Who, What, When, Where?!: Miscellaneous Celebrity News 2.0

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, anna0852 said:

Can he be re-tried?

No. They found the previous prosecutors oral agreement to not try him is binding. He can’t be tried again on that case. They could try him with a different victim but I don’t know if they have a good of case to do that. 

[Bort]

10 minutes ago, anna0852 said:

Can he be re-tried?

Fifth amendment. Double jeopardy. 

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, kariyaki said:

Fifth amendment. Double jeopardy. 

I don’t think it’s a double jeopardy situation because the conviction was overturned rather than him being found not guilty. They said he can’t be retried because the original prosecutor made a deal that he wouldn’t be prosecuted forcing him to testify in a civil case rather than pleading the fifth. 

[Nicmar]

5 hours ago, Blergh said:

Jaleel. White playing a bullying stalker that the show tried to insist the audience was supposed to like and sympathize with wasn't something that was entirely in his control at the time (especially when he was a minor). 

However, how he treated his colleagues WAS- and, by his own admission, he dumped on and dissed his younger costar Jaimee Foxworth and even decades later attempted to justify having done so (despite her having made it public record that her own female DNA Donor had very badly exploited her during that time).

So, my question re the podcast, did Mr. White take the opportunity given to him via that outlet to apologize for having dissed a minor performer who'd had serious issues during that time?

I read that Jaimee  Foxworth went in to porn...

[Guest]

BRITNEY SPEARS Personal Conservator Responds to Dad's Claims ... SHE HAS NO MARRIAGE OR BABY RESTRICTIONS

The finger pointing has started with Britney’s conservatorship. 

[aradia22]

Quote

They could try him with a different victim but I don’t know if they have a good of case to do that. 

My memory is hazy but I thought I read an article that they tried the case they did partially because the statute of limitations had run out on the other cases. 

[Guest]

29 minutes ago, aradia22 said:

My memory is hazy but I thought I read an article that they tried the case they did partially because the statute of limitations had run out on the other cases. 

That’s true. Based on what we know the statute of limitations would be up in all the cases but he has victims in multiple states so there may be a case where charges could still be filed. 

Edited June 30, 2021 by Guest

[LexieLily]

4 hours ago, Dani said:

BRITNEY SPEARS Personal Conservator Responds to Dad's Claims ... SHE HAS NO MARRIAGE OR BABY RESTRICTIONS

The finger pointing has started with Britney’s conservatorship. 

And so it begins. Somehow I knew this would happen, and that Jamie would start it.

[AgentRXS]

https://www.tmz.com/2021/06/30/britney-spears-judge-denies-move-oust-father-jamie-co-conservator/

And yet, the judge keeps Jamie in place as her conservator.  Poor girl.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, AgentRXS said:

https://www.tmz.com/2021/06/30/britney-spears-judge-denies-move-oust-father-jamie-co-conservator/

And yet, the judge keeps Jamie in place as her conservator.  Poor girl.

Just to be clear, he is only conservator of her financial estate. He is not conservator of her person. 

That TMZ article mostly raised issues about Britney’s lawyer. They requested the Bessemer Trust be name conservator on her estate and then didn’t file the damn paperwork to actually make is happen once the judge decided to give Bessemer and Jamie equal say. He left Jamie in complete control of her estate when it wasn’t even necessary. 

Edited July 1, 2021 by Guest

[Crs97]

This is such a mess.  Who is forcing Britney to take birth control if her dad isn’t her personal conservator?

Edited July 1, 2021 by Crs97

[bobalina]

1 hour ago, Crs97 said:

This is such a mess.  Who is forcing Britney to take birth control if her dad isn’t her personal conservator?

It's very possible that no one is. We all are assuming Britney is telling the truth. Maybe not.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Crs97 said:

This is such a mess.  Who is forcing Britney to take birth control if her dad isn’t her personal conservator?

I would say there are two possibilities. The first is that Britney isn’t completely telling the truth. The second is that Britney has been led to believe that she could be forced to have an IUD and she never challenged it. The truth may be a combination of the two.

We don’t know if being forced to have an IUD means she was physically forced or if her dad told her she couldn’t have a child and she went along with it. I imagine when you are in that kind of situation you are inclined to believe what the person in charge says. 

