Smarmy self-righteousness? Check!

[bolt.]

Wait, what were you saying about how ineffective shame is? Uh huh. Let me retrieve my eyes from where they rolled across the floor.....please.

Huh?

 

I'm not getting your implication here.

 

Maybe we define shame differently?

[I.Dup.]

Huh?

 

I'm not getting your implication here.

 

Maybe we define shame differently?

 

Let's see. You tell a grown woman that she needs to educate herself, that it's inappropriate to anonymously refer to someone as "Crazy," (but I'm guessing if the girl was a few years older and sleeping with her 16-year-old son, it would be okay to call her crazy?), that she must not know what mental illness is, and that she should apologize to a girl who was screwing her son in her own home?

[SKL]

Yeah, um, what did they think Mom was going to do when she caught them in the act?  Serve tea and crumpets?  (No pun intended!)

[bolt.]

Let's see. You tell a grown woman that she needs to educate herself, that it's inappropriate to anonymously refer to someone as "Crazy," (but I'm guessing if the girl was a few years older and sleeping with her 16-year-old son, it would be okay to call her crazy?), that she must not know what mental illness is, and that she should apologize to a girl who was screwing her son in her own home?

I thought I was giving her good and well reasoned advice. I don't think she has any reason to be ashamed. Lots of people accidentally use "crazy" as an insult (I used to) and I expect its quite normal to freak out when you actively encounter your teen in a sexual situation. Where does the shame come into it?

 

I do think its a mistake to call anyone crazy. Having a mental illness is not an insult, it's a serious medical condition that shouldn't be referred to that way -- ever. Such mockery of the ill is a society wide problem that I like to address whenever I can.

 

And, I also stand by my assessment that there is no good reason to put a vulnerable teenage girl out into the night if she had nowhere to go and no way to get there -- where she is at significant risk if both crime and exposure. Although it is perfectly understandable in the heat of the moment, risking someone's safety like that (if that's how it happened) is an ethical violation no matter what kind of screwing was going on, and an apology would be quite appropriate. (Now if she had a car, or whatever, and was perfectly safe: that's fine. I only said an apology was appropriate if it was with 'only the clothes on her back'.)

[bolt.]

Yeah, um, what did they think Mom was going to do when she caught them in the act? Serve tea and crumpets? (No pun intended!)

If the girl had no safe way to be out if doors, it would be right to shelter her somewhere separate from the son (chaperoned) or drive her to a safe location, or encourage both of them to leave together however they arrived.

[Joanne]

What is wrong with our culture that God forbid we hold kids to any sort of standard or restrict their behavior in any way, but we as adults can judge, shame, and guilt ourselves and each other, and hold ourselves to ridiculously high standards? Where does it flip over from "kid should never feel shame or guilt about anything, ever" to "adult, who is suddenly held responsible and must operate by stringently high standards." What kind of backwords world do we live in? Since when did shame become the worst .

You are arguing with something that does not exist in this thread. I haven't read anything in this thread that suggests lack of *standards*. I see a lot of restriction, even in the more seemingly liberal minded parenting.

 

No one is suggesting that a child shouldn't experience appropriate guilt.

 

But it is always more mature and powerful to move towards something positivethan away from something negative. Towards responsible sexual choices vs. Away from sex due to shame.

 

*shame* refers to a person's core. No one should define with a shameful core. No amount of shame will make a pregnant woman not pregnant. But shame can sure be a part of not being able to make mature, healthy choices.

 

Shame is toxic and non productive. Principled living is holistic and healthy. Shame has never done anything positive for me, and is likely related to the many extra pounds that now hang unhealthfully on my body.

 

I have, howeverm made sustained positive changes during non shamed based realizations.

[*Michelle*]

A different talk about women, from a father to his son.

[LucyStoner]

What is wrong with our culture that God forbid we hold kids to any sort of standard or restrict their behavior in any way, but we as adults can judge, shame, and guilt ourselves and each other, and hold ourselves to ridiculously high standards? Where does it flip over from "kid should never feel shame or guilt about anything, ever" to "adult, who is suddenly held responsible and must operate by stringently high standards." What kind of backwords world do we live in? Since when did shame become the worst thing ever? Maybe if more people had a bit of "shame" there wouldn't be so many crimes and tragedies occurring. There's a reason "he/she has no shame" is an insult.

