The Lessons of “Adolescence”: Mental Health Must Address the Hidden Lessons of Boyhood
The Netflix series Adolescence offers a gripping exploration of how rigid masculine norms, interpersonal dynamics, and social media converge to shape aggression in young men. At the center is Jamie Miller, a 13-year-old boy arrested for the murder of a young girl, Katie, raising a critical question: are his actions best explained by a disruptive behavior disorder like Conduct Disorder (CD) or Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD), or is the mental health field overlooking a deeper, socially conditioned pathology? Boys are over three times more likely than girls to be diagnosed with these disorders,1 reinforcing the assumption that male aggression stems from impulse control issues without considering the possible influence of internalized belief systems.
Social norms often link masculinity to dominance, emotional suppression, and aggression, shaped by ideals of toughness, anti-femininity, and power.2 These values don’t form in isolation. They are instilled early by a patriarchal system that pushes boys into rigid gender roles. As Gupta et al. (2023) describe, boys are often chastised for showing emotion or engaging in behaviors deemed "feminine," and are instead rewarded for suppressing vulnerability and adopting aggression as a norm. This conditioning leads not only to emotional stunting and social disconnection but also creates an internalized pressure to perform masculinity at any cost.3
Jamie’s story is fictional, but the ideology behind it is very real. Across cultures, patriarchal ideals of manhood continue to thrive, limiting boys’ emotional growth, isolating them socially, and priming some for violence. Gupta et al. (2023) emphasize that these rigid expectations often prevent men from seeking psychological help, further isolating them and reinforcing maladaptive behaviors that may manifest in aggression or self-destruction.4 The emotional toll of patriarchy, often hidden beneath a veneer of stoicism, is profound and far-reaching.
Adolescence is also a period of heightened neural plasticity and social sensitivity. During this stage, the brain's reward system becomes especially responsive to social cues, making peer validation a powerful motivator. Research shows that adolescents spend more time with peers than at any other life stage and place tremendous value on peer approval, with the mere presence, real or perceived, of peers increasing risk-taking behaviors.5 The developing brain’s need for peer validation makes online spaces within the “manosphere”, a network of communities promoting male dominance, misogyny, and anti-feminist beliefs, especially influential. Jamie’s school life mirrors this. Masculinity is defined through dominance and control: classmates share topless photos of girls, defy female teachers, and mock boys who don’t conform. At home, Jamie’s father exerts subtle but firm emotional control. We learn he once tore down a shed in anger, and in the final episode, his wife and daughter suppress their emotions to cater to his. These influences don’t just allow Jamie’s violence; they shape his understanding of what it means to be a man.
His aggression isn't purely impulsive, nor entirely predatory. It reflects a complex blend of social conditioning and psychological vulnerability. In episode three, Jamie sits across from the psychologist Briony, not overwhelmed by emotion but performing dominance as a measure of worth. “Most boys would have touched her, so that makes me better,” he says, then adds, “Don’t you think?” Even while asserting dominance, he looks to Briony for validation. He wants to be accepted, but only on his terms, using control to appear superior and desirable, a core paradox of a restrictive masculinity.
This paradox plays out repeatedly in his interactions with Briony. He asks if she finds him attractive, tells her he likes her “as a person”, and becomes visibly uncomfortable when the conversation turns to sex. He wants to be wanted but cannot tolerate emotional exposure. His view of Katie, whose topless photos were leaked, is equally telling. He sees her humiliation not with empathy, but as an opportunity for attention. The tension between craving connection and fearing vulnerability sits at the center of his pathology.
Social media amplifies this conditioning. Platforms like TikTok and YouTube elevate figures such as Andrew Tate,6 promoting the idea that empathy is weakness and dominance is success. Jamie doesn't just see this content, he absorbs it. Adolescents are especially influenced by the values of admired others, as these shape identity and guide behavior.7 Jamie clings to an ideology that validates his insecurities by redirecting his anger toward girls. His insistence that he’s done “nothing wrong” reflects more than a defense. It reveals a belief system where harming girls is not criminal but powerful.
