1.0. Introduction
Shame has come into spotlight in recent times as result of evolutionary concept of the origin of collaboration (Wettlaufer, 2008). In the field of anthropology, shame has been considered in favor of social emotions with significant impact on conflicts and cooperation among the young people in the society (Casimir Schnegg, 2002). Shame is brought by inappropriate behaviors, which are in contrast to the social or in-group norms (Wettlaufer, 2008). Shame represents internal control over behavioral traits and penalties for not respecting the rules laid down by the society. Therefore, shame can be described as the feelings that are brought by failure to appropriately control body or mind, following particular customary laws and regulation in the presence of the others, as taught to the young people (Jones Goldsmith, 2005).
Shame affects the identity of a person at the lowest level of societal competency (Schwartz, 2006). Shame elicits the feelings of guilt and the feeling of blame for a negative event or behavior that concerns a person at a more conscious point. When feeling shame, an individual person usually lowers his face to avoid being recognized by the passersby. In our contemporary society, shame has become an integral part of human emotion and shyness.
According to Schwartz (2006) there is nothing more intricate and excruciating emotion than shame. Shame entails absolute condemnation of self. Shame is a major catastrophic event in a person as individuals start to believe that they are not accepted in the society. Consequently, the awesome might of shame makes an individual to feel disgraceful and dishonorable with self. An individual who feels shame wants to bury himself from everyone. In contrast, guilt does not involve condemning one self but self-criticism for the mistakes done.
1.1. Background knowledge
Criticism of ones self elicited by shame is directed towards a mistake that one has made for which they feel very responsible and want to correct (Schwartz, 2010). From the psychological point of view, there is an overlap between shame and guilt where a person who feels shame may also feel guilty. However, shame is more of a public affair than guilt because the person who feels shame expects public condemnation. On the other hand the person who feels guilty may be the only one who is aware of the mistakes heshe has committed.
Scheff, (2007) suggested that a person who feels guilty might have sentiments of lost self-esteem but not to the degree that is experienced by the shameful person. For instance, a student who has cheated in examination may feel guilty of the high grades awarded to him her because it was not earned in an honest manner even though no one is aware of the cheating. On the other hand, when the same student is caught red handed cheating in an exam, right in the midst of his fellow students, he may feel absolutely shameful and embarrassed. The latter occurrence is because everyone is aware of the cheating.
Fessler, (2004) described shame as the most powerful force propping society and the force that directly linked to an individual behavior. A lot of shame is dangerous. An extreme tendency to experience shame leads to humiliation and humiliation results in anger. The conventional norms and traditions in most society work very hard to minimize the power of shame in natural behavior and to justify the use of humiliation. Therefore the societal norms and moral laws have been undergoing evolution in the way these norms and laws handle shameful cases.
In the past, many behavioral traits exhibited in contemporary society and were taken lightly as having been caused by public shame and humiliation. For instance, pregnancy out of wedlock forced victims to be banished from the community because of the stigma associated with it. Men who impregnated women out of wedlock were subjected to public ridicule. In the current world even the terms are outdated (Fessler, 2004). While many people would like to embrace the olden days of scarlet letters and homes for unmarried mothers, it is very significant to admit the social cost of destigmatizing previously unacceptable behavior. The major consequences are children borne in single parent households starting their lives at a significant disadvantage under the set standards by the social scientist.
Schwartz (2006) disclosed that a number of people suffer from the shameful disorder known as social avoidance, which is sometimes erroneously taken to mean social phobia or social anxiety. The distinction between the mentioned disorders has to do with the state of the personality disorder. A personality disorder is a long- term behavioral trait, which results in tribulations in work and personal relationships. The fact that it is a long-term problem makes its treatment next to impossible.
Symptoms of avoidant personal disorder are social phobia, extreme shyness, feeling of shortfall and sensitivity to denial and criticism, choosing loneliness and isolation, avoiding criticism, avoiding eye contact at work or elsewhere, and last but not the least avoiding saying anything (Schwartz, 2010). The individual suffering from the avoidance disorder is always focused on any signs of dissatisfaction from others.
