Gemara

83b (Mishnah): We evaluate embarrassment according to the one who embarrassed and the one who was embarrassed.

90a (Mishnah): If Levi spat at David, and the spit reached him...

(Rav Papa): This is if the spit landed on him. If it landed on his clothing, Levi is exempt.

Question: In any case, this is no less than verbal embarrassment!

Answer (R. Yosi bar Avin): Our Mishnah teaches that one is exempt for verbal embarrassment.

(Mishnah): A case occurred in which a man uncovered a woman's head in the market. R. Akiva obligated him to pay 400. R. Akiva agreed to give the man time to pay.

The man broke a small flask of oil in front of her. She uncovered her hair to dab the oil into her hair. The man had witnesses see this, and claimed that he should not pay 400 Zuz (since she herself uncovers her hair for trifling reason).

R. Akiva: That is no claim. A person may not injure himself, but if he does, he is exempt. Others may not injure him, if they do, they are liable.

Rishonim

The Rif and Rosh (32b and 8:15): If Levi spat at David, he is liable only if the spit reached him, but not if it landed on his clothing. We learn that one is exempt for verbal embarrassment.

Rosh: It seems that we learn from "v'Hechezikah bi'Mvushav" (she grabbed a man by his testicles) that one pays only for actions to the body. Rav Shrirah Gaon says that even for verbal embarrassment we put someone in Cherem until he appeases the victim properly according to his prestige. It seems that verbal embarrassment is worse than embarrassment through hitting, for nothing is worse than Lashon ha'Ra.

Rambam (Hilchos Chovel u'Mazik 3:1): Embarrassment is evaluated according to the one who embarrassed and the one who was embarrassed. Being embarrassed by a lowly person is unlike being embarrassed by a great person. The former is greater.

Ran (Kesuvos 14a DH Masnisin Iy): Rashi says that if an average person embarrassed, this is worse than if a lowly or honorable person embarrassed. It seems that this applies to matters other than rape and seduction. (There, the lowlier the man, the greater the embarrassment.)

Rambam (5): If Levi embarrassed David verbally, or spat on his clothing, he is exempt from paying. Beis Din should fence the matter in every time and place like they see fit. If one embarrassed a Chacham, even verbally, he pays the full amount. The law was fixed that one who embarrasses a Chacham, even verbally, is fined. We collect from him 35 gold Dinarim. We have a tradition that we collect this in Eretz Yisrael and in Chutz la'Aretz.

Magid Mishneh: The Ge'onim enforced this fine without distinguishing between different levels of Chachamim.

Rambam (Hilchos Na'arah 2:4): Embarrassment (for a girl who was raped or enticed) is according to the one who embarrassed and the one who was embarrassed. Embarrassing a distinguished Na'arah from a family of good lineage is unlike embarrassing a lowly poor girl. Being embarrassed by a great person is unlike being embarrassed by a lowly person.

Poskim

Shulchan Aruch (CM 420:24): Embarrassment is according to the one who embarrassed and the one who was embarrassed. Being embarrassed by a lowly person is unlike being embarrassed by a great person. The former is greater.

Question (SMA 25 and Prishah EH 177:5): Rashi (Kesuvos 40a) and the Ran both say that (in matters other than rape or seduction) the greatest embarrassment is from an average person. The Tur and Shulchan Aruch are unlike either of them!

Answer (Prishah and Gra 30): The Tur and Shulchan Aruch are like Rashi in Bava Kama (83b DH ha'Kol) and the Rambam.

Bach (DH Boshes): Perhaps Rashi in Kesuvos meant that embarrassment is greatest from an average person only for rape or seduction. (This would resolve the contradiction in Rashi.) However, this is totally opposite to the Ran!

Rema: Similarly, the embarrassment of a more dignified person is greater. The embarrassment of a Kohen is greater than that of someone else.

Rivash (94): Since it is a Mitzvah to honor Kohanim, clearly one who disgraces a Kohen should be punished more than one who disgraces a Yisrael. Even though normally one is exempt for verbal embarrassment, it is proper to publicly censure one who does so to a Kohen, and force him to ask forgiveness and appease the Kohen until he pardons him. The Rambam says that it is always proper to do so. All the more so this applies to a Kohen who guards his Kedushah regarding marriage and Tum'as Mes.

Shulchan Aruch (EH 177:1): One who entices a virgin Yisrael (Rema - between three years old and Bagrus) pays Boshes, Pegam and a fine.

Tur: Embarrassment is evaluated according to the one who embarrassed and the one who was embarrassed. Embarrassing a distinguished Na'arah from an esteemed family is unlike embarrassing a lowly poor girl. Being embarrassed by a great person is unlike being embarrassed by a lowly person. Beis Din estimates how much her father and family would have [aid in order that this not occur.

Taz (2): If the girl was lewd, her embarrassment is smaller than that of a modest Bas Yisrael. It seems that even if we see her act lewdly afterwards, we may assume that she was this way even beforehand. We learn from Bava Kama. Even though the woman herself uncovered her hair, R. Akiva obligated the man to pay 400 Zuz because a person is allowed to harm himself. If not, he would have been exempt. We do not say that only now she began to act immodestly!