“Adolescence”: Was the Manosphere Really to Blame?
The Netflix series Adolescence, where a White teenager murders a White girl, has resulted in a great deal of commentary, including Tobias Langdon’s TOO article. Until reading it, I had no idea that the media in UK reacted that way and didn’t know that the story was inspired by a real incident with a non-White teenager murdering a White girl. The media doing what it always does: reverse the races when necessary to blame Whites.
The usual reaction is to blame 13-year-old Jamie’s rage on the manosphere, as in this Guardian article:
Jamie’s plight becomes a poignant study of the nightmarish influence of the so-called manosphere – that pernicious online world of “red pills”, “truth groups” and the 80-20 rule (which posits that 80% of women are attracted to 20% of men). It’s a shadowy sphere populated by alphas, “incels”, MRAs (men’s rights activists) and PUAs (pickup artists), whose fragile egos turn into entitled fury. From mocking emojis on Instagram to the dark web and deepfakes, it’s another country to anyone over 40. No wonder parents are, as Bascombe’s son points out, “blundering around, not getting it”.
A NYTimes article also emphasized the internet.
Initially the pair struggled to work out a motivation for the show’s main character, Jamie Miller (Owen Cooper), until an assistant suggested the pair research the culture of incels, men who see themselves as involuntarily celibate and rail against women online.
Thorne said he bought a burner phone and set up new social media accounts on it, then spent six months “diving into very dark holes” of incel content online. It made him realize, he said, that the grim arithmetic of the incel worldview — the belief that 80 percent of women are attracted to just 20 percent of men, so boys must manipulate girls if they want to find sexual partners — could also seem “incredibly attractive” to many young men.
The 80-20 split is real as anyone who has ever dated realizes (the universal principle of female hypergamy), and this means that many men are frustrated. This is particularly true in polygynous cultures where high-status men are able to have multiple wives. A great strength of Western cultures is that monogamy dampens male competition for females, but there are certainly vestiges of it in the dating arena where wealthy, high-status men have no difficulty dating attractive, desirable women. As usual, the left denies reality in favor of imagining a world where all are equal — where individual differences like intelligence, physical attractiveness, social status, etc. are irrelevant.
But what the Times doesn’t say in that article is that the girl called Jamie an incel on social media and said he would always be an incel. It was extremely cruel for the girl to call him an incel in a forum where all his schoolmates would see it. No teenager wants to hear that at an age when social status is everything, especially from a girl. So it was understandable that he was angry. The girl was the bully, Jamie the victim.
Imagine if Jamie had been cast as Black. If a Black teenager was bullied by a White girl, the media would either ignore the whole thing (likely—so it would never be cast that way) or assume that the killing was justified.
Another Times article, “Tate-pilled boys are a problem for schools,” notes:
You know by the end of the first episode that Jamie is guilty; the police have video of Jamie stabbing Katie. So the central question becomes why did he do it, and the explanation rolls out over the next three episodes. His family is loving, if imperfect, like most families. Jamie’s father, a plumber, is disappointed in him for not being an athlete and doesn’t quite know how to relate to his sensitive, artistic son. Jamie is bullied in school and filled with self-loathing, and he turns to Andrew Tate and other purveyors of sexist online content to make himself feel big.
In fact, there is only one mention in the series where Tate is named, although the writers did say that they wanted to “look in the eye of modern male rage” and examine the influence of public figures such as Andrew Tate on boys. Even though it’s a common theme in the commentary on the show, writers are never explicit about the evidence that he is attracted to the manosphere, although Tate is “namechecked once, the show is not about him. None of the kids ever mention him, which I thought was interesting.”
Yes, interesting. The media goes way out of their way to blame the manosphere but there’s really no evidence in what the viewer sees that the manosphere or “Tate-pilled boys” has anything to do with it. Teenage boys don’t need Tate or the manosphere to be infuriated at being called an incel. Both father and son have a problem with their temper, so the explanation could just as easily be genetic. One has the feeling that the show’s writers jumped on the manosphere theme after the (man-hating) reviews from the left started coming out, or else they would have made it much more explicit.
13-year-old Jamie is actually very good looking but not a big masculine guy, so he’s not going to be a big-time athlete, and it’s true that the father, like many fathers, would have loved to have a big, strapping athlete for a son. But I should have thought Jamie would be attractive to at least some girls. I thought it ridiculous that Jamie had the self-concept of being ugly. Is that what the left has done to White people?
I expected the usual politically correct portrayals of Blacks—virtuous and intelligent—but it’s so common that I hardly get upset about it. It struck me that all the White women were unattractive and out of shape, but the Blacks were physically robust and in great physical shape (the policeman must work out—his arms were very jacked, as we say). And his son was much taller than Jamie and was doubtless chosen because viewers would see him as physically attractive. And of course, the Blacks are presented as intelligent, well-spoken, kind, and not prone to temperamental outbursts like Jamie and his father.