[Auntie Anxiety]

36 minutes ago, bobalina said:

It's very possible that no one is. We all are assuming Britney is telling the truth. Maybe not.

There are always three sides to any story.

[merylinkid]

There is a third person Jodi Montgomery -- a professional conservator appointed by the court who is the conservator of her person.   That means she makes the medical decisions.   So it is NOT her dad as Britney ranted who is making her keep the IUD or take meds.   It's possible her stupid lawyer didn't tell her there was another person OR its possible Britney just hates her dad and blames him for everything OR a combo of the two.

I am sure some people are going to claim collusion but if your practice is being a professional conservator it is unlikely that you will behave in an unethical manner for ONE case.   Unless you are getting paid never have to work again money or are incredibly biased in one way (see Cosby prosecutor), you want to keep doing what you are doing.   Montgomery likely has other clients she is their conservator and would like the court to keep appointing her to be a conservator.   She's not going to mess that up just to get in good with Britney's dad.   

The order the judge signed was based on a filing in November.   It is not related to the hearing last week.

 

[biakbiak]

35 minutes ago, merylinkid said:

am sure some people are going to claim collusion but if your practice is being a professional conservator it is unlikely that you will behave in an unethical manner for ONE cas

Since it doesn’t involve Brittany I won’t link them but there are a shit ton of articles and direct case notes about how insular and often corrupt the world of conservatorships are because the person under control literally can’t fire anyone directly and is paying everyone’s fees if your interested. 

Edited July 1, 2021 by biakbiak

[Chaos Theory]

What I find interesting about conservatorship is that Britney Spears is paying the fees to of her fathers lawyers but she can’t hire her own lawyer.  So her father has a million dollar law firm saying she can’t handle her own affairs.  She is paying for her father’s million dollar Psychiatrist who  are saying she can’t handle her own affairs  but because she is so incompetent she gets court appointed attorneys and psychiatrists who get paid more then they normally would so it is in their best interest to leak information to her father so the conservatorship stays in place.

Edited July 1, 2021 by Chaos Theory

[Ohiopirate02]

7 hours ago, Dani said:

I would say there are two possibilities. The first is that Britney isn’t completely telling the truth. The second is that Britney has been led to believe that she could be forced to have an IUD and she never challenged it. The truth may be a combination of the two.

We don’t know if being forced to have an IUD means she was physically forced or if her dad told her she couldn’t have a child and she went along with it. I imagine when you are in that kind of situation you are inclined to believe what the person in charge says. 

From what I have read about Britney, I get the feeling she is a trusting soul who listens to what her doctors say even if it is to her detriment.  So if she goes to the gynecologist and he/she recommends an IUD, she readily agrees thinking her doctor is a professional and smarter than her.  Same thing with her lithium prescription.  I used to work in pharmacy, and saw this type of people on a daily basis.  They do not realize they can talk to their doctor about their diagnosis and course of therapy.  They also never seek a second opinion, and get mad at the pharmacist when he/she won't immediately fill a prescription due to contraindication or allergy.  There's a reason why it's called doctor-patient relationship, the patient is supposed to speak up and voice their concerns, not blindly follow.  

[SuprSuprElevated]

On 6/29/2021 at 3:37 PM, Danny Franks said:

It was part of the plot of Chasing Amy, definitely. But there was also the whole thing about Holden's insecure masculinity being unable to cope with the idea that the girl he'd 'turned' wasn't as gay as he thought, and had sex with other guys before they met.

He was fine hearing about Alyssa's sexual exploits with other girls, but as soon as he learned she once had a threesome with two guys, he spiralled and completely destroyed their relationship.

In the end he lost the girl because he couldn't deal with his own shit, and he lost his best friend, Banksy, because Banksy couldn't deal with his unrequited romantic feelings for Holden.

No one will ever accuse Kevin Smith of being a deep, thoughtful filmmaker, but there's some stuff in there that shows a level of self-reflection that a lot of writers lack.

 

That's insane. I've listened to a bunch of episodes of Smartless, and it's not worth a whole lot more than I paid - nothing. 

They're all nice, funny guys and the guests seem to be game for conversation, but there's nothing really there. It's all just little stories and quips and anecdotes about their lives and the lives of other famous people they know.

