“There can be no outrage, methinks, against our common nature, —whatever be the delinquencies of the individual— no outrage more flagrant than to forbid the culprit to hide his face for shame; as it was the essence of this punishment to do.”
– Nathaniel Hawthorne, The Scarlet Letter
As you know from reading The Scarlet Letter, Hester Prynne’s crime results in “public shaming,” a common practice in Puritan society. Do you believe “public shaming” should be used in our society to punish individuals who break laws? Would it deter more crime? Be sure to defend your position! Remember, if you enter the conversation after a few people have responded, respond to points your peers have made. Let's make this a discussion rather than individual posts!
Of course I'm the first one to reply.
ReplyDeletePublic shaming can be effective, especially when the shamed want nothing more than to repent (as seen with Hester), however ridicule should not be the first tier of punishment in my opinion. Especially when it comes to children, embarrassment can sometimes be worse than death... therefore it should only be used as a sort of last resort for the more serious cases. My point is that while public shaming can be very effective, it should not be used as punishment for petty acts or as an initial penalty for anything. It was effective in Hester's case in the Scarlet Letter, but she also thought that if she didn't repent, she would be sentenced to eternal damnation.
I agree with Edward on his point that, yes, public shaming can be effective if the person truly does feel guilty and that it should not be used as a tool for punishing children. In this day and age, everything is posted online or shared with everyone you know. This has lead to many issues with bullying and posting things without another person's consent just for the mere value of our entertainment. Children are brutally honest and cruel enough alone. The constant reminder that things posted online (as shown with the picture above) never truly are deleted is scary.
DeleteIf public shaming was as effective as it was in colonial times, wouldn't we just take convicts and put them on a scaffold like Hester and hope they fear the judgment of God?
I agree as to what Edward is saying. public shaming really only works on those who feel that they deserve to be publicly shamed. If you take someone who doesn't care whether their publicly shamed as has no effect on them because they can care less
DeleteI also agree with Edwards point if the individual does not sense that they have anything to feel guilt or shame over then the effect of public shaming won't have any influence over the person. Whether if the practice applies in these times I think depends on the individual's view of his actions and the audience the individual is being exposed to and his connection with the selected audience. If the person does feel guilty and this practice is applied the audience should only be to people the person knows and has some type of respect and are close to them so it can have a positive effect. if the audience are people who the person does not know or mostly likely will never see again like showing them on a road then it doesn't help I think it will only cause the individual to be bullied and harassed which in these times we have seen end badly and will probably either get them more angry or depressed. In Hester's era this would be more effective because they were very keen on morals with religion. Now people aren't really as religious as before and would probably show whether this practice works or not
DeleteI honestly think that in this day and age, public shaming would have no effect on the way we do things. You could do one of the most embarrassing things you could ever do and think you'll be humiliated for the rest of your life, but come the next day no one will remember what happened, or something else could happen to anyone else and they'll get their 15 minutes of infamy. The truth is no one cares about what happens to you, people simply move on. The only reason why Hester was publicly shamed for what she did is because during that time period, our views on social behavior and religion were very different from what they are today. What were considered sins then are now the new norm. Had Hester committed her sin in today's society, considering her circumstances, people would understand what and why she did what she did, and she wouldn't be judged the same way she was back then.
ReplyDeleteYou stated, "The truth is no one cares about what happens to you, people simply move on."
DeleteThis isn't about changing the behavior of society, but changing the behavior of the "criminal."
Also, though Hester "wouldn't be judged the same way she was back then", are we as a society "okay" with adulterers?
I don’t want to say that adultery is not morally wrong, but its not really a crime. I wouldn't consider Hester an adulterer because she, along with others, had thought her husband had died at sea. She thought she was all alone and she has the right to move on, nothing should stop her from living her new life. However if what happened took place today, even if the circumstances were different, and Hester had cheated on her husband, knowing he was very much alive, it still wouldn't be anybody’s business of what happened between the two. We know from the novel that Hester and Chillingworth relationship wasn't the best, so in modern times, the most logical thing that would have happened would be a divorce, and in that case, she would be reliving her former life, and not committing a sin.