In contemporary culture, there is shame apportioned on the celebrities by the media. If any of the well-known celebrity for instance a sporting icon like Tiger Woods commits a shameful act, the entire media fraternity will make it a top story. Mistakes made by the celebrities are pseudo-emphatically explained even if they were as a result of external forces they had no control over (Fessler, 2004). An example of the media hunt is former US president Bill Clinton. Clintons legacy was damaged by his lack of ability to control his urges, was unfairly hunted by the out of control media, but still remains a hero in todays society (Stearns, 2003).
Stearns (2008) described guilt and shame as sentiments that reflect self-consciousness and impose morality, and that work as a means of delimiting behavior to the societal norms and culture. Therefore enforcing feelings of shame and guiltiness are the basic components of child socialization. According to Stearns (2008) definitions of shame and guilt are diverse. Some authors argue that the most important element of shame is public exposure of the mistakes or inadequacies someone has committed while others recognize shame as self-dilapidation and feeling of being unworthy (Fessler, 2004).
In all cases, shame depicts the wish of hiding from others. Guilt, on the other hand, is linked to the desire of making an apology, reparation and to be forgiven (Stearns, 2008). In trying to differentiate guilt from shame, some authors define guilt as owing its roots from an individual point of view, in contrast shame points at the global self. Others see guilt as a private matter of conscience while shame as public thus influences the reputation of a person (Fessler, 2007).
1.2. Thesis statement.
Shame has been used for a very long period of time as a means of disciplining both children and adults in western societies. Use of shame has undergone considerable evolution in western societies. Plenty of criticism was leveled against the use of shame in punishing children and some experts argued that shame distorted child development. This forced parents and the society at large to devise new approaches of discipline to reduce the burden shame instilled on people. It is apparent that the devised modern methods of disciplines have failed terribly because currently western society has integrated shame into their way of life.
1.3. Shame in children in the early years
According to Sterns (2008) shame entails the need to hide from the view of other people. The shame that is experienced especially in an early age comes as a result of encounters which are subjective to social issues shaming in the full view of other people. This kind of shame that was experienced in full view of other people was a feature of the older Western societies. In colonial America, shame was used to a large extent and was reinforced with corporal chastening.
The young people who went against the set codes of conduct were forced to endure mockery from the brothers and sisters or the other people in society. Reprimanding was intentionally carried out in the full view of other people just as beating was Scheff, (2007). The young people took part in shaming other children and the other grown up people who were considered criminals. The shaming actions were also carried out in learning institutions where the young student who was thought to be going against the code of behavior would be told to occupy a given location in the room in full view of the colleagues.
Scheff, (2007) stated the new methods adopted by parents in instilling good conduct in children. Parents have also been asked not to let their feelings to run without managing them and to steer away from corporal chastening. Shame in the young in society can be enhanced through the lack of having the garments or playing tools that other age mates possessed (Matt, 2002)
1.4. The connection between shame and the Avoidant Personality
According to Schwartz, (2006) there is a chance that shame is the most complicated and hurting feeling there is. Shame is considered a chief assault that is directed towards the person in which the person feels that the societies will find the person intolerable. Schwartz, (2006) established that there is a connection between shame and the Avoidant Personality in the Western society. In this, the great worth that is given to personality contributes greatly towards making it hard for the people who are dealing with the Personality disorder. The difficulty is brought out by the worth that is given to personality since personality gives ground for people to shy away from social relations.
For people with the Personality Disorder, it is very hard to have social relations because of the hurting feelings induced. The person with Personality Disorder finds working together with other people as a danger since it would require them to acknowledge the social dread and the ways of behaving that have been created and which the person has been using for a given duration. The person with the Personality Disorder does not handle disapproval well because it makes the person to feel ashamed (Schwartz, 2006).
