Framing Britney Spears

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Honestly I'm starting to believe she's under the conservatorship because she has the intelligence level (and decision-making abilities) of a 8-year-old.

Quite frankly she's being targeted by these grifters who see children with her as a free ticket to $20K a month for 18 years.

It's not a crime to be an idiot though so...have at it.

+1. In addition to KFed's $20K/month, Sam Lutfi got a settlement. Men getting involved with Britney seem to come out ahead financially.

And, what’s your point? Again, it’s totally her choice if that’s where she wants her money to go. I don’t see any outrage or calls for conservatorship for the numerous male celebrities having multiple children with different baby mamas and paying them child support for the rest of their lives (Donald Trump, Nick Cannon, any rocker or rapper). Do you even hear your misogyny?

I'm not arguing the conservatorship should continue. You must have missed the "have at it." Let the feeding frenzy of grifters begin!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Honestly I'm starting to believe she's under the conservatorship because she has the intelligence level (and decision-making abilities) of a 8-year-old.

Quite frankly she's being targeted by these grifters who see children with her as a free ticket to $20K a month for 18 years.

It's not a crime to be an idiot though so...have at it.

+1. In addition to KFed's $20K/month, Sam Lutfi got a settlement. Men getting involved with Britney seem to come out ahead financially.

And, what’s your point? Again, it’s totally her choice if that’s where she wants her money to go. I don’t see any outrage or calls for conservatorship for the numerous male celebrities having multiple children with different baby mamas and paying them child support for the rest of their lives (Donald Trump, Nick Cannon, any rocker or rapper). Do you even hear your misogyny?

+1. It’s abundantly clear that sexism and misogyny have played a big role in what’s happened to Britney and why people think it’s acceptable. The woman hasn’t been allowed to have her own phone for over a decade! The people in charge of Britney want to control her so they can profit off of her. That’s what this is about.

[Anonymous]

It’s sad because she was very clearly having a mental health crisis when this began.

But it is bizarre how it evolved.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok so day one of her Freedum she wears a giant engagement ring, drives to get burgers and fries and a giant soda and puts it all on social media to be sure she’s got plenty of paparazzi attention.
Her boyfriend or whatever he is (goon) has that same look KFed has on. Like it’s hilarious how easy to fool she is.
Here we go…

And that is completely her choice. She doesn’t need to be making decisions you deem stellar in order to qualify for freedom when she’s capable of making hundreds of millions of dollars for others. Not to mention she’s basically been held captive for 13 years. She can have a little fun now that she’s been granted more freedom!

+1. We don’t get to strip people of their freedom just because we think they make poor life choices. Hell, I think a majority of Americans make poor life choices!

Honestly I'm starting to believe she's under the conservatorship because she has the intelligence level (and decision-making abilities) of a 8-year-old.

Quite frankly she's being targeted by these grifters who see children with her as a free ticket to $20K a month for 18 years.

It's not a crime to be an idiot though so...have at it.

I agree. I don’t think the issue is her mental health so much as her mental health issues combined with very low intellectual capacity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Honestly I'm starting to believe she's under the conservatorship because she has the intelligence level (and decision-making abilities) of a 8-year-old.

Quite frankly she's being targeted by these grifters who see children with her as a free ticket to $20K a month for 18 years.

It's not a crime to be an idiot though so...have at it.

+1. In addition to KFed's $20K/month, Sam Lutfi got a settlement. Men getting involved with Britney seem to come out ahead financially.

And, what’s your point? Again, it’s totally her choice if that’s where she wants her money to go. I don’t see any outrage or calls for conservatorship for the numerous male celebrities having multiple children with different baby mamas and paying them child support for the rest of their lives (Donald Trump, Nick Cannon, any rocker or rapper). Do you even hear your misogyny?

+1. It’s abundantly clear that sexism and misogyny have played a big role in what’s happened to Britney and why people think it’s acceptable. The woman hasn’t been allowed to have her own phone for over a decade! The people in charge of Britney want to control her so they can profit off of her. That’s what this is about.

What’s clear is most of you have never had to deal with anyone who suffers with severe mental illness. Queue the “I have and it wasn’t that bad/difficult and they are fine” posters.

