What Is Meant by Having “Thin Skin”: Stealing value from those who have it
It has always come up, and for whatever reason lately, has come up more often than usual, the notion of having a “thin skin.” The insinuation is that one should develop a “thick skin” and yield to insults of whatever kind for the purpose of collective opinion. Most of the world functions on this premise; however I disagree with it vehemently. I take name calling as a challenge to combat, otherwise it wouldn’t be attempted—for that is the real meaning behind the action. Yet our modern American interpretation of name calling and subtle slander is to assimilate the individual into group oriented behavior—to do as the drill sergeant does and drive out individual ego from a task and replace it with group assimilation. When the term “thin skin” is used, most of the time it is because the accuser wishes to impose upon another the destruction of individual ego so that they yield to collective enterprise.
When the issue of bullying is addressed in public schools, this is almost always the root cause. Schools do not know what to do about bullying because they are institutions of compliance, and require the destruction of individual ego. They generate bullying behavior by their very nature of existence. So they hope to curb the most violent forms of bullying with rules which never work, because the desire of institutionalism craves more the compliance of ego destruction than the compliance of rules to serve the whims of individuals. So as along as public schools exist in their current form, bullying will always occur. There is nothing a teacher, an administrator, or a parent can do about the issue.
In the military, bullying is used heavily during basic training. Personal insults are flung at individuals to strip them of their ego. The military mind molder then replaces the stripped away ego with compliance to greater causes associated with sacrifice to the group. Colleges do the same in their hazing rituals for the similar reasons. This is why such large portions of functioning adults have duality issues in their lives—why so many of them feel individually unsatisfied, ethically, sexually, intellectually when they are alone and are driven like moths to fire at social circles of group assimilation in order to find personal comfort, which never fully comes. They drink, get drunk, pop anti-depression medicine, or indulge themselves in some type of television prime time fiction, or fantasy sports selection to compensate their personal loss. The human craving of such activity comes from the destruction of their individual egos—and usually at the young age of grade school.
The entire human race past the age of 15 years of age expects group yielding to some degree or another. It has been pounded into our minds from a young age and the results are terribly obvious. Personal depression is driven by the need to align the values of individual ego with the social imposition of group assimilation. The desire to fulfill the empty goals of any group whether it be in a business enterprise where the underlings structure their lives around sucking up to their boss for the needs of the company rather than the drives of their individuality. The boss should not be surprised when they discover that a parade of incompetents work for their company. The boss hired individuals to fulfill certain tasks, yet those employees have built their lives around group pecking order, becoming obsessed with who is where on an organizational chart, believing falsely that the title one holds provides the merit of value for a job done—and those titles are given out by the boss—so sucking up might provide such merit. Both parties miss what they are looking for in the relationship, the boss loses because they end up hiring incompetent staff members who bring nothing to an enterprise but bobble heads who nod in agreement not because they agree with the boss, but because they want the titles the boss is entitled to provide to those deemed worthy. Because the boss often thinks the same way, they often give such titles to those who are most prone to assimilation to their organization—and failure ensues.
When I was young as is still the case, I did not accept this assimilation. In sports I sabotaged my own career because I would not allow myself to be assimilated into the group. I refused the snippy comments and personal insults from my coaches thinking they were making me better with violence earning me the nickname of “animal.” The older I got, the worse it got until coaches stopped trying to involve me. They wanted my athletic ability but I was just too much of a pain for the “team” they were trying to build. In class, I didn’t accept it from teachers. One example was an English teacher who was late every morning for home room class. This went on for months. The entire class had to stand outside waiting for the teacher to arrive. I felt as an individual that this was wrong, because it disrespected the individual rights of the other kids, and it made me very angry. So one morning when this teacher arrived to class—late, they discovered that the lock to their classroom door was packed shut with chewing gum, so that a key would not unlock the door. My message to the teacher was that if they wanted to ensure they could unlock their door in the morning, they better arrive early to protect it from sabotage. It took half a day to get a locksmith to open the door, which I had packed with gum in full view of everyone. Of course some of the students told the authorities on me as they were seeking favoritism from the teacher in a similar way that businessman kisses ass to work their way up the institutional ladder. They want the authority figure to grant the titles not based on individual effort, but by degree of personal sacrifice to the organization as a whole. I got into a lot of trouble, but it didn’t stop the behavior. I went on with a group of friends to set off fireworks in the halls under student’s feet within the very next week, and had frequent fights with other students. I sought to sabotage authority any way possible. It wasn’t that I went out looking for trouble, but was simply protecting my individuality against group assimilation.