 

Who pray tell is advocating that people not have "any sort of standard or restrict their behavior in any way" for their children?  I don't think that rejecting shame about sex and sexuality is the same thing not parenting and guiding your children to become upright, confident young adults capable of making good decisions.  

 

I want my children to operate from good morals and strong values, not shame, fear or pain.  And make no mistake, shame causes pain and fear.  

 

A lack of shame is not what causes someone to make a string of bad decisions and end up tied to co-parenting with someone they don't like or love and agree with about parenting.  Choosing to have sex, to have sex too young, who to have sex with, how to have sex, what to use or not use as contraceptive etc.  Shame is not what would have helped one or more of those choices be made in a wiser fashion.  Shame is not a substitute for wisdom and maturity.  

[bolt.]

What is wrong with our culture that God forbid we hold kids to any sort of standard or restrict their behavior in any way, but we as adults can judge, shame, and guilt ourselves and each other, and hold ourselves to ridiculously high standards? Where does it flip over from "kid should never feel shame or guilt about anything, ever" to "adult, who is suddenly held responsible and must operate by stringently high standards." What kind of backwords world do we live in? Since when did shame become the worst .

Adults set their own standards. I'd encourage all adults to never try to use shame to change their own behaviour, not to set unattainable standards for themselves. It's not healthy and it rarely works.

 

I don't shame myself.

 

I don't set standards for other people. If/when I encourage them to re-think or change something, it is almost always because I think they will be healthier and/or happier and/or wiser if they do. I never expect them to sense these things as "standards" or to feel ashamed of themselves! But you are right, to remind me that maybe they do. That might explain the occasional very negative reactions I sometimes get.

 

I do feel shame from time to time. It's intense and debilitating. It usually happens when I assess myself to have fallen short of my own idea of "good behaviour" (or, more accurately, a good impression of my good character, I guess) -- and to have done so in the sight of people that I am going to have to see again. It is a "hidey" feeling that makes me feel deeply alone. I hate it. I don't know how anyone could use it as a force for good.

[SKL]

If the girl had no safe way to be out if doors, it would be right to shelter her somewhere separate from the son (chaperoned) or drive her to a safe location, or encourage both of them to leave together however they arrived.

 

I guess it depends on where one lives, because when I was a teen, I was safe out walking alone at any hour.  This girl apparently figured out a way to get there "with nothing but the clothes on her back," she could figure out a way to return home.  If she wasn't feeling safe, she could call her parents to come and get her.

 

In no way does her boyfriend's mom owe her an apology.

[SKL]

I do think there is a lot of "I did it, and I don't want to feel bad, therefore it isn't bad."  Though it's not really about being "bad," but engaging in something unhealthy for one or both participants.  So unhealthy that some of us can't be mellow at the thought of our kids doing it.  There are many things I did as a kid that I wouldn't want my kids doing.  Stupid, dangerous, embarrassing, and mean things.  I can't change my past, but I can hope to guide my kids in a better direction.

[FaithManor]

I'd just like to say on the subject of shame based parenting. Reality has a brutal method for beating

kids over the head with the message that "you screwed up without parental help". In fact, it can drive an

already embarrassed and distraught teenage over the edge.

 

My parents, many years ago lived to regret this kind of parenting. Oh, they shamed my brother and his

girlfriend quite thoroughly and not only did their relationship with my brother NEVER recover and is to

this day, 32 years later remain strained, but an innocent child got caught in that fall out...a 16 year

old pregnant girl who couldn't go home because her parents were so ashamed of her, and well aware of what

the father's parents thought too. Pregnant, homeless, not wanting to abort her child, but the words

couldn't be taken back . My paternal grandparents who possessed more grace and mercy between them than

any other adults I have ever met, helped them out. Thank goodness! My nephew was an absolute delight to

everyone when he arrived and that boy and I have a special connection to this very day. The two married

and had two more children then split. But the hurt never completely healed so once free of a husband

who felt duty bound to allow his parents to see his children, remembered the pain her now ex inlaws

inflicted on her, the harlot and streetwalker comments in particular, and cut them out of her children's

lives. Her own parents received the same. My grandparents (until they died) and I were welcome to remain

in her life.

 

It made a very deep impression on me of what NOT to do!