Usually, I finish an episode with an unsatisfied, 'is that it?' feeling, like I was still waiting for them to actually give me something interesting.

It's Thursday, July 1, 2021, and I have a confession to make:

I have never listened to a podcast.  Any podcast.  Ever.

<backs slowly out of the room>

[Shannon L.]

9 minutes ago, SuprSuprElevated said:

I have never listened to a podcast.  Any podcast.  Ever.

I wouldn't even know where to find one.  I'm also not completely clear if you have to pay for them and, if so, how. 

 

[ifionlyknew]

13 minutes ago, SuprSuprElevated said:

It's Thursday, July 1, 2021, and I have a confession to make:

I have never listened to a podcast.  Any podcast.  Ever.

<backs slowly out of the room>

Me either. I would rather read a transcript of a podcast than listen to one.

 

[SuprSuprElevated]

6 minutes ago, Shannon L. said:

I wouldn't even know where to find one.  I'm also not completely clear if you have to pay for them and, if so, how. 

 

I will be corrected probably, but I believe they are found in the same places as one can download music (also, never), and that some are free of cost and others are not.  So iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, etc.

[JustHereForFood]

5 minutes ago, SuprSuprElevated said:

I will be corrected probably, but I believe they are found in the same places as one can download music (also, never), and that some are free of cost and others are not.  So iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, etc.

I have never been on any of those apps. I listen to everything I want on youtube and if I want to own some music, I buy the CD.

[biakbiak]

11 minutes ago, SuprSuprElevated said:

I will be corrected probably, but I believe they are found in the same places as one can download music (also, never), and that some are free of cost and others are not.  So iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, etc.

Subscribe anywhere you can get it but rate and review on Apple Podcasts!

Edited July 1, 2021 by biakbiak

[BlackberryJam]

11 minutes ago, SuprSuprElevated said:

I will be corrected probably, but I believe they are found in the same places as one can download music (also, never), and that some are free of cost and others are not.  So iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, etc.

I don't listen to Podcasts or Youtube videos of people talking about stuff. And on top of that, I don't want to know where to find podcasts. Podcasts are like piles of dog poop to me. I'm not interested in it, don't care about it, and I'm certainly not interested in seeking it out. I just get annoyed when it gets dropped in my yard. (Note, I don't have a dog. *shakes fists at neighbors*)

[Crs97]

With Jodi saying she has not required the IUD and her father now demanding an investigation into Britney’s claims . . . this isn’t ending anytime soon.

I totally get that Britney could be lying or confused about the facts.  I am guardian for an adult child and some of the stories he tells about us are legendary.  (Right now he is mad at me because I don’t consider chips and Gatorade a nutritious lunch.)  Her claims were just so specific and none of this really adds up.  I saw one report that the previous judge encouraged her attorney not to tell Britney she could get married under a conservatorship.  Yet, she was engaged before to a guy (tied to Jamie IIRC) so she knew at some point she could be.    
 

The court needs an independent review of this entire case.  It is all so heartbreaking.

[biakbiak]

24 minutes ago, Crs97 said:

The court needs an independent review of this entire case.  It is all so heartbreaking.

Based on the courts decision in this case and so many others I think there needs to be an investigation into how conservatorships are handled and that includes the judges that preside over them. 

[Luckylyn]

John Oliver went into detail of abuses that can happen in conservatorships .

It does seem unfair that Brittany is not allowed to select and pay for her own attorneys but her father can use her money to hire his.   At minimum a person should be able to choose their own representation in court.  The whole system seems weighted against the person in the conservatorship.  I do think there are people who may not be competent  to care for themselves but there needs to be an independent review and protection should be in place to prevent abuse.  Some people are temporarily incompetent, some may just be under the control of unscrupulous people, and some may need permanent supervision.  There are no easy one size fits all solutions.   It really has to be a case by case basis with independent review in my opinion .

[Crs97]

In one transition workshop I attended for my kids with special needs, guardianship came up.  They kept stressing to the kids and parents that a guardian could not tell the ward whom they could see or date nor whether or not they could have sex.  Then one woman in the audience  mentioned that even with everyone agreeing that she no longer needed a guardian, it had been two years of court proceedings and it still hadn’t been terminated.  Reform is needed.

