Adolescence in schools: TV show’s portrayal of one boyhood may do more harm than good when used as a teaching tool

Netflix television series Adolescence follows a 13-year-old boy accused of the murder of his female classmate. It touches upon incel online hate groups, toxic influencers and the misogynistic online spaces of the manosphere.

Keir Starmer, the UK prime minister, has backed a move for Adolescence to be shown in schools, and Netflix has now made the series available to be shown for free in classrooms through charity Into Film+, which has also produced a guide for teachers. Resources for teachers and parents will also be produced by relationships charity Tender.

Adolescence is a drama and deserves the praise it has attracted. But it wasn’t developed as an educational resource, the kind that is produced in consultation with young people and schools and should be underpinned by robust research and well planned evaluations.

The series shows an extreme example of one teenager drawn into the world of the manosphere. Not all boys will see themselves reflected in this portrayal. And as a researcher working on masculinity and misogyny, my concern is that showing the series in schools may lead boys to think that they are all perceived as potential threats.

Showing the series as a teaching tool risks framing boyhood as monolithic, with one particular – and problematic – way of being a boy.

Already, a broad-brush, blame-heavy approach is often taken to boys in response to issues relating to sexual harassment and violence. “We may have a problem with boys and young men that we need to address”, Keir Starmer has said.

Boys dealing with blame

In research I have carried out for a forthcoming book on boys and masculinity, I worked with young men and boys aged 13 to 19. One 15-year-old boy said that “I am always told that I am part of the problem but never allowed to be part of the solution”. I also found that this broad blame culture leads to feelings of worthlessness in young men and boys, which shuts down vital dialogue and also may lead them to resort to looking for direction from negative spaces such as the manosphere.

It is evident from reports and evidence that young men and boys do carry out a large amount of reported sexual harassment and harms against young women and girls. This can be seen in the 2021 Ofsted report into sexual harassment in schools in England, for example. The 2025 2000 Women report states that, in the UK, a woman is killed by a man every three days.

There is evidently a serious, endemic and complex problem. The misogyny that can be popularised by toxic influencers online also needs urgently addressing.

But a “one-size-fits-all” approach to tackle “boys’ issues” may result in making things worse, not better, due to the lack of recognition of the intersectionality of boyhood. Other aspects of identity, such as race, age, class, gender identity, sexual orientation, religion, sexuality and physical and mental health will have implications for the approaches that need to be taken.

Read more: How to talk to boys about misogyny

My ongoing research has demonstrated that boyhood means differing things to different boys. In steering groups with young men and boys from various ethnicities and differing social classes, a consistent theme emerged. This was a conflict between the internal and external self that the boys felt that they had to portray. This was also highlighted in a further 16 focus groups carried out on the project, again with a range of boys.

The internal self refers to who the boys actually are, including other identity traits such as race and class, and all the other intersecting aspects of their identity. The external self is what they felt they should show as a boys to fit into the hierarchy of masculinity and how they should portray themselves to fit within the social expectations of being a boy. This causes a conflict of external and internal self.

Efforts to help boys deal with issues such as the messages of the manosphere need to be attuned to the nuance of their internal selves. Generalising boys does not account for the individual identities that they bring to the issues that affect them.

Boys as individuals

The monolithic perspective of “boys” and the ensuing group blame oversimplifies complex issues, resulting in less than effective solutions and interventions that do not acknowledge or account for the nuances and complexities that surround individual boys.

This approach ignores diversities and intersecting identities and steers societal thinking about boys as a set group. It risks stereotyping them and causing prejudicial approaches. When boys are stigmatised in such a way, it compounds issues across genders, breaks down valuable communication and can also cause resentment and hostility.

One of the key voices and valuable perspectives that is missing from this debate is that of young men and boys themselves. We need to truly listen to their perspectives and their needs and build upon these as they are the experts in the world they are experiencing. Good practice accounts for and builds upon these experiences, with young people.

My research has demonstrated that young people want to be a part of these discussions rather than having things decided for them. It also shows that, quite often, we are teaching them what they already know and providing support and education that is too little, too late. We need to move away from the broad brush blaming of boys and young men and begin to approach them based upon their own individual identities – of which gender is only a part.

Sophie King-Hill receives funding from ESRC.