 

Keep your heads about you folks as you parent your teens. The consequences of rubbing their faces in

their impulsive decisions and mistakes may come back to bite you in the rear with very unpleasant

side effects to the oh so judgmental parent.

 

I can honestly say this situation in our extended family has caused dh and I to be very careful how we

approach such matters. Additionally, though my brother would probably not be happy about it, his story

has been a case study we have discussed openly and in depth with our kids with the hope of helping them

more mature decisions about dating and s*x.

 

To be honest, I came from a very conservative religious background in which shaming was a primary mode

of discipline and I can' think of a single family in which this turned out to be effective. But, it

sure destroyed a lot of relationships.

[bolt.]

Would anyone care to list any other "acceptable" reasons to remove a teenage girl from the shelter of your home, alone, in the middle of the night? I'd like to know your thoughts -- because to me this just sounds incredibly reckless... And I don't even think "she was having sexin my house" is a acceptable reason to do it.

 

(If my teenager is sexually active and out in the night at your house, I'd hope for a little grown up good judgement regarding her safety even in a heated moment of discovery -- wouldn't anyone else hope the same? Doesn't this qualify as a "do unto others" situation?)

 

It's fine if she has a car.

It's fine if she has a safe boyfriend and they leave together (they did get there together sometime in the night).

Maybe it's fine if the night is warm and the town is safe.

 

My thought are focused here specifically on a "clothes on her back" scenario, and I'm presupposing my own climate zone. I guess that's pretty specific, and even though I said "if" that is the case, I know I'm adding that "if" to the non-info that was actually mentioned. I'll do the other "if": "if" the girl was perfectly safe, I do not feel that any apology would be owed.

[LeslieAnneLevine]

I'm not saying that it is supposed to take place at all. I accept that teens are autonomous human beings with strong sexual urges and that they do not always choose to delay intercourse until their 18th birthdays or marriage or whatever.

 

That doesn't mean that I'm allowing 14 year olds to have co-ed sleepovers. That does mean that I will provide my teens with contraception if they ask me for it. It means that my teenager does not spend his every waking hour under my direct supervision. He is allowed to go swimming, to the movies, to sleepovers with friends, etc. He is allowed to take the shuttle around base to go to the library or exchange when he wants to.

 

If he decided to enter into a sexual relationship he would find a way, I'm sure. I know that I did. I would not be angry if I found out that he had. I would be reasonably concerned. His physical and emotional health is important to me. I just would not be surprised or angry that it had happened.

 

Well, let's not go overboard; I wasn't talking about hosting co-ed sleepovers. I was wondering where the couple would have sex (if they so chose) if they had to keep the door open at all times. Now I know: somewhere out there. That was my question and I thank you and Joanne for answering it.

 

 

[SKL]

Not sure the ejection even happened in the middle of the night.  She woke up and found them.  It might have been morning.

 

I assume that even though she "freaked out," she would not have thrown a young girl into a patently unsafe situation.

She also did not say she prevented her son from following GF and helping her get to wherever they were going next.

[bolt.]

Fair enough... I did only say "if" it was night, and she had no means. I don't actually know whether that was the case, of course.

[Reflections]

Shame.  Is shame worth a life?  Two lives?

 

Last week while waiting in the ER, I met a distraught woman.  She saw us come in, and on seeing my distress, gave me a warm blanket for my son.  Later, she came by to see if she could get me another.  She was not a nurse.  She was a mom whose 16yo daughter just found out she was pregnant and had tried to commit suicide.  This mom was fine with the unexpected/unplanned pregnancy, but the daughter's boyfriend's family, not so much.  

 

Was shaming the poor girl worth that price?  

[bolt.]

My dd's are 5 and 8 -- already one of my "touchstones" is to tell myself, "The track record I build now, of how I respond when I find out their mistakes, is the basis on which they will decide whether or not I'm the right place to turn if they end up with my grand baby unexpectedly inside them. What reaction do I want them to predict for me on that day, based on what I do and say in this day?"

[swellmomma]

Ladies I have to tell you I am so relieved to learn tonight I have nothing to worry about with my son and sex.  I was informed tonight of his 5 and 10 year plans.  In 5 years at 20 he figures he will be ready to lose his virginity and see what sex is like.  And then he is going to wait until he is 25, get married and have lots of sex whenever he wants.  I am such a lucky mom to have a son that plans so well for his future....rofl.  Good lord, that boy is a piece of work.  That was his response to me having another sex talk with him after this thread lol he decided I needed to hear his plan so I would leave him alone already lol  No pout lipped girl on fb will sway him apparently, he has a plan!  Now if only that plan included something like graduate high school rather than play video games.

