When Shame Engulfs the Whole Person
From Dissertation to Essay
There is a difference between saying, “I did something wrong” and saying, “There is something wrong with me.”
In the first sentence, attention is directed toward an action. Something was done or left undone. The action can be assessed, criticised, and perhaps repaired. The person who acted wrongly may take responsibility, ask forgiveness, or attempt to make amends.
In the second sentence, it is no longer the action that is being judged. The judgement falls upon the person. It is not something specific I have done that is wrong. I am what is wrong.
Here we find a fundamental distinction between guilt and shame.
The distinction is not absolute. In lived experience, the emotions often flow into one another. We use the words interchangeably, and it can be difficult to know where one ends and the other begins. Yet the difference is decisive. Guilt may be connected to what we have done. Shame may envelop the whole of who we are.
This was the experience I encountered again and again in the work on my doctoral dissertation. People did not speak only of feeling ashamed of something that had happened. They described themselves as unclean, inferior, different, and unworthy. A violation inflicted upon them by others had gradually taken on the character of a judgement upon their own existence.
The abuse was an act carried out by another human being.
The shame remained with the person who had been subjected to it.
This is the moral paradox of shame.
When an Action Becomes an Identity
Guilt normally presupposes that someone has done something they could have refrained from doing. The person who acted may be held responsible. Guilt therefore points toward the relationship between action, responsibility, and consequence.
Shame does not always follow this logic. It may strike a person who has done nothing wrong. A child subjected to sexual abuse is not guilty of the abuse. The child did not choose the act, bears no responsibility for it, and did not possess the adult’s ability to understand or reject what was happening.
Yet the child may feel shame.
The child may feel ashamed of the body, of what was done to the body, of reactions that were not understood, of being unable to stop the adult, or of not telling anyone about the abuse. Later, the adult may look back and blame the child they once were, as though that child should have possessed the adult’s knowledge, strength, and freedom to act.
A serious displacement then occurs. Responsibility is moved from the person who acted to the person who was subjected to the act. The guilty person may avoid feeling guilt, while the innocent person carries the shame.
But shame does not necessarily remain attached to the event. It may move from “this happened to me” to “this says something about me.” It may then develop further into “this reveals who I truly am.”
In this way, experience becomes identity.
The person is no longer someone who was violated. They begin to understand themselves as a violated, damaged, or unclean human being. What was inflicted from the outside is experienced as an inner truth.
This is one of the most destructive features of shame. It conceals the distinction between what was done to a person and the person to whom it was done.
Shame Speaks in Complete Sentences
Guilt may be specific:
I lied.
I failed someone.
I harmed another person.
I should have acted differently.
Shame often expresses itself in more comprehensive terms:
I am worthless.
I am weak.
I am unclean.
No one could love me if they knew me as I truly am.
I do not deserve to belong.
The language of guilt may be precise. The language of shame is often totalising. It draws conclusions about the entire person on the basis of one action, one experience, one body, or one relationship.
A mistake becomes evidence that I am a failure.
A rejection becomes evidence that I am unworthy of love.
A violation becomes evidence that there is something about me that invites violation.
A child’s powerlessness is later interpreted as cowardice or complicity.
Shame therefore speaks not only about the past. It also shapes expectations of the future. It does not merely say that something terrible has happened. It says that the same thing will happen again because I am who I am. Others will reject me if they see me. Intimacy will lead to exposure. Trust will end in betrayal.
Shame becomes an interpretation of life.
It tells the person who they are, how others see them, and what they may expect from the world.
But shame is not necessarily true simply because it feels true.
An Emotion That Hides
Other powerful emotions may be easier to recognise. Anger can be heard in the voice and felt in the body. Fear may appear as flight, agitation, or withdrawal. Grief may be expressed through tears and words of loss.
Shame often hides.
It may hide behind silence. It may appear as irritation, self-contempt, rejection, or indifference. It may lie beneath an outward appearance of strength and independence. It may also conceal itself behind an excessive need to be competent, helpful, correct, or indispensable.
The person protects themselves from being seen by creating a form that can safely be presented to others.
They may become the high-achieving student, the caring helper, the successful employee, or the person who always remains in control. These are not necessarily false identities. The person may indeed be competent, caring, and responsible. But when their entire sense of worth depends upon maintaining this form, life becomes fragile.
A failure at work is then experienced not merely as a mistake. It threatens the whole self-image.
A critical remark does not concern only what was done. It is heard as an exposure of who one is.
A conflict is not simply a disagreement. It may be experienced as the beginning of exclusion.
Shame makes the person cautious in relation to the gaze of others. They listen not only to what others actually say, but also to what they fear others may think. They search for signs of contempt, rejection, or devaluation.
A neutral facial expression may be interpreted as disapproval. A pause in conversation may feel like condemnation. An invitation that never comes may confirm the sense of not belonging.
Shame fills the silence with its own interpretation.