Shame is a worldwide phenomenon found in almost all culture and civilization but there is a set of origins that explains root causes of shame (Sterns, 2008). In western nations a lot of stress has been put on separateness, autonomy and unemotional personality. Hollywood movies portray the heroic persons who are strong, courageous and of few words. These characters depict self-reliance of the highest order (Ikegami, 2003). Therefore the highest value placed on heroic individuals and self-reliance in the west has played a major role in complicating matters for those suffering from avoidant personality disorders. This complication arises because the value placed on individual personality acts as a means of avoiding social interaction. Individuals suffering from avoidant personality disorder feel that interaction is very painful and should be avoided it at all cost, yet some professions demand socialization in order to be successful (Sterns, 2008).
Work requirements that demand cooperation act as a threat to the persons suffering from the avoidant personality disorder because they are forced to face up their fears and the conventional patterns of behaviors. Therefore people suffering from this kind of disease may feel that being given jobs requiring cooperation is some form of humiliation (Schwartz, 2006). It is amazing why people with avoidant personality will always want to avoid and shun social contact as it arouses a lot of anxiety. Persons with avoidant personality will always value independence very highly in spite of issues of anxiety and need to avoid people. It is also the nature of social avoidant people to be very sensitive of criticism even the slightest criticism causes a lot of pain. Actually, criticism of the person suffering from the disorder results in humiliation and therefore shame.
1.5. Evolution of shame in the western countries.
From the definitions and descriptions given above, it is clear that shame based upon the experience of the public coverage and the societies that rely mainly on public discipline will incur greater shame in young people than those that rely on private discipline (Stearns, 2008). Children in eastern nations for instance China and Japan are exposed to relatively high level of shame, in that mistakes are identified and corrected publicly, both at home and in school. This is not a common phenomenon in most European countries where private shaming is the most common act of discipline on children. An example of public shaming used especially in school is making a child try several times to solve a question on the board, each attempt being criticized by the fellow students until he gets the question correct.
The major objective for public shaming of students is to achieve the childs sense of right and self-worthiness thereby made contingent on the groups approval. The patterns of discipline used are based on the broader view that stresses the need of the group and encourage students to be in conformity with the group (Matt 2002).
Guilt and shame are self-awareness sentiments, and as such are tied to the variety of individual concepts and culture. Non-western cultures give emphasis to a mutually dependent self tied to group membership and are more shame prone (Schwartz 2006). On the other hand western culture tends to give more emphasis for the independent self and focuses on individual persons thus more prone to the feelings of guilt.
In the olden days, public shaming was also a characteristic of western societies but historians have been more fascinated in the period when there was a major shift from shame to guilt in childhood between 18thc and 19thc, specifically the US. (Hoare 2005). Shame was extensively used in colonial America and even strengthened by corporal punishment. Scolding of children was done in public and it also involved spanking or whipping. Young children participated in the discipline of others including adults. Therefore, most of the childhood experience was subjected to shaming others and probably being shamed.
In the 19th century, discipline changed from a public affair to a private one mostly undertaken within the family boundary. Disciplines to the offending child involved isolation, being locked in a solitary room for days with little food among others. The objective of the punishment was to encourage introspection of the bad act and, through this aggravate an eventual admission of wrongdoing upon which the child is received back into the affectionate family (Stearns, 2008). This approach did not remove application of shame in discipline and other members of the family were aware of the events. The main aim of the punishment was the feeling of guilt by the offender and the capacity to experience or foresee the same in future wrongdoings. Different offences had their own special dose of guilt and guilt capacity varied with maturity. Use of shame and guilt in that era was very significant in nurturing good behavior.
Parents and other adult members of the society played a great role in the lives of children but the credit was not theirs alone (Wettlaufer, 2008). Shame was greatly criticized but still was being applied in childrens lives for instance teachers continued to use shame in the face of professional advice. Peer pressure among the young people was a major contributor to their behavioral change. This is because peers humiliated each other and significantly influenced the conduct of its members (Stearns, 2008).