DeleteI agree that public shaming would not be fair in today's society for Hester. However, I'm wondering what you think about people we do view as criminals...rapists, murderers, molesters?
DeleteI think “public shaming” should not be used in our society to punish individuals who break law. The “public shaming” is fairly disgraceful to whoever undergoes it. If we use this kind of cruel punishment overly, it may result in much worse consequence. People who suffer public shaming may convert their anger to harming the society more relentlessly, like killing more people, to vent their hate toward the environment surrounding them.
ReplyDelete“Public shaming” hurts people’s self-esteems. Criminals who can not stand such disgrace may end up with self-destructing, such as suicide, to relieve themselves from being tortured by exposing to public after this unbearable shaming. In the other hand, the use of “public shaming” also reflects the social deficiency, such as , the existence of uncultivated people, aristocracy, coldbloodedness, and lagging development. Except for amusing the callous audience who could find joy from watching others’ embarrassment for a short moment, “public shaming” does not do any good.
In our civil country, we have many newly-developed methods, such as imprisonment, to punish criminals, as well as to educate them to obey the laws in order to keep them from breaking the rules again.
Moreover, I also oppose the open trial of certain adult criminals in the modern society. Because even though the culprits break the laws and do bad things, they are still human beings who are still under the protection of the country’s core concept of democracy. It is unfair for them who are sensitive to endure the disguised “public shaming” nowadays.
I cannot agree more with you. The use of public shaming in our society for criminals or outcast should not be in place. For some criminals just the fact that their life has been changed, into a life of isolation and despair can be overwhelming and instead of living behind bars they commit suicide, and that’s without public shaming, because to many of these individuals the fact that they have broken the law, result in public shaming, with the press, and media, doing the public shaming. For example Jerry Sandusky, and his humiliation for his crime led him to depression which in turn, led to his suicide. Like bullies, when they bully a person, that person might go home, and vent his anger with more aggression, to the people surrounding that individual. This occurs because like you stated “People who suffer public shaming may convert their anger to harming the society more relentlessly, like killing more people, to vent their hate toward the environment surrounding them.” We see this happen too many times in our society, we saw it occur in 1999, with the school shooting, in California, or it could just be in the form that the person goes home and vents his anger with his little siblings, and at that pint the cycle is repeated. The harm that this causes to the person is permanent, lowering their self-esteem, like you said. This is very depressing to know, and knowing that you cannot do anything to help these people, is awful, so we should set the example by starting from early child hood development by showing that public shaming on others, hurts people mentally and should not live like in Hester Prynnes’ day. That we as a society have evolve to something grander.
DeleteI totally agree with your response, I believe the use of "public Shaming" is emmbarassing to whoever goes through it. Even though that criminals did what they did, public shaming is a whole different type of punishment. Public shaming could result in the criminal acting out more than they already have. Today public shaming would be seen as something done way back in the day. Public shaming would also be something very horrifying to the eyes of young children.
DeleteTo use any form of shaming as punishment will show various degrees of success and failure. Most people will feel embarrassed while doing it, at least enough to deter the offender from repeating the offence, However some people may get too embarrassed leading to aggressive behavior from feeling cornered and alienated from the norms of society. This can be extremely dangerous and cause horrible effects in the near future. ( You know something typical like another shooting...) Also there are some people who enjoy any form of attention (narcissists) and people who like to make jokes about themselves. They may have the most fun with the attention from the public and sometimes even the media.
ReplyDeleteHowever since most people like to fit in and will move on past this unusual (well actually quite common now...) punishment it can be extremely effective, due to the fact it plays on human's desire to fit tin. There are still other options that should be considered before you result to this. (Also the age factor is very important to take into account.)
I agree with your response completely! A child (maybe between the ages of 5-10) may be effected by a punishment such as this. However, as they get older, public punishment (in this era) would really have no effect.
