Science
Taylor Swift's new album is rife with breakup songs. Psychologists explain why we love them
Perhaps never before have so many been so eager for something so steeped in heartbreak.
Taylor Swift‘s legions of devotees have eagerly anticipated her new album, “The Tortured Poets Department,” in hopes of gaining insight into her notoriously private six-year relationship with actor Joe Alwyn — particularly her perspective on its demise.
Swift delivers. In a track titled “Fresh Out the Slammer,” the 14-time Grammy Award winner sings of spending “Years of labor, locks and ceilings / In the shade of how he was feeling.” Another song called “So Long London” has her recounting that “I stopped CPR, after all it’s no use / Thе spirit was gone, we would never come to.”
“Songwriting is something that, like, actually gets me through my life, and I’ve never had an album where I needed songwriting more than I needed it on ‘Tortured Poets,’” Swift confessed to an audience in Melbourne, Australia, when her Eras tour played there in February.
Embracing a breakup album may seem like a macabre thing to do. But psychologists and cognitive scientists say songs about relationships gone bad actually can do listeners a lot of good.
“When people have a romantic breakup, they feel very alone in their experience,” said David Sbarra, a professor of psychology at the University of Arizona who studies how marital separation and divorce affect health. “They feel very isolated and think that the unique individual circumstances that characterized their breakup are particularly terrible.”
A breakup song can change that, said Sbarra, who conducted a deep dive into the emotional authenticity of Olivia Rodrigo‘s lyrics about a doomed relationship on her debut album “Sour.”
“Songs play a powerful role in normalizing our experience, in making us feel that we are not this weird, unusual, distorted kind of person,” he said.
Indeed, almost everyone who has reached their late teens has lived through the demise of a romantic relationship and endured the gamut of emotions that accompany it.
“The songs function to affirm their emotions, validate them, remind the listener they are not alone,” said Bill Thompson, a psychologist at Bond University in Queensland, Australia, who studies why music is important to people. “The emotions associated with breaking up are universal. They are a natural part of being human — even if they are also painful.”
Thompson said the concept of a love song — and by extension, a breakup song — may be written into our genes. Birds are known to serenade potential mates, while mice, humpback whales and other species use vocalizations to attract their partners.
“So among our ancestors, music might have played a role in mate selection and courtship,” he said. “It’s possible the prevalence of songs about love and courtship is a remnant of this ancestral function.”
The Sumerians of Mesopotamia devised a love song by around 2000 BCE, and scholars of Ancient Egypt have found love songs inscribed into pottery and written on sheets of papyrus. But it’s not clear when the first breakup song arose.
Why breakup songs caught on is less of a mystery, experts said.
“Breakups certainly inspire a rich broth of emotions,” said Arianna Galligher, a licensed clinical social worker and director of the Stress, Trauma and Resilience program at The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center. “For a lot of people, listening to music helps them sort through their own emotional experience.”
Sometimes a breakup song can be cathartic. Here, Taylor Swift shows her strength during a performance at SoFi Stadium in Inglewood in August 2023.
(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)
Sadness is often the primary emotion in a breakup song. But it’s certainly not the only one.
The 10-minute version of Swift’s “All Too Well” evokes a range of strong feelings, including “sadness at the end of the relationship, nostalgia about the past romance, regret that the relationship failed, anger at being dumped, resentment that the boyfriend moved on to other young women, scorn at his unfaithfulness, and fear of being hurt again,” Paul Thagard, a philosopher and cognitive scientist at the University of Waterloo, writes in his forthcoming book “Dreams, Jokes, and Songs.”
“I think it is a fabulous song,” Thagard said in an interview. “The reason it’s such a fabulous song is that it manages to convey a lot of different emotions.”
There’s no rule that says the emotions in a breakup song have to be negative. If a relationship was a poor fit — or even toxic — it’s appropriate to celebrate when it comes to an end, Galligher said.
Likewise, a breakup song suffused with sadness can resonate with a listener in a rock-solid relationship who is coping with another kind of loss.
“Sadness is not exclusive to breakups,” Galligher said. “Sometimes it can be helpful to listen to a song that is ostensibly about a breakup, but it helps you tap into something inside of you that knows sadness.”
She recalled a time that Adele’s “Someone Like You” came on the radio as she was driving to a memorial service.
“I was in a perfectly functional relationship, very happily coupled, and I found myself tapping into the song’s sadness and grief related to the loss of my friend,” she said. “It was really helpful to be able to access those emotions.”
When a breakup is fresh and the pain is raw, a song can serve as “a virtual empathetic friend” by affirming and validating a listener’s emotions, helping them process their feelings, and reminding them they’re not alone, Thompson said.
“The advantage is that you won’t get unwanted advice,” he said. “Music is just there for you and supportive.”