The Self Is Formed Between People
We often speak of shame as an inner emotion. It is felt in the body and in our relationship with ourselves. Yet it does not arise in a social vacuum.
Our self-image develops in encounters with others. We learn to see ourselves through the faces, words, and actions that meet us. The child depends upon the gaze of others in order to discover that they exist, that they are wanted, and that they possess value.
This does not mean that human beings simply become whatever others think of them. But the recognition of others matters for how we learn to relate to ourselves.
A child met with care learns not only that others may be trusted. The child may also develop a basic confidence that their own needs are legitimate.
A child who is repeatedly rejected, humiliated, or violated may learn something else. They may come to understand their needs as burdens, their boundaries as unimportant, and their body as available to others.
When the violation is committed by a person upon whom the child depends, a particularly difficult conflict arises. The child needs the adult and cannot easily understand the adult as dangerous or guilty. It may then be easier to place the explanation within the self:
I am the one who misunderstood.
I am the one who caused this.
I am the one who is different.
I am the one who is dirty.
Shame may therefore function as an attempt to create meaning in a situation that would otherwise be incomprehensible. If the fault lies within me, the world around me may still appear reasonably ordered. The adult may continue to be the person upon whom the child depends. The price is that the child makes themselves the cause of what happened.
This is not a conscious decision. It is a way of surviving.
But what once helped the child preserve a necessary attachment may later become a destructive understanding of the self.
Guilt May Open—Shame May Close
Guilt is painful, but it may serve a moral function. When I acknowledge that I have wronged another person, guilt may urge me to take responsibility. I may apologise, attempt to make amends, and change my actions.
Guilt may therefore open a path back into community.
Shame often does the opposite. When I believe not only that the action was wrong, but that I myself am unworthy, it becomes difficult to see what can be repaired. An action may be changed. A person who experiences their whole self as wrong does not know where change could begin.
The guilty person may say:
I did something I should not have done. I must take responsibility.
The shame-filled person may say:
This is who I am. There is no way out.
Here shame approaches despair. Despair is not only a powerful feeling, but a way of being in the world. The future closes. The person cannot imagine that life might become different, because the problem is no longer understood as something they have or something that happened to them. The problem is the person they believe themselves to be.
Shame may therefore make change difficult even when the person longs for it. Someone who sees themselves as unworthy may struggle to receive care. Recognition may awaken suspicion. Kind words may be dismissed as ignorance:
You say this because you do not know me.
If you knew who I truly was, you would withdraw.
In this way, shame protects itself. Everything that contradicts it may be explained away. Rejection confirms shame, while recognition is interpreted as lack of insight.
Shame creates a closed system.
When the Emotions Merge
In my doctoral research, I also examined the relationship between shame and guilt through questionnaires. Among participants who had experienced sexual abuse in childhood, the association between a tendency to feel shame and a tendency to feel guilt was strong.
The number itself was less important than the question it opened:
Why were these emotions so closely intertwined?
The interviews showed that the words guilt and shame were often used interchangeably. Some made a clear distinction between them. They knew that the perpetrator was guilty, yet they still felt shame. Others described feelings of guilt even while knowing that they had not been responsible.
This shows that an emotion does not always correspond to moral reality.
A person may feel guilty without being guilty.
A person may be guilty without feeling guilt.
A person may feel ashamed of something that should never have been placed upon them.
We therefore cannot determine responsibility merely by asking who feels the most. The strongest feeling of guilt is not necessarily found in the person who bears the greatest guilt. Sometimes it has instead been placed upon the person who possessed the least power.
The moral question must therefore be distinguished from the emotional one:
Who acted?
Who possessed power?
Who bore responsibility?
Who was violated?
Only when these questions are answered clearly can false guilt and imposed shame be challenged.
Shame Is Not the Same as Conscience
Shame may form part of our moral life. We may rightly feel ashamed when we have behaved cowardly, degradingly, or without regard for others. Shame may signal that we have failed to live according to values we wish to uphold.
But shame is an unreliable judge.
It may respond to injustice, but also to difference.
It may be awakened when we have violated others, but also when we ourselves have been violated.
It may protect a community against cruelty, but it may also protect the prejudices of the community against those who do not fit in.
People have been made to feel shame because of poverty, illness, disability, body, sexuality, social background, and mental suffering. Shame has often revealed more about the norms of the community than about the morality of the individual.
We must therefore distinguish between the shame that points toward actual responsibility and the shame used to keep people in their place.
Shame is not moral truth simply because it hurts.
It must be examined.
What am I ashamed of?
Have I actually wronged another person?
Or have I taken over a judgement directed at me by others?
Do I bear responsibility for an action?
Or do I bear the consequences of an action committed by someone else?
These are practical-philosophical questions because they concern how we understand ourselves and live together with others. They require both self-knowledge and a critical examination of the norms through which we have learned to see ourselves.
