By Selwyn Duke
It was on one of his many adventures that famed world traveler and documentary maker, Alby Mangels, found himself in a land where to this day you can ask some of the locals what human flesh tastes like and get an informed answer. The land was Papua New Guinea and the time was over a score of years ago -- back when this dark wilderness was a real-life land that time forgot. While trekking through jungle and traversing rivers, Mangels had the unique opportunity to meet people who were at best a stone's throw from the stone-age. The footage he shot bears witness to a place where good hygiene and medical care were as unknown as the computer and the VCR. This was evidenced by fungal skin conditions that would envelop whole bodies and that were simply a result of a failure to wash, and small pricks that went untreated, became infected and turned into ulcerated sores. Rivaling their primitive technological state was their pagan moral one, as the seven deadly sins were on full display and were mistaken for virtues when committed for one's own benefit. Mangels alluded to this simmering vice that could easily explode in a fit of wrath and violence when he spoke about how it would behoove him to mind his p's and q's. He was addressing the issue of dealing with the tribes' offerings and rendered the following admonition, "It's not a good idea to knock back their hospitality." He was wary because he realized that he was dealing with very proud people, and proud people have large egos that are easily bruised -- and when they get bruised they often strike back. They could be easily offended, you see -- so he had to walk on eggs to ensure that no offense would be taken.
Certainly though, those tribesmen were not in any way unique. Excessive pride has always been a hallmark of primitive pagan cultures. It's also something that most all of us find to be very distasteful when exhibited by others. After all, who wants to be around someone who is easily offended, who lashes out constantly because his ego can't abide even well-intentioned, constructive criticism? Who wants to have dealings with people whose pride precludes them from ever admitting they're wrong and making amends, or the prideful ones who can never debate honestly because they will never submit to even an airtight argument? We've all known such people, and being around them is no walk in the park.
However, man learned a long time ago that pride is like darkness: the more there is the less you can see. This is why dying to yourself, experiencing true conversion [which means turning from yourself to God], cultivating humility in yourself has always been a tenet of Christianity. People came to realize that they should be far more worried about offending God [meaning, committing violations against the Truth, or the good] than about whether or not others offend them. They came to realize that enlightened people understand that while you shouldn't be so thick-skinned that you're insensitive to others, you also shouldn't be so thin-skinned that you can't cope. They came to realize that what has been said is true: offense cannot be given, it can only be taken.
This is why it's curious that more and more these days we hear people complaining that they feel offended -- it's hard to discuss anything nowadays without someone making that claim. Less and less these days do people say "You're wrong" or "That's untrue" or "I disagree" -- they are being supplanted by the catchall phrase, "I find that to be offensive." It's also what you will hear if you make a joke involving the wrong subject matter, even if the quip was well-intentioned and funny. The fact is that many of us have become so immature and proud that we have lost the ability to laugh at ourselves.
Now, of course, I realize the "I find that to be offensive" shtick is often just a ploy people employ to silence opposition and win debates. In reality, more often than not it's not that they find what you say to be offensive, it's just that they don't happen to like or agree with it. For this reason, protestations about having been offended are often one of the more malicious kinds of manipulation. Having said this, it is also true that this incessant bellyaching about having been offended is indicative of regression to a more primitive state of being -- it is indicative of our becoming more prideful.
Avoiding giving offense has become such a high priority that it has superceded things that are infinitely important. For instance, this desire stifles intellectual debate because many of us would rather cast the honest search for truth to the winds than risk offending someone and being called insensitive or intolerant, because the tongue-paralyzing social pressure that can be brought to bear against people who voice unfashionable Truths is intense. For this reason, we often will not hear about the correct solutions to political or social problems, because if they offend politically favored groups they will be suppressed no matter how much havoc doing so will wreak. Could you imagine a politician or prominent social commentator trying to discuss whether or not women have a duty to stay home with their children? Or, how about a politician questioning the validity of hate-crime laws or supporting racial-profiling? How about if the President were to say that homosexual behavior is gravely sinful? Do you think that these comments would be met with sober debate and analysis? No way! Instead, the result would be a tidal wave of emotionalism that drowned out reason and asked for the heads of those who ventured where the thought-police decree we shouldn't. Yes, in this age in which pointing out politically incorrect sin is considered offensive, giving offense in a politically incorrect fashion is considered to be the most grievous sin of all.
Unfortunately, while our inordinate amount of focus on not giving offense may, as I said earlier, often be nothing more than a ploy, the fact is that it is causing us to transform ourselves into a more thin-skinned, egocentric people. For instance, it is not uncommon now for employees to be sent to "Sensitivity Training Classes." Even more destructive are the messages that are sent to children in schools and elsewhere. When I was a child, I remember hearing many a time "Sticks and stones may break my bones but names will never hurt me." Children don't hear this too much anymore; instead, they are inculcated with the idea that they should suppress anything that might hurt someone's feelings. This all may sound good and wise; after all, we want people to be sensitive to others -- but it poses a great danger. Firstly, it doesn't serve to encourage people to transcend egocentrism and become individuals who are above being offended -- more enlightened individuals, in other words. This is because when you spend so much time schooling people in how to not offend others, you're transmitting the idea that being one who is easily offended is the normal state of being. This is folly because when you tell people not to give offense you are encouraging them to not spread the disease but are leaving them susceptible to it, but when you teach them to not take offense you are vaccinating them against it. Secondly and more ominously, when the overriding goal is to avoid giving offense, Truth and honesty are usually lost in the shuffle. The fact is that the Truth hurts, sometimes, and that's why one must be able to draw the distinction between the thoughtless trampling over of someone's feelings and the necessary and cathartic emotional pain that is sometimes a by-product of speaking Truth. This is why the number one priority must be to recognize Truth and express it when necessary -- do that and everything else will take care of itself. But once that ceases to be our main priority we become a people that cares more about protecting egos than professing Truth. And that is truly tragic, because sensitivity can be a virtue -- but when sensitivity to others' feelings necessitates insensitivity to the Truth, it becomes the worst of vices.