[Anonymous]

Schizophrenia is often diagnosed at the age when Brit had her first troubles. Someone with whom I'd gone to kindergarten all the way through high school and into the same college was diagnosed with this, and now she's a 38 year old woman living in her parents home. She has a job at a restaurant and seems happy and OK when I have visited, but I know she's on medication she'll have to take for the rest of her life, and that she is under her parents care to make sure she stays on it and that she is OK. I always wondered if this could be what happened to Britney: maybe her medication works and she feels OK, but she has some diagnosis that is permanent and really needs monitoring, so she really needs the conservatorship?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Honestly I'm starting to believe she's under the conservatorship because she has the intelligence level (and decision-making abilities) of a 8-year-old.

Quite frankly she's being targeted by these grifters who see children with her as a free ticket to $20K a month for 18 years.

It's not a crime to be an idiot though so...have at it.

+1. In addition to KFed's $20K/month, Sam Lutfi got a settlement. Men getting involved with Britney seem to come out ahead financially.

And, what’s your point? Again, it’s totally her choice if that’s where she wants her money to go. I don’t see any outrage or calls for conservatorship for the numerous male celebrities having multiple children with different baby mamas and paying them child support for the rest of their lives (Donald Trump, Nick Cannon, any rocker or rapper). Do you even hear your misogyny?

+1. It’s abundantly clear that sexism and misogyny have played a big role in what’s happened to Britney and why people think it’s acceptable. The woman hasn’t been allowed to have her own phone for over a decade! The people in charge of Britney want to control her so they can profit off of her. That’s what this is about.

Right? Kanye West has been unstable for a long time and he's not under a conservatorship.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Honestly I'm starting to believe she's under the conservatorship because she has the intelligence level (and decision-making abilities) of a 8-year-old.

Quite frankly she's being targeted by these grifters who see children with her as a free ticket to $20K a month for 18 years.

It's not a crime to be an idiot though so...have at it.

+1. In addition to KFed's $20K/month, Sam Lutfi got a settlement. Men getting involved with Britney seem to come out ahead financially.

And, what’s your point? Again, it’s totally her choice if that’s where she wants her money to go. I don’t see any outrage or calls for conservatorship for the numerous male celebrities having multiple children with different baby mamas and paying them child support for the rest of their lives (Donald Trump, Nick Cannon, any rocker or rapper). Do you even hear your misogyny?

+1. It’s abundantly clear that sexism and misogyny have played a big role in what’s happened to Britney and why people think it’s acceptable. The woman hasn’t been allowed to have her own phone for over a decade! The people in charge of Britney want to control her so they can profit off of her. That’s what this is about.

Right? Kanye West has been unstable for a long time and he's not under a conservatorship.

That's because there's no one who loves him enough to do it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Honestly I'm starting to believe she's under the conservatorship because she has the intelligence level (and decision-making abilities) of a 8-year-old.

Quite frankly she's being targeted by these grifters who see children with her as a free ticket to $20K a month for 18 years.

It's not a crime to be an idiot though so...have at it.

+1. In addition to KFed's $20K/month, Sam Lutfi got a settlement. Men getting involved with Britney seem to come out ahead financially.

And, what’s your point? Again, it’s totally her choice if that’s where she wants her money to go. I don’t see any outrage or calls for conservatorship for the numerous male celebrities having multiple children with different baby mamas and paying them child support for the rest of their lives (Donald Trump, Nick Cannon, any rocker or rapper). Do you even hear your misogyny?

+1. It’s abundantly clear that sexism and misogyny have played a big role in what’s happened to Britney and why people think it’s acceptable. The woman hasn’t been allowed to have her own phone for over a decade! The people in charge of Britney want to control her so they can profit off of her. That’s what this is about.

What’s clear is most of you have never had to deal with anyone who suffers with severe mental illness. Queue the “I have and it wasn’t that bad/difficult and they are fine” posters.

The vast majority of Americans coping with mental illness are permitted to be in charge of their own lives. They are allowed to hire their own attorneys and to own and use phones. If you have special evidence indicating that Britney should not be included among those Americans despite maintaining an enormously successful and lucrative career, please do share.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Schizophrenia is often diagnosed at the age when Brit had her first troubles. Someone with whom I'd gone to kindergarten all the way through high school and into the same college was diagnosed with this, and now she's a 38 year old woman living in her parents home. She has a job at a restaurant and seems happy and OK when I have visited, but I know she's on medication she'll have to take for the rest of her life, and that she is under her parents care to make sure she stays on it and that she is OK. I always wondered if this could be what happened to Britney: maybe her medication works and she feels OK, but she has some diagnosis that is permanent and really needs monitoring, so she really needs the conservatorship?