[Blergh]

Does anyone have any info re what the' judge''s alleged reasoning was re doing nothing to help Miss Spears out- despite her desperate plea (and can she possibly appeal this to a higher court)?  I hope there's someone in her life who will actually sincerely try to console and empathize with her after this cruel slap in the face because I don't see how that can help her mental state (whatever it may actually be at this time). 

IMO, I wouldn't trust that particular judge to mediate a skunk rassle! 

[Enero]

6 hours ago, merylinkid said:

There is a third person Jodi Montgomery -- a professional conservator appointed by the court who is the conservator of her person.   That means she makes the medical decisions.   So it is NOT her dad as Britney ranted who is making her keep the IUD or take meds.   It's possible her stupid lawyer didn't tell her there was another person OR its possible Britney just hates her dad and blames him for everything OR a combo of the two.

I am sure some people are going to claim collusion but if your practice is being a professional conservator it is unlikely that you will behave in an unethical manner for ONE case.   Unless you are getting paid never have to work again money or are incredibly biased in one way (see Cosby prosecutor), you want to keep doing what you are doing.   Montgomery likely has other clients she is their conservator and would like the court to keep appointing her to be a conservator.   She's not going to mess that up just to get in good with Britney's dad.   

The order the judge signed was based on a filing in November.   It is not related to the hearing last week.

 

Thank you for explaining this. I read up on the case as well, and as you said it sounds like Ms/Mr. Montgomery has been temporarily in charge of Britney’s personal affairs ie medical decisions etc. since Britney’s father stepped down as conservator over this aspect of her life last year. And from what I read Britney desires this individual to be assigned as permanent conservator over her personal affairs. 

My understanding also is that Jamie Spears is co-conservator of Britney’s estate/finances along with Bessemer Trust and that Britney desires her father to be removed and Bessemer to have full control of her estate/finances. 

So from what I can gather the consevatorship MAY  need to remain, but those in control needs to change. There is a lot being said from both sides and I’m guessing parts of the truth is somewhere in this mess. It’s a sad and unfortunate situation, which I hope will be sorted out soon and in Britney’s best interest. 

[GaT]

15 hours ago, Crs97 said:

This is such a mess.  Who is forcing Britney to take birth control if her dad isn’t her personal conservator?

 

14 hours ago, bobalina said:

It's very possible that no one is. We all are assuming Britney is telling the truth. Maybe not.

 

6 hours ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

From what I have read about Britney, I get the feeling she is a trusting soul who listens to what her doctors say even if it is to her detriment.  So if she goes to the gynecologist and he/she recommends an IUD, she readily agrees thinking her doctor is a professional and smarter than her.  Same thing with her lithium prescription.  I used to work in pharmacy, and saw this type of people on a daily basis.  They do not realize they can talk to their doctor about their diagnosis and course of therapy.  They also never seek a second opinion, and get mad at the pharmacist when he/she won't immediately fill a prescription due to contraindication or allergy.  There's a reason why it's called doctor-patient relationship, the patient is supposed to speak up and voice their concerns, not blindly follow.  

When you consider that Britney started in show business when she was a very young child, & has had people telling her what to do all this time, there's a really good chance she doesn't have any idea she can question things or say no. And the conservator doesn't have any reason to tell her. Someone may have told her that she needs permission to get married & have kids & she doesn't  know that's not correct. According to her testimony, she didn't know she was allowed to ask for the conservatorship to be dissolved until recently.

Edited July 1, 2021 by GaT

[Guest]

8 hours ago, merylinkid said:

There is a third person Jodi Montgomery -- a professional conservator appointed by the court who is the conservator of her person.   That means she makes the medical decisions.   So it is NOT her dad as Britney ranted who is making her keep the IUD or take meds.   It's possible her stupid lawyer didn't tell her there was another person OR its possible Britney just hates her dad and blames him for everything OR a combo of the two.

 

Jodi Montgomery has only been Britney’s conservator since Jamie’s health issues caused him to step down temporarily. Britney’s statement was covering the whole 13 years so it is possible she was only talking about what she experienced with Jamie. Also, Britney could believe she still has to follow her fathers orders. If Montgomery doesn’t know that Britney believes she can’t have the IUD out it probably would have never occurred to her to let Britney know unless asked. 