DeleteI believe that public shaming should be used to punish individuals that break the laws simply because just as Hester Prynne was forced to wear an "A" and reveal herself to the public due to committing adultery, not only were the people in her society aware of what she did but she became exposed, having herself realize within that what she has done is wrong and shall not go unnoticed. People who tend to break laws and are never brought to the public eye or are exposed feel that what they have done is okay and nothing will happen if the same law is broken again as they did not experience any repercussions previously before. Hester, after being banned from society because of her committed sin, realized that she had to regain her trust from the people again and worked hard to get back into society. People that are shamed in public often are embarrassed and work to gain trust again such as those running for high political offices (mayor, governor, president) do whatever they can to persuade the people that they are good for the job even though they were exposed for a certain scandal. Those who are publicly shamed will learn their lesson and as we all know "what's done in the dark will come to the light".
ReplyDeleteI disagree with Bridget but not completely. Public shaming will do well in some cases for younger children. This public shaming can cause the child to fill humiliated and not want to do the bad deed again. However if the child is not mentally stable this method can cause repercussions. The child can feel discourage and begin to shy away from being in public. Also I don’t believe that public shaming should be used for big situations, for example murder, rape, theft, etc. The humiliation can lead to a buildup of anger in the individual which ultimately leads up to another crime. And usually the crime will be bigger and with vengeance.
DeleteI disagree with Bridgette completely (sorry Biscuit). I think for you to answer this question you would have to realize the different time periods. Back then, of course public shaming would have worked especially in the Puritan society in which they lived. But in this modern era, public shaming would have less or even none of an effect on criminals, or individuals that break the law. Children would eventually come to an age where they wouldn't care whether they were shamed or not which would cause them to do even more crime.
DeleteI disagree with Bridgette on the notion of public shaming because a criminal will not share the same perception of the punishment as a child would. Also, it would be extremely difficult for one to regain the trust of society after being publicly shamed because the purpose of the punishment is to scar his or her reputation for life. This would serve no benefit to society because the criminal would be less motivated to live righteously and would likely commit crime again.
DeleteI'm so very sorry Bridgett, but I also disagree with you. As Travon has already mentioned, you did not acknowledge that the events in the Scarlet Letter are set in a different time period where public shaming was generally effective because it usually discouraged the person from committing the same act again. However, although Hester did not commit adultery again, she did begin to see the "A" as a source of empowerment as the story progressed. By embroidering the "A", she acknowledged that the act of adultery was still a part of who she was because it shaped her. Although the public shaming prevented her from participating in society as she once would, this would not work in a modern setting even if it is applied to other, more serious, crimes. Public shaming just thrusts people into the spotlight, which can actually boost their reputation. I mean, Miley Cyrus basically fell off the radar until everyone went crazy over the VMAs. Public shaming similar to "all press is good press" in some cases, especially today when public basically means over the internet, similar to what Fabrizio stated a long, long time ago. Public shaming will not hinder people from going on with their lives. Although their lives will become more difficult, I believe that generally people will carry on as those around them quickly forget.
DeleteI disagree with Bridgett as well. I do not think that public shaming will effect people now a days, like it did during the time period of the Scarlet Letter. Rules and regulations are not as harsh now as they were during that time. People are not looked down upon as heavily now. For some people public shaming may not effect them because they may just want the attention that public shaming will bring them.
DeleteI do not condone public shaming.i do not believe public shaming would have any type of effect on any individual in our society. In this day and age most people are much more daring than back in in the 1920's or the 1960's. Public shaming has no affect on anybody. For example if you tell a child you shouldn't eat this cookie or you shouldn't touch that do you honestly think they would listen. They're children! they will do what they're little hearts desire. Same thing goes for anybody really. We have shamed so many murderers,rapists, con artist ect. Did they ever stop any crimes that they committed? no. Society has grown to become a society to care less about public shaming (even though they do it on a daily bases). We have reality shows that show actors or actresses shaming themselves but it seems they can never learn from their mistakes. There is no difference between a child and adult. If you publicly shame a child for example, this child in this picture, he may stop for the time being of course because he's being punished but when its over he'll most likely do it again. Same thing goes for criminals they go to court, they apologize, they go to jail, but when they are released not all of them decide to live a "better life". In reality most of them go back to what they were doing before until they get caught again. Public shaming is like a never ending cycle really. You do something wrong, you're publicly shamed, you reflect and then the cycle starts again. no effect whats so ever.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Ambar completely! Public shaming in my opinion does not affect the public, nor make them care about the situation. As she stated, when you tell a children not to do something, they will go ahead a do it as the child they are without knowing any better. An adult would do the same, no matter how much you advise an adult at the end of the day they'll do as they please or what they believe is best for themselves. Specially in today's society when people are careless and live as they please with more freedom. I personally do not agree in public shaming and I believe it should not be allow, but because it is freedom of expression it would not stop from occurring. No adult, and specially no child should be publicly shamed. It's not like the public actually cares or pays attention to the situation, at the end of the day they will still continue with their own opinions and lives.
