5 ms·
I'm going to push back on the critique of shaming. It's literally the only consequence groups without any (economic/political) power have. It bears no force o
by Frondo 9y ago
I'm going to push back on the critique of shaming. It's literally the only consequence groups without any (economic/political) power have. It bears no force of law. It creates no consequence directly except for a little discomfort on the part of the recipient.
Tell historically disadvantaged communities--the ones with decades or centuries of societal biases working against them--they can't shame people they think are behaving shamefully, and what do you leave them with?
The critique of shaming just seems like another way to prop up a status quo that isn't a very good one for a lot of people.
- virgil_disgr4ce 9y agoWell put—thank you.
- reitanqild 9y agoIt's literally the only consequence groups without any (economic/political) power have. To me it seems it is more used by resourceful people.
- philwelch 9y agoShaming people is an exercise of political power. If a group truly lacks political power, they're not capable of effectively shaming anyone.
- msla 9y agoShaming by some groups is a badge of honor: If I'm hated by a certain unpopular political group, that's a real point in my favor in some regions. It's credibility you can't buy. And it doesn't matter if the group which hates me is powerful, as long as they're hated in turn by the people I want credibility with. The only way shaming hurts me is if the group doing the shaming is powerful among people I care about. Thus shaming is an expression of power, and a use of social force which must come from groups which have power.
- Powerofmene 9y agoThis goes back to that old adage "the enemy of my enemy is my friend."