As an adult I am very happy, and healthy. I’m in my middle years now, I take no medicine for depression, heart disease, or any other physical aliment. And while many my age seem to rely on Viagra to maintain their bedroom stamina, I couldn’t imagine having such a stupid problem—and don’t need it. I don’t drink, I don’t over eat, I don’t lose sleep at night over social issues, I could care less what my neighbors are doing so long as they don’t bother me. And I could sit for entire weekends totally alone and not get enough “me” time. I love myself, and I am happy I do. The result is that I have much love to give my family because the value of “love” is generated by my ego—which is uniquely preserved. Part of the preservation is in not tolerating attempts to assimilate my behavior to the whims of group compliance.
When it is said that such people have “thin skin” this is what the accusers hate, they wish to see a person who will yield their individuality to group goals instead of an individual pulling the group toward their goals. When it is wondered by the masses what the invisible qualities of leadership are, the root is in the ability of individuals to get groups to follow them. But leaders are not provided in this fashion by titles given by a boss. Leaders have intact egos that can bend the will of broken intellects to their desires by sheer force—the force is in unifying conquered souls toward a goal the individual leader desires. Really good leaders can do the same with individuals as well, and I am of this latter category. Because of my background that is often dripped with blood I learned how to achieve leadership without destroying the individuality of the participants. The spilt blood was worth the value, because the skill is unique in modern America, and it serves me well. That value wasn’t given to me by anybody; it is something I gave myself by not allowing my ego to be stripped away by group assimilators at any point in my life.
The same rules hold today. I don’t worry what people say behind my back, but if they engage me directly, they will get a fight—100% of the time. It is a personal policy that I have for my life to protect it against the forces of group assimilation which I have determined is one of the most corrosive forces in the known universe. At times when I have found myself at Walgreens to get a passport picture, or just to pick up some small grocery item I continue to be amazed at the long lines of people seeking doctor prescriptions for ailments that are mostly psychological. Most of the morbidly obese, the headache prone, the depression driven, the faulty heart conditions of those seeking Walgreen prescriptions, and even the blue pill popping men who desire to keep a four-hour erection for 5 minutes of bedroom engagement with their wives are driven to their multiple forms of insanity because of their stripped away egos which they yielded to group compliance imposed upon them by name calling. Of course my attitude has put me before many court judges who threatened years in jail if I did not become more compliant, but I always presented to them the perilous dilemma, which I covered in my novel Tail of the Dragon. I was always basically a good person, with moral authority on my side. The cost of putting my non compliant behavior into a locked up area is greater for them than against me, so they have elected not to do it. In times when blood has been spilt and bodies were broken, it was cheaper for the statist system to yield to the individual, because the refusal to yield in a locked up environment means death and liability for the captors—and knowing that they were looking at a pure example of goodness, they elected not to impose that cost on themselves. Thus, the benefit of being an individual in a socially broken world full of followers who are lost if they don’t have a leader in their lives to issue out merit for unearned action. Name calling is the first step into removing ego from individuals for the benefit of group assimilation. The loss of ego destroys individuals and robs the gifts that personalities have to give to their families, their friends, their companies, but worst of all, themselves. Such victims die a slow death beginning in their grade school years once they start yielding to authority instead of fighting to preserve themselves.
So I have a strict policy against assault, I don’t allow it, verbally, or physically. It is not my duty to learn to take it for some mythical “greater good,” yielding to the needs of institutionalism. The by-product is that I have unique gifts to offer, and those who know me best, understand how much it enriches their lives—and institutions. But the benefits cannot be understood without the context of leadership and what makes someone a “natural leader” and what makes others just kiss-ass administrators as worthless as toilet paper—the tragedy of our current society is in their lack of ability to know the difference because they are functioning from the wrong motivations in their lives given to them by faulty educations at an early age. It is for these reasons that I have a zero tolerance policy for personal insult, and why many refer to my behavior has being “thin skinned” as if it were my social duty to allow impositions from inferiors to loot my value to bolster their own deflated egos with the value of my personal worth. The term, “thin skin” is just another name calling attempt to do for the egos what Viagra does for their genitals, and that is something I won’t allow—and never will.
Rich Hoffman
Give yourself the gift of ADVENTURE. CLICK HERE!
