If I've done something stupid and no one catches me or outs me, then yes I have no shame.  This is because shame is an individual's resultant expression of remorse as dictated by the general population's regard for that individual and his/her actions.  What the hell does that mean?  I don't know, but it looked good on the monitor.  The issue at hand in North America, and indeed most Christian countries, is that the society at large is based on guilt.  You've done something bad and you feel bad about it.  For example, a school boy throws pins into the music teacher's puffy sweater so that when she sits down and leans back she finally gets the prick she otherwise would never have experienced because she is a homely looking wench.  That school boy might feel guilt over causing this minor pain.  For the record, I didn't feel guilt just pride that I didn't get caught.  If I had been caught I would have expressed shame and then redoubled my efforts at avoiding detection the next time.  No lesson learned there.

I see Canada and the other Christian countries going from more of a guilt based society to more of a shame based one.  This shift has some repercussions.  I won't say dire repercussions, because countries like Japan are a shame based society.  In Japan, if a principal of a high school takes part in compensated dating (read whoring) and doesn't get caught he faces no repercussions.  This is because in Japan, as a shame society, there is an appropriate time and place for everything, including getting your diggity with a student.  However, if he gets caught he will be shamed to the max and will likely kill himself in an act of contrition (which is a mighty tough act to follow).   This says, to me at least, that the only inappropriate thing is getting caught.

To be fair shaming has been around in Christian societies, but I suspect the church brought in guilt because it could never really monitor all offenses.  So, why not give people the gift of guilt and they can monitor themselves.  Making people feel guilty, a tactic used by churches, councilors and loving parents, doesn't really do justice to an act already committed.  Neither does shame for that matter.  At least with shame the public is aware of the act and the resultant spectacle of that person's reputation being dragged through whatever crap they deserve makes for an interesting lesson for the public at large (if heeded).

So, going back to the principal above who killed himself he is a lesson to other principals;  Don't get caught.  Arnold Schwarzenegger had no issue with boning his maid for years until he got caught.  Representative Weiner had no problems sending photos of his namesake, until he got caught.  Edwards, Clinton, Hart, all did what they did because they felt they could get away with it.  

Interesting aside, apart from Arnold you rarely hear of a GOP candidate getting into trouble like this.  I suspect it's because the typical GOP male is ugly and old, but that may be a fallacy on my part.  Could you imagine the depraved desperation of a woman willing to fool around with Newt Gingrich? Bob Dole? John McCain?  I don't actually have to vomit because I'm thinking about McCain and his Oh-face, but more correctly I want to vomit, violently.  It's the better looking politicians who get the girls or who have girls throw themselves at them.  A friend of mine once lamented that it must be tough to be Tiger Woods.  His wife asked why, he replied 'having all that va-jay-jay thrown at you'  He felt some shame pretty damn quick, I tell you.  

That's another feature of shame, it's only felt or experienced if the crowd who knows about the act feels that the act is immoral or shameful.  If my friend had said that same Tiger Woods line to me, I would have laughed, patted him on the back, agreed with him fully, and promptly denied to my wife the conversation ever took place.  Know your audience.  Wiener didn't know his audience. Let me tell all you aspiring politicians who the audience is in the age of the web; everyone!  The internet, with facebook, twitter, and other lowly social media sites trying to be like facebook and twitter, is the ultimate shaming tool.  

People bemoan the future of the internet due to people placing photos of Vancouver Stanley Cup rioters in an effort to help police.  So what?  I mean, who really cares?  If someone is stupid enough to do something stupid and have it filmed and put on youTube then they deserve what they get.

Does that mean people shouldn't act in moral fashion?  Hell no.  Of course they should.  But now, with the weakening of moral fabric (read decline of church, and, sure, television; all those reality shows are having a huge impact) there is nothing to take its place, except the internet and its ability to shame people.  Facebook launched its facial recognition feature so that helps in outing people who've been photographed doing idiotic acts.  

My mom had some simple advice when she found a cassette my brother and I had made.  It was a fake radio show and the lead in was 'It's time for everyone's favourite show: S.H.I.T!'  The variety of curse words we used and the frequency with which we used them strikes a bit of nostalgia for me.  We felt like adults using those words.  I remember one story we did about a 10 foot tall Texan who used midgets as butt dildos.  Well, my mom heard our brilliant, witty conversation and said simply, 'if you don't want to be caught saying something stupid, don't record it.'  And now, I've shared it with everyone for all eternity.  Yay eternity.  

But that rule applies still today.  If you want to avoid shame don't record yourself doing stupid things!  Or better yet don't do the stupid thing to begin with, because you'll likely get recorded and that video will be posted on the internet.  And folks, the internet never forgets!  Just ask the Star Wars Kid http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPPj6viIBmU.

Over and...

Out.