Why Britney Spears is ‘manic’ again, and the rise of weaponised pop psychology

Tortured women are lip-smackingly delicious to watch. Especially if they’re thin, fragile and beautiful.

From Marilyn Monroe looking pretty popping pills to Whitney Houston’s unsteady TV appearances and Amy Winehouse getting papped with bloody toes on the streets of Soho, we lap it up like thirsty dogs on a sunny day. 

A woman in pain is one of society’s favourite kinks.

A woman in pain is one of society’s favourite kinks. Oooooh yeah, give us some sad, sad women from history and we’re captivated for hours. And make it romantic, like the intense, long-term suffering of Sylvia Plath from bipolar disorder, or Princess Diana’s delicate, engrossing battle with bulimia, both of which have been written about extensively, whilst achieving little in addressing the stigma of depression and eating disorders. 

Above: Famous women dubbed by the media as 'tortured', such as Britney Spears, Amy Winehouse and Princess Diana, seem to captivate the general public. 

Maybe it’s a male gaze thing: a study conducted in 2012 by Texas-Austin University, found that “across the board, men find women with some psychological vulnerability far more attractive than the average. Comparatively, physical vulnerabilities — such as being short — don't make any difference.” The study notes that the attraction is only short-term, though (if I comment on that finding, I won’t stop, so let’s move on). 

A study conducted in 2012 by Texas-Austin University, found that “across the board, men find women with some psychological vulnerability far more attractive than the average".

The mental health of women is juicy. Lots of people take pleasure in telling Meghan Markle she pretended to feel suicidal, but when Caroline Flack killed herself the hashtag #bekind trended non-stop. It almost feels… oh, I don’t know… inconsistent. 

But you’d have thought we’d learned our lesson with Britney Spears. In 2007, the entire world let Britney Spears down. Driven by celebrity magazines drooling at the hottest story in years, Spears was wheeled into hospital in the middle of an alleged breakdown. The non-consensual images were shared with the internet. Minute-by-minute, hounds like Perez Hilton profiled her every mental move. 

And it got darker. In 2008, after actor Heath Ledger died, Perez sold a t-shirt with an image from Brokeback Mountain and the phrase "Why couldn't it have been Britney?" He’s since apologised. Everyone else has retrospectively thought “EEK! We fuelled that. And we laughed at that kid who made the YouTube video about leaving Britney alone.” That kid, Chris Crocker, turned out to be on the right side of history. 

Above: Chris Crocker's video, imploring people to leave Britney Spears alone, turned out to be on the right side of history.

But society is so much better at discussing mental health these days, so this would never happen now, right? RIGHT? If that’s what you think, you’re fucking wrong. Let’s use Britney as an example, one more time. She is hounded, still. The media follows her, still. And comments on her mental health, still. Just a few weeks ago, TMZ released a story entitled “Britney Spears Manic Episode in Restaurant’ which features a video of Spears sitting in a restaurant. When she notices other customers are filming her, Britney holds up a menu so they can no longer see. The story described her behaviour as “bizarre” and said that she was “yelling gibberish”. 

The only difference is that, now, we have a load of exciting new mental health terminology to play with, making it sound like we know some shit.

What’s the difference between this story in 2023 and the reporting style of 2007? Well, 15 years later, Spears is still being filmed without her consent, and stories about her mental health are still being shared on the internet. So, not much has changed, really. The only difference is that, now, we have a load of exciting new mental health terminology to play with, like ‘manic psychotic breaks’, making it sound like we know some shit. 

And, when we pretend to know some shit, we can pretend to care. Perez Hilton uploads TikToks about Britney Spears most days, but his reporting now masquerades as concern. A YouTube video he shared last month was entitled ‘Britney Spears is Not Well’, but it reads like an accusation. 

Above: Jon Ronson’s The Psychopath Test started a cultural conversation about those living amongst us with ‘functioning’ psychopathy.

We’ve learned a lot of new words in the last few years. Google searches for ‘narcissism’ have roughly doubled since five years ago. Jon Ronson’s book The Psychopath Test, released in 2011, started a cultural conversation about those living amongst us with ‘functioning’ (dodgy term) psychopathy. Channel 4 had a quiz on their website so we could find out if we were psychopaths! 

Gaslighting is now so common that gaslighters are gaslighting other gaslighters, creating one fiery paranoid inferno in the centre of society.

The stat that gets wheeled out often is that 5% of CEOs have the disorder. This doesn’t help the conversation surrounding mental health. It’s basic and, again, an accusation not an understanding. All the stat does is make it justifiable to call everyone a psychopath, because there’s a tiny chance our hunch is correct. 

