Teenagers + Technology = Evil

(This is the first in what will probably be a long series of Overdue Essays: things I have written or contemplated in the past that were not posted due most likely to other demands, hence their timeliness is usually past.)

Even though April is over, I feel remiss if I did not mention something that had been on my mind much of that month: That mass violence seems to be unavoidable in April. There's Columbine (April 20, 1999), Virginia Tech (April 16, 2007), and the Oklahoma City bombing (April 19, 1995).

And then a few weeks ago came the story that eight teenage girls lured a classmate to one of their houses to bully and humiliate her to post on YouTube, so they could presumably get famous.

This was no old-school taunting; this was actual gang violence. They slammed her head into a bedroom wall REPEATEDLY, giving her a concussion.

What the fuck.

There's hate, and then there's teenage hate. And teenage hate combined with technology, warped values and money is just evil. It's appalling to read these stories, let alone be faced with the video, just because it's so alien and frightening. Even in my middle and high school years, even if I had wanted to enact some sort of violent physical revenge on someone, not only would I not have the imagination, means or wherewithal to do something of this magnitude, I would never have dared. There's stupid, and there's risky, but in what logical sense did these kids connect "intentional malicious brutal violence" and "internet video sensation" with "beloved superstar"?

The large scale of this story--eight girls, plus two boys as lookouts--again connects teen culture with technology, and shows what a deadly combination the two are. It encourages passive-aggressiveness; it blows everything out of proportion. This "stunt", this "prank" followed a string of nasty MySpace messages, texts and IMs that connected these students to one another. It's a never-ending cycle, and because nothing is face-to-face--there is no censor because they're so body language--when it finally hits in person it explodes.

This idea of fame is also incredibly warped. I can see the thrill of being on YouTube where someone can find you. I see the exhilaration of being on TV--you're important now! The world cares! Yet for all we know of fame and its trappings--hell, we're inundated with it every day--it still has that irresistible lure, so much so that people continue to sink into further and further depths to get some inkling of notoriety. But we're getting to the point where it's no longer about humiliating just ourselves anymore. The Moment of Truth is designed to ruin lives, and represents a new low for American culture. Maybe that's why--after so many years of feeling you need to be scrubbed raw in a hot shower after stumbling across a few channels on TV--NBC's new schedule is build around shows that are designed to be uplifting and positive. No more dark antiheroes like Tony Soprano, wondering which area of your life screwed you over today, but the kinds of shows that can inspire you to do more than watch television and dream about fighting crime.

Looking back, it seems that the seminal movie Mean Girls, which just rode a wave of alpha girl stories when it came out in 2004, could very well use an update. While that movie has justifiably resonated with millions of teens and former teens, a remake would just read as a ripoff of recent stories, much like episodes of SVU do.

Around the time this story broke, a survey also came out stating that mean girls are usually the most popular girls in school. Well, duh. Any who's gone to school should recognize this. Kinda hard to figure out at times, especially as it defies logic. But these are the girls who are not only mean, but manipulative, fearless, and incredibly intimidating, and they know it.

The Florida case piggybacks on a similar disturbing story from November, Megan Meier's suicide; that story is still getting traction. The woman who, in the eyes of many, effectively killed the 14 year-old is widely considered the most hated woman on the internet. The Florida story is just the most recent high-profile case, although there have been several similar ones, including a few copycats.

Technology is just a medium. It is neutral by this definition. It is just an instrument that humans use, and therefore, like any other gadget, it can be used for good or evil. We need to stop kids from using it maliciously, for taunting, humiliating, and hurting others. Spreading bullying so that in a few years we will have half a generation so morally and emotionally stunted because they were victims and perpetrators is going to leave them unable and afraid to communicate honestly and healthily, hampering their relationships.

Those involved in the Florida bullying should be charged and convicted. I can only assume they didn't learn waterboarding in school, or else that poor girl would be dead by now.

Does a feature story on one boy's bullying warrant coverage in the Times?

I read the feature on Monday about Billy Wolfe, and his horrible bullying saga…but I’m missing the point. At the end of the article, I went, “That’s it?” It ends with a quote by him, in reference to an incident where he opens a textbook to find hate message directed at him. Maybe because the article is making no judgments, just simply laying the story out there, is why it feels incomplete. What’s happening? What’s going to happen? It’s sad to say that in situations like this, many families move, but I completely agree with the Wolfes in that it is incredibly unfair to make them move and that the school is basically forcing them to do so, or to take such dramatic action as suing them.

The idea behind an article like this would be to highlight bullying. But I think the paper did a poor job of it—by focusing on one boy in particular, we only get his story, not even if it’s indicative of bullying levels across the country. His story needs to be tied into something larger—or maybe that’s just me expecting traditional journalism. “A Boy the Bullies Love to Hate” is part of Dan Barry’s “This Land” column, which tells human interest stories from all areas of the United States. Ok, sounds cool. But…what is the point Barry is making, other than publicizing Billy Wolfe’s case? That’s not a bad thing at all, and he’s doing it in a low-key way, even if the article is currently listed on their most-emailed list. From reading articles like this, it seems like bullying has increased, or maybe it’s just that it’s getting more coverage—which always skews perception and numbers. The story, like most bullying ones, is sad. What breaks your heart is that the kid is probably going to grow up with a lot of problems, thanks to what he’s experienced. Focusing on school is hard if everything school-related is a source of constant anxiety, and only doing well will spur others to further their harassment.

The article notes, in the issue of fairness, that some people think that Billy has contributed to his bullying; that is, he’s instigated or egged on his tormentors. I’m sure he has—what teenage boy doesn’t snarl an insult or hurl his fist when he’s reached his breaking point? It may not be right, but it’s true. It’s also true that sustained beatings for several years when clearly he is the only one needs some serious monitoring and some serious questions answered pronto.

Being the victim of bullying is always an unwinnable situation. You tell your parents or other authority figures, and just about whatever happens will come back to haunt you: you feel like a sissy, weak, a failure, but often it’s as a last resort. And whatever disciplinary action happens, it just makes others angrier and can possibly start a whole new level of agony. Even if the bully goes away, the lasting scars—and his friends—still linger.