6 hours ago, Chaos Theory said:

What I find interesting about conservatorship is that Britney Spears is paying the fees to of her fathers lawyers but she can’t hire her own lawyer.  So her father has a million dollar law firm saying she can’t handle her own affairs.  She is paying for her father’s million dollar Psychiatrist who  are saying she can’t handle her own affairs  but because she is so incompetent she gets court appointed attorneys and psychiatrists who get paid more then they normally would so it is in their best interest to leak information to her father so the conservatorship stays in place.

Britney is paying for her own lawyer she just wasn’t able to choose him. He was appointed by the court. Last October, there was a court ruling giving Britney the right to expand her legal time which her father opposed. So she does now have the ability to hire her own lawyers but the court appointed one is still the head of her legal team. I have no idea if she has hired more or if that means she can replace the court appointed lawyer. 

4 hours ago, Blergh said:

Does anyone have any info re what the' judge''s alleged reasoning was re doing nothing to help Miss Spears out- despite her desperate plea (and can she possibly appeal this to a higher court)?  I hope there's someone in her life who will actually sincerely try to console and empathize with her after this cruel slap in the face because I don't see how that can help her mental state (whatever it may actually be at this time). 

IMO, I wouldn't trust that particular judge to mediate a skunk rassle! 

This ruling was completely related to a ruling from the end of 2020 and is not based off of Britney’s statement at all. As far as we know, Britney hasn’t actually requested to end the conservatorship (she hadn’t on the day she spoke). This is based off of Britney’s request last year to make Bessemer Trust her financial conservator and Jodi Montegomery her personal conservator. The judge kept Montgomery as the temporary personal conservator and made Jamie Spears and Bessemer co-conservators of her financial estate. The judge gave Britney mostly what she wanted but didn’t boot Jamie completely which is pretty fair when trying to figure out what is best.

When are dealing with someone with a history of mental health issues judges aren’t going to just immediately changes things based in only what they say. There are processes to go through to make sure it is actually the right decision. 

Edited July 1, 2021 by Guest

[aradia22]

I'm dipping into speculation/conspiracy but smart people who do shady things don't put those things in writing. It's easy enough to tell Britney anything and then turn around and claim nothing of the sort happened like 'oh, are you going to believe the crazy woman? She's not credible.' The general public loves DNA evidence and "receipts" but sometimes you have to parse testimony. I am biased as a fan of Britney's music, but I just find it hard to listen to what she said and think it wouldn't be a good use of the court's time to investigate the whole situation to make sure everyone involved has her best interests in mind if the conservatorship needs to stay in place. If she has a contentious relationship with her family, why involve any of them? It's not like she's a child where her relationship with her parents might need to be prioritized. 

[merylinkid]

1 hour ago, Enero said:

There is a lot being said from both sides and I’m guessing parts of the truth is somewhere in this mess.

That is the most accurate thing said about the situation so far.

We only know what's in the papers and based on our own experiences with the justice system (I've done guardianships.   Every guardian is someone I would trust with my stuff.  Are there unscrupulous ones out there?   Sure.   Are there thousands of cases where everything is just fine?   Probably.   We only hear about the ones where something goes wrong).   We don't know the whole case.   We haven't seen her medical records.   We aren't in the courtroom hearing all the testimony and reading all the reports.   We don't see the financial records.   

[Crashcourse]

6 hours ago, SuprSuprElevated said:

It's Thursday, July 1, 2021, and I have a confession to make:

I have never listened to a podcast.  Any podcast.  Ever.

<backs slowly out of the room>

You are not alone. ✋

[scarynikki12]

In happier news:

 

[Danny Franks]

7 hours ago, SuprSuprElevated said:

I will be corrected probably, but I believe they are found in the same places as one can download music (also, never), and that some are free of cost and others are not.  So iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, etc.

There are also dedicated podcast aggregators (is that the right term?) like Stitcher, Pocket Casts etc, that you can use to search, subscribe and download podcasts you want to listen to.