[DarlaS]

I find this to be far more disturbing than any of the duck face teens I've seen on facebook.

It follows you...

[Mrs Mungo]

Everyone says how liberal they are, until something like that happens, and they find out they're pretty darned conservative. Not ultra, but pretty conservative.

 

I said that training starts early with regard to privacy.

 

I actually didn't say I was pretty darn liberal with teens having sex. I said what the OP I was answering was describing was outside of my personal realm of reality. I didn't hang out with many people who were having sex in high school. I certainly wasn't. And making out in front of family members? Uhh...none of the married people in my family act that way, never mind the unmarried people. Maybe it is an issue of modeling behavior? I don't know. It is just outside of my experience. That isn't a judgment; it is just a statement of fact.

[SKL]

My SIL and a high % of her sisters were unwed teen mothers.  (My brother was her second husband.)  I remember my SIL as well as other former teen moms declaring that their daughters aren't going to be in that predicament because they're going to be smart about talking to their kids.  I distinctly remember when her dds were 9 and 11 and she said, "I've told them that I don't care what they do, as long as they use protection."   Her daughters and many of the girls in that generation of her family became unwed teen mothers.  One of them has had 4 out-of-wedlock kids (so far) by at least 3 different fathers. 

 

So, all this idealism about how there is a "safe" way to talk to our kids about sex is not convincing to me. 

 

I don't think there is anything wrong with letting kids know that we will be disappointed if they cut short their youth by procreating before they are ready.  My kids will also know that I will cherish my grandchildren no matter how they are conceived.  Both can be true at the same time.

[justamouse]

\

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Yeah, um, what did they think Mom was going to do when she caught them in the act? Serve tea and crumpets? (No pun intended!)

Act like a rational human being?

[El...]

Edited to remove quote.

 

:grouphug: for your and your family. 

 

 

[justamouse]

:grouphug: for your and your family. 

 

 

I appreciate the hugs. Retelling that made me cry. Would you mind deleting that quote for me? 

[Catwoman]

\

I'm so sorry. :(

[Mrs Mungo]

Plenty of people with mental illnesses are perfectly capable of consenting. It isn't rape to have sex with everyone with a mental illness.

 

Some people without mental illnesses are still able to be described as crazy. Not in a joking way, but in the vernacular. JMO.

 

I don't know where anyone got the idea that people are not holding kids to high standards. I don't get that from anyone's posts. The value judgments of WHY we have high standards is different.

[Mrs Mungo]

And I ask him, "What were you doing sleeping with a girl you didn't want to marry? Did you want to inflict a mother like that on your child? Why were you having sex with crazy?"

If it makes you feel better, dh and I have had this conversation with really grown men in their thirties (although most of them are smart enough not to get the girl/woman pregnant). But, it probably doesn't make you feel better. It certainly doesn't make me feel good.

[Free]

What is wrong with our culture that God forbid we hold kids to any sort of standard or restrict their behavior in any way, but we as adults can judge, shame, and guilt ourselves and each other, and hold ourselves to ridiculously high standards? Where does it flip over from "kid should never feel shame or guilt about anything, ever" to "adult, who is suddenly held responsible and must operate by stringently high standards." What kind of backwords world do we live in? Since when did shame become the worst thing ever? Maybe if more people had a bit of "shame" there wouldn't be so many crimes and tragedies occurring. There's a reason "he/she has no shame" is an insult.

 

Shame is not the same thing as holding oneself to high standards. Shame comes into play only after you have failed to live up to your standards. When that happens, you can either react with shame and guilt and beat yourself up for not "being a better person". Or you accept your limitations, forgive yourself and work towards healing yourself.

[Mrs Mungo]

Shame is not the same thing as holding oneself to high standards. Shame comes into play only after you have failed to live up to your standards. When that happens, you can either react with shame and guilt and beat yourself up for not "being a better person". Or you accept your limitations, forgive yourself and work towards healing yourself.

