Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I won't watch this. Based on "growing knife crime" in the UK--then completely twisted to make it appear yet again that young, white men and boys are the problem. And you all can't figure out how Trump got elected.

Agree.

Netflix is pushing false narratives and propaganda here.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I won't watch this. Based on "growing knife crime" in the UK--then completely twisted to make it appear yet again that young, white men and boys are the problem. And you all can't figure out how Trump got elected.

Agree.

Netflix is pushing false narratives and propaganda here.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So what’s her diagnosis of him?

Anything mentioned in the series?

The show doesn’t touch on a diagnosis, which makes sense from a psychological standpoint because most things in the DSM aren’t diagnosed to juveniles.

I’ve been following the show on Reddit and most agree he was just a self-radicalized incel and part of the “manosphere”, the likes of Andrew Tate. Young and impressionable, with extremely low self-esteem and self-image, with no cheerleader in his court at home, bullied by peers, etc. he was an easy target for the movement.

Anonymous wrote:I won't watch this. Based on "growing knife crime" in the UK--then completely twisted to make it appear yet again that young, white men and boys are the problem. And you all can't figure out how Trump got elected.

Anonymous wrote:I won't watch this. Based on "growing knife crime" in the UK--then completely twisted to make it appear yet again that young, white men and boys are the problem. And you all can't figure out how Trump got elected.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So what’s her diagnosis of him?

Anything mentioned in the series?

Anonymous wrote:So what’s her diagnosis of him?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I won't watch this. Based on "growing knife crime" in the UK--then completely twisted to make it appear yet again that young, white men and boys are the problem. And you all can't figure out how Trump got elected.

Did Trump get elected because when people like you encounter something that doesn't perfectly confirm your worldview, you refuse to look at it or engage with it and then draw broad conclusions about it anyway? It does sound like you are onto something.

FTR, if you look at the statistics for stabbing homicides in England and Wales, you will see that most victims and perpetrators of these crimes are white, and that if the victim is white, the perpetrator is most likely to also be white. The series also accurately portrays other nuances of the statistics. For instance, when a stabbing victim is female and the perpetrator is someone known to her, the most common motive is "quarrel, revenge, or loss of temper." In other ways, the show deviates from the statistical norm for obvious reasons. For instance, while knife crimes are on the rise in the UK across all age groups, including teenagers, a knife crime is far more likely to have a victim and perpetrator in their 20s or 30s than a teen/tween. But obviously the show wanted to look at the disturbing trend of young teens stabbing each other, not to create an approximation of the average knife crime. You can look at detailed statistics in the spreadsheet available here: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/datasets/appendixtableshomicideinenglandandwales

I will also note that the people who are accusing the series of "twisting" a real story are most often referring to the very tragic killing of three young (white) girls at a Taylor Swift themed dance class by a murderer who is black. It was a highly publicized case in the UK and the perpetrator was recently sentenced, so a lot of people seem to assume the crime in Adolescence was ripped from those headlines. Except that doesn't make sense at all. The murderer in that case was 17 at the time (now 18) and the victims were six and seven years old (in addition to stabbing and killing these three girls, the murderer also injured 10 other people at the party, mostly other children). So it was an extremely different case of an older teen going on a killing spree against very young children. A horrible, tragic event but not at all what the series depicts.

There are plenty of stories of crimes more similar to what Adolescence depicts in UK news if you look, however because the killers in those cases are under age 15 or 16 (I can't remember what the cut off is in the UK), their names and identities are shielded, so we don't know their race. However, based on the locations of these killings and the race of the victims (plenty of them are white, and as I noted, white victims are significantly more likely to have been killed by white assailants), there is absolutely no reason to think the show creators "twisted" the facts of real life killings to fit a race agenda. There have undoubtedly been knife killings in the UK similar to the one depicted on the show. The show is fiction and not based on a single killing, but they are depicting a real issue in the UK with honesty and accuracy.

Don't waste your breath, as well said as this was. These people have an angle and won't deviate from it. Never mind that show's cinematography is outstandingly cool (one continuous shot for each episode!); or that Stpehen Graham is an amazing actor (white man) and he co-created and wrote the show and wanted to be in it; never mind that the core issue ISN'T knife violence, it's the effects of family, peers, and social media on developing minds (male and female--Katie is not centered, but we do learn a lot).

Never mind all that. it is just woke garbage because the police are blalck and female and the murderer is a young white boy. I can't roll my eyes hard enough.