Yet current diagnostic frameworks often attribute male aggression to impulse control, without examining belief-driven behavior. What if violence isn’t just dysregulation, but a deliberate expression of internalized misogyny? Currently, the DSM lacks a framework to distinguish between boys acting out due to emotional dysregulation versus those whose aggression is shaped by ideology. This distinction matters.
Mental health professionals must move beyond labeling behaviors as 'externalizing.' We must ask: What do boys believe about girls? Who are their role models? Where are they learning these ideas? A boy who expresses resentment toward girls, sees relationships as hierarchical, or justifies aggression may not fit cleanly into an existing diagnosis. These are warning signs that must be addressed. As we await formal recognition of belief-driven violence in diagnostic frameworks, clinicians might consider tools like the Toxic Masculinity Scale, the Man Box Scale, or the Male Role Norms Scale (MRNS), after confirming their validity.
The 2017 documentary The Work shows how emotional healing can transform even those shaped by violence. In a four-day workshop, incarcerated men cry, grieve, and find strength and safety in vulnerability. If boys like Jamie had access to spaces like this earlier, they might grow into men led by empathy, not by false toughness rooted in fear, shame, and emotional isolation. As mental health professionals, we must help bring programs like this into schools, correctional facilities, and communities before emotional suppression becomes identity.
In 2019, the American Psychological Association issued guidelines emphasizing the need to help boys and men break free from harmful masculinity norms. Parents and educators cannot tackle this alone. Mental health professionals must address the ideologies shaping boys like Jamie before violence occurs.
The show makes clear that this goes beyond parenting. In the final episode, Jamie’s father looks at his daughter Lisa, kind and empathetic, and asks, “How did we make her?” His wife replies, “The same way we made him.” Both were raised in the same home, but other forces shaped Jamie: school, peers, and algorithms that reward dominance and punish emotion. Much of this flies under the radar. Students use coded emojis and whisper about figures like Andrew Tate while overwhelmed teachers look on, unsure how to intervene. One teacher admits, “These kids are impossible. What am I supposed to do?”
The first warning signs may not be fists, but a boy scrolling alone, absorbing a worldview that equates control with worth and violence with power. If we diagnose boys like Jamie without addressing the ideologies that are shaping them, we are treating symptoms while ignoring the cause. These boys are not beyond help. They are not born this way. But if we fail to act, the cycle will continue. Change is not optional. It is necessary.
References:
1. Uotila, J., Gyllenberg, D., Korhonen, L., Hinkka-Yli-Salomäki, S., Heinonen, E., Chudal, R., Gissler, M., & Sourander, A. (2021). Incidence and comorbidities of disruptive behavior disorders diagnosed in Finnish specialist psychiatric services. Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology, 56(11), 2063–2072. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-020-02015-3
2. Sileo, K. M., & Kershaw, T. S. (2020). Dimensions of Masculine Norms, Depression, and Mental Health Service Utilization: Results From a Prospective Cohort Study Among Emerging Adult Men in the United States. American journal of men's health, 14(1), 1557988320906980. https://doi.org/10.1177/1557988320906980
3. Gupta, M., Madabushi, J. S., & Gupta, N. (2023). Critical Overview of Patriarchy, Its Interferences With Psychological Development, and Risks for Mental Health. Cureus, 15(6), e40216. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.40216
4. Gupta, M., Madabushi, J. S., & Gupta, N. (2023). Critical Overview of Patriarchy, Its Interferences With Psychological Development, and Risks for Mental Health. Cureus, 15(6), e40216. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.40216
5. Albert, D., Chein, J., & Steinberg, L. (2013). Peer Influences on Adolescent Decision Making. Current directions in psychological science, 22(2), 114–120. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721412471347
6. BBC. (2025, February 27). Who is Andrew Tate? the self-proclaimed misogynist influencer. BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-64125045
7. Pfeifer, J. H., & Berkman, E. T. (2018). The Development of Self and Identity in Adolescence: Neural Evidence and Implications for a Value-Based Choice Perspective on Motivated Behavior. Child development perspectives, 12(3), 158–164. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12279
As published in the Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry.
Bhaloo, A. (2025). Adolescence. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2025.07.1053