The Responsibility of the Helper
When shame engulfs the whole person, it is not enough to say that the person has nothing to be ashamed of.
The statement may be true. But it does not necessarily reach them.
A person who has lived with shame for a long time does not carry it merely as an incorrect thought. Shame may have become part of the body, relationships, language, and expectations. It may have shaped how the person receives others, how they interpret closeness, and what they believe they deserve.
Shame cannot therefore always be talked away.
Nor is the helper’s first task to correct, but to understand where the person is. This does not mean confirming shame-filled self-condemnation. It means taking the experience seriously without accepting shame’s judgement as truth.
The way we meet the other person therefore becomes decisive.
If a person speaks of something they are ashamed of and is met with discomfort, distance, or a rapid attempt to change the subject, the old judgement may be confirmed: No one can bear to hear this. I am alone with it.
If the helper takes over the story, explains too quickly, or turns the person into an interesting professional case, the experience of being made into an object may be repeated.
But if the story is met with calmness, respect, and a clear placement of responsibility, something else may begin.
What happened was real.
It was serious.
The responsibility did not lie with the child.
The person who was violated is more than the violation.
Such sentences may appear simple. But they gain meaning only when they are carried by a relationship that makes them credible.
Recognition is not merely the act of saying the right words. It is meeting the other person in a way that makes it possible for them to experience themselves differently.
Separating the Person from the Judgement
When shame says, “I am worthless,” the response cannot simply be, “No, you are not.” What matters is to investigate how this judgement came into being.
Who taught the person to see themselves in this way?
Which experiences made self-contempt understandable?
Which relationships maintained the judgement?
And which new experiences may challenge it?
The judgement of shame may be experienced as an inner truth, but it has a history. It came into being somewhere. It arose within particular relationships, actions, and interpretations. This means that it need not be final.
The human being is not an unchangeable entity determined once and for all by what has happened. The self is formed in relationships and may also be transformed through relationships.
This does not mean that the past disappears. What was done cannot be undone. Memories cannot always be removed, and consequences may accompany a person throughout life.
But the relationship to what happened may change.
“I am destroyed” may slowly become “I was subjected to something that harmed me.”
“I am unclean” may become “Someone violated my body.”
“I was complicit” may become “I was a child trying to survive.”
These are not merely new formulations. They represent a moral restoration of the distinction between action and person, responsibility and suffering, guilt and shame.
More Than What Happened
A person who has experienced a serious violation can never be reduced to that violation. Yet systems of care may unintentionally do precisely this. The person becomes “the abuse survivor,” “the traumatised person,” “the self-harming patient,” or “the client with shame-related difficulties.”
Such descriptions may serve a professional function. They may describe experiences, needs, and symptoms. But they become dangerous if they are allowed to stand as the whole story of a human being.
Then we repeat the movement of shame itself. We allow one experience to envelop the entire person.
A human being is always more than what happened to them. They are also their relationships, actions, hopes, interests, abilities, contradictions, and possibilities. They may be both vulnerable and strong, shaped by the past and still capable of creating something new.
To recognise this is not to minimise the violation. It is to refuse the violation the right to define the whole person.
Shame says:
This is all you are.
Recognition replies:
This is part of your story, but the story is greater than this.
A Judgement That Can Be Opposed
When shame engulfs the whole person, it may feel final. It says that there is nowhere to go, because one cannot escape from who one is.
But shame’s judgement is not the final judgement upon a human being.
It can be opposed.
Not through empty reassurance, but through new experiences of being seen without being rejected, heard without being taken over, and encountered without being reduced.
It can be opposed when responsibility is placed where it belongs.
It can be opposed when the person discovers that feeling guilty is not the same as being guilty.
It can be opposed when the body is no longer understood only as the site of violation, but also as the living body that still belongs to the person.
And it can be opposed when the person slowly learns to distinguish between what was done to them and who they are.
This is not a rapid path. Shame was often formed through repeated experiences, and it rarely disappears through a single conversation. But a person may gradually develop a new relationship with themselves.
They may learn to say:
This happened to me, but it is not the whole of me.
I carried the shame, but the responsibility was not mine.
I was violated, but my dignity was not abolished.
Shame engulfs the whole person when an action, a violation, or a rejection is transformed into the truth about who they are. The way out begins when this confusion becomes visible.
The human being is not their shame.
That is what shame tries to make them forget.
The human being is not their shame.
That is what shame tries to make them forget.
This essay was written in a conversation with OpenAI/ChatGPT
This essay is part of the series “From Dissertation to Essay” and is based particularly on the dissertation’s chapters concerning shame and guilt, the self, self-image, despair, and negative self-evaluation: Pettersen, K. T. (2009). An Exploration into the Concept and Phenomenon of Shame within the Context of Child Sexual Abuse: An Existential-Dialogical Perspective of Social Work within the Settings of a Norwegian Incest Centre. NTNU.
No comments:
Post a Comment