Unintended consequences of Adolescence

[Taytoface]

Whilst this is an incredible programme with a powerful and necessary message, I find myself worried that every time the there is a new social justice cause de jour, it is women that get shoved again up the privilege pyramid, to be told we should be grateful for what we have.

A renewed focus on working class white boys and men, will come at the expense of women. This is because in the privilege hierarchy, the attention flows to the bottom. Now white men, like trans identified men before them, will displace women at the bottom of the heap. We will be deemed to have privilege over them, as we have had the solace and sisterhood of feminism, whilst the poor menz have had to resort to the manosphere.

I have come to loathe the privilege pyramid.

Couldn’t disagree with you more. We urgently need to have the conversation about toxic masculinity and how it impacts on young girls and women.

I don’t agree either that the focus on “white working class boys” will come at the expense of women. The issue affects everyone, directly or indirectly: families, the emergency services, teachers, pupils, mums, dads…For every “white working class boy” 🤔 out there there is a mum who’s possibly desperately worried about her son and the direction his life may take.

I don't necessarily agree. Inequality is inequality, and structural causes should be addressed for women, men, disabled people etc. etc.

My concern is that women are somehow expected to solve these problems for men. Women had to do all the heavy lifting to make their lives better. I just don't see grassroots men's movements doing the same. There's a handful around male suicide and mental health, but where are the men's organisations fighting porn, child exploitation, county lines, male violence, homophobia etc.? Where are the male-led movements advocating for an education system that produces better outcomes for boys?

OP I think you couldn't be more wrong!! If you want things to get better for women and girls then tackling male behaviour, the reasons for it, and what needs to be done differently is vital! This show has prompted all those discussions and that's a start.

Couldn't disagree with you more. So much of the violence women and girls face is from this group and we need to tackle it urgently as they're literally killing people. It's not taking the focus off women, it's actually highlighting their violence against women. This show seems to have got men talking and thinking about the issue a lot, which can only help. There are no oppression olympics.

I think the two points are not mutually exclusive.

OP is right. There exists a "woe is me" pyramid and women are being shafted.

But those who disagree are also right.
Cleaning up things for the poor "menz" will sort things out for women too.

But someone above hit the nail on the head : who is doing the sorting out? And I think the answer to that lies in the pyramid hence OP's frustration.

You don't have to tear her down to prove your point. The point of taking care of young children, boys or girls, will always be important.

I don’t think “the existence of a ‘woe is me’ pyramid”, if such a pyramid exists, is relevant to the important issues raised by the drama.

OP does hence she's started the thread.

You can state why you think it isn't relevant, if it exists.

But you can't deny that it seems one group of men has now got the attention of the nation just after another group of men are exiting it... or maybe it is a societal thing and we're just used to giving messages about boys more limelight without actually helping them???

Highlighting and addressing the problems for working class white boys can only help us all.

And I have seen a male politician trying to support this group being criticised and attacked for it.

If we criticise attempts to help as being ’all about the men’, then we are perpetuating the problem. There’s a good chance this is a small start to men getting their act together.

Also disagree with OP

“One group of men has now got the attention of the nation” - are you envious of this group? Do you think “the nation” can only have its eyes on one problem at a time? Isn’t this a very complex issue that affects us all and which has a complex set of root causes?

I don’t understand the privilege pyramid. Can you provide a diagram of such a pyramid please? Who designed it? Is it specific to the UK or Europe or the world?

TIA

This with bells on.

I was heartened to see this article in my local free local paper today:
Project calls on Dublin men to tackle domestic violence
It refers to the White Ribbon campaign, which doesn't get the publicity it deserves. This is the UK branch:
White Ribbon UK

I think I'll post this on the 'Lost Boys' thread too, it's good to have something positive to point to!

I'm going to buck the trend here and say that I agree with the OP - up to a point anyway. I think her main concern/annoyance is over the fact that we always get pushed aside to make way for the latest "man woe". Women seem to be a temporary cause, with our concerns and discrimations filling in when there aren't male problems to address.
Having said that, I agree that addressing men's problems SHOULD help ours too, and that there definitely are problems to be addressed.
I just wish our own concerns were seen as more than "fillers".

I have this odd feeling we're back to the "these two things cannot be true at the same time."

That's a fallacy which undermines women massively.

It is possible to realise that support is being advocated for one group over another group without it being about sentiment and jealousy our criticism.

It should be possible to highlight deficiency in the upbringing of boys whilst advocating for women to be respected as a sex class. But we as a society are getting this wrong somehow.

That's what op is highlighting.
Sticking fingers in ears to make sure people hear the messaging about the boys just might cause more issues.

Again who's being called on to "sort it"? It's an important question which fell out of the first few responses.

I think OP has a valid point. I'm seeing the framing of things like the gender pay gap being presented as an attack on white working class men. The concept of equal pay for work of equal value has always been misunderstood.
The way girl's progress in education is being belittled as preferential treatment; a system that discriminates against boys.

Really interesting points all round. Perhaps I have been a bit reactionary, but I have seen too much that advancement of marginalized groups tend to come at the expense of women. And I am fed the fuck up of it.