I honestly don't know where I'd be without them, because you can find pods on almost any topic you want, and unless you're being incredibly obscure, you'll probably have a choice of several for that topic.

Feel like a twelve hour, detailed history of the Persian Empire? Dan Carlin's Hardcore History has you covered. How about satirical takes on the week's news? The Bugle is there. You Must Remember This has stories from the golden age of Hollywood. Binge Mode, The Rewatchables, Unspooled, Blank Check are all movie deep dives. And so on, forever.

Point blank refusing to learn anything about them seems as confounding to me as people who refuse to read books. Why would you deny yourself an avenue of knowledge and entertainment?

[SuprSuprElevated]

On 7/1/2021 at 5:03 PM, Danny Franks said:

Point blank refusing to learn anything about them seems as confounding to me as people who refuse to read books. Why would you deny yourself an avenue of knowledge and entertainment?

Confound away sir/madam~

p.s.&b.t.w:  Never said never would.  Said haven't.  🖖

Edited July 3, 2021 by SuprSuprElevated

[Mabinogia]

7 hours ago, JustHereForFood said:

and if I want to own some music, I buy the CD.

They still make those!?!??!!

37 minutes ago, Danny Franks said:

Point blank refusing to learn anything about them seems as confounding to me as people who refuse to read books. Why would you deny yourself an avenue of knowledge and entertainment?

I just can't with podcasts. Same with audiobooks. I don't have the auditory attention span for it. I am strongly visual, especially when talking to people. I even hate talking on the phone because I can't see the other person so I can't really pay attention to what is being said. 

Music is the only thing I can just listen to, but even then I'm usually singing, so again, not just listening. If I just listen to a disembodied voice I really won't comprehend or remember what they are saying. I need visuals. 

[Danny Franks]

40 minutes ago, SuprSuprElevated said:

Confound away sir/madam~

p.s.&b.t.w:  Never said never.  Said haven't.  🖖

No, I know you didn't say never, but others did.

6 minutes ago, Mabinogia said:

I just can't with podcasts. Same with audiobooks. I don't have the auditory attention span for it. I am strongly visual, especially when talking to people. I even hate talking on the phone because I can't see the other person so I can't really pay attention to what is being said. 

Music is the only thing I can just listen to, but even then I'm usually singing, so again, not just listening. If I just listen to a disembodied voice I really won't comprehend or remember what they are saying. I need visuals. 

I'm the opposite. I have podcasts on for probably about half the time I'm awake every day. When I'm driving or walking, working out, doing stuff around the house. Sometimes I miss stuff and have to rewind them a few minutes, but I find myself much happier listening to a podcast than having to sit down and watch a video on the same topic.

[ABay]

Podcasts are just another entertainment form and there are good ones and bad ones, interesting ones and boring ones, well-produced ones and those that are the auditory equivalent of an Ed Wood film, ones with hosts you love and ones with hosts who say like every 3rd word.  They aren't much different from radio shows, especially ones from NPR and CBC, except that they don't come on air at specific times.

[RealHousewife]

9 hours ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

From what I have read about Britney, I get the feeling she is a trusting soul who listens to what her doctors say even if it is to her detriment.  So if she goes to the gynecologist and he/she recommends an IUD, she readily agrees thinking her doctor is a professional and smarter than her.  Same thing with her lithium prescription.  I used to work in pharmacy, and saw this type of people on a daily basis.  They do not realize they can talk to their doctor about their diagnosis and course of therapy.  They also never seek a second opinion, and get mad at the pharmacist when he/she won't immediately fill a prescription due to contraindication or allergy.  There's a reason why it's called doctor-patient relationship, the patient is supposed to speak up and voice their concerns, not blindly follow.  

Britney's called herself naive. I think Felicia said years ago Britney was very trusting of what anyone said, that she'd believe anyone and say, yes mam. She probably had to put trust in others to a degree starting a huge career so young. She had to rely on so many people. A teenager would be in over her head performing all over the world, home schooling, dealing with contracts, money, etc. It's possible she's finally finding her own voice at 39. She's lead a very unique life in that in some ways she's been an adult extremely early, but in others she's kind of been like a child. I also remember Britney saying she was a scaredy cat and always felt someone was out to get her. I can see her being intimidated by everyone from her parents to managers to lawyers. It's really sad. What makes it more tragic to me, is I think non-fans might see her as this crazy chick. Britney was a VERY mature teen. I don't think this was said often, but I remember she was a great student too. She was a bright kid. I'm not even saying this as a a stan or anything. I can see her as naive, but the woman is not stupid. I really wonder what she would have been like if she didn't become a pop star. She said once if she weren't a performer she might have become an entertainment lawyer. I believe she could have become one and might have just been a "regular" successful, healthy adult. 