Anonymous wrote:I won't watch this. Based on "growing knife crime" in the UK--then completely twisted to make it appear yet again that young, white men and boys are the problem. And you all can't figure out how Trump got elected.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I won't watch this. Based on "growing knife crime" in the UK--then completely twisted to make it appear yet again that young, white men and boys are the problem. And you all can't figure out how Trump got elected.

Did Trump get elected because when people like you encounter something that doesn't perfectly confirm your worldview, you refuse to look at it or engage with it and then draw broad conclusions about it anyway? It does sound like you are onto something.

FTR, if you look at the statistics for stabbing homicides in England and Wales, you will see that most victims and perpetrators of these crimes are white, and that if the victim is white, the perpetrator is most likely to also be white. The series also accurately portrays other nuances of the statistics. For instance, when a stabbing victim is female and the perpetrator is someone known to her, the most common motive is "quarrel, revenge, or loss of temper." In other ways, the show deviates from the statistical norm for obvious reasons. For instance, while knife crimes are on the rise in the UK across all age groups, including teenagers, a knife crime is far more likely to have a victim and perpetrator in their 20s or 30s than a teen/tween. But obviously the show wanted to look at the disturbing trend of young teens stabbing each other, not to create an approximation of the average knife crime. You can look at detailed statistics in the spreadsheet available here: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/datasets/appendixtableshomicideinenglandandwales

I will also note that the people who are accusing the series of "twisting" a real story are most often referring to the very tragic killing of three young (white) girls at a Taylor Swift themed dance class by a murderer who is black. It was a highly publicized case in the UK and the perpetrator was recently sentenced, so a lot of people seem to assume the crime in Adolescence was ripped from those headlines. Except that doesn't make sense at all. The murderer in that case was 17 at the time (now 18) and the victims were six and seven years old (in addition to stabbing and killing these three girls, the murderer also injured 10 other people at the party, mostly other children). So it was an extremely different case of an older teen going on a killing spree against very young children. A horrible, tragic event but not at all what the series depicts.

There are plenty of stories of crimes more similar to what Adolescence depicts in UK news if you look, however because the killers in those cases are under age 15 or 16 (I can't remember what the cut off is in the UK), their names and identities are shielded, so we don't know their race. However, based on the locations of these killings and the race of the victims (plenty of them are white, and as I noted, white victims are significantly more likely to have been killed by white assailants), there is absolutely no reason to think the show creators "twisted" the facts of real life killings to fit a race agenda. There have undoubtedly been knife killings in the UK similar to the one depicted on the show. The show is fiction and not based on a single killing, but they are depicting a real issue in the UK with honesty and accuracy.

Anonymous wrote:I won't watch this. Based on "growing knife crime" in the UK--then completely twisted to make it appear yet again that young, white men and boys are the problem. And you all can't figure out how Trump got elected.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Correct me if I’m wrong, but the psychologist wasn’t working for the defense or the prosecution.
The court system dictated that since he is a minor, the judge would need the opinions of 3 independent psychologists to provide a brief evaluation before sentencing.
I am sure her report would be the most damning

This. She was also specifically asking questions to find out if he understood the consequences of what he'd done (asking him if he understood what death is, that Katie is not coming back) that indicate at least one element of her evaluation was competency to stand trial. She was a neutral observer, not trying to reach a conclusion because she was paid by one side or the other.

When Jaime tells his family in the last episode that he was changing his plea to guilty, I also assumed that was an indication that Briony (and the other people who evaluated Jaime) had likely reported that he was competent to stand trial and could understand the consequences of his actions.

Since the prosecution had a video of him stabbing the girl (with no provocation) and walking away, plus had testimony of another child who provided the knife (indicating the murder was premeditated), Jaime has almost no possible defenses other that mental incompetency. So I assumed he'd previously been pleading not guilty due to mental incompetency but when the psych evals came in, the judge either would not all or strongly recommended against it, so he pretty much had to switch to guilty.

So I think Briony was looking, as the audience was, for a psychological explanation that would show that Jaime didn't understand what he was doing, perhaps thought his violent actions could be undone or were not permanent, as they might be in a video game. But then she sees through the course of this conversation that he is coldly aware of what he's done, that he did it with intention, and that he would do it again. But I do think we are meant to understand she doesn't reach that conclusion until the interview we see.

Really?
The psych reports were for the judge, not prosecution or defense?
I thought that his defense was being handled by other people and he most likely was not that aware of the severity of consequences of the legal system.
He is 13 in this series and Britain has a different system with regards to competency to stand trial in a youth court

Anonymous wrote:I won't watch this. Based on "growing knife crime" in the UK--then completely twisted to make it appear yet again that young, white men and boys are the problem. And you all can't figure out how Trump got elected.