(Contains spoilers for the TV drama Adolescence).

Like many people I was gripped by the Netflix drama Adolescence, which tells the story of a teen murder victim. Except as Jude Doyle points out, it doesn’t tell you very much about the victim at all.

While it’s beautifully shot and features some incredible performances, it’s a story that wants you to feel sorry not for the murdered girl, but for the family of her murderer – and to some extent, for the murderer. And as soon as you realise that that’s what it’s doing, it becomes a very different and much less successful piece of television.

Doyle makes a good argument that the drama is ultimately superficial (which perhaps explains why the Labour government is so keen on having it shown in schools, despite the show itself pointing out the uselessness of showing videos to bored and fractious teenage boys).

It’s uninterested in engaging with the darkness it purports to be exploring to any significant degree: it throws in a few signifiers about the “manosphere” of online misogyny, but it doesn’t engage with the reality of it or the fact that misogyny is not something that was invented by social media, a “a weird Ringu-style Internet curse that happens if your son gets too much screen time”. Male violence of the kind portrayed in Adolescence is what you get when your society tells men that they are entitled to control women and their bodies. And god knows, that’s not a message that men are only just encountering.

With one key exception – which Doyle praises, and writes about in detail – there are hardly any female characters, and the ones that do appear are woefully underwritten; the teenage girl whose murder is at the centre of the drama is barely a cipher.

Doyle:

“making a miniseries about Toxic Masculinity and only focusing on male characters is like making a miniseries about Hitler and only focusing on his painting. It’s not until you see who’s getting hurt, and how badly they’re hurting, that you get the point.”