Detective father and son
Notice too the women in the background.
Surprisingly, I thought Jamie’s family were portrayed positively, especially the father—he had a loving marriage and never hit Jamie or his wife, although he did have a temper problem (as did Jamie). It was clear that the father was the head of household (patriarchy!!), so I suppose liberals see that as pathological, although I didn’t see it mentioned. Jamie clearly identifies much more with his father, so, e.g., he chooses his father to be the one person from the family who can sit in on the police interviews. The mother seems surprised and a bit upset about that.
But who can’t sympathize with the parents? Imagine your son murdering a girl and then having to deal with the fallout from the community. The wife wants to move but the husband realizes that the story will get out eventually wherever they are. Their older daughter is devastated.
One can totally understand the father’s rage at the teenagers on bikes who painted his truck with the word ‘nonce‘ (spelled incorrectly), meaning a sexual pervert attracted to children — and an extremely negative thing to call someone in British slang. The teenagers laughed at the family, and the father beat up one of the culprits.
It ends with both parents saying they should have done more. The last scene shows the father (but not the mother) weeping uncontrollably.
Truth on its head again.
Most white boys whatever their “class” are OK.
Black youths are notorious for knife crime, mugging and looting.
Asians for sex crimes.
Women are responsible for a good share of domestic unpleasantness and even violence.
We need to smash both internet & TV porn and DEI ideology, and restore the two-parent healthy family to its rightful place in the social structure.
Good points! However, if one really wants to ‘smash both internet & TV porn and DEI ideology’ in the near future their only option would be to move to Russia, where that filth has already been smashed.
I prefer to stay here and with others to do what needs to be done. Running to Russia, not for us.
Bingo! All Europeans must Rearm…even if only 3D printed usable guns*
Having seen how our German Manosphere in 2015 was super welcoming to the migrant hordes I would say yes.
Yes, those super cucks are to blame.
Is not the moiety of the “German Manosphere” controlled by Weimar-Jewry?
Having by been extensively and frequently all over Germany…it was and is clear Germany is a sadly a ZOG footstool..all Jewish brainwashing…not the fault of German Folk at all…**
I know beyond any doubt that Trump won the 2020 Elecions and that Biden was not elected but seleced and manipulated. After he Russian Hoax, 5impeachments failed, 20 fabricated felonies accusations and 3 assassnation attemps TRUMP won 2024 elections with 90Millons popular votes and 270 electoral votes, the DEMs Sorocrats refuse to accept Trumps victory. Very puzzling that DEMs succesfully are pushing the save our democracy fake narrative. Judges are deciding elections in USA, France, UK, Gremnay, Rumania, Bulgaria, Congo etc. DEMs are inverting reality dfending democracy by letting lllegal Mexicans vote, NO ID elections,fake Ballots.. on ridicolous grounds, they are same people that demanded Vaxx IDs. Saving democracy by deligfitimazing Elon Musk DOGE which has uncovered more than $1TRIZLLION in fraud corruoction..There is NO shred of evidence that Musk is going to gut SS…exactly the opposite Musk is making SS solvent until 2050. The DEMs thieves and theur mobs are pretending to be the champions of democracy..I dont see a MAGA TRUMP COUNTER STRATEGY…Trump WH has serious problem of communications, spies, traitors, that must be JAILED.Trump has the power but unable to execute his policies…After so much LIES, billions in corruption, more hoaxes, trans butchery shootings terrorist car burnings..etc…WHY do they believe the lyng fraud DEMs..? why??
” I thought it ridiculous that Jamie had the self-concept of being ugly. Is that what the left has done to White people?”
Yes, Mr MacDonald. Your words are correct. The visually attractive becomes ugly; fiction becomes truth; love becomes hate; loyalty to family and kin-group becomes oppression until there are no binding core values left anymore.
Love is Hate .War is Peace…we have always been at war with Oceanna…1984** The Jews have turned the world upside down..but in our view…their end ..always apprx 80 years of..*empire* ..inexorably..comes crashing down…their end corresponds to their deeds..consequently as previously.. historical cally..the Jews have No one to blame but themselves”. For New readers and young folks demanding answers ..see the classic film..”Jud Suss”..
@ Alan
A bit more is needed than that old Nazi adaptation of a Jewish novel which is interestingly discussed at great length by Susan Tegel (2011). A more sympathetic English movie was made in 1934 with Conrad Veidt as the villain (not the English-looking Jewish actor Leslie Howard as bookseller Henry Pordes stated).
Instead a minimal “starter” reading list would help: on one side, Kevin McDonald, Gilad Atzmon, Bernard Lazare (1995ed), Ilan Pappe, Albert Lindemann (2000), Hilaire Belloc (1937ed), Peter Winter.
On the other, Peter Schaefer, Dan Cohn-Sherbok (2007), Cesare G. De Michelis (2004), Richard Lynn, Julius Carlebach (1978).