The growth of consumerism in the nineteenth century to date has strengthened yet another catalyst of shame. People who cannot keep up with the trends in fashion and the latest styles of clothes fairly often feel ashamed (Wettlaufer, 2008). People put a lot of effort to conform to the groups standard in consumerism and this is being driven by the desire to steer clear of shame from the cohorts.
1.6. Criticism of use of shame in discipline.
The culture of inculcating shame in young children started being questioned a lot in the 21st century. Experts started to debate the burden shame imposed on children, probably leading to their distorted development. Parents were urged to come up with strategies that would avoid overburdening children with guilt, as assertive literatures openly turned against what became to be oppressive practices of outdated centuries (Wettlaufer, 2008). Shame was viewed as very objectionable and too powerful, hindering the significant developments of sense of self esteem rather being a motivating factor in childrens life.
To act as replacement for shame, three alternative policies were recognized (Stearns, 2008). The course of action was that the parents were to help the children not to fall apart in their behavioral conducts so as to eradicate the need for punishment. This was made possible by greater tolerance for certain child behaviors. Secondly, parents and teachers were encouraged to offer gifts in favor of excellent behaviors as opposed to reprimanding the child for wrongdoing. Schools introduced programs which enhanced self-esteem and re-evaluated use of grades to sanction students.
Psychologists came up with new methods to alter children behavior and depress the use of guilt as form of punishment, which in their view is very detrimental to the child progress. For instance, a child could be lured using gifts to overcome fear of darkness, pets or subjects in school rather than being astonished by blame which will further weaken the child psychologically. The third proposal was to be used when the two approaches given above failed and the need to discipline a child was necessary. Professionals and parents explored new approaches, which were emotionally neutral to substitute for the guilt-prone approaches used earlier which include isolation of children from the family (Eaton, 2000).
The third approach was based on the view that children would respond to rational discussion without guilt implications. But if the discussions broke down two other options are proposed. The first one is fining children as a form of punishment without guilt. The other option is to ground a child, which means locking the child out of the entertainment or from the friends company for a particular period of time (Stearns, 2008). The objective of the third approach was to provide the right kind of discipline without resorting overtly to shame.
The overall impact of changes on the childrens experiences is very hard to appraise. Even if there is substantial decrease in the cases of child guilt recently, it is apparent that children continue to feel guilty even in families and societies that seek to limit guilt experience (Stearns, 2008). Other societal changes offer new opportunities for guilt in children such as increased parental expectation for academic performance and the escalating cases of divorce, which may direct children to believe that they played part in the break up.
The aversion of guilt can also be used to influence parental behavior (Wettlaufer, 2008). Currently most children in the European countries feel authorized to inform their parents if the parent is making the child guilty, with the aim of minimizing the parental criticism in the wake of prospective detrimental sentiments of shame.
Freiedman, H.F. (2006) became one of the contemporary opponents of use of shame in the corporate world. Freiedman, H.F. (2006) noted that use of shame in the workplace and humiliations leads to violence and other business problems. Therefore, very significant steps should be taken to ensure that managers are not shaming employees. Employee appraisal should be done in a manner that minimizes employee shame. In any case an employee is humiliated or shamed an apology is one method that should be used to avoid a bad situation turning into a disaster.
Even though guilt and shame still remain part and parcel of peoples lives, their meaning and uses have changed significantly as part of the larger family, education institutions and society as a whole. As a stronger means of enhancing the adult behavioral traits, the sentiments so far discussed have become part of how we can examine childhood experience.
1.7. Instances of shame in the western nations
Shame has taken a deferent dimension in the western society. Shame in this context can be viewed in terms of socio-historical shaping and we might ask after the status of shame in societies where face to face interaction is complemented by information communication technology. Shame is overshadowed by forms of social interaction, including internet communication and in the contemporary environment where media images insinuates themselves into interaction and self conception (Scheff, 2007). The reconciliation of shamelessness in the western society takes a wide perspective. Media provides enormous examples, pervasive sexual and violent TV programs, mainstreaming of internet pornography, unethical behavior of celebrities, immoral performances found in the You Tube and other internet video sites among others. In the legal sector attorneys very often instruct their clients not to admit any wrongdoing even if the client is guilty of the crime. This is also a common phenomenon in the western politics where politicians blatantly deny mistakes in public after being recorded in several occasions on the same subject (Freiedman, 2006).