I am using this post as a jumping off point because I suspect this is where there is a miscommunication. Shame and guilt are *not* the same thing. This might be where the dialogue is breaking down. Here is an explanation from a better author than I am, Steven Pressfield (The Warrior Ethos):

 

Sociologists tell us that there are two types of cultures: guilt-based and shame-based.

 

Individuals in a guilt-based culture internalize their society’s conceptions of right and wrong. The sinner feels his crime in his guts. He doesn’t need anyone to convict him and sentence him; he convicts and sentences himself.

 

The West is a guilt-based culture. Since the Judeo-Christian God sees and knows our private deeds and innermost thoughts, we are always guilty of something, with no way out save some form of divine absolution, forgiveness or grace.

 

A shame-based culture is the opposite. In a shame-based culture, “face†is everything. All that matters is what the community believes of us. If we have committed murder but we can convince our fellows that we’re innocent, we’re home free. On the other hand, if the community believes evil of us—even if we’re blameless—we have lost face and honor. Death has become preferable to life.

 

A shame-based culture imposes its values from outside the individual, by the good or bad opinion of the group. The community imposes its code on its members by such acts as shunning and public shaming.

Other ways people have explained it? Guilt is about what you did. Shame is about who you are. It is hard to find redemption from shame versus guilt. Guilt is about failure to live up to a standard. Shame is about looking bad in the eyes of others.

 

Is that helping make more sense out of what some people are saying?

 

Another Pressfield bit of writing:

At Thermopylae in 480 B.C., every one of the 300 Spartans died resisting the Persian invaders except one, a warrior named Aristodemus who was withdrawn at the last minute because an eye inflammation had rendered him temporarily blind. The next year, the Spartans again faced the Persians, at Plataea, in central Greece. This time, Aristodemus was healthy and fought in the front rank. When the battle was over, all who had witnessed his actions agreed that Aristodemus had earned the prize of valor, so brilliant and relentless had been his courage. But the magistrates refused to award him this honor, judging that he was driven by such excess of shame that he risked his life recklessly, deliberately seeking to die.

Because he was *shamed*, there was no redemption from what came before. Shame based cultures are better at controlling people, but tend to lend themselves more to abortion, suicide, things like that.

[PeacefulChaos]

Indeed.

 

How did the girl(s) get the cell phone number from a "purity"-minded" boy? Certainly his mother has done a thorough job exposing the "fact" that a girl just wants to seduce them. :p I mean, where would the girl get the idea that this boy would even want that kind of interaction? Is it possible that mama doesn't know her boys as well as she thinks?

 

I don't like polarization of views like this, period.

I don't see where cell phone numbers have anything to do with anything.  These were pictures on fb, not texts.

 

Re if duck face is meant to be sexy or not. Um, once upon a time to evoke the look of a high cheek boned models, yeah that was an intent. Since stopduckface and "friends don't let friends duckface" though? Any web savvy person with a smartphone who isn't doing it ironically or to be silly very well may have some serious mental limitations. This is the era of Instagram. Social media savvy kids know how silly duckface is.

 

:iagree: :iagree: :iagree:

And girls never try to look sultry in their profile pics. :001_rolleyes:

Sure they do.  But they don't use the duck face to do it.  :rolleyes:

I know a lot of teenagers.  Not one does the duck face in a sultry manner in their pictures.  Either I just managed to live in a place/be related to EVERY smart girl on the planet, or the duck face phenomenon has nothing to do with sultriness anymore, and a heck of a lot more to do with being silly.

 

I thought I was giving her good and well reasoned advice. I don't think she has any reason to be ashamed. Lots of people accidentally use "crazy" as an insult (I used to) and I expect its quite normal to freak out when you actively encounter your teen in a sexual situation. Where does the shame come into it?

 

I do think its a mistake to call anyone crazy. Having a mental illness is not an insult, it's a serious medical condition that shouldn't be referred to that way -- ever. Such mockery of the ill is a society wide problem that I like to address whenever I can.

 

And, I also stand by my assessment that there is no good reason to put a vulnerable teenage girl out into the night if she had nowhere to go and no way to get there -- where she is at significant risk if both crime and exposure. Although it is perfectly understandable in the heat of the moment, risking someone's safety like that (if that's how it happened) is an ethical violation no matter what kind of screwing was going on, and an apology would be quite appropriate. (Now if she had a car, or whatever, and was perfectly safe: that's fine. I only said an apology was appropriate if it was with 'only the clothes on her back'.)