Thagard agreed: “There’s no judgment coming from a song.” (Unless you’re one of the unlucky men who has broken Swift’s heart.)
In addition, binging on breakup songs can be part of “a habituation process” that reduces the intensity of feelings associated with a romantic split, Sbarra said. Some people may find that necessary before they’re ready to talk about their breakup with another person.
“Sometimes folks need to spend a little time reflecting on their own feelings,” Galligher said. “Having a little bit of solitude to be introspective can be really beneficial, and then you seek the connection with others.”
Yet for all that breakup songs have to offer, it’s still possible to have too much of a good thing. Studies have found that listening to sad music can make sad people feel even sadder by prompting them them to dwell on their sadness.
“You do have to take your temperature about whether this is ultimately helping you or hurting you,” Sbarra said.
That said, listening to breakup songs can be a healthy way of distancing oneself from a painful event.
“It’s not you,” he said. “It’s Taylor Swift.”
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that states may ban hormone treatments for transgender teens, rejecting the claim that such gender-based discrimination is unconstitutional.
In a 6-3 decision, the justices said states are generally free to decide on proper standards of medical care, particularly when health experts are divided.
Chief Justice John G. Roberts, writing for the court, said the state decides on medical regulations. “We leave questions regarding its policy to the people, their elected representatives, and the democratic process,” he said.
In dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor said the law “plainly discriminates on the basis of sex… By retreating from meaningful judicial review exactly where it matters most, the Court abandons transgender children and their families to political whims. In sadness, I dissent.” Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson agreed.
The ruling upholds laws in Tennessee and 23 other Republican-led states, all of them adopted in the past four years.
Tennessee lawmakers said the number of minors being diagnosed with gender dysphoria had “exploded” in recent years, leading to a “surge in unproven and risky medical interventions for these underage patients.”
California and other Democratic-led states do not prohibit doctors from prescribing puberty blockers or hormones for those under age 18 who are diagnosed with gender dysphoria.
While the court’s ruling in the Tennessee case should not directly affect California’s law, the Trump administration seeks to prevent the use of federal funds to pay for gender affirming care.
This could affect patients who rely on Medicaid and also restrict hospitals and other medical clinics from providing hormones and other medical treatments for minors.
Wednesday’s decision highlights the sharp turn in the past year on trans rights and “gender affirming” care.
Solicitor Gen. Elizabeth Prelogar, representing the Biden administration, had appealed to the Supreme Court in November 2023, and urged the justices to strike down the red-state laws.
She spoke of a broad consensus in favor of gender affirming care. It was unconstitutional, she argued, for states to ban “evidence-based treatments supported by the overwhelming consensus of the medical community.”
But Republican lawmakers voiced doubt about the long-term effect of these hormone treatments for adolescents.
Their skepticism was reinforced by the Cass Report from Britain, which concluded there were not long-term studies or reliable evidence in support of the treatments.
Trans-rights advocates argued the court should have deferred to parents and their doctors, not state lawmakers.
“The court today failed to do its job,” said Jennifer Levi, GLAD Law senior director of transgender and queer rights. “When the political system breaks down and legislatures bow to popular hostility, the judiciary must be the Constitution’s backbone. Instead, it chose to look away, abandoning both vulnerable children and the parents who love them.”
Lawyers for Lambda Legal and the ACLU called it “a heartbreaking ruling, making it more difficult for transgender youth to escape the danger and trauma of being denied their ability to live and thrive.”
“This is a sad day, and the implications will reverberate for years and across the country, but it does not shake our resolve to continue fighting,” said Sasha Buchert, a Lambda attorney.
Upon taking office in January, President Trump targeted transgender people without specifically mentioning them.
He said his administration would “recognize two sexes, male and female. These sexes are not changeable and are grounded in fundamental and incontrovertible reality.”
His administration later said its ban on gender affirming care for minors would extend to medical facilities receiving federal funds.
President Trump signed legislation Thursday seeking to rescind California’s ambitious auto emission standards, including a landmark rule that eventually would have barred sales of new gas-only cars in California by 2035.
In a bill signing ceremony in the East Room of the White House, Trump slammed California’s planned zero-emission requirements for new car sales as “a disaster for our country.” During a meandering 50-minute speech, he argued that California’s regulations would raise car prices, hobble American car companies and place an incredible strain on electrical grids across the country.
“We officially rescue the U.S. auto industry from destruction by terminating the California electric vehicle mandate, once and for all,” Trump said to applause from a room filled with conservative legislators and business representatives.
“This horrible scheme would effectively abolish the internal combustion engine, which most people prefer,” Trump continued.
Trump boasted the legislation would “kill the California mandates forever,” declaring it would dash progressive plans to accelerate the adoption of electric vehicles.
“They can’t take us to court,” he said. “They can’t do any of the things they can do with the executive orders, and it’s permanent.”
