Who's really to blame? Mathematician Cathy O'Neil puts shame in its place

"Shame reminds people of the rules and the ultimate risks in ignoring them," author Cathy O'Neil said.

(CNN)Shame has existed since the first humans walked the Earth, according to mathematician and journalist Cathy O'Neil. But lately its evolutionary function -- to encourage pro-social behavior by enforcing norms that help sustain societies -- has been hijacked by parties seeking profit and power, O'Neil contends.

Efforts to shift blame away from institutions and toward individuals sabotage shame's original mission, O'Neil explains in her new book, "The Shame Machine: Who Profits in the New Age of Humiliation."
Cathy O'Neil is author of "The Shame Machine."
Instead of reinforcing fairness and justice to reengage people with their communities, shame "has been weaponized by corporations to profit and by institutions to maintain power." Usually, she said, "that's being done in a bullying, punching down shame kind of way."
    By recognizing and confronting the "shame machine" wherever it operates, O'Neil said she hopes we can unite to "punch up" at the real sources of the problem.
      This conversation has been edited and condensed for clarity.
        CNN: What is shame?
        Cathy O'Neil: Shame is a policing tool used to reinforce rules and taboos as way to promote a society's survival. When an individual's desires conflict with group expectations, shame can rein in behavior.
          But it can be painful, and the damage can run deep, making us feel worthless and stripping us of our humanity. Shame packs a vicious punch.
          CNN: Does shame have any positive function in societies?
          O'Neil: Shame is a social mechanism. When it works, it looks a bit like persuasion with a soft hint of the potential for being outcast if you don't follow the rules. The idea is to discourage selfish action in favor of what the community needs.
          O'Neil's "The Shame Machine" explores how some sectors seeking profit and power have sabotaged shame's original mission.
          For example, the Hopi Pueblo clown festival includes pulling rule-breaking villagers into the middle of the ceremony to shame them. Public humiliation calls them out for misdeeds in front of the entire village.
          But no one is arrested, physically punished or outcast forever. Instead, the festival focuses on helping individuals to become "more Hopi" by convincing them to stop making choices that are bad for the community. A distinctive feature here is that the target of the shame has the choice to conform.
          CNN: You write that giant sectors of today's economy are organized and optimized to foster shame that's bullying. How so?
          O'Neil: The shame-industrial complex has an old-school traditional part and a newfangled "big data" part. There's a long tradition of companies working to make you feel ashamed of something in order to sell you a product to try to make you feel better. Often, the product fails or even worsens the problem.
          One horrifying example is a company's recent campaign to make teenage girls feel like their vaginas smell disgusting so they can sell them a deodorant. First of all, there's nothing wrong with the way our bodies smell naturally. Secondly, those types of products can actually cause problems like yeast infections.
          Particularly insidious is the use of "concern trolling" by a profit-driven business that claims no one should have to feel ashamed about their body while actually manufacturing the shame they pretend to condemn.
          The newer incarnations of the shame-industrial complex are the big tech companies and social media platforms that set up the perfect environment for us to shame each other.
          The algorithms are optimized to pit us against others and drag each other down. When we shame each other and ourselves, we are actually working for their profit.
          CNN: What do you mean by shame that "punches down"?
          O'Neil: Shaming someone for anything beyond their control constitutes punching down or bullying. This often involves outsiders exaggerating the shamed individual's power to "correct" some condition or behavior, acting as if making an easy choice would solve the problem even when the choice is not at all easy -- like shaming somebody for opioid addiction, for example.
          Or, from my personal history, being fat-shamed by my parents and society as if dieting to lose weight was actually a simple, successful remedy. The weight-loss industry profits off that assumption despite the reality that dieting essentially doesn't work.
          One takeaway message I want to impart is: Don't shame people for what they can't choose. And remember, it's easy to overestimate someone else's choice.
          Instead, let's turn downward punches into upward ones.
          CNN: What does "punching up" look like?
          O'Neil: Punching up involves shaming people in power -- those who have a voice and a platform to defend and/or redeem themselves -- for making choices that harm others. It can encourage outliers to refocus on the common good.
          A war on shame machines would entail scrutinizing public services like welfare offices, work requirements and all of those grueling bureaucratic nightmares that poor people have to go through to access basic services.