Re: the use of the word 'crazy'.  Just out of curiosity - this applies to saying crazy at all?  Like, 'Are you crazy?!' to someone, or 'That's crazy...' ; 'This day is so crazy' ; 'The kids are driving me crazy!' ; 'The kids are acting crazy!' ... you get the point.  :D

I don't refer to people with mental illnesses as crazy.  So I don't see a correlation between the two, to speak of, and I don't feel anything negative about using the word at all. 

[Free]

I am using this post as a jumping off point because I suspect this is where there is a miscommunication. Shame and guilt are *not* the same thing. This might be where the dialogue is breaking down. Here is an explanation from a better author than I am, Steven Pressfield (The Warrior Ethos):

 

Guilt is about what you did. Shame is about who you are. It is hard to find redemption from shame versus guilt. Guilt is about failure to live up to a standard. Shame is about looking bad in the eyes of others.

I agree with you that shame causes a person to look outwards for direction because he has not learnt to even calibrate, let alone use, his internal compass.

 

The point I was trying to make though was, how will you deal with your failures? Both shame and guilt place an expectation of infallibility and to me neither are useful in creating positive change. I have learnt that for me what works is acceptance of my nature - both good and bad. When I dont take my failure personally, I can analyse what went wrong more rationally and make amends accordingly. That was my point.

[SKL]

It's funny the way some people are trying to shame other posters for being OK with shame.  ;)

[bobbeym]

A different talk about women, from a father to his son.

 

What a wonderful conversation that dad plans to have.  I love this quote the best:

 

It is a woman’s responsibility to dress herself in the morning.  It is your responsibility to look at her like a human being regardless of what she is wearing.

 

 

 

I don't think there is anything wrong with letting kids know that we will be disappointed if they cut short their youth by procreating before they are ready.  My kids will also know that I will cherish my grandchildren no matter how they are conceived.  Both can be true at the same time.

 

I completely agree. I also feel it's a fine line between showing/voicing disapproval without crossing over into the shaming. 

 

My DIL lived with us for a year before the kids got married.  They had always been very vocal about no sex before marriage and we helped by serving as chaperones.  There was one morning though where they took things to a new level. While it wasn't full scale tEa, the guilt they had from their own actions worked better than anything I could have done.  DH and I reiterated house rules, acknowledged the disappointment we felt that they chose to break our rules and changed things up to provide more chaperoning than we had before.  DIL's family on the other hand, shamed DIL and it has created a rift between them that I don't think will ever go away.

[*Lulu*]

It's funny the way some people are trying to shame other posters for being OK with shame. ;)

I don't see anyone doing the above. I see posters having a conversation about the definition of words and the application of them in different circumstances.

[Free]

It's funny the way some people are trying to shame other posters for being OK with shame.  ;)

 

That is an interesting point. A few years ago I could not have engaged in any online conversations because I took everything too personally. If I did not get 100% agreement I felt hurt / anxious. Any opposing view point was automatically an attack. I was too invested in how others perceived me. Learning to be OK with who I was, and allowing myself to be different was the first step for me in allowing others to express themselves differently than me.

 

And this is really the same point I was making in my earlier post.

[I.Dup.]

 

Is that helping make more sense out of what some people are saying?

 

It does, thank you. But do you think the people who are so anti-shame would be okay with guilt? I doubt it.

 

 

That is an interesting point. A few years ago I could not have engaged in any online conversations because I took everything too personally. If I did not get 100% agreement I felt hurt / anxious. Any opposing view point was automatically an attack. I was too invested in how others perceived me. Learning to be OK with who I was, and allowing myself to be different was the first step for me in allowing others to express themselves differently than me.

 

I can relate. It's a very slow learning process for me. Getting older definitely helps.

[albeto.]

It does, thank you. But do you think the people who are so anti-shame would be okay with guilt? I doubt it.

 

Guilt leads to shame. I don't know how you have one without the other. I think what might be confusing is that all societies use shame as a means of protecting and encouraging certain behaviors.  We've evolved to do so, we cannot help it, and we can see this same behavior in many other primate species. This is an impulse we have that has contributed to civilization. As such, I think it is morally neutral, just like any other impulsive behavior. How it is used determines whether or not it's used appropriately (good), or inappropriately (bad).