Is the schizophrenic woman you know under a conservatorship? Just because people have serious mental health problems doesn’t mean they need to be placed under a conservatorship, which is a very extreme measure. Sometimes they just need a considerable amount of assistance, which is something Britney can afford to get.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Honestly I'm starting to believe she's under the conservatorship because she has the intelligence level (and decision-making abilities) of a 8-year-old.

Quite frankly she's being targeted by these grifters who see children with her as a free ticket to $20K a month for 18 years.

It's not a crime to be an idiot though so...have at it.

+1. In addition to KFed's $20K/month, Sam Lutfi got a settlement. Men getting involved with Britney seem to come out ahead financially.

And, what’s your point? Again, it’s totally her choice if that’s where she wants her money to go. I don’t see any outrage or calls for conservatorship for the numerous male celebrities having multiple children with different baby mamas and paying them child support for the rest of their lives (Donald Trump, Nick Cannon, any rocker or rapper). Do you even hear your misogyny?

+1. It’s abundantly clear that sexism and misogyny have played a big role in what’s happened to Britney and why people think it’s acceptable. The woman hasn’t been allowed to have her own phone for over a decade! The people in charge of Britney want to control her so they can profit off of her. That’s what this is about.

Right? Kanye West has been unstable for a long time and he's not under a conservatorship.

That's because there's no one who loves him enough to do it.

GMAFB. You have no idea who loves Kanye West or how much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Honestly I'm starting to believe she's under the conservatorship because she has the intelligence level (and decision-making abilities) of a 8-year-old.

Quite frankly she's being targeted by these grifters who see children with her as a free ticket to $20K a month for 18 years.

It's not a crime to be an idiot though so...have at it.

+1. In addition to KFed's $20K/month, Sam Lutfi got a settlement. Men getting involved with Britney seem to come out ahead financially.

And, what’s your point? Again, it’s totally her choice if that’s where she wants her money to go. I don’t see any outrage or calls for conservatorship for the numerous male celebrities having multiple children with different baby mamas and paying them child support for the rest of their lives (Donald Trump, Nick Cannon, any rocker or rapper). Do you even hear your misogyny?

+1. It’s abundantly clear that sexism and misogyny have played a big role in what’s happened to Britney and why people think it’s acceptable. The woman hasn’t been allowed to have her own phone for over a decade! The people in charge of Britney want to control her so they can profit off of her. That’s what this is about.

What’s clear is most of you have never had to deal with anyone who suffers with severe mental illness. Queue the “I have and it wasn’t that bad/difficult and they are fine” posters.

The vast majority of Americans coping with mental illness are permitted to be in charge of their own lives. They are allowed to hire their own attorneys and to own and use phones. If you have special evidence indicating that Britney should not be included among those Americans despite maintaining an enormously successful and lucrative career, please do share.

So there should be no conservatorships? There should be a line somewhere? If so, where is the line?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Honestly I'm starting to believe she's under the conservatorship because she has the intelligence level (and decision-making abilities) of a 8-year-old.

Quite frankly she's being targeted by these grifters who see children with her as a free ticket to $20K a month for 18 years.

It's not a crime to be an idiot though so...have at it.

+1. In addition to KFed's $20K/month, Sam Lutfi got a settlement. Men getting involved with Britney seem to come out ahead financially.

And, what’s your point? Again, it’s totally her choice if that’s where she wants her money to go. I don’t see any outrage or calls for conservatorship for the numerous male celebrities having multiple children with different baby mamas and paying them child support for the rest of their lives (Donald Trump, Nick Cannon, any rocker or rapper). Do you even hear your misogyny?

+1. It’s abundantly clear that sexism and misogyny have played a big role in what’s happened to Britney and why people think it’s acceptable. The woman hasn’t been allowed to have her own phone for over a decade! The people in charge of Britney want to control her so they can profit off of her. That’s what this is about.

What’s clear is most of you have never had to deal with anyone who suffers with severe mental illness. Queue the “I have and it wasn’t that bad/difficult and they are fine” posters.

The vast majority of Americans coping with mental illness are permitted to be in charge of their own lives. They are allowed to hire their own attorneys and to own and use phones. If you have special evidence indicating that Britney should not be included among those Americans despite maintaining an enormously successful and lucrative career, please do share.

Yes, but maybe they shouldn't be.

We closed the mental institutions and replaced them with Nothing. That doesn't mean it's the best way.

[Anonymous]

We do not know what mental illness she has. How anyone can speak with such authority without knowing that is beyond me.

[Anonymous]

If Britney were ugly, we wouldn't care about her.