The Shame Game

I was on a radio call-in show in Minneapolis last week, listening to the callers tell their tales of economic woe: An eight-month job search followed by a job at half the person’s former pay, an 18-month search leading to serious depression, a five-year search leading to nothing at all. During a commercial break, my host – the amiable Jack Rice – noted that almost all these stories were told in the third person, usually as something that had happened to a spouse. Were some of the callers just too embarrassed to own their own stories – too crushed by the shame of layoffs and unemployment?

Shame hangs heavy over the economic landscape: the shame of the newly laid-off, the shame of the chronically poor. It’s easy enough for enlightened members of the comfortable classes to insist there’s no reason for shame: You didn’t bring the layoff down on yourself; you didn’t determine that the maximum wage in your line of work would be in the neighborhood of $8 an hour. Snap out of it, I want to say, blame the economy or its corporate chieftains. Just don’t blame yourself!

But shame is a verb as well as a noun. Almost nobody arrives at shame on their own; there are shamers and shamees. Hester Prynne didn’t pin that scarlet A on her own chest. In fact, it may be wiser to think of shame as a relationship rather than just a feeling: a relationship of domination in which the mocking judgments of the dominant are internalized by the dominated.

Shaming can be a more effective means of social control than force. The peasant who stepped out of line could be derided for daring to question his “betters.” The woman who spoke out against patriarchal restrictions could be dismissed as a harridan or even a slut. It doesn’t always work, of course. In 1994, Dan Quayle and rightwing writer Charles Murray launched an initiative to “re-stigmatize” out-of-wedlock births by restoring the old pejorative term “illegitimate.” But somehow the country wasn’t ready to label millions of babies bastards.

Shame was far more effective in the build-up to welfare reform. Consistently stereotyped as lazy, promiscuous parasites, welfare recipients largely failed to rally in their own defense. I remember talking to a young (white) woman who professed great enthusiasm for draconian forms of welfare reform – only to admit that she herself had been raised on welfare by a beloved and plucky single mother. That’s deeply internalized shame.

The ultimate trick is to make people ashamed of the injuries inflicted upon them. In many cultures, rape renders a woman an unmarriageable pariah. In Pakistan today – one of our more embarrassing “allies” – a woman who brings charges of rape can be punished for “adultery.” Even in America, many women’s first response to sexual harassment or assault is to feel soiled and shamed, as if she had brought the unwanted advances on herself.

Something similar goes on in the case of the laid off and unemployed, thanks to the prevailing Calvinist form of Protestantism, according to which productivity and employment are the source of one’s identity as well as one’s income. Not working? Then what are you? And to put the Calvinist message in crude theological terms: go to hell.

In case anyone fails to feel their full measure of shame over unemployment, there is an entire shame industry to whip them into shape: The career coaches, self-help books, motivational speakers and business gurus who preach that whatever happens to you must be a result of your own “attitude.” Laid off and coming up empty on your job search? You must be too “negative,” and hence attracting negative circumstances into your life. To paraphrase one career coach I encountered during my research for Bait and Switch: We’re not here to talk about the economy or the market; we’re here to talk about you.

Shame is a potent weapon, but it should never be used against the already-injured and aggrieved. Instead, let’s turn it against the aggrievers: Shame on Ford and GM for putting all their eggs in the SUV basket and then laying off thousands. Shame on the CEO’s who make eight-figure incomes while their lowest paid employees trudge between food banks. Shame on Congress for leaving us with an unemployment insurance program that covers only a little more than a third of the laid off.

Everyone else should hold their heads up high.

Comments

[Anarcissie]

I would guess that, like most important elements of popular culture, economic shame functions positively for many people, and therefore they reinforce it. For one thing, I think shame is the necessary underside of pride. Economic pride means feeling better than other people because you have more money than they do, get it faster, or use it more cleverly. It looks like a mainspring of capitalist economic activity to me. So the people who suffer shame are among those who labor to lift up the well-named gross national product, which is what we all want, isn't it?

[Jonathan Cohen]

It's interesting - the same thing is at play in the corporate world about salaries.

It's an unspoken rule that one is not supposed to discuss one's salaries with coworkers. But why? The only one who'd be harmed by such a discussion is the employer. It's in their best interests to keep this 'rule' going.

[Carol]

I like the Navajo notion that if you are very rich you should be ashamed because you haven't done enough to help your poor relatives.

Good shame vs bad shame.

[Sharon]

It's the typical dysfunctional family model, where no one talks about the elephant in the room.

Don't talk about salaries, don't talk about legal and economic systems that are tilted toward the "haves." That's "class warfare." Divide and conquer, lest the People get together and organize.

[LSLE]

This has probably been pointed out before, but…people who take complete responsibility for their layoffs/failures/downward mobility are expressing very typical behaviors of abused children. Abused and neglected children usually believe that they deserve their beatings/abuse, and that "if they only work harder/behave better/etc., they will be loved and cared for." An expert in child psychology could probably explain this better, but I believe it has something to do with the fact that the only thing a child can do (or thinks that he/she can do) is change himself/herself.

[Greg]

Along the same lines as LSLE--I read on another blog the reason Democrats won't go near the issue of health care is because of the Clinton Health Care plan fiasco--so now the health care topic is "the bad room" or that bad place where that bad thing happened.

[lc2]

It probably goes without saying, but might bear mention: in union workplaces there are zero secrets in terms of wages and benefits. Does a lot for morale and teamwork to have that out of the way ... and I thought the modern workplace was all about teamwork.

[lc2]

Of course there's an odd shame for many to admit the need for or benefits of advocacy in the form of a union, or any affinity group for that matter. Even the members often don't want to self-identify and/or don't avail themselves of representation when conflicts regarding scheduling or arbitrary discipline, etc. arise ... therefore leaving the impression that unions are only for the troublemakers and freeloaders of the bunch.

I recall working with a young man of limited intellectual capacity whose transportation needs had changed. Instead of approaching his manager about a 1/2 hour schedule change (which he would have been granted without arguement in this workplace) so he could catch the last bus. Which is how I found him walking 5 miles home along a highway -- at midnight -- in January. And that was in a union shop, where we were guaranteed reasonable schedule requests per the contract! Things would've continued in this vein indefinitely had I not intervened on his behalf -- and urged the manager to spare him the shame of discussing the matter. Strange times, indeed.

[Alex]

Dear Barbara,

The nature of a Capitalistic system is that there are "winners" and there are "losers". Maybe the difference between being a winner and being a loser is simply who you know. Cronyism seems to be the main way to guarantee success in today's world. Yet, society will go on. There have been ghettos for over a hundred years, and they will be there for another 100. Communism failed, as you all know, and Socialism in Europe is being dismantled. Some of this is I.Q., whether you like it or not. Most Americans are too uneducated to fully participate in the wonder of Globalization. Do you think lazy Johnny is going to be able to compete for the technological jobs of the future with Krish from IIT (India Institute of Technology), give me a break. America is all about quantity over quality, and America's time in the sun is over. You can argue that it is economic deprivation, bad schools, etc., but at the end of the day, they are many stupid people, especially in America. There is very little intellectual curiosity. The whole culture is infantile. The closest thing to a Utopian society was in Europe in the 80's and 90's, and now Globalization will blow it apart. Being poor in America is horrifying, and it means being surrounded by ignorant, dangerous people. My point is that nothing will change. Bush was elected, remember. He was elected by the ignorant masses, and they voted to stay in their little hovels and live out their obese little lives. Let's not get all emotional hoping for some miracle. Democracy doesn't work if 90% of the people are morons or close to it. Call me cynical, but this is a waste of time, although I agree with the fundamental principles behind your argument, most Americans are operating at a much too primitive level to even understand let alone rock the vote. Human nature is all about "survival of the fittest", and frankly, I don't care one second about the people who suffered during Katrina. Human nature is all about greed and status. Capitalism is simply an outgrowth of human nature. There was no golden time in human history, and there wont be one. With more and more people every year, there simply isn't the money to go around, and I, for one, am not going to give up one bit of my lifestyle to help those ignorant people. Personally, I don't want those now living in the ghettos living near me, ever...Most people think like I do, though they don't dare say it. There is a huge cultural, and educational divide in America and it's there, unfortunately. I don't want my kids growing up with gang bangers and other idiots walking around our neighborhood. Robert Hughes, the author and art critic, wrote recently, "I don't think stupid or ill-read people are as good to be with as wise and fully literate ones. Consequently, most of the human race doesn't matter much to me, outside the normal and necessary frame of courtesy and the obligation to respect human rights. I see no reason to squirm around apologizing for this." Amen.

[Jennifer]

I really love this blog, in part because it seems to be finishing up the job that I thought was left undone in Bait and Switch.

I'm a huge Ehrenreich fan, which made my disappointment with Bait and Switch that much keener.

If anyone's interested, I published a review of Bait and Switch, which is available online here: http://www.readerweekly.us/issue/350/Jennifer_Martin-Romme.html

This blog has softened my critical stance towards the book. Now instead of seeing the book as slipshod, I see it more as undercooked with the conversations here finishing the job.

Having read this blog, I have to ask myself if my reaction to Bait and Switch was because I'm part of the professional class myself.

Anyway, I love now having such immediate access to more Ehrenreich pieces!

[Anarcissie]

Alex: 'Personally, I don't want those now living in the ghettos living near me, ever...Most people think like I do, though they don't dare say it. There is a huge cultural, and educational divide in America and it's there, unfortunately. I don't want my kids growing up with gang bangers and other idiots walking around our neighborhood.'

I can understand your feelings. However, it's not only the culture of the slums that is boring and destructive, there is more of the same in the suburbs and among the elites, although it takes a somewhat different form (because the people doing it have more money, mostly).

Unfortunately, the kind of feelings you have are routinely manipulated into systems of oppression. One of the reasons people have to pay so much for real estate and wind up living far from their jobs, constantly burning gas on crowded highways to obtain the most elementary necessities of life, is the conviction that by doing so they can escape from the bad people. (Usually, those who are improperly pigmented.) The enormous consumption of resources that results from this flight in turn feeds the oil war complex and destroys the environment as well. Meanwhile the individuals caught in this trap find themselves strapped to huge mortgages and paying innumerable taxes and fees to institutions which give them very little in return.

My solution has been to get used to the boring, destructive people I already know, rather than seek out new ones. It's worked pretty well, and my way is a lot cheaper. And that means I am freer from the work machine and its violence. Such are the benefits of economic shamelessness!

[Terry Vermeylen]

The biggest impediment towards a just society is the relationship between government and big business. They perpetuate the myth that we are better off working ourselves to the bone and that living on a conveyor belt of consumerism is THE way to go. In fact we should be reducing the work week and thinking about using some of that extra time to improve our communities and spend more time with family and friends. And a supportive community can go a long way to reducing people's shame levels.

[chris]

Barbara wrote:

"Shame is a potent weapon, but it should never be used against the already-injured and aggrieved."

Shame??? You must be kidding. We've entered an age of untter shamelessness. What's left that receives this society's seal of DISAPPROVAL?

Not women who bear "illegitimate" children they can't support(I happen to be one of those kids).

Not criminals (50-cent made a movie romanticizing his criminal life).

Not politicians who tell lies in their sleep (Clinton, Gore, Bush, Cheney take your pick).

Not kids who refuse to learn anything in school (I've taught in Brooklyn public schools).

About the only behavior that still seems taboo is pedophilia. But even pedophiles have a society that supports and lauds their interest. How much longer before pedophilia achives some level of acceptibility?

Barbara wrote:
"Instead, let’s turn it against the aggrievers: Shame on Ford and GM for putting all their eggs in the SUV basket and then laying off thousands."

What total lunacy. First, Ford and GM produce a huge range of vehicles. Big cars, small cars, pick-up trucks, intermediate sized cars. Ford Focus and Chevy Malibu, for two examples.

The most insane assumption inherent in such idiotic statements is that auto manufacturers have acquired omniscience, at least as far as knowing in advance what all car-buyers will want at all times.

Oil prices are falling. Will gas return to $2.00 a gallon? Will larger vehicles regain their appeal?

If car-makers are expected to know which designs will sell and how many units to build, then oil companies should have no trouble forecasting oil prices, which, if known, would affect the buying decisions of car shoppers.

But no one knows exactly when or how consumer tastes will change.

Meanwhile, if you want to end capital spending and R&D spending at car companies, you can pay auto-workers more money for about a year. Then sales will begin to crumble, and they will fall until there are no sales. At that point Toyota and Honda will dominate the US motor vehicle market. Then GM and Ford will face bankruptcy which would probably lead them to merge. But that wouldn't work unless a very large number of workers were layed off.

[James]

Love this Blog. Some very insightful opinions that I have not found elsewhere.

I'm 57 years old and have retrained 3 times during my "career".

The first time was during Ronald Raygun when he busted all the Patco workers and turned "Union" into a dirty word.

(I know, I hear you, Union was a dirty word before Ronnie Raygun, but for the sake of an argument...I hope you give me a moment)

The second time I was forced out onto the street and into competition with kids half my age was during Poppy Bush and his "Thousand-Points-of Light". Remember that one? Oh, those were the days my friend. We all ran out and spent fortunes becoming Computer Repair Techs and System Engineers. We busted our ass...worked long days and went to school at night on our own dime.. but eventually we had to compete with the HB1 Visa nerds from India. Now , those jobs pay a whopping 10 bucks an hour (if you're lucky). And of course, it's all our fault. We just didn't push hard enough or we weren't productive enough.

I recently had to hang up my Gold Century-21 Real Estate jacket. (Size 44 long in case anyone wants to buy it. I also have the magnetic signs that go on the side of your car. A turn-key package that will allow YOU to make a fortune in real Estate). I've traded in my Century-21 accessories for a Dominoe's Pizza sign for the top of my car. Well, it pays the light bill.

I'm now in training for a job in the medical field. But quite honestly, I'm getting tired. I dont know how many more times I can do this. The up-side of the situation is, that at least in the Medical Field, when I'm 79 years old and I collapse, I'll be right there in the hospital... I won't have very far to walk.

I'm watching Elaine Chao on CNBC. You know her. She's that perky little Secretary of Labor who's married to Sen. Mitch McConnel from Kentucky.

She giggles and coos how "Wonderful" the job market is and once again, points out that it is our fault if we fail to grasp this Wonderful-WalMart Opportunity.

The only thing I can say is that there are some truly some ignorant people in this country. I'm afraid the hour is late and the damage done is beyond repair. Sit there and watch your "American Idol" Mr. and Mrs. America.

By the way... last one out grab the flag and close the door....God help us all.

[chris]

James, you wrote:

"The only thing I can say is that there are some truly some ignorant people in this country. I'm afraid the hour is late and the damage done is beyond repair."

Who are these "ignorant people" and exactly what is beyond repair?

It is not possible to control the direction of technology or what employment opportunities it will deliver. Yet you seem to suggest there should be a grand arbiter with the power to halt or restrict changes that might harm someone somewhere in the US economy.

That can't happen. We live in challenging times.

[eternalsquire]

Barbara said:

... thanks to the prevailing Calvinist form of Protestantism, according to which productivity and employment are the source of one’s identity as well as one’s income. Not working? Then what are you? And to put the Calvinist message in crude theological terms: go to hell....

And the main theological defect of Calvinism is therefore that the worth of a person is directly related to how much other
use to others that person is.

Although I was raised Jewish and converted to Christianity by way of the Protestant traditions, I have a great deal of sympathy for some of the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church.

Chief among these is the assertion that all human life is of equally infinite value in comparison.

Calvinism is therefore defective in that it lacks a certain quality of mercy, that demands that all people from all walks of life exist with some degree of dignity.

In modern times, this translates out to that minimal standard of living required to feed, clothe, house, and educate every human being born, or yet to be born, and that this minimum should not depend on the ability to work.

Alex said:

... With more and more people every year, there simply isn't the money to go around...

Absolute bushwa. Money is a numerical abstraction meant to represent the relative worth of a good or service. With more people comes a greater opportunity to obtain services from human labor, or to create more goods using human labor to transform raw material into a finished product.

In no case does the world suffer a lack of food, energy, water, or any of the other resources needed to sustain all.

What the world does lack are the number of people allowed to partake of the world's bounty. As a corallary to the teachings of John Paul II's "seamless garment", we need to extend that permission, at least to a small extent, unconditionally to all in need.

Chris said:

Yet you seem to suggest there should be a grand arbiter with the power to halt or restrict changes that might harm someone somewhere in the US economy.

Sure there is! He's there waiting for you to repent your sins and accept His mercy in your heart. He will then act through you for the betterment of humankind.

[Anarcissie]

Terry Vermeylen- 'The biggest impediment towards a just society is the relationship between government and big business. They perpetuate the myth that we are better off working ourselves to the bone and that living on a conveyor belt of consumerism is THE way to go.'

But is that just the corps and the government? It seems to me that idea is widespread throughout the population. Of course, the corps and the government feed it, being directed by winners and alpha males and such. But we -- a lot of us -- feed _them_, too.

People are enslaved to stuff and to social status. How can we break the spell?

[eternalsquire]

Anarcissie: "People are enslaved to stuff and to social status. How can we break the spell?"

The question is spot on.

The spell is cast by the darker powers to blind us from being able to see the power from heaven.

We need to distinguish that which is absolutely necessary to living a life of charity, mercy, and justice, against that which is not.

The implementation is left as an exercise for the student.

[lc2]

Alex should get credit for being honest, I guess. Maybe I'm a closet Christian. WWJD? Probably not endorse the comments of Hughes, who does not seem to have been enlightened by the humanity he must've benefited from following the debilitating accident he had some years back. What are the chances he had one of those ill-read types wiping his hiney after his car wreck? It's funny how during the crises of life when one is useless to others --when kindness really counts -- one tends to run into people who've chosen imparting compassion over other pursuits -- and are usually changed forever for the experience. You also find that intelligence and insight doesn't always come packaged in degrees, King's English, or the like. But then I guess it would require intelligence and insight to ferret it out.

I also think it's just plain gross when people don't like to share. There's more window dressing when it's adults talking about their tax dollars (mostly being spent in Iraq and developing weapons for future fruitless endeavors -- Iran? -- make no mistake) but it's ultimately no less distasteful than hearing a five-year old shriek: "That's MINE!"

[JP Merzetti]

James - I hear ya!
I think we just must suppose that a lot of stats go unrecorded and unreported (unless some enterprising entrepreneur digs them up and whips them into a bestseller)
-and that's no dig intended at B.E.
I suspect a thousand good authors couldn't tell the entire story...(I've only worked my way through a couple of hundred.)
Your story -
unfolds throughout the land like the western explansion in days of yore.
For a bit of illumination, I suggest to naysayers - go hang out with Dale Maharidge's adventures on the road, way back there in 1985. Have a good look at the pictures in his book.
Look long and deep into the faces of America.
That was then.
It's much worse now.
Perhaps what makes it so hideous, really - is the giant infotainment and propaganda machine that does such a good job convincing us we're really somewhere else.
Out there in the real world, you can't airbrush away the zits. You can manipulate a medium to death, but unless you can work miracles with loaves and fishes, it takes real money to pay the grocery bill.
What would a Kerouac find out on the road today?
Cries and whispers move throughout the land.
Many hearts are in the right place, but lack leadership, direction, and any real and profound hope.
Um, we're still only human, after all.

[Holly Redmond]

I hate to say it, but on this one, I have to agree with several of Chris' points.
Haveing said that, I'm a little at odds with how to express why.
Every six months, we go in and re-apply for government assistance, the food stamps, the medical insurance for my kids, that stuff.
Everytime WE do it, it always feels like we've failed -again-.
Each time, we get a little closer to not having to do it, so, it's getting better, but- see, here's the thing.
Every time we go in, you see a mixed bag of people. Race, age, whatever, it really holds no bearing- there are all kinds.
I'd say of the maybe ten, twenty people you'll see in the waiting room, maybe ONe other family has the same kind of 'guilty' expression- the rest seem like, "oh ho, hum, why do I have to waaait.." or worse, last time, I sat next to a young mother with five kids, pretty obviously pregnant with her sixth, who was complaining as loudly as she could that she wasn't receiving more benefits.
She had perfectly manicured nails, was complaining into a cell phone, and her kids were running around in name brand clothes. In the next breath, she complained that two of the kids' fathers were late with paying her rent.
This is not an uncommon occurance, at all.
It's no wonder people lump welfare recipiants into catagories- look how the bulk of them are.
I know this will probably make alot of people angry with me, but honestly, it really upsets me. I mean, my fiance works hard to support us, we're extremely responsible about NOT having any more children, and it seems as though our responsibility is being hindered by the system, not helped.
And then, we get called 'lazy' because so many people have seen these welfare moms, just like the ones I see in there, all the time- and they think that's us, too.
Chris has said I have 'entitlement' issues- and maybe I do. I don't feel the government owes me anything- however, I DO think it needs some restructuring. It's not right that if you work hard, and you really strive to be more responsible, you get less help than one who will not.
It's not right that we're all lumped into one catagory- and wagging your finger at people who look down thier noses at the poor, well, that's incredibly one-sided.
If it were a case of one bad apple, I'd see that point, but it isn't.
It's more a case of many bad apples and few good.
And, also, I agree with him disagreeing about the 'irrepairable' nature of things.
Maybe I am ignorantly optimistic, but I don't think we're in the shitter, just yet. I also don't think that people saying that does any good- because if more people realised that things CAN change and worked to make them change, they would.

[Sharon]

James, you're certainly not alone. I was a software engineer most of my life. I was laid off from my job that was 10 minutes from home, and spent most of last year commuting 140+ miles a day. Finally I quit to go back to grad school to become a librarian. In hindsight it was probably the best thing that ever happened to me, but I can say that because I don't have a family to support. There are other people in that position who don't have the choices I have.

All this talk about the glories of Globalization contains a lot of assumptions. It's not only oil that we are dependent on other countries for. We've also "outsourced" the majority of our manufacturing know-how, and a lot of our food production. What food we do still produce is produced on factory farms that are heavily dependent on petroleum products. We've squandered our resources for the past 50+ years on single family housing on what used to be good farm land, and on the highways and other infrastructure required to support them. Someday soon we're going to come to regret that as a foolish and short-sighted waste of valuable resources. And we're especially going to regret the loss of skills of all those people whom globalization deemed to be no longer "useful."

[lc2]

I don't know, Holly, I've heard almost identical versions of your story too many times to think it's unique. Namely, my mother in law and her mother both insist that the welfare they received in the late 60s-early 70s is qualitatively different than that offered today -- now they are married, productive members of society. To which I replied, "You're right. Now, there is a work requirement, whereas you had no such obligation." The real difference? They were rescused via marriage, after being abandoned by alcoholic first husbands. Of course my mil was forced to leave high school, since those were the good old days when teenage motherhood was too shameful for public view (and she was married!), so supporting herself and the kids on her secretary's job was pretty much a non-option. The irony that she went on to work for 30 years in a clerical position for the school system that rejected her and all her early academic promise, is lost on her.

Or I could tell you stories about a friend who now makes $70K/yr as an RN but who was heckled for using food stamps in the grocery store while in nursing school, because she had so many kids with her (she was doing child care in her spare time). Something along the lines of not being woman enough to hang on to the father (she'd been married for 18 years when he decided to abuse then abandon her).

Don't kid yourself, you are a member of many untouchable categories because you aren't married, even if you intend to be. The question is: who decides the criteria for a worthy social investment?

[chris]

lc2 wrote:

"Or I could tell you stories about a friend who now makes $70K/yr as an RN but who was heckled for using food stamps in the grocery store while in nursing school, because she had so many kids with her (she was doing child care in her spare time)."

I doubt the accuracy of this anecdote.

I've lived in several cities and neighborhoods where food stamps are common currency and I have never witnessed "heckling" of someone who paid for groceries with federal scrip.

The only situation I found myself disapproving of occurred when store owners would ring up ineligible items like beer as approved items.

[chris]

Holly Redmond wrote:

"And then, we get called 'lazy' because so many people have seen these welfare moms, just like the ones I see in there, all the time- and they think that's us, too."

Who calls welfare recipients lazy? Who are these people you are thinking about?

I think you've created your own boogie men.

There is certainly disdain for the CONCEPTUAL welfare recipient who aims to milk the system. That's no different than the disdain for other low-level miscreants.

No thinking person denies there are times when a government handout is needed and appropriate. But there is also no doubt there are generations of people who have subsisted on welfare since Lyndon Johnson delivered the Great Society to America.