DeleteFrom analyzing the significance of The Scarlet Letter, one could understand that "Public shaming" is just a reflection of societies response towards unfamiliar people by cloaking whom they perceive as criminals with a label that would live longer than the severity of their crime. I do not believe that "public shaming" is an effective nor necessary method of punishment because it is counterproductive. For example, the person being publicly shamed for committing a crime or wrong doing could be a sociopath who feeds of the publicity and infamy of their actions. Another reason why public shaming is ineffective is because a person who commits a crime made the decision to do wrong, and should have already acknowledged what they have done whether or not they believe that it was morally correct. Therefore, the act of public shaming would serve no purpose because it is simply just a forced recollection of the crime committed. From what I understand about the Puritan legal system, every crime and it's severity is punishable by law so that the crime is not committed again. However, not everyone shares the same belief regarding the severity of a punishment. If this is so, wouldn't the risks of the crime being committed again be higher if unsound and un-incarcerated criminals become motivated to breach a similar law knowing that a trivial punishment such as public shaming would be their impending "doom". Throughout history, the thrill of public shaming or any form of public punishment seems to excite people in society as a result of todays media, the rumors of Puritan scaffoldings, or the vicious games played by criminals at the Roman Coliseum. Overall, who gave man the authority to eternally condemn an individual as a sinner, not giving them the chance to live proactively in order prove if he or she genuinely learned from consequences of their crime. Depending on the individual being publicly shamed, the experience could have forever scared their conscience or deprived them of any opportunity to live a righteous life.
ReplyDeleteI honestly have a split opinion of Public Shaming. On one hand I totally support it for younger children and even teens. However I don’t believe it should be used for adults such as criminals. As a teenager we do anything to fit in to society. We will spend so much money to look and feel cool and not seem as an outsider to our fellow peers. If a teenager were to be punished through public shaming, they would feel humiliated enough hopefully not to do it again. When it comes to adult I don’t think they should go through public shame because I feel that most adults have matured enough not to let peoples judgment get to them in today’s society. I feel that if it was punishment for adults, there would happen to be a narcissist that would go and partake in criminal activity just to get the attention that goes along with public shaming. And from this it would become a violent cycle; the idea of public shaming wouldn’t decrease criminal activity but in a way increase it. I believe that public shaming only works for certain ages, preferably between the ages of 5-17.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you Kaelana, however I do not agree it should be used or not (I remain neural). Its true public shaming has its positives and its negatives when it comes to cause and effects of each situation. Each situation of a crime is different as well as the person, their personally and life experiences that is receiving the punishment. For one person the shame of their crime can affect them at the moment though later never cross their mind again, while for other it could be the worst experience of their life. This experience can go on to effect the person more strongly than intend in the first place leading them into a depression or even suicide, however it could also bring them to a lighter side of thing by showing them a new perspective on life. With something like this punishment there is no way of knowing if it will work or not, or if it should be used or not; it really depends on the person. However, some experiences in life can be life changing for the better or worse and affected the person actions for the remainder of their life; this can be true at any age.
DeleteI am going to agree and disagree there, Kaelana. While I do agree that putting younger people on display for their wrong doings is an alright idea, I think it should also apply to those who are older, as well. Many individuals in society seek to have a clean image of themselves, if not, an image they deem fit to satisfy others' opinions. I feel like teens as well as adults would feel ashamed of what they've done, and would serve as an excellent example those who haven't done anything wrong yet would be more pensive to commit heinous acts. Many people of all ages are very susceptible to the opinions and ideas of other, and most, (in their sane minds) do not enjoy being ridiculed. Granted there would be those who would seek to make frivolity out of the system in place, but I think there will always be those who disregard order, whether in seeking individualism, or for a love of chaos. Public shaming could help keep people on a more just path, and prevent them from being as tempted to stray towards evil. The degree of the outing should also be harsh, yet fair, as not to seem barbaric, but to prove a finite point about committing crimes.
