June 1st, 2025 | Megan Priestman

Progressive Fiction, Conservative Truth: Adolescence And The Forgotten White Male

The Netflix series that drives home the reality faced by white men.

Netflix's recent drama, Adolescence, has sparked both significant hype and controversy since its release, receiving widespread acclaim and endorsement from influential figures, including Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who publicly recommended it for educational viewing in schools. Prominent media outlets and politicians alike have praised the show for its gripping portrayal of youth violence, online radicalization, and the toxic masculinity of the ‘Manosphere’.

However, the series has also faced substantial criticism, especially from right-wing commentators who argue it distorts reality to advance a far-left narrative. For example, Matt Walsh of The Daily Wire, in episode 1575 of his podcast, breaks down the progressive agenda of the show, criticising the series as fictional propaganda treated misleadingly as a ‘documentary’ by some in the British media. Walsh highlights the statistical improbability of Jamie, the main character, to engage in knife crime, arguing the show falsely positions young white males as society's primary threat (in disregard to actual crime statistics indicating significant involvement from other demographics). He takes the view that the British government’s endorsement of the show as educational content perpetuates harmful misinformation.

Similarly, Konstantin Kisin of the Triggernometry podcast, highlights the show's emotional and artistic power but challenges its portrayal as representative of real-life youth violence. He argues the series leverages primal parental fears—children’s safety, parental inadequacy, and the unknown threats posed by social media in effort to evoke an emotional response in its viewers. Like Walsh, Kisin agrees that using young, white Jamie as the main character is statistically misleading and potentially damaging in shaping public perception.

While I agree with these critiques and acknowledge the harm in presenting fictionalized portrayals as factual social commentary, I had a very different interpretation of the series. The writers sought to craft a progressive narrative—illustrating how any child, including white males from two parent households, could fall prey to extremist and misogynistic online content and engage in violence. Paradoxically, however, these progressives drove home the reality of Britain’s forgotten white male.

The writers, Jack Thorne* and Stephen Graham**, both open about their commitment to social justice, equality, and inclusivity, unintentionally highlight this issue through the character of Jamie, the show's white working class teenage protagonist, who is emotionally isolated and largely invisible to the institutions meant to support him. 

Several scenes throughout the series powerfully illustrate Jamie’s role as the overlooked white male, and they’re worth examining in detail to understand the depth of his emotional and social neglect.

We start with Jamie’s education—a multicultural school plagued by classroom disorder and teacher burnout. When the officer investigating Jamie’s background asks his history teacher what Jamie was like in class he waves away the inquiry: “I don’t see him, you know? These kids are f***ing impossible. What am I supposed to do?” It's a stark admission of systemic failure.

We then have the police conduct during Jamie’s interrogation. Although the black officer briefly acknowledges Jamie’s good grades, he quickly pivots to scrutinize his social media behavior, accusing him of posting "pretty aggressive" content with "innuendos" on the Instagram photos of female models. Jamie’s earlier admission of behavioral issues at school is ignored, eclipsed by the officer’s determination to expose the misogyny underpinning Jamie’s conduct. Most tellingly, when asked if he's considering taking A—levels (optional high—school courses in preparation for university), Jamie pauses for an uncomfortably long time. Only after reassurance from his lawyer and father does he respond, “no…I dunno,” revealing he has likely never considered higher education as an option, despite being described as academically capable. 

Further evidence of institutional neglect is seen in the contrasting treatment of Jade, a black female student and friend of Jamie’s victim. After attacking a male classmate (who we later find had supplied Jamie with the murder weapon), Jade is comforted by a female teacher who pulls her alone into an empty classroom to offer her emotional support. “I did say it would be best for you not to come in today, didn’t I?” she says, implying she had been consistently checking in with her. The teacher tells her, “I know you’re hurt and upset” and promises Jade will have someone to talk to. The stark disparity in institutional responses between Jade and Jamie reflects a broader pattern of care extended to the females around Jamie, from which he himself is notably excluded.

Jamie's emotional deprivation can also be seen in his interactions with the court—appointed psychiatrist assessing his fitness for trial. During the session, Jamie is genuinely happy, craving connection and attention, even joyfully accepting small gestures such as marshmallows sneaked into his hot chocolate. When he’s told this is his final meeting with her, the despair is palpable: “That's f***ing it, is it? It doesn't seem like a proper goodbye,” showing his desperation for validation of genuine care. He concludes the interview by demanding to know if she genuinely liked him "as a person."

Lastly, there’s Jamie's home environment. In a conversation following a mental breakdown by Jamie’s father, his mother describes his isolation, noting, “he never left his room. He’d come home, slam the door, straight up the stairs to the computer. I’d see the light on in his room at 1:00 in the morning.” In response to this, his father defensively claimed, “we couldn't do nothing about that, all kids are like that these days aren't they? You don't know what they’re watching in their rooms.” 

Although his parents had made efforts to involve him in various activities, Jamie either struggled to succeed or showed little interest—leading them to eventually abandon those attempts and instead buy him a computer. His father’s business then started to take off and we’re told his work hours stretched late into the evening. His father ultimately conceded in this scene that he “took the eye off the ball a little bit” when it came to parenting Jamie. Without consistent support or supervision, Jamie was effectively left to navigate adolescence entirely on his own. 

In contrast, with Jamie behind bars, his parents appeared attentive and nurturing toward his older sister, offering her comfort and a sense of normalcy by suggesting takeout and a movie. After she leaves the room, Jamie’s father remarks, “How did we make her, eh?”—a statement laced with admiration for her maturity and strength in the wake of their family’s turmoil.

Ultimately, while Thorne and Graham’s storytelling checks all the progressive boxes-an angry white male radicalised online by misogynists, a young female victimized by a male, the deep insights of the Manosphere being provided to police by a wise, young, black male, and so on, the show inadvertently reveals a significant oversight- the emotional and social neglect experienced by young working class white males. Thorne and Graham’s exploration into youth violence and online culture ironically proves the point: even amid progressive calls for inclusion and empathy, the "forgotten white male" remains profoundly unseen. 

*Jack Thorne
Thorne has been a member of the Labour Party since 1996 and has consistently engaged with themes of social justice, particularly focusing on disability rights and the impact of austerity measures. His 2014 play Hope delved into the challenges faced by a Labour council during austerity, reflecting his concerns about the party's direction. In 2021, Thorne delivered the MacTaggart Lecture at the Edinburgh TV Festival, criticizing the television industry's neglect of disabled individuals and advocating for better representation. 

**Stephen Graham
Graham's work often addresses issues of prejudice and social inequality. He has portrayed characters grappling with racism and extremism, notably playing reformed neo-Nazi Matthew Collins in The Walk-In, a series based on true events involving the infiltration of a far-right group. In interviews, Graham has expressed a strong stance against discrimination, stating, "I wouldn’t stand in a room with someone misogynistic, racist, or homophobic."