How so?
Adolescence | Netflix
- Thread starter Glanza
- Start date
As the posted TV interview with Kemi, the general media reaction and it being raised in parliament shows this is being pushed as a piece of work that should be directing future law and policy.
But its all nonsense anyway.
Let's actually break down what happened in the series...
Jamie apparently was watching some 'Andrew Tate' style videos.
Separately Katie sent a 'topless' picture of herself to another boy that was then widely distributed around the school.
Jamie apparently took inspiration from the videos he had been watching feeling that Katie would, in the circumstances, be more susceptible to accepting an approach from him and he asked her out. There's nothing I've seen in the series to suggest that he did so in an inappropriate way.
Not only did Katie decline his request to go out with him but she then ridiculed him and then started a very public campaign of bullying Jamie, via social media, though the use of coded emoji's.
Bizarrely it is Katie that seems to have the most influenced by the 'manospehere' 'toxic male pick up artist' sub culture in her actions at this point as she seems to know all about this hidden 'language' of emoji use.
*side note a lot of actual children also seem to to be unaware, in real life, as to this usage suggesting or was either made up for the series or they used an quite obscure usage of these symbols, even amongst the youth of today, as a plot device*
Jamie is therefore now the target of ridicule and bullying at school and obtains a knife from a friend it appears because he wanted to confront Katie to threaten her in an effort to stop her bullying. Other than trying to tie Jamie's action's here to a more general disdain for women from the Tate style videos there's nothing in his actions here that could reasonably be extrapolated as having been inspired by the videos he had been watching.
Just a general sense that he was being bullied and had decided to confront his bully. However Jamie appears to be one of the smaller/ less developed boys in his year and, as is often the case girls are sometimes physically more developed around this age and so when Jamie confronts Katie, after following her late at night, she quickly manages to get the better of him by pushing him to the floor and then starts to walk away. Jamie then apparently even more enraged by this produces the knife and stabs her repeatedly from behind as per the video shown in interview.
So, as per the show, the only part of Jamie's action clearly linked to his online activities re the 'Tate' style videos, before he was arrested for the stabbing, was the apparently quite innocuous act of asking a girl out.
Seeking to confront a bully and being stupid enough to take and use knife isn't something that's a new phenomenon easily blammed on social media.
And in Adolescence's case it portrays a very unlikely scenario where the stabber is a 13-year-old white boy and the victim is a girl of a similar age.
And yet Kemi's being badgered, on TV, for not watching this unlikely depiction of a stabbing that doesn't really have that much to do with what it's been claimed to have been caused by (online 'toxic masculitnity' content) in the first place!
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 29,864
I bet you still haven't watched it.
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Feb 2006
- Posts
- 17,502
- Location
- Surrey
Do you get annoyed that Lord of the rings (books or movies) isn't true to the source material by chance? Or star wars episode 4 to 6?
When Lord of the Rings and Star Wars are being pushed widely as essential watching for setting law and public policy I'll let you know.
Oh hi Vince I assumed you must've had me had me on mute.
I watched episode 1-3 in full (once) and watched episode 4 up until the dad was in the van with daughter and wife after his van was sprayed with 'nonce'.
I don't know why you're so doubtful that I would check the source material given the ubiquity of Netflix subscriptions?
I'll try to watch the rest of 4 this weekend.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Feb 2006
- Posts
- 17,502
- Location
- Surrey
Have you guys thought about changing some things in your life to avoid these situations? I don't mean that in an insulting way, I post plenty on these forums I know not coming from a position of strength here. But the only place I see this discussed is here, I search for "making of" videos on youtube, and with friends. Why are you all so exposed to all these places where it "gets shoved up your ass"? I think the show is great, best I've watched all year, but in my bubble it doesn't exist that this show is that major. Why are you bubbles such that you feel you can't avoid it? I guess you go on Facebook and it's there? This is a sign to get off it. The kemi interview mentioned above, is this not daytime TV interview? Perhaps turn it off? Find better ways to spend your time than the places that Reed you this content, as as adult you're not dealing with it well, coming up with these theories and ideas. Kind of reminds me of some show I watched this year, where some 13 year old kid is fed material that leads him to weird theories and ideas. Maybe some law needs to do something about this...