There was a resent court case in Germany where a man found an enthusiastic partner in the Internet, who killed him, cooked and ate his flesh. The German chief prosecutor could not find any law to charge the accused of cannibalism. If the laws cannot outlaw cannibalism because the victim cooperated and other European law supports the act such as assisted suicide, then the European culture and norms no longer values shame and the resultant chaos (Fessler, 2004).
Mary, (2001) used traditional theoretical model of male behavioral control to demonstrate why shame and honor is part of the patriarchy concept. Apart from the female behavior, the models extended the concept to entail the understanding of the male feelings of shame. The study also revealed that most western nations especially the English speaking including US, shame and honor changed from the traditional extended kinship to nuclear families (Mary, 2001). The dimension of community involvement in family matters has reduced drastically if not lost completely (Schwartz, 2006). This makes an important point in many researches on gender violence which asserts that home is the most dangerous place for any woman. Thus from the study, reduced shame and lack of communal responsibilities in the west have seen gender rights of women violated.
David Irving was arrested on charges of holocaust denial. Irving is a renowned holocaust denier and apologist for Adolph Hitler, but when Irving was accused of the wrongdoings during the holocaust Deborah Lipstard, Irving sued Deborah Lipstard for libel and won the court case. It is rumored that Irvin remains ashamed to accept the libel that he earned in the court case. The Guardian newspaper stated that Irving does not refute that Jews were exterminated by the Nazi forces but only disputes the number of the concentration camps. Irving even questions the number of the Jews that were killed in the gas chambers and claims the number of those who died is far much lower than the accepted. Irving also argues that the number of Jews who died in Auschwitz was because of typhus disease and not gas chambers. In short, Irving is lacking the moral authority to deny the holocaust and only in search of refuge on the precision of the information and analysis (Freiedman, 2006)
Last but not least, we revisit the story of the former American president Bill Clinton whose character was assassinated by the media for alleged infidelity with his office assistant. Whether the rumors where true or not, Clinton still remains a hero in the face of many people in the Western nations and even the world at large (Stearns, 2003). Cases of infidelity are on rise in the western world and the most astonishing one is the case of exchanging partners. Many cultures regard the latter case as an abomination or as a cultural shock with a lot of condemnation from the religious circle but it is still practiced in western world (Verzet, 2010).The above examples illustrates few instances of shameful acts that are overlooked in the western society.
Conclusion
According to the study, shame has undergone a lot of evolution in the western world (Wettlaufer, 2008). It started from the era where both the adult and the children were publicly punished and put to shame in front of the whole community. It shifted into the use of guilt as a means of punishment. Children were locked or put in isolation until they confessed their wrong doings and made to feel guilt of the mistakes made, thats when they were allowed back into the loving family (Fessler, 2004).
A lot of criticism arose from the experts on the use of guilt as a means of punishing children and the experts argued that guilt distorted child development. This led to the development of the three approaches of child discipline still used to date. These forms of discipline regarded to be efficient and free of guilt and shame has resulted in escalation of rot in the western world (Freiedman, 2006). The study illustrations show how the current western cultures and behavioral patterns clash with the religious beliefs and the conventional norms and morals of the society.
The study depicts the relationship between shame and avoidance personality disorder, a long-term condition of fear of crowd and high regard for isolation. This condition can be reduced by means of medication, which reduces anxiety and depression (Gruenewald, et al, 2004). The condition can also be treated by cognitive-behavioral therapy, which helps to minimize social phobia and avoidance disorders.
Categories:
0 comments:
Post a Comment