MovieChat Forums > Britney Spears Discussion > 'I was worried Lindsay, Paris or Britney...

'I was worried Lindsay, Paris or Britney would die': why the 00s were so toxic for women


https://www.vox.com/culture/22350286/2000s-pop-culture-misogyny-britney-spears-janet-jackson-whitney-houston-monica-lewinsky

In the 2000s, it was open season on young women. “It was blatant, horrifying misogyny,” says the former New York Daily News gossip columnist Ben Widdicombe, author of Gatecrasher: How I Helped the Rich Become Famous and Ruin the World. He welcomes our soul-searching about the period. “I’m glad it’s being re-evaluated,” he says. “I think it has to be. The media was incredibly cruel to Britney and other women at the time. It was a great moral failing of the tabloid press, that we did that. And I unfortunately was a cog in that machine.”

Widdicombe tells me that, even back then, the press treatment of Spears was horrifying to watch. “It was clear to us reporting staff at the time that we needed to leave Britney alone,” he says. “Her mental health required the media to step back. But this voracious capitalist engine wasn’t going to do that.” While Widdicombe didn’t personally report on Britney’s breakdown, he says he was powerless to stop his editors from splashing it on the front page, because there was simply too much money to be made from it.

Widdicombe says he feared that starlets would come to harm: “I was seriously worried that either Lindsay Lohan, Paris Hilton or Britney Spears would die. Britney had mental health problems, Lindsay had a drug problem and Paris was known to drink and drive. And the media would pretend to hand-wring in sorrow, but actually their deaths would make a lot of money for them.”


https://www.thenewfeminist.co.uk/2022/04/why-the-2000s-was-a-sexist-wasteland/

reply

There are bunch of thing here. Those women were toxic to themselves. Partying, drunk driving, and drugs are all self inflicted.

The tabloids have no morals. But it was still a symbiotic relationship. They loved the attention, and used the paparazzi to promote themselves.

This guy acts like this is something that we moved past. That group only opened the flood gates. Once they fell out of favor, other like Miley Cyrus, The Kardashians, the bad girls club, real housewives etc etc popped up to take their place.

Misogyny? This is female behavior, that is primarily followed by a female audience. They need take accountability for this.

reply

'There are bunch of thing here. Those women were toxic to themselves. Partying, drunk driving, and drugs are all self inflicted.

The tabloids have no morals. But it was still a symbiotic relationship. They loved the attention, and used the paparazzi to promote themselves.'


Exactly.

reply

"This is female behavior, that is primarily followed by a female audience."

Nope, that's human behaviour, followed by a human audience. 👁️​ ☻ 👁️​

reply

I would be ok with that generalization if the point of the article was not to call this misogyny. It’s not. They just want to be above criticism.

reply

Spears and Lohan were car-crashes, over-indulging in just about everything. That was their choice. Hilton was a vacuous, attention-seeking, 'famous for being famous', spoilt little rich girl, with too much time on her hands (Spears and Lohan at least had day jobs).

I can remember exactly how many months, weeks, days, hours, and minutes I spent frantically worrying on their behalf. 0.

reply

The explanation is simple - they went from being adored little girls to judged women in a split second and their egos couldn't comprehend. When you enter showbiz as an adult, you are more or less already jaded and prepared. Most child stars without a solid family support crash and burn.

reply

No one was targeting Christina Agiulera. Because she wasn't out every night partying and being high.

reply