[JustHereForFood]

59 minutes ago, Mabinogia said:

They still make those!?!??!!

Sure! To be fair, I'm not sure if they make new ones or just sell the oldies, because I haven't been listening to anything from the last decade or so 😃.

1 hour ago, Mabinogia said:

I just can't with podcasts. Same with audiobooks. I don't have the auditory attention span for it. I am strongly visual, especially when talking to people. I even hate talking on the phone because I can't see the other person so I can't really pay attention to what is being said. 

I'm similar to that. The only podcast I listen to is on youtube, with the guys shown talking and no matter how much I try to do other stuff during listening, I always end up just watching them, if I want to pay attention. 

[Crashcourse]

1 hour ago, Danny Franks said:

Point blank refusing to learn anything about them seems as confounding to me as people who refuse to read books. Why would you deny yourself an avenue of knowledge and entertainment?

Woah, now.  Just because someone doesn't listen to podcasts doesn't mean they're being willfully ignorant.  They just...don't listen to podcasts.   No big deal.

[Zella]

1 hour ago, Mabinogia said:

I just can't with podcasts. Same with audiobooks. I don't have the auditory attention span for it. I am strongly visual, especially when talking to people. I even hate talking on the phone because I can't see the other person so I can't really pay attention to what is being said. 

Music is the only thing I can just listen to, but even then I'm usually singing, so again, not just listening. If I just listen to a disembodied voice I really won't comprehend or remember what they are saying. I need visuals. 

Same. I find it really frustrating when I try to explain this to people, and their solution is to just recommend other podcasts or audiobooks to me. I literally cannot process the medium. Like, can't even tell you the main character in an audiobook I listened to can't process it. It's basically like listening to the teachers from Charlie Brown for me. Send me a book or documentary recommendation on the same topic instead, please, so I can actually understand and retain the information. 

Just now, Crashcourse said:

Woah, now.  Just because someone doesn't listen to podcasts doesn't mean they're being willfully ignorant.  They just...don't listen to podcasts.   No big deal.

Exactly. Thank you. 

Edited July 1, 2021 by Zella

[Auntie Anxiety]

2 minutes ago, Crashcourse said:

Woah, now.  Just because someone doesn't listen to podcasts doesn't mean they're being willfully ignorant.  They just...don't listen to podcasts.   No big deal.

It’s like social media. People might think you NEED to be on it because they spend half their waking hours attached to it. I’m just not interested. 

[LexieLily]

Bessemer Trust Motioned To Withdraw.

The wealth management firm said in a court filing that it wanted to resign “due to changed circumstances,” citing Ms. Spears’s recent public criticisms of the conservatorship.

The firm said in its filing that it had been told that Ms. Spears’s conservatorship was voluntary and that she had consented to the company acting as co-conservator. But in a court hearing on June 23, Ms. Spears excoriated the conservatorship and demanded that it end.

[BlackberryJam]

2 minutes ago, Auntie Anxiety said:

It’s like social media. People might think you NEED to be on it because they spend half their waking hours attached to it. I’m just not interested. 

Precisely. It’s not as if podcasts are the only source of information and entertainment. And it’s simply not my preferred source.

[Vermicious Knid]

She may be required to be on birth control because of the Lithium prescription, it's been know to cause horrific birth defects. I was looking at another site's discussion of the Britney situation and there were several people on there who were convinced her own statement actually proved why she needed to be under conservatorship.

I also have never deliberately listened to a podcast, I say deliberately because sometimes they are played on NPR when I have it on. For me it's because I'm a fast reader. This is also why I don't do audiobooks. Why should I spend 14 hours listening to something I can read in 3-4. Or 24 minutes of a podcast I can read in 10.