Britney Spears’ boyfriend, Sam Asghari, is speaking out in support of the pop star following the release of the FX documentary about her.

@NardineSaad reports

Asghari gave his support to Spears and was bluntly disparaging her father.

He said he has “zero respect” for the elder Spears, who has a court-approved conservatorship over the singer.
https://t.co/7QTq0nvMFr
“Now it’s important for people to understand that I have zero respect for someone trying to control our relationship and constantly throwing obstacles our way,” he said on social media.

That's not all he said...
https://t.co/7QTq0nvMFr
Lawyers for Jamie Spears did not immediately respond to The Times’ requests for comment Tuesday.

Meanwhile, here's the story behind the couple, including how they met and social media posts they released
https://t.co/7QTq0nvMFr
Here's why Britney Spears doesn't appear in the new FX documentary about the conservatorship and the #FreeBritney movement https://t.co/ulPYwiaYkq
A clip of @CraigyFerg's memorable monologue about @britneyspears has found a new life.

"I wanted to put myself in the position of what Ms. Spears had been in," @CraigyFerg previously said of the moment https://t.co/f03CvkFIZH
Ferguson also discussed the "uncomfortable" reaction from the crowd, the beautiful moment at the end of the monologue, and what happened the next morning.

More: https://t.co/f03CvkFIZH

More from Celebrities

You May Also Like

This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".


The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.


Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)


There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.


At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?