DeleteThank you Etianna I totally forgot to take into account the fact that people deal with things differently. To Xavier, I understand your point that some seek to have a clean image of themselves. However, you can't forget about how narcissist love the attention of others and would go out and commit crimes just to be in the lime light. Now I'm not saying that all adults are narcissist, but just to avoid any chance of a narcissist committing crimes why not just punish them through the law.
DeleteI agree more to what Edward was trying to state because i too believe that to an extent, public shaming is effective but only as a last resort. Trying to solve the problems through other methods before the public knowing everything that you have done might be easier on the person themselves. Having that pressure of everyone's eyes on you and their negative reactions toward you afterward or even while you stand in the middle of the crowd can make anyone, especially a person of younger age, feel as if they are at the lowest point of their entire lives and can actually harm a person more in the long run from the way I look at it.
ReplyDeleteI have to agree with Ambar's point. I don't agree with the thought of shaming one for their bad doings. As Ambar said it would do nothing in this day and age. I feel as though people don't feel shame anymore. As though they like the attention of being bad or as Ambar said PEOPLE JUST DONT CARE anymore. It's kind of sad how things have changed so severely. I think if people cared more about there self image and more of what society thinks of them there would be hardly any crime anymore. In the "Scarlet Letter", in those time people were overwhelmingly devoted to the law and wouldn't dare to break a rule. In the 21st century society is more daring and care less about the consequences.
ReplyDeletePublic shaming can have a benefit even if its to inform society of the character of the person committing the offense. Public shaming is still a part of our society and we witness it daily when you watch the news and the police parade a suspect in a crime in front of the press often before they are convicted of a crime. However i would have to agree with most of you in that public shaming is no longer a deterrent for doing something and some people may take pride in being singled out for their shame and fro some it may start them on a path to further offenses and retaliating against the people who ridiculed them.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you Hailey, although public shaming isn’t as effective today as it was back then in the sense that it prevented people from committing a crime, it is indeed still present today because every day on the news you see mug shots of people who have committed crimes or you see them in newspaper article and so forth so the publishing of their crimes is an act of public shaming in order to cause embarrassment on the person committing the crime. Sometimes the publicity that the criminals get can do worse instead of good because some people do get the joy of being known as an infamous person, therefore I do not believe that “public shaming” should be used in our society to punish criminals because it would just cause an increase in crime rate from individuals who want the public’s attention.
ReplyDeleteI believe that public shaming is something that should be used in public society, however not in the same form that was used in Nathaniel Hawthornes', The Scarlet Letter. In the novel, Hester was forced to stand before a group of people whilst being judged and ridiculed by them. Back then when there were few people to do so with limited opinions and closed minds, it was simple to judge how the outcome would be, hostile and with everyone concurring with one another. However in this day and age when people are becoming more open-minded, opinionated, and verbal with their thoughts, even brash with their actions. It can lead to chaos in the event that you see someone being held accountable for their crime in public. Imagine the person in said situation was a man being charged with molestation of a child, a mother of three who is attending this event can be overwhelmed with so much detestation for this man that she can be driven to cause him physical harm. Who's to say there aren't a group of people there supporting him (Pro-molestation? It's a possibility with the amount of crazy people in this world.) An event like this can lead to events such as riots and murder. Anyone who would think that shaming someone publicly in the same fashion as the novel would be effective is erroneous in their judgment. However, with things such as news broadcasts, newspapers, and the lovely internet, people are more aware of events like this going on in the world. They are able to know about the crime and know who is the committer of said crimes. That's public shame enough, having your name and photo being posted nationally, and even internationally for the entire world to see. Or when people get letters in the mail letting them know if an offender has moved into their neighborhood, with their name, race, and date of birth written on it, another form of public shame. There are already forms of letting people know the crimes people commit and who exactly committed it. So we don't need someone standing on the side of the street holding a sign stating it. It's not Colonial times anymore people, our culture has changed exponentially.