I'm not sure that this particular issue is about the advancement of marginalized groups. It's about better relationships, it's about confronting toxic ways of thinking and behaving, it's about improving society for everyone.

I’ve just finished watching it . I thought the acting very good despite the dialogue hard to understand . However I learnt very little about incels or misogyny and I don’t think the message and horror was portrayed sufficiently. A lost opportunity.

I’m really struggling to understand your reaction to this particular drama is that you’re worried that “advancement of a marginalised group” (working class white boys, in your OP) is going to have an adverse impact on attention given to women’s issues.

If I had a son who I felt was heading in the same direction as Jamie then I react as a mother to help my son, not stand aside as a woman because this is a male problem for males to fix. Maybe I’ve misunderstood something in your OP - if so I apologise for misinterpreting.

I don't want to put words in OP's mouth but consider it this way:

You have a son and a daughter.
Your son is heading in the direction of Jamie.
Your daughter just lost a swimming gold to "Jacqueline" who she had to watch undress and she had to undress in front of into skins which take 15-30 mins to put on.
You, mum, are actually doing stuff. running around fighting for your daughter and your son. Emailing swimming boards about risk assessments and actually booking therapy for your son and putting limits on networks you don't understand.

Your husband is talking. That's all he does. He never talks about your daughter. Only about "Jacqueline" and your son. He tells you how much you are in this together.

There'd be a focus on growing the boys into good men in society. then your daughter would overall benefit. But actually there is still a detriment to her here. The adverse impact on attention did happen. Can you see it?

I don't see this as OP standing aside. I see it as OP standing up to remind people swarming from popular issue to popular issue that society is a whole and holistic care is also an option.

I can see why it feels like this but i disagree.

for once this is men speaking out and men taking the responsibility.

male writers. Men are talking about it.

One of the writers has said that we don’t need “more male role models.” We need radical change.

for once this to me feels like the men taking responsibility.

this will ultimately benefit women.

also - how far have we come in a month? I started a thread where Victoria smith was talking about exactly these things with other women on start the week, radio 4. Really no good till the men are the ones doing it all.

Jack Thorne on role models:

Adolescence writer calls for 'radical action' not role models https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0egyyq1z47o

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5271466-victoria-smith-on-start-the-week-bbc-radio-4?utm_campaign=thread&utm_medium=app_share

Personally I think you cannot address the impact of misogyny upon woman & girls without unpicking and addressing toxic masculinity. That would be like trying to deal with flooding without assessing where the water is coming from…

They should be seen as two parts of one issue. So, for example, domestic violence increases exponentially after wars/conflicts. There is lots of data internationally about this, and in part it is to do with the brutalisation of men in combat based wars. However, after WW2 there was a massive surge in VAW in response to the fact that men felt - and were - isplaced by women. They had ‘taken’ their jobs while they were away fighting and now were skilled in manufacturing and farming, they had become used to having money of their own (though in many countries such as the UK, they didn’t get the right to have private bank accounts for another 30 years), they learned to cope without/to not need a man. The data shows that VAW increased on a societal level in the US in particular on a level not fully explained by war trauma/PTSD. Ie there was a recognition that men felt marginalised. It is suggested in academic circles that this is where the seeds of current toxic masculinity were planted - within the shift in power in a traditionally patriarchal society where men, even poor working class ones, were ‘on top’.

What seems to have happened is that middle class men have managed to hold their place within the power/social pyramid, but poor men have sifted lower down in terms of rights and how they are perceived. I think - and I believe adolescence was trying to point to this by not casting a black actor as the teen - that this demotion of poorer males, the erosion of their social status, is what underpins toxic masculinity across all ethnicities. Poor immigrants (legal or illegal) who have nothing will resent the group who are next on the societal ladder. And it is women. Because we are still, after all this time, not far from the bottom. Just my opinion…

For the last fifty years in teaching it has been the case that poor white boys have worse outcomes than any other group in society. Every other group out achieves them. I don’t consider Jamie in Adolescence a poor white boy. He has much on his side.
If a group is constantly marginalised and excluded it is bad for everyone. I remember the casual racism in the sixties and the seventies. The unthinking exclusion from all institutions, the stereo typing, proved to be dangerous and there was a huge cultural shift nationally and a zero tolerance of racism. Obviously, there is still a long way to go but if you focus on education, most grammar schools in London are full of black and brown children whose parents are determined that their children will have successful lives.
Education has not been able to provide the same push for poor white boys. If you do a tiny bit of internet research you see the huge gulf between girls in all areas of education and poor white boys. It is so dangerous to have such an unthinking disregard for such a large group. They haven’t really got any high profile people fighting for them ( Wes Streeting is doing a bit).
There has to be a big focus on supporting this very marginalised group. People who have nothing and no aspirations turn to anyone who appears to be on their side ( internet) . I have a friend who tried to teach at one of the worst performing schools in Sheffield. Boys there had no chance of escaping and bettering themselves. They are a hopeless group. They have the potential to be a dangerous group.
I haven’t any answers but I do recognise that this group needs significant input . They need politicians to have strategies, inclusion programmes, aspirational programmes so this group can have proper support without turning to false role models on the internet.