It’s not possible for everyone you hate to be a narcissist. And no, you’re not OCD if you’re quite partial to a clean kitchen. Gaslighting is now so common that gaslighters are gaslighting other gaslighters, creating one fiery paranoid inferno in the centre of society. If I don’t like something you say, I can inform you that you are ‘projecting’, because this is a psychological defence mechanism that everyone apparently understands (and didn’t just see described in an Instagram Reel). We’re all ill with imposter syndrome, too. Aren’t we? Because a qualitative research project from 1978 and Sheryl Sandberg said so. 

Above: The cover of Kanye West's album Ye referenced his bipolar diagnosis, but flippant references are unhelpful.

In the mass media, psychological commentary is often careless. In December, Kanye West gave an interview declaring: “God says love everyone. For me, I believe that I am not bipolar, I am not in some kind of episode, but I may be slightly autistic - like Rain Man, and that’s part of my superpower!” (West had been diagnosed as bipolar in 2016 and, on the front cover of his album, Ye, he wrote; “I hate being Bi-Polar it’s awesome.”) Flippant references to unhelpful stereotypes and frequent self-diagnoses are doing nothing to help the conversation, either.  

This is an important time. Many people who’ve sensed there was something different, unexplainable, challenging about their own brains are now receiving clarity, and it’s helping. Lives are being changed for the better with neurodivergent diagnoses. According to the ADHD foundation, there has been a 400% increase in the number of adults seeking a diagnosis since 2020. I think this is a good thing. Especially when I consider my parents’ generation, who were never allowed to seek help for what was going on in their minds. 

But everyone’s a psychiatrist these days. Human beings have found the rise in accessible pop psychology in books and on social media very useful. Partly because we want to understand ourselves. Partly because everyone loves a label but also - and more dangerously - because mental health discourse has always been a means of regulating behaviour as well as people. It’s a weapon. 

Above: Vogue Portugal's 2020 cover received a backlash, being deemed insensitive and behind the times.

In July 2020, Vogue Portugal was pressured into pulling and apologising for a front cover of what they called The Madness Issue, which showed a young woman, naked in a bath, being washed by two nurses in old-fashioned uniforms. There was a backlash and the image was deemed insensitive and behind the times. I actually thought it was very good, and ahead of its time. I don't think society was ready for it. My interpretation was that ‘madness’ in women has been used throughout history to control them and humiliate them. Which is true. 

 ‘Madness’ in women has been used throughout history to control them and humiliate them.

The book Hysterical by Pragya Agarwal is an excellent digest of the history of gendered emotion and expression. In the 12th and 13th centuries women crying in public was considered devilish, uncouth and inappropriate. When women “set traps with their tears” they were “trying to deceive a man”. God forbid they were just pissed off. Crying women were sometimes arrested. Anger was a woman’s disease, as was depression: a result of a “wandering womb”. Research (and also, you know, life) shows that, even now, women of colour have to deal with the angry tropes. These words, flung at people like rocks, are designed to denigrate and disarm. She’s mad. Ignore her. 

(The subject of men, emotions and minds is also a minefield, because many men are groomed by society to keep ‘weak’ thoughts and feelings to themselves. To keep calm and carry on. In 1859 the psychologist PIerre Briquet said: “We saw little hysteria in men because we did not want to see it.”) 

Above: Pragya Agarwal's book Hysterical examines the history of gendered emotion and expression.

Mental extremities have always been used as accusations; the language of lunacy a volatile and nasty playground. I recently heard a (slanderous) rumour that I “hate men”.  A rumour spread by a man I refused to work with due to his incompetence and rudeness. “I’m not the problem,” he said. “It’s her. She hates men.” Scour the internet and you’ll find a hundred instances where I’ve stated explicitly that I do not hate men, I like men, but that society has a problem with the patriarchy. Fucking hell, is that a revolutionary statement, now? 

But it makes sense. The best way to nullify and discredit what I say is to pathologise me. If you pathologise me, then I am alienated. I am painted as other. An erratic other, at that. And who wants to be an erratic other? No one! I don’t just see problems with the patriarchy, I HATE MEN. Your ex-girlfriend wasn’t just reacting to your bad behaviour, she was a PSYCHO. Britney Spears isn’t just annoyed in a restaurant, she’s MANIC. It’s a weapon. 

The idea of psychology has become so accessible that it’s being exploited. 

People will do anything to be seen as ‘normal’. To avoid having traits that are in some way socially undesirable, and so we fall in line because we don’t want to be referred to as ‘mental’, or a ‘narcissist’, or ‘projecting’, or ‘an angry feminist’, or ‘manic’.  

The idea of psychology has become so accessible that it’s being exploited. Why bother learning ins and outs, when you can use a few words that people vaguely understand, based on stereotypes? A few words are enough to other. Psychology has become a toy. Just another weapon in the human armoury. It always was, of course, but now we have more clever-sounding words, and more platforms to use them on. If we couldn’t trust human beings with the brains of others in the first place, how are they supposed to be trusted with the appropriate terminology?