Adolescence burst on to our screens less than a month ago and has had an impact rarely seen for a TV show.
As a piece of TV, it is superb and has received almost unprecedented levels of attention, from people tipping it to win awards through to others claiming it is a “governmental Marxist psyop against working-class white boysâ€.
This week Sir Keir Starmer announced that Netflix had agreed to make the show available to secondary schools for free. The rationale is that the show covers such important topics that all children should see it as some sort of learning tool.
Should Adolescence be shown in schools?
While I’m sure this is well intentioned, in reality it has the potential to do far more harm than good, and the announcement has caused a lot of debate.
Victim Focus, an organisation dedicated to improving the treatment and portrayal of victims of abuse and trauma, has created an , which has been signed by more than 1,200 professionals.
Adolescence makes reference to incels, the manosphere and Andrew Tate. These are cursory mentions and the show conflates inceldom with Andrew Tate. The issue here is that the vast majority of incels actually despise Tate: to them he represents everything they are not - successful, rich, athletic, sexually active.
Then there are the emojis with “secret†meanings being used in the show, such as dynamite and kidney beans. In response to the programme, lots of graphics “decoding†incel emojis have popped up. The only problem is, many of these emojis are not actually seen on incel forums. Most incel platforms don’t allow emojis and a number of prominent researchers looking at incel culture have questioned the legitimacy of the emojis used in the show.
There is the potential of causing a moral panic, where parents see emojis being used and suddenly think their child is going to turn into a murderer.
Watching all four episodes would take four hours. Where, in an already packed curriculum, are teachers supposed to find the time to show this? What about students who don’t want to watch it? What about those who may have been through trauma and could potentially be triggered?
There are themes in the show that definitely need discussion - misogyny, generational trauma, fathers being unable to emotionally connect with their sons. These are all really important topics to discuss, but they need to be discussed in a safe space with an experienced practitioner who knows how to handle these topics and discussions around them.
How does it help the vulnerable boy in class struggling with low mood and low self-esteem, who may have started to engage with “self-help†content and Tate videos, to be told that this is where he could end up.
We must also consider that a lot of teenagers won’t be engaging in this content and many won’t have an awareness of it. There is the potential of pushing curious students towards this material; the nature of algorithms means that we are potentially exposing them to a lot of awful material.
It’s important to remember that Adolescence is a piece of art. It’s entertainment. It hasn’t been made to be shown in school as an educational tool. The creators have used creative licence for the sake of the show. Are there clips that could be used to encourage discussion? Absolutely. But again, this has to be handled with care and compassion.
Such a storm has been whipped up that we are now at a point where MPs who haven’t watched the show are being told that this is a “dereliction of dutyâ€. We have to pause and remember that while Adolescence raises some really valid and important discussion points, it is just a TV show.
Thomas Michael is a 51ºÚÁÏ lead
For an indispensable look at the week’s biggest stories and talking points, sign up for our Weekly Debrief newsletter