It's kind of interesting that grown adults seem to be upset or unable to cope with this shows presence in their bubble, but then think it's unrealistic that a 13 year old boy could have a bubble of incel stuff that leads him to have the views on girls that he has.
From users in this thread, it seems their algorithms purposefully push clips and material that causes a negative reaction from them as adults, but they don't believe the algorithms do this to kids and nothing needs to be changed.
It's kind of interesting that grown adults seem to be upset or unable to cope with this shows presence in their bubble, but then think it's unrealistic that a 13 year old boy could have a bubble of incel stuff that leads him to have the views on girls that he has.
From users in this thread, it seems their algorithms purposefully push clips and material that causes a negative reaction from them as adults, but they don't believe the algorithms do this to kids and nothing needs to be changed.
Last edited:
Good point well made tbh.
There definitely is this sort of ‘dislike’ / ‘disappointment’ culture that seems to get pleasure from watching things fail that has led to a cultural creep in people saying some pretty wild and derogatory things on these forums towards public individuals. Even if you don’t like them… woah Nelly, calm down?!
If adults are subject to this, and they evidently are, it isn’t too far fetched to imagine people getting really turbo.
Sort of related; in the PC forum recently there were quite a few people causally defending the existence a game which focussed on you raping a female family member (yes, really). Wtf is going on there! How desensitised are people getting?! There is a good argument and discussion for what content is suitable / offensive etc. but… that game. Woah.
Last edited:
Other than on here and a couple of people saying they'd watched it at work when it first came out I've literally seen nothing else about it unless I've gone looking.
It's amazing how different the content of people's "bubbles" can be.
It's amazing how different the content of people's "bubbles" can be.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 29,864
Facebooks (and YouTube's) algorithm is so blatant.
Facebook keeps trying to push random posts and even videos on me of men getting "done over" in some way by wives, girlfriends etc. Luckily I'm not entirely brain-dead so I can see right through it.
You've got to be diligent with the 'Not interested' 'Show fewer like these' etc buttons
Facebook keeps trying to push random posts and even videos on me of men getting "done over" in some way by wives, girlfriends etc. Luckily I'm not entirely brain-dead so I can see right through it.
You've got to be diligent with the 'Not interested' 'Show fewer like these' etc buttons
This is the gaslighting that's all to common in society today.
Propaganda is pushed incessantly, and with particular effort when it comes to children. And yet when people notice and or objecting to this process they're accused of being the ones with a problem.
The mass media and politician response to this show is a classic example.
Talk of it being shown widely in schools as an 'educational' resource, discussed in the very same Parliament that has just shelved the already watered down investigations into some actual serious offending against children, the leader of the opposition berated on TV for not watching this rather unrealistic and very unlikely depiction of knife crime despite her saying that she concentrated on actual cases and statistics not dramas.
It's nonsense what life session are adolescents and Kemi supposed to 'learn' from this series'?
Boys don't ask girls out unless they turn you down and then orchasterate a campaign of online bullying against you?
Boys don't take a knife out with you 'for your defence' or when seeking to confront someone whoose giving you grief because that knife might end up being used to seriously hurt or kill someone? (How often has that sort if messaging worked out before?)
Kemi make sure you support the Labour government in instituting more laws around speech/ 'hate'/ 'misogyny' so 13 year old white boys don't get any ideas about asking girls out? Maybe lets ban a few more swords and 'combat' style knives that are only used on a tiny fraction of attacks with bladed weapons because a kitchen knife is already perfectly sufficent for the task?
If Adolescence was just a drama on Netflix it would be fine.
Anyone with knowledge of hospitals, the police, fire brigade etc will end up rolling their eyes a little when watching a dramatisation involving thoose sorts of services as misrepresentations/ mistakes are made about how things actually work or quite ridiculous events unfold to keep thr plot moving and exciting to watch.
This is where Kemi's comment about Casualty was bang on. Just like Adolescence it's a drama that loosely does deal with some themes that do actually effect the health services/ the NHS in particular.
But there's not that much talk of showing it as an educational resource to children or using it as a product to guide public policy/ law.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Feb 2006
- Posts
- 17,502
- Location
- Surrey
I'm curious, if you were to rewrite the show, in particular let's say the actual incident, how would you edit it to make it a bit more realistic?
Which bit was unrealistic and unlikely?
Would it be fair to say has the show been more realistic, then you'd be OK with the response you currently see?