 

Those behaviors that any given society understands to be valuable (ie, "good"), are identified as moral. Those behaviors that go against that are considered immoral. Because each society is shaped by different events, inspired by unique histories, we see moral codes developing differently from society to society, and even community to community, family to family. 

 

In this sense, shame is a morally neutral tool. It can be helpful when it inspires guilt for perpetrating injustice, such as publicly protected racism or sexism. It can be harmful when inspiring behavior that is identified as immoral for unjust or irrational reasons, such as feeling shame for non-conventional sexual behavior (LGBTQ, self-stimulation, transgender, hyper or hypo sexuality, etc). I think we all agree that people should feel ashamed for promoting dangerous, unjust things, like racism, sexism, child abuse, etc. Where we don't agree is on which behaviors are justifiably immoral, like teen sex, premarital sex, use of birth control, and terminating unwanted pregnancy. 

 

In my opinion, the blogger's examples of sharing her moral code by shaming girls who exhibit behavior indicative of inappropriate sexual behavior (linked in OP) are examples of inappropriate shaming. Subsequent identification of hypocrisy and double standard of shaming one gender while rationalizing the same behavior of another, as seen in this thread, is an example of good shaming. It's good, in my opinion, because one ought to feel guilt, and therefore shame, for unjustly accusing another person of being guilty of an offense against an irrational and unjustifiable belief.  When these offenses against irrational and unjustifiable beliefs inspires a plethora of unjust private behavior and public policy, both formal and informal, people should take notice of the real and measurable offense they're committing against arguably innocent people. 

[Joanne]

A TED talk about shame from a research professional on the topic:

 

http://www.ted.com/talks/brene_brown_listening_to_shame.html

 

She's got some great stuff on shame, if you are interested.

[I.Dup.]

Guilt leads to shame. I don't know how you have one without the other. I think what might be confusing is that all societies use shame as a means of protecting and encouraging certain behaviors.  We've evolved to do so, we cannot help it, and we can see this same behavior in many other primate species. This is an impulse we have that has contributed to civilization. As such, I think it is morally neutral, just like any other impulsive behavior. How it is used determines whether or not it's used appropriately (good), or inappropriately (bad).

 

Those behaviors that any given society understands to be valuable (ie, "good"), are identified as moral. Those behaviors that go against that are considered immoral. Because each society is shaped by different events, inspired by unique histories, we see moral codes developing differently from society to society, and even community to community, family to family. 

 

In this sense, shame is a morally neutral tool. It can be helpful when it inspires guilt for perpetrating injustice, such as publicly protected racism or sexism. It can be harmful when inspiring behavior that is identified as immoral for unjust or irrational reasons, such as feeling shame for non-conventional sexual behavior (LGBTQ, self-stimulation, transgender, hyper or hypo sexuality, etc). I think we all agree that people should feel ashamed for promoting dangerous, unjust things, like racism, sexism, child abuse, etc. Where we don't agree is on which behaviors are justifiably immoral, like teen sex, premarital sex, use of birth control, and terminating unwanted pregnancy. 

 

In my opinion, the blogger's examples of sharing her moral code by shaming girls who exhibit behavior indicative of inappropriate sexual behavior (linked in OP) are examples of inappropriate shaming. Subsequent identification of hypocrisy and double standard of shaming one gender while rationalizing the same behavior of another, as seen in this thread, is an example of good shaming. It's good, in my opinion, because one ought to feel guilt, and therefore shame, for unjustly accusing another person of being guilty of an offense against an irrational and unjustifiable belief.  When these offenses against irrational and unjustifiable beliefs inspires a plethora of unjust private behavior and public policy, both formal and informal, people should take notice of the real and measurable offense they're committing against arguably innocent people. 

 

 

But again, you're advocating shaming the pro-shamers because they go against your pet issues. Everyone is against shame if the shame is directed toward things they personally think are fine behaviors, or morally neutral. While others legitimately feel those behaviors are wrong.

[albeto.]

But again, you're advocating shaming the pro-shamers because they go against your pet issues. Everyone is against shame if the shame is directed toward things they personally think are fine behaviors, or morally neutral. While others legitimately feel those behaviors are wrong.