But moments after he signed the three bills into law, California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta led a coalition of 10 attorneys general in filing a lawsuit to challenge Trump’s laws, which had been approved by Congress in May. Bonta argued Congress unlawfully acted to upend California’s emission rules by invoking the Congressional Review Act, a law designed to allow legislators to rescind major federal rules adopted toward the end of a presidential administration. California and several congressional rules experts have said the Congressional Review Act could not be used to overturn federal waivers that enable California to enforce its auto emission standards.
“We’re doing this to ensure future generations inherit a livable planet with breathable air,” Bonta said at a news conference Thursday morning. “Meanwhile, the president’s divisive, partisan agenda is jeopardizing our lives, our economy and our environment. It’s reckless, it’s illegal, and because of it, we’ll be seeing the Trump administration in court again for the 26th time.”
By signing these three bills into law, Trump invalidated some of the most innovative regulations adopted by California environmental rule makers and undercut California’s long-standing authority to set more rigorous vehicle emission standards:
- The Advanced Clean Cars II rule would’ve required car companies to sell California dealerships an increasing percentage of new zero-emission or long-range hybrid vehicles, starting at 35% in 2026. The regulation would’ve culminated in a ban on the sale of new gas-only cars in California in 2035.
- Advanced Clean Trucks rule, which would’ve required a significant percentage of medium- and heavy-duty truck sales be zero-emission by 2035.
- The Heavy-Duty Engine and Vehicle Omnibus rule that established cleaner engine standards and required warranties for new heavy-duty vehicles.
In his second term, Trump has repeatedly attacked California’s ambitious auto emission rules, including the Advanced Clean Cars II regulation, which he has incorrectly described as an electric vehicle mandate. The rule does not block the sale of used gas-only cars or other zero-emission vehicles, like hydrogen-powered cars.
Because of its historically bad air quality, California is the only state that has been given permission to adopt auto emission standards that are stricter than federal standards. Many other Democratic states adhere to California’s auto emission rules, which has put pressure on auto companies to comply with the state’s progressive rules. That has irked a number of Republicans, including Trump, who believe there should be a unified slate of auto standards set by the federal government.
“It’s had us tied up in knots for years,” Trump said in his remarks Thursday morning. “They’d pass these crazy rules in California, and 17 states would go by them. The automakers didn’t know what to do because they’re really building cars for two countries.”
But California needs a federal waiver from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for its pace-setting auto emission standards to be enforceable.
Michael Regan, the U.S. EPA administrator during the Biden administration, granted several California waivers, including two in December 2024.
Prior to the Senate vote to overturn California auto emission rules, both
the Senate parliamentarian and Government Accountability Office had determined these federal waivers are not rules, they are administrative orders, not subject to the Congressional Review Act.
Despite those rulings, the Senate moved ahead with the vote and advanced the bill to Trump’s desk with a simple majority vote.
Milwaukee fatal apartment fire; moving company goes above and beyond to help
Hispanic journalist arrested during metro Atlanta protests in ICE custody
Suspect in fatal Minneapolis DUI crash set to be deported before trial can begin
Tree falls on car in Indianapolis, blocking traffic on Delaware Street
Nick Bonino joining Pittsburgh Penguins coaching staff
Why Marjorie Taylor Greene was ‘kicked out’ of the Freedom Caucus according to Rep. Buck
Colorado Rockies game no. 116 thread: Zac Gallen vs José Ureña
See it: Tesla crashes into Columbus convention center at 70 mph
Fox News Politics: Georgia the whole day through
Death of missing Oregon girl found in stream ruled homicide
Ilhan Omar claims no one has 'attacked Americans,' but Iran's deadly history tells different story
'We don't need Bezos': Venetians plan to protest billionaire's wedding
What's in the Senate's version of Trump's 'big bill'?
Video: Inside Trump’s Shifting Stance on Iran
Virginia Democrats choose nominee to challenge GOP Attorney General Jason Miyares
-
Business1 week agoYale’s Endowment Selling Private Equity Stakes as Trump Targets Ivies
-
Culture1 week agoBarbara Holdridge, Whose Record Label Foretold Audiobooks, Dies at 95
-
Science1 week agoIn Taxicab Geometry, Pi Equals 4 and Circles Aren’t Round
-
News1 week agoYosemite Bans Large Flags From El Capitan, Criminalizing Protests
-
Culture1 week agoA Murdered Journalist’s Unfinished Book About the Amazon Gets Completed and Published
-
Culture1 week agoHow Many Memorable Lines Can You Match Up With Their Novels?
-
Business1 week agoWaymo halts service in downtown Los Angeles amid ICE protests
-
Politics1 week agoFox News Politics Newsletter: Hillary ‘Can’t Handle the Ratio'