Amongst some other glaring issues (some seemingly included because the continual filming style required them) .....
A thirteen year old white boys stabbing a girl.
In the last year 23/24 forty children lost their lives to a knife or sharp instrument, 17 of whom were aged 15 or younger.
Beyond the Headlines update: a data-driven look at the rise in fatal stabbings | Youth Endowment Fund
The start of 2025 has seen fatal stabbings of young people making headlines across the country. Every child’s life lost is devastating to families and communities. While it’s easy to feel overwhelmed by the scale of the problem, it’s crucial to remember that there are concrete actions we can...
youthendowmentfund.org.uk
I doubt most people could name more than one or two victims.
A 13 year old boy stabbing a girl or a similar age would be an exceptional and very news worthy event (reporting restrictions allowing). The child also being a baby faced white boy from an apparently 'good' family with no apparent history of criminal behavior from the child in the past would make it even more exceptional.
I have no particular issue with dramatisations dealing with such unusual scenarios.
The issue is if they're the portrayed as essential viewing for MP's, as a learning tool for children and as a policy/ law setting tool.
Most of the stabbers for thoose 40 kids would have themselves been children or young adults already extensively known to the police/social services many engaged in some level of pre existing criminal activity around something like drug dealing, or street robbery.
If were going to have discussion around murder, knife crime and even 'toxic masculitnity' lets have some actual attention on where the real problems lie!
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Feb 2006
- Posts
- 17,502
- Location
- Surrey
Amongst some other glaring issues (some seemingly included because the continual filming style required them) .....
A thirteen year old white boys stabbing a girl.
In the last year 23/24 forty children lost their lives to a knife or sharp instrument, 17 of whom were aged 15 or younger.
Beyond the Headlines update: a data-driven look at the rise in fatal stabbings | Youth Endowment Fund
The start of 2025 has seen fatal stabbings of young people making headlines across the country. Every child’s life lost is devastating to families and communities. While it’s easy to feel overwhelmed by the scale of the problem, it’s crucial to remember that there are concrete actions we can...youthendowmentfund.org.uk
I doubt most people could name more than one or two victims.
A 13 year old boy stabbing a girl or a similar age would be an exceptional and very news worthy event (reporting restrictions allowing). The child also being a baby faced white boy from an apparently 'good' family with no apparent history of criminal behavior from the child in the past would make it even more exceptional.
I have no particular issue with dramatisations dealing with such unusual scenarios.
The issue is if they're the portrayed as essential viewing for MP's, as a learning tool for children and as a policy/ law setting tool.
Most of the stabbers for thoose 40 kids would have themselves been children or young adults already extensively known to the police/social services many engaged in some level of pre existing criminal activity around something like drug dealing, or street robbery.
If were going to have discussion around murder, knife crime and even 'toxic masculitnity' lets have some actual attention on where the real problems lie!
Why did you go back 23/24 years? This isn't a show about a historic event, but something that's apparently on the rise in very recent years, with the likes of Andrew Tate giving boys a worrying view on females, and the fear of what that leads to going ahead, hence why it gets discussed as "look at the path this sort of view can lead to in young impressionable boys, based on recent examples (sorry they are black kids), and a possible outcome if we don't do something.
Would you prefer government don't discuss something until it's happened for 20+ years? Because it hasn't happened to white boys yet, there should be nothing done? Not even a discussion?
Why limit it to lost lives?
Do you know the figures for stabbings where the victim lives?
Is colour really an issue here for you?
As you included the word "white boy", am I right to assume it does happen with black boys?
Ermmmmmm....
That's the last year for figures 2023 to 2024....
The Home office produce figures running from the start of April to the end of March the next year.
Crime outcomes in England and Wales 2023 to 2024
Outcomes assigned to offences recorded to March 2024 and the total number of outcomes recorded, by outcome type and offence type.
Last edited:
Just a quick reply to remind you that actually, it is
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Feb 2006
- Posts
- 17,502
- Location
- Surrey
My mistake, I read it as the last 23/24 years, not the year of 2023 to 2024Ermmmmmm....
That's the last year for figures 2023 to 2024....
The Home office produce figures running from the start of April to the end of March the next year.
Crime outcomes in England and Wales 2023 to 2024
Outcomes assigned to offences recorded to March 2024 and the total number of outcomes recorded, by outcome type and offence type.www.gov.uk