Florida’s  anti-cyberbullying law is named after Cape Coral high school student Jeffrey Johnson, who committed suicide at age 15 after being bullied.  The law was passed in 2008.  Two teenage girls from Estero High School have the dubious distinction of being the  first to be prosecuted under it.

Two Estero High School teens were arrested Wednesday, charged with cyber bullying a classmate after officials learned of a fake Facebook account with sexually explicit photos.

The investigation began on April 29 when a parent told a school resource officer about a Facebook account, which contained inappropriate, sexually explicit pictures and statements about the victim, according to a Lee County Sheriff’s Office report. The account had 181 “friends.”

The items posted on the fake account included a photo of the victim’s head placed on top of a nude girl’s body, a photo of a man’s genitalia near her open mouth and comments about sex acts, according to the report.

Some pretty nasty stuff there, far beyond yelling “yo momma wears army boots” on the playground.  But this prosecution begs many questions, and undermines many of the assumptions being heavily promoted about schoolyard bullying in the digital age.

Initially, the cries about cyber civil rights, that bullying is a gender issue rather than a bullying issue, fail to find support, noting that these are girls bullying girls, boys bullying boys, and by no means Danielle Citron’s fantasy of a conspiracy by men against women.  If the discussion of bullying is to have any basis in reality, it’s time to put that machination to rest.

Further, Jeffrey’s Law defines bullying in remarkably comprehensive terms.

(3)  For purposes of this section:
 (a)  “Bullying” means systematically and chronically inflicting physical hurt or psychological distress on one or more students and may involve:
 1.  Teasing;
 2.  Social exclusion;
 3.  Threat;
 4.  Intimidation;
 5.  Stalking;
 6.  Physical violence;
 7.  Theft;
 8.  Sexual or racial harassment;
 9.  Public humiliation; or
10.  Destruction of property.

Some prongs, such as physical violence and theft, seem to be fine if one ignores that they replicate existing crimes.  Other prongs, such as teasing and social exclusion, are more problematic given that they have been perpetual problems, and presumably part of a child’s nature.  Not a good part, but still a part.  Still other prongs, intimidation, stalking and public humiliation, are vague and rhetorical, and may well be serious or may be, well, childish.

In the situation in Estero, the conduct is very much a product of a digital age, from its photoshopped sexual image to its Facebook placement.  It’s not that children are necessarily any meaner than they’ve ever been, but now have tools readily available to them to effectuate cruelty in new and technologically advanced ways. 

The flip side, of course, is that while children aren’t necessarily any meaner, what might once have produced a spanking and suspension now lands a kid in prison with a felony around their neck forever.  The glory of technology, and its ready use by our lauded digital natives, has a very unfortunate downside. 

The question that remains unconsidered is whether the solution to online bullying is to prosecute children for behaving children with their hands on a keyboard.  The focus is generally on the harm done, the extent of hurt feelings and the reaction by the target of the bullying.  When a young person takes his or her own life, it’s heartbreaking, though it’s hard to believe that the act of bullying alone is the impetus for such an extreme reaction.  While we want to pin the reason on a discrete act, the psychological foundation for suicide isn’t likely to happen overnight.

But what of the act committed rather than the hurt suffered?  Creating a fake Facebook page with a girl’s head on someone else’s nude body, even with an image of male genitalia near the face, strikes me as a rather obvious and childish prank.  It’s mean and nasty, but still an obvious prank.  There’s nothing to suggest that anybody believed it to be real.

Having spent some time surfing the websites favored by at least one teenager with whom I’m quite familiar, the conduct of the two Estero girls seems rather pedestrian.  There are a lot of kids photoshopping body parts of others, some demonstrating pretty strong skills, by the way.  And other kids get some big lulz over it, not believing it to be real but enjoying the smackdown. 

Yes, it’s sad that they feel the need to humiliate each other, sadder still that they do so in such sexually explicit ways.  Yes, to adults, creating such fake Facebook pages may seem extreme, but it’s not our sensibilities (not to mention limited skillsets) that matter here.  This has become the world of our children, where the use of technology to smack others has replaced schoolyard taunts has become normal.  A sad normal, but their normal.

Yet prosecution?  Prison?  Is that the answer to mean girls and boys?  It’s perfectly understandable that Jeffrey Johnson’s parents, having endured the loss of their son to suicide following bullying, would think no law too extreme “so that no other parent should suffer the death of their child.”  And indeed, as a parent, I can appreciate the pain they must have endured.  For the reasons discussed ad nauseam, however, we know all too well how these visceral reactions to tragedy produce overwrought reactions and law which have unintended consequences that end up causing far more harm than then solve.

The two Estero teenagers should be grounded.  Punished sternly.  Made to understand the wrongfulness of their conduct.  Sent to bed without supper.  Suspended from school and refused their place on the cheerleading squad.  But they shouldn’t be prosecuted, and they certainly shouldn’t be turned into criminals for being mean children.