THE LEORA LETTER

“Slut,” “hoe,” and “thot” are slippery and subjective terms that can apply to any girl or woman, regardless of how they dress or behave. I shed light on slut-shaming—how and why assumptions about being “too” sexual are applied, the consequences for women, and the impact on everyone, regardless of gender.

Shame as a Form of Control: Q&A with Colin Wayne Leach, PhD

Over the last decade, the word “slut-shaming” has become part of vernacular language, referring to the experience of calling out a woman for being “too” sexual—regardless of her actual sexual experience. But what do we really mean when we talk about “shaming” a woman in this manner—what does shame feel like, what does the act of shaming look like, and why are some people targeted in the first place?

Colin Wayne Leach, PhD, professor of psychology at Barnard College, Columbia University, is a leading expert in status and morality in self-evaluation, emotion, and motivation. He has done extensive research on guilt and shame and comments on emotions such as schadenfreude.



Dr. Leach discusses his research and shares insights on the meanings of “shame” in the context of slut-shaming and other forms of social control.

Leora Tanenbaum: What is the focus of your research on shame?

Colin Wayne Leach, PhD: My general interest is emotion, especially emotions that have a moral component. I had been doing research on guilt, which is a close relative of shame. I then turned to shame, but unlike many people studying it in the field of psychology, I am most interested in the social and cultural approaches to shame rather than the individual psychology alone.

Tanenbaum: How does slut-shaming connect with your work?

Leach: I’ve been influenced by the work done on honor, including feminine honor. In societies or groups with a code of feminine honor, there is a policing of women by families or groups when they believe that honor has been damaged or is under threat by a female member of the family or group. And in the case of honor, it is possible that the woman has not actually committed a moral violation, but others who are connected to her see her as having done so, and they then accuse her of damaging the social image and reputation, i.e., the honor—of the family or group. Honor becomes a way to reinforce and regulate particular behaviors, and in this case the behaviors are connected with women’s sexuality. Now, she may be accused of having violated the honor code, but the woman may not think she has done anything wrong, and she may not feel bad about what is said that she has done wrong.

 In my work, originally with Nicolay Gausel, I try to separate the psychological side—when I’m criticizing myself for something I have done—versus the concern where I am worrying about what other people think about me for what I have done. Those are two different things, and both are really powerful.

Tanenbaum: What I find really interesting is the way that other people perceive me, and how that perception influences my self-image—even if, up until now, my self-image was fine. But now, I’m hearing that you are saying that I am a “slut.” So now, all of a sudden, my self-image is called into question, even if I have not engaged in behavior that is “wrong,” and there is nothing to regulate.

Leach: On the surface, what you are talking about sounds like what psychologists describe as “shame.” But psychologists misunderstand a number of aspects of shame. I believe that they underplay the social nature of shame.



If I think I’ve done something wrong, and I blame myself and hold myself accountable, that is very different from the experience of other people putting me down. In both situations, I may feel down about myself, I may feel lessened self-worth, and I may want to hide myself away from judging others. But when other people are putting me down, I am managing an overly social kind of shame.

Put another way, there is a difference between the “inside-out” versus the “outside-in” psychological experience. These may look the same on the surface, but what is important is the fact that how we think of ourselves comes from how other people view us. And if enough people whose opinions we care about are seeing us as lesser, this can cause a debilitating psychological experience. Yet, it is not the same experience as having those feelings come from the inside – from criticizing ourselves because we have fallen short of our own moral standard.

Tanenbaum: Why is this distinction important?

Leach: Our emotional life is a balance between what we think of ourselves and what other people think of us. In the example of slut-shaming, the stigma is being perpetrated by other people. It is community-driven, and it is a very social process. It hurts because other people matter to us, especially people in our family and in our groups. And that psychological experience is different from feeling devalued because we are beating ourselves up internally. It’s the difference between other people beating you up and you beating yourself up. Those are different actions. Even if you ultimately beat yourself up as a result of other people beating you up, we need to understand the ultimate cause of the emotional pain.

Tanenbaum: Often, when a girl or woman is slut-shamed by other people, then she justifies and rationalizes their behavior and comes to believe that she did something to provoke the slut-shaming. So the “outside-in” and the “inside-out” become tangled with each other.

Leach: Yes, and we see that in cases of trauma, particularly sexual trauma, when the target of sexual assault feels that somehow they bear some responsibility, and that they brought this upon themselves. They may not really believe that to be true, but they also feel the need to answer the questions, “Why me?” and “Why is this happening to me?” So the outside and the inside can become kind of indistinguishable. And it makes some sort of sense psychologically. Even if people aren't really blaming themselves, in the end, it has happened to them and they wonder what it is about them that could have played a role in what was done to them. Obviously, this can be devastating emotionally if it leads to serious self-blame in lieu of blaming the actual perpetrator(s).

Tanenbaum: With social media and digital culture, shaming is often enacted by complete strangers. But it hurts anyway. Is that because there’s a fear that if all these anonymous people are judging me in this public forum, then inevitably people I care about will judge me too?

Leach: Yes. And even if what they are saying about you is not real, even if it is false and constructed, it is still at the same time real because that is what people believe about you. It becomes a real thing that you have to deal with.

Tanenbaum: You also research reactions to police brutality against Black communities and Black protests against this violence. How does that work connect with your work on shame?

Leach: The two topics are actually very connected because they are about stigma and social control. In psychology, we talk about the way that description enables prescription. When you describe a particular group as morally questionable, then it becomes easier to prescribe control, regulation, policing, and punishment of the group. This is the logic of social regulation and subordination.

So in the case of slut-shaming, the thinking is that if women can’t control their sexuality, and therefore are violating social rules, then we are entitled to take actions to control them—for example, by limiting their freedom of movement, how they dress, with whom they can socialize, or even by criminalizing or demonizing their behavior.

And you can make a parallel argument with the regulation of Black people’s free movement. If Black folks are dangerous, then there is a need for police and other state authorities to regulate their actions to protect the body politic.

And then we can think in richer ways about intersections. So, for example, with women of color, these logics of regulation and subordination get even more specific because of beliefs about this particular type of women. So if a poor woman of color disappears and may have been killed, society is less attentive to that news than if a White woman disappears because women of color are described as expendable or as invisible and white women as described as precious and in need of care and protection.

The amazing thing about systems of oppression is that they are flexible and adaptable. They do the work of making sense of where people are situated within the society. And then we tend to assume that they are in the place that they should be in. I’m fascinated by the ways we can manipulate a sense of danger—for example, that a woman who is sexual poses a threat—to justify regulation and control of her.

Key takeaway: Let’s celebrate effort rather than hiding it. “Effortless perfection” is not only impossible; it’s a hoax that entraps women and causes great harm, from assault to mental health issues to abusive relationships.