 

"Pet issue" is a misnomer. I disagree with shaming for the sake of promoting an irrational belief, especially when that promotion comes at the expense of innocent people's well-being. Let me explain. The blogger featured in the OP shamed her kids' friends for their behavior. By doing this, she has modeled for her kids (and encouraged thousands of parents like her) how to equate sexual behavior with intrinsic value. This is an irrational belief. By this I mean there is no rational correlation between sexual behavior and intrinsic value. Nevertheless, this shaming not only encourages that, it celebrates it and receives public approval for doing so.

 

So who is the victim here? Whose well-being is threatened? It's not the blogger's, there is no universal scales of justice that are being weighed unfairly, her boys won't suffer for feeling sexually attracted to the image of a healthy, young woman on their facebook page. So who is the victim? The girls are more likely to suffer for this "crime" they've committed - a "crime" that has no victim. Let that sink in a minute - there is no victim, and yet these girls (and all those like them) have been identified as doing something wrong, something offensive, something that offends... who?  Because this is a popular social belief, parents are encouraged to continue the shaming of their own kids, rationalize freak outs as a first reaction when they find their kids are sexually active, shame and even disown kids who exhibit nonconformist sexual behavior, shame teens from using birth control, and pressure (in some ways legally) young women to continue the development of unwanted pregnancies. The victims here aren't the blogger and her family - the victims are the women in society who are being held accountable to an irrational standard - sexual "purity." To promote"sexual purity" is to promote an irrational, superstitious belief system, and one worthy of identifying as shameful. One should be as embarrassed to promote this idea as they would be to promote astrology, or numerology, or the value of tin foil hats.

[bolt.]

Guilt is what a person feels when they have committed a crime or sin. It might lead to shame in some people, but that's not the way I experience it, so I tend not to analyze other situations that way.

 

Plus, a person who is guilty -- just is guilty, even if they don't feel a guilty feeling. Complicated, I guess.

[I.Dup.]

This is an irrational belief. By this I mean there is no rational correlation between sexual behavior and intrinsic value. 

 

In your opinion.

 

To promote"sexual purity" is to promote an irrational, superstitious belief system, and one worthy of identifying as shameful. One should be as embarrassed to promote this idea as they would be to promote astrology, or numerology, or the value of tin foil hats.

 

In your opinion.

 

Your view sounds just as ridiculous to people who believe differently, as their views do to you. I'm really trying to be open to what you're preaching, but it's just so far to one direction, I cannot wrap my mind around it.

 

[*Lulu*]

Your view sounds just as ridiculous to people who believe differently, as their views do to you. I'm really trying to be open to what you're preaching, but it's just so far to one direction, I cannot wrap my mind around it.

 

 

Asking for clarification here:

 

Do you believe that the value or worth of a person is in any way tied to thier sexual behavior?

[I.Dup.]

Asking for clarification here:

 

Do you believe that the value or worth of a person is in any way tied to thier sexual behavior?

 

Short answer, yes. :( I could do more explaining and clarifying, but I don't really feel like it right now, and I'm not sure it will help anyway.

[Delirium]

Short answer, yes. :( I could do more explaining and clarifying, but I don't really feel like it right now, and I'm not sure it will help anyway.

 

That's terrifying. I'm sorry you feel that way. Thanks for helping me understand your view though.

[swellmomma]

Short answer, yes. :( I could do more explaining and clarifying, but I don't really feel like it right now, and I'm not sure it will help anyway.

 

*snort* why am I not surprised?

[*Lulu*]

Short answer, yes. :( I could do more explaining and clarifying, but I don't really feel like it right now, and I'm not sure it will help anyway.

Okay. I'm going to ask two more questions and will understand if you don't want to answer.

 

Is this a belief as in a church endorsed life view you fully embrace?

 

Or is this, to use a personal example, like when somebody complements me and I *know* they are right but still feel undeserving of the complement?

[I.Dup.]

*snort* why am I not surprised?

 

What do you mean?

 

And why is it terrifying?

 

The question was:

 

Do you believe that the value or worth of a person is in any way tied to thier sexual behavior?

 

How can it not be? I am not referring to a teen who occasionally masturbates versus one who does not. Or a girl who loses her virginity before marriage versus one who does not.

 

But there is evidence everywhere that proves our value or worth, at least in society, is tied in to our sexual behavior. People are regularly jailed, fired, lose their marriage, lose their kids, or other terrible things because of their "sexual behavior."