
I wish people would take some responsibility here. We happily consume every piece of information that is produced about Britney. We provided the demand for "news" about her, and when it all went wrong we blamed the media.

What the media is doing isn't right, but at least they're doing it for a reason (money). This is in contrast to the multitudes who'll happily take part in her destruction for what is nothing less than gossip and a break from boredom.

I feel sorry for her. And I'm sorry for what I've done to her. And I hope she gets better soon.

posted by seanyboy 04 February | 15:16

I take exception to the implication that her IQ should in some way affect how we feel about her.

It shouldn't. That comment was a response to bunnyfire saying that I shouldn't call Britney a dingbat, although to all appearances she seems to be one.

Look, if Bruce Springsteen died tommorrow, I'd be bummed but mainly because he wouldn't be making any new music. Beyond that I don't know the man.

posted by jonmc 04 February | 15:26

Well, jonmc, maybe you thought I was a dingbat back in 2002 when my meds were messed up and my friend was dying and I was regularly imploding and then banned from metafilter.

But I was SICK. I was literally not in my right mind. And that is a scary and frightening place to be. And, remember, I HAD a stable marriage and a loving family and a church that helped me and people who supported me and NO ONE hounding me.

No one chooses to do the things she has done in public for the fun of it.

posted by bunnyfire 04 February | 15:37

Not dingbat as in crazy, bunny, dingbat as in dumb. And even pre-craziness, Britney struck as being dumber than a Quaaluded possum.

posted by jonmc 04 February | 15:41

I wish people would take some responsibility here.

I do, too. I'm not blaming the media as if they have no consuming audience; but I don't feel much collective guilt because I try pretty hard not to be part of the audience. It's not all that hard to avoid the gossip industry and celebrity coverage entirely. It's not the stuff I read or buy or look at on the web or search out on TV. The people who are purchasing the stuff, or watching the shows, do bear guilt, but a lot of people tune it out. It's gotten extreme in the last decade or so - it's no longer tabloids taking pictures of cellulite, it's an obsessive, distracting, hounding, cruel industry that distracts people from their real lives.

posted by Miko 04 February | 16:08

Well, Miko, a pretty good chunk of the population's real lives consist of tedious work, dysfunctional families and bad entertainment. In that context it's not surprising that people might turn to the tabloids for either the economic/social pornography of celebrity life or a dose of sweet schadenfruede at seeing that their supposed 'betters' are just as fucked up.

And Britney would be a trainwreck if she was a waitress, too, it's just that we wouldn't care.

posted by jonmc 04 February | 16:21

Miko, indeed. It's easy to forget about your own suffering by indulging in lurid voyeurism of someone else's. That dubious relief is what the tabloids are selling to a very eager market. But hey, we've come along way since the Romans put folks in the ring with lions, right?

posted by pieisexactlythree 04 February | 16:21

Jon, do you really think celebrities like Spears are set up as our 'betters'? That's a new one on me.

posted by pieisexactlythree 04 February | 16:24

And Britney would be a trainwreck if she was a waitress, too, it's just that we wouldn't care.

I would.

As to her IQ, you gotta remember she and her family are from Louisiana. And I have noticed that when you Yankees hear a Southern accent you unconsciously subtract some IQ points from whoever's speaking. Just sayin'.

posted by bunnyfire 04 February | 16:25

Jon, do you really think celebrities like Spears are set up as our 'betters'?

Well, 'celebrity,' derives from 'celebrated,' and she (and all the other tabloid regulars) certainly have reaped the worldly rewards of money, sex, and adulation more than you or I.

The tabloids actually have a wonderful two-way racket going. Your average burger-flipper/office slave gets to read about Robert Downey Jr snorting coke off a supermodels ass in his solid gold hottub and wish that were him and then he gets to feel morally righteous and filled with schaudenfreudic glee when they report that Downey got busted/went to rehab/gained weight/ got caught sodomizing a haddock etc.

posted by jonmc 04 February | 16:31

she (and all the other tabloid regulars) certainly have reaped the worldly rewards of money, sex, and adulation more than you or I.

The woman has been involuntarily committed. I'm not sure if I can look at her at this point and say, ahhh, yes, look at the joys fame can bring! Compared to her, we're all doing pretty well for ourselves.

posted by ThePinkSuperhero 04 February | 16:37

Yeah, after spending the last decade rolling in money and adulation for her grand contribution to society of being a big breasted blonde. Sorry, but I can only feel so much sympathy.

posted by jonmc 04 February | 16:43

Yes, because of course rich and famous people are not humans, but rather unfeeling robots who deserve no human compassion. Am I right?

posted by muddgirl 04 February | 17:04

Yeah. And "adulation"? Seems like she's been the target over the years of an awful lot of snark, even when she was "sane."

posted by bunnyfire 04 February | 17:13

ok folks:

if jonmc is gonna write a novel, he needs to know that it is a PACK, not a herd, of sled dogs.

that is all.

posted by By the Grace of God 04 February | 17:24

And "adulation"?

Yes, I'd say that arenas full of screaming fans, multiplatinum record sales and half the teenage girls in the country imitating you qualifies as adulation, yes. And when you're that well known, some people are going to hate you just as strongly. That's part of the deal. Actually, that's part of the deal of simply living I think.

if jonmc is gonna write a novel,

He isn't. Nor is he going to enter the Iditarod.

posted by jonmc 04 February | 17:27

jon, have you ever stopped to wonder why you hate people you've never even met?

posted by bmarkey 04 February | 17:56

This isn't entertainment. This is someone literally teetering on the edge of a very steep cliff before our eyes. And I can't take my eyes away because I know that except for the grace of God, there go I.

Craig Ferguson did a affecting monologue on this subject a year ago.

posted by concrete 05 February | 02:56

Craig Ferguson is an asshole who cut Bill Maher's off and kicked him out of his show for cracking a joke, that's how much of an asshole Ferguson is. He's also very unfunny. And given that Ferguson is (very happily) feeding off of the same generous hand that feeds Spears, ie corporate entertainment, it makes sense that he's defending a coworker against all reason.

I'm not sure if I can look at her at this point and say, ahhh, yes, look at the joys fame can bring! Compared to her, we're all doing pretty well for ourselves.

she's worth 100 million dollars and you're not. in nowadays America, this is not a small detail. not to mention, if you had that money and she didn't, she'd be just another meth head, only in a Lousiana trailer park; and you wouldn't be nearly as fucked up as she is, up in your Beverly Hills mansion. this codependent thing where the general public is supposed to feel necessearily sorry for celebrity drug addicts, so as to clean one's conscience and not give a shit about less famous, less attractive drug addicts (those belong in jail or in homeless shelters, obviously), is really laughably cynical.

dumber than a Quaaluded possum.

I laughed again, you're on a roll there giovanni

posted by matteo 05 February | 15:01

it makes sense that he's defending a coworker against all reason

Or maybe he just has an ounce of pity in him? Nah, it couldn't be that.

if you had that money and she didn't, she'd be just another meth head, only in a Lousiana trailer park; and you wouldn't be nearly as fucked up as she is, up in your Beverly Hills mansion.

the general public is supposed to feel necessearily sorry for celebrity drug addicts, so as to clean one's conscience and not give a shit about less famous, less attractive drug addicts

Y'know, it's perfectly possible to feel empathy for both Britney Spears and that random crackhead on the corner. Just because one of them made some records I don't like (and subsequently made a lot of money) doesn't make her any less human.

If Britney's mom and pop had let her grow up like a normal kid, she might well have become "another meth head... in a Louisiana trailer park". Or she might be a well-adjusted young adult by now. My guess is that a lot of the problems she's experiencing now go back to her coming of age in a very public way, in an environment where she probably didn't hear the word "no" all that often. We'll never know the truth there, of course. Still, it strikes me as as being a little petty to insist that she'd be just as fucked-up. (And if I'd had access to that kind of money that young, I'd have been dead before I hit 20.)

Again I have to wonder, why such vehement hatred for someone in a bad spot? It's pretty fucking ugly, if you ask me.

Oh, and also: If Bill Maher were half as funny as he thinks he is, he'd be on to something. As it is...

posted by bmarkey 05 February | 16:03

← Worst. Title. Ever. || Your Highschool →

HOME || REGISTER || LOGIN