—
Itās a common experience: We try to talk about privilege or Black Lives Matter or institutional racism, and we find ourselves walking on eggshells, carefully choosing our words to avoid offending any white males who might be in our audience (oops, sorry: I should clarify that not all white males respond this way).
Even if we do take pains to carefully explain our terms, to avoid certain third rail words (like āprivilegeā), and to pre-emptively stroke the egos of the very people whose social positions weāre challenging, the conversation quickly derails into how women or people of color have all the rights now, and how the life of the white male is so difficult.
So itās ironic when people like Donald Trump and Clint Eastwood complain about how āPolitically Correctā people are just too sensitive. Men from that tradition pine for an era when they themselves could say what they want, using whatever words they want, without consequences. Now they must be careful, watching their language, lest they offend someone. In a no-doubt deliberate act of misogyny, Eastwood calls this the āpussy generation.ā
The concept is not a new one. George Carlin used the term āpussificationā to complain about Harley-Davidson theme restaurants. Adam Carollaās reference to it is used to sell a book with āPussificationā in the title and a clearly anonymous writer: Think about that. A champion of the traditional male, the brave and fearless steed of yesteryear, hiding behind a pseudonym.
However, while Carlin was an unrepentant cusser, he was not a hypocrite: If someone attacked him, he didnāt make himself the victim. He shrugged it off. Yes, his comedy was often sexist and racist. Yes, he pulled no punches. But he knew that if you give, you have to take in kind. He was consistent in his liberalism; when he complained of hypersensitivity on the left, he had credibility.
Trump, meanwhile, encourages his supporters to beat up anyone who heckles him. He refuses to debate because Megyn Kelly hurt his feelings. He revoked the Washington Postās press credentials because they were āunfair.ā He routinely blocks from his existence people who say things that might upset him. He is the poster child for hypersensitivity. When he and others like him complain of hypersensitivity on the left, they have no credibility.
āā¦ā
If you donāt want to live in a world of hypersensitivity, stop making us stop the conversation to explain to you, once again, that āprivilegeā does not mean that we think youāre living in a marble-and-gold encrusted mansion and that you beat your black slaves as your morning exercise. Stop making us stop the conversation to agree, once again, that āblack lives matterā does not imply that white lives, or police lives, or Latino lives, or whatever donāt matter. Stop making us stop the conversation to insert āsomeā before all occurrences of āmenā because, no, youāre right, not all men are rapists.
In short, Mr. Trump, Mr. Eastwood, Mr. Limbaugh, Mr. Beck, Mr. Carolla,Ā Mr. Faulkner: If you want an end to hypersensitivity, you can start by ending your own hypersensitivity.
In a fair world, the right to offend others comes with the obligation to suffer offense. Carlin knew that; Trump et al. donāt, or at least donāt want to accept that. This is not to exonerate Carlinās behavior: His brashness was hurtful to many people. But unlike the others listed here, he was not a hypocrite.
What is it thatās so offensive, anyway? The crux of so-called āPolitical Correctnessā is looking for language that doesnāt offend people, particularly the culturally weak or under-advantaged. Eastwood would have us believe that, back in the day, people of color and women were just fine with his style of brash, take-no-prisoners jokes. No, they really werenāt. They put up with it in publicĀ but complained of it in private.
The offensiveness of off-color jokes and microaggression hasnāt changed over the years. Whatās changed is the ability of the under-advantaged to talk publicly about it. And oftentimes, these conversations are even happening in female spaces and POC spaces that are invaded by white males with the purpose of complaining about the mere existence of the conversation.
One of the most powerful metaphors in recent memory is Ta-Nehisi Coatesās Dream. This is not his own dream: This is, rather, the dream that white suburban America lives in, with Boy Scout meetings and manicured lawns and Mrs. Cleaver in an apron and sun dress. It is not reality, it is the wishful thinking of rose-colored glasses that Lily Allen illustrates in her āLDNā video.
āā¦ā
When people complain of Political Correctness, theyāre complaining about being forcefully awakened from this dream. They pretend that the past was pleasant for everyone because they enjoyed being able to say what they want without being challenged for it. They are losing power: The power to suppress others with their casual comments. They donāt like it, