Shaming as societal self correction

[ThoughtfulMind]

You can logicaly proof the benefits of it. We all can agree that degeneracy is growing in the cities and not as much in small villages. Well, you don’t need to be Einstein to understand that the difference is the anonymity of the cities. People are not guarded by their neighbours and vice versa. The anonymity then enables people to sin, not to go to church, to do whatever they want.

If you live in a small village and people start asking you questions about where you’ve been last sunday, because they didn’t see you in the church… you better overcome your laziness next time, to avoid weird looks and questions from your neighbours. Again no one can say it’s a bad thing in this case.

 

[GeauxGirl]

If there would be no consequences for him he would cheat on his wife with this woman, however since he knows the life would become a hell on earth if he did (shaming), he resists.

I don’t think shame is interchangeable with consequence. Shame, to me, is an inner feeling. Shaming is an external action from others. The consequences of his cheating (wife being hurt, marriage ending, losing his family) may cause shame, but shaming, IMO, would be posting this man’s face & transgression in a public place for his community to see.

Feeling shame & remorse because we have seen the consequences of our actions is beneficial to avoiding recidivism. Being shamed (vs feeling ashamed) is less productive, IMO.

 

[ThoughtfulMind]

If you have someone with underdevelop inner moral compass, the society can supplement it. Of course there are extremes, like in enything else on this planet.

My country is post-socialistic republic and we had people cooperating with communist secret service, which is loooong gone, and I also think those people shouldn’t be shamed for what they did if they repented (a lot of people are unable to forgive) - that would be the extreme end. But some shaming for what they did is just in my opinion - it serves as a reminder for those in the future that such behaviour is not tolerated.

BTW: Thanks to everyone who posted their opinion. Even though I defend my view on it, I am not closed to changing my view. Ivery much appreciate your comments!

 

[redbetta]

Where are people being shamed for their parenting? On mommy blogs? From what I’ve seen, it’s considered impolite to call out bad parenting when you see it. I work in retail and see people letting their kids run around wild and make a huge mess. I also see families full of morbidly obese kids. For the latter case, I want so bad to call them out for setting up their kids for a lifetime of health problems and robbing them of a normal childhood, but, in today’s world, I would be considered a jerk.

Nowadays, there are not nearly enough immediate consequences for people’s stupidity. People are too shameless.

 

[redbetta]

You are bolder than I am.

But, it is amazing how much self-awareness people lack when it comes to clothing choices. Sure, it’s a free society, but at least wear something that fits you properly so you’re not spilling out everywhere.

 

[ThoughtfulMind]

it is amazing how much self-awareness people lack when it comes to clothing choices.

I think you’ve just pointed out something that have a lot to do with the “fear of shame”. Fashion was very conservative, just because of it. We were keeping each other in bounds before. We are lacking it greatly nowadays.

 

[The_Old_Maid]

The “ORVILLE” episode “Majority Rule” proposed a world where shaming and popularity replace the rule of law and morality. Interestingly, not everyone liked the episode because they felt it was picking on social media.

(Two first-contact anthropologists are downvoted out of society for not giving their seat on the bus to a pregnant woman. If you pay attention, you will note from the camera angle that the citizen who publicly shamed them was also seated. No one on the bus offered her a seat. These two were just the only people who got caught.)

So on the one hand, I agree that people don’t have enough sense of propriety, and a little embarrassment can be a way to remind people of it. On the other hand, shaming doesn’t necessarily seem aimed at the strong and shameless. In fact, it doesn’t even seem to work on the strong!

Is it just my imagination, or does shaming gravitate more toward people who would have been bullied by other methods anyway?

 

[PetraG]

If it’s for something of less damage and there isn’t a jail term.

Guilt is an emotional warning that sends us to get right with God and neighbor.
A sense of guilt is a gift, like a sense of anger, a sense of affection…it is to be mastered, but it has a use and should not be ignored.
Shame is a jail term that never ends. It makes the offense into a weight that is always carried.

You can logicaly proof the benefits of it.

Yet it is easy to ignore the damage it does, as well.
Remember that this is how the Evil One sought to tempt Our Lord…“IF you are the Son of God…” (Matt. 4:6)–that is, he made an attack on Our Lord’s sense of self. The fear of shame is also used to tempt people to hold back from doing good things–“if I try this and fail, what will people think of me?”

Shame is a judgment that has no mercy in it. It is the judgment of the Accuser. That is why the Church teaches against it. Guilt is a call away from sin, a call to reconciliation. Teaching people to feel guilty when they have done wrong is a benefit to them. Teaching them to feel ashamed if they are embarrassed is not. Shame is paralyzing, shame attacks the self, shame shrinks from the hope of mercy. I think it is too easily used by the devil.

I do think it is very important to teach people from a young age what the difference is between guilt and shame. People who learn that shame is damaging are too easily mislead by the evil one into believing that a sense of guilt is also damaging, that they should feel good about their actions no matter what. That is NOT what the teaching against shaming others means!!! Likewise, guilt is a sign that we may not be right with others. It is like a smoke alarm–valuable but not always correct! People need to be taught that guilt is a warning to look to our actions and see if we need to turn back or make amends, but that it is not inerrant. We can feel guilty when we have done nothing wrong and we can fail to feel guilty when we have. A well-formed conscience uses guilt as a tool, not as an unerring guide.

 

[Rational1]

In my view shame is most and perhaps only effective when it is experienced inwardly triggering a self motivated change in behavior. External shame on the other hand can be hypocritical when it comes from other imperfect humans and it leads to causing pain in others or even indignation by the one being shamed.

 

[ThoughtfulMind]

If you pay attention, you will note from the camera angle that the citizen who publicly shamed them was also seated. No one on the bus offered her a seat. These two were just the only people who got caught

I agree that it is nonsense if you are acting as a hypocrite, however would you agree that if people left their seats for the pregnant woman, it wouldn’t be seen as a bad thing?

Is it just my imagination, or does shaming gravitate more toward people who would have been bullied by other methods anyway?

Yeah the direct (vocal) shaming would probably be aimed at people who are easier to bully. I agree, but the silent shaming is coming for anyone - that kind where the whole village is just talking behind your back because of what you did and you get to know about it only after coupe of days. In such case even the strong person cannot threaten the whole village.

As I said it couple of times here - there are proper ways to do such thing witch kind of charity and also wrong way, when you try to put yourself above the person. But just because some people cannot do something properly doesn’t necesseraly mean it’s wrong as a concept, or does it?

 

[ThoughtfulMind]

Wow, I really like your response, however I feel a little bit lost in how you feel about it. For a minute it looked like you agree with me then it was the opposite. So those examples which I provided throughout the thread are seen as doing evil or good in your point of view?

 

[ThoughtfulMind]

shame is most and perhaps only effective when it is experienced inwardly

But you have to teach your inner moral compass somehow. That’s where this societal punishments come to play IMHO.

 

[PetraG]

As I said it couple of times here - there are proper ways to do such thing witch kind of charity and also wrong way, when you try to put yourself above the person. But just because some people cannot do something properly doesn’t necesseraly mean it’s wrong as a concept, or does it?

Shame is a feeling of humiliation, not a feeling that we have violated a norm. The feeling that we have violated a norm is guilt.

…silent shaming is coming for anyone - that kind where the whole village is just talking behind your back because of what you did and you get to know about it only after coupe of days. In such case even the strong person cannot threaten the whole village.

Silent shaming? You mean talking behind people’s backs and badmouthing them in the hopes that your criticism will get to them in a form that can’t be traced back to you? I think it would be better if the village got together and openly questioned the person’s actions.

Covert aggression makes people socially paranoid. The Lord’s method when someone has wronged you is to take them aside privately first, then to bring witnesses, then to remove them from a place of trust if they will not amend themselves such that they’d be worthy of keeping that place. Whether they are friend or enemy, however, the command is to love them. Love doesn’t shame others, because shaming is directly giving the message that the target is unworthy of love.

But you have to teach your inner moral compass somehow. That’s where this societal punishments come to play IMHO.

I really think you’re talking about the problem of people avoiding shaming and going all the way to actively eliminationg all sense of guilt. A sense of guilt is a good thing. You are right: to silence anything that gives us a sense of guilt is a moral handicap. Guilt is a valuable tool of the conscience, and shouldn’t be repressed.

Shame says: Anyone who does such a thing is a low example of a human being. You did that. You’re a low example of a human being.

Guilt says: Someone who has done such a thing has failed their duties as a human being. You did that. You need to make amends and reconcile with those you have wronged, and be free again.

The story of the Prodigal Son shows that God wants us to return without fear of shaming. There are still going to be temporal consequences of our sins–the Father tells the older son that “everything I have is yours” because what the younger son has squandered cannot magically be restored–but we don’t lose our places as persons in the family of God because we have squandered grace.

 

[ThoughtfulMind]

The feeling that we have violated a norm is guilt.

Well but guilt has to come from something, it doesnt just appear. And breaking the norm makes people guilty because their moral compass knows that for what they do punishment comes. At least that’s how I see it. The norm is norm because people are enforcing it by shaming those who don’t.

I was in a mall year or so ago, and while I was standing on an escalator I saw a girl in front of me with shoooooort shorts, I could actually see quite a bit of her butt. So I decided to tell my friend next to me reasonably loud (but in the same time silent enough for others not to hear it), that it’s really gross to show everyone your butt in such shorts. She immediately pull those short down, and I believe she will never wear them again.

I think I did it in a charitable way, not to ashame her in front of all the people around but loud enough so she, and only she, could hear it. I didn’t tell her directly otherwise she would get into defense mode and it would be way more humiliating for her than it needs to be.

As I said in this example I think that if I took her aside to tell her about her shorts, she would probably get aggresive and very defensive. I might be wrong but I think this way she can save her face by not admiting to wrong doing and in the same time she will do better next time.

 

[Rational1]

Rational1:

shame is most and perhaps only effective when it is experienced inwardly

But you have to teach your inner moral compass somehow. That’s where this societal punishments come to play IMHO.

If you want to teach someone it has to come from a good place and is expressed via respect and love.

 

[on_the_hill]

Sometimes we have to be uncharitable to prevent evil. Like slaping kid on the but when he misbehave (I don’t know about U.S. but here in Europe it’s seen as proper way to teach your kids), to get them behave better next time.

Highly controversial here in the U.S.
It may have been on CAF that I read a post that said, ‘the spanking might make you feel better but it won’t do anything for your child.’

I’m against shaming, but let’s put this into perspectives and degrees. Certainly, there’s some value in shame because it can compel people to behave according to some manner of appropriateness. People want to do the right thing within context, and shame can be an effective discouragement from inappropriate behavior.

But a widespread shaming of a person (e.g. via social media like Facebook) generally does more harm than good. I submit that 99% of the people who are ‘shaming’ are doing with simplistically baleful reasons. They want to beat-up on someone who’s an easy target and get away with it.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Shaming is not what Jesus would do, does not teach people to not sin for love of God when instead they’re just trying to avoid shunning, and ultimately does not work for many people.

The pride parades are a direct result of a group of people standing up against shaming and saying “We’re not gonna take it any more.” If we had treated them humanely, they would not need self-affirmance events.

I also hate all the works of literature that have to do with shaming. Usually it’s some woman getting shamed and ultimately suffering some unhappy fate while the man involved gets off scot free. Who in their right mind would see that as productive?

Jesus never shamed anyone but the Pharisees. Think about it. Maybe those who want to shame others should be the ones to be shamed.

 

[ThoughtfulMind]

I 100% agree. that’s pretty much what I was trying to advocate for.

 

[ThoughtfulMind]

So you admited Jesus shamed the Pharisees. That would mean that the “What would Jesus do” can apply here. Well I always try to see the REASON (Logos) in what Jesus taught - sometimes people flip it 360 to suit our liberal ideas, sometimes it’s taken too literaly. But mostly if you actualy thing about the things Jesus taught us they make sense. And this auto correction functionality of shaming makes sanse and existed throughout the middle ages until this day, because it was needed and was beneficial. As with anything else, you can go to extremes and use it for you own good feelings, but if used wisely society can benefit from it. Just look at Jesus and the merchants. Would you say he did it to feel better? Of course not - he used the anger in a good way to fight the evil. The same applies here. Use it wisely. Jesus used St. Peters “dark side” for good as well.

 

[DeniseNY]

You think that’s charitable? You seem oddly proud of your remark.