ReplyDelete9/17/2013
ReplyDeleteI feel that public embarrassment is a good punishment to a certain extent. This should not be the first resort when deciding how to punish someone for their actions but instead, a last resort to a moderate conflict or the only logical punishment to a minor conflict. Such as the image above. Public embarrassment in this case makes the son aware that he can not put his hands on his mother and allows the father to have others people's opinions influence his son. This can be good because he'll be able to see where he went wrong, but it can also be a bad thing. Such as in the Scarlet Letter, that punishment for crime like that today wouldn't be effective. Firstly because it isn't considered a crime now and second because, sadly, so many people in this day in age do it that it's not something society as a whole should punish you for.
Sorry for the late post :P but...
ReplyDeleteMy opinion on public embarrassment is that it's ineffective towards criminals of serious offenses. We shouldn't use shame as a substitute for punishment, because shame does'nt solve any of the issues in society that creates criminals, nor does it helps to bring the crime rates down in those societies. A person would need to have some sort of conscience in order to be affected by public shaming, but most criminals aren't bothered by their crimes until they're brought to court. As people we usually try to shame others by showing thier face on tv screens,and newspapers saying that " this individual is an example of what not to be" but we fail to realize that we should focus more on why this person did that, or what in his/her environment influenced this person to act out this way. We over look the origin story behind a crimial, because most people think by shaming them were changing their mental state. If this were true then we wouldn't have people going to jail for the same crimes. Unless a teenager, or a child cause a minor offense, public shaming shouldn't be used in our society to punish individuals who break laws.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI agree with most of my peers about public shaming having little to no effect on criminals today. In my opinion most people today like their business to be the center of the public eye. A person who has commited a crime would only recieve the feeling of shame due to a guilty conscience, regardless of if it is in public or private. In Nathaniel Hawthornes' The Scarlet Letter, Hester lived in a purtian soicety where people were not allowed to voice their opinions. In the novel Hester commited adultery and as a result Hester was publicly punished for her crime. If Hester commited her crime in todays society, publicly shaming her would have had no effect on her, in fact people would proabably be intrigue by her story rather than offended by it. Today public shaming would probably only have an effect on young children who are in the process of learning right from wrong.
ReplyDeleteI am fully against public shaming and believe that attempting to make it an effective form of punishment in our present day society, would be absolutely inept. You could expose someone of every bad thing that they've done & they'll still continue to commit any offense that they please, without any remorse. Public shaming would have no affect on debarring crime, because regardless if a persons actions are bared, theirs a chance their not going to halt similar future actions. Some people even feed off of the publicity they get from having their actions unveiled, solely because that was assumably the reason they committed their crime in the first place. The main generalization that's behind why "public shaming" was more acceptable during the time period of 'The Scarlet Letter' , is because during that point in time, civilians were more cautious of how they were presented. If you had contrasting morals or behavior than everyone else, you were immediately shunned and presented as the example of what not to be in society. In this day and age, peoples' mindsets have shifted & they could disregard anyone's opinion about them and what they do in their lives.
ReplyDeleteI agree with some of what Ambar and Travon said. In my opinion I believe that the death sentence should be implemented more in the judicial system instead of just the life sentence (or the ridiculous multiple life sentences that people get sometimes). If you are a serial killer, committed mass murders etc. you should receive the death sentence. I feel that with certain crimes it I only right to punish it with the death sentence. Now I know that most people will disagree with me on this but, I feel that crime is needed and is necessary to maintain healthy society. Crime and the judicial system are the ultimate check and balance. If there was absolutely no crime then there would be no need for the judicial system, cops, prisons etc. Let’s face it, crime is normal. I feel that a society will not function without crime. Also, crime is a way to show the bad that can happen or that people can do and with just that alone it will make some people not want to steer in the wrong direction and stay in a positive light. Without crime so many jobs will not be needed and society will lack strive for better. Crime is one of the reasons why society is always changing and attempting to become better year in and year out. Now don’t get me wrong I am not saying go out and kill people and burn houses down but crime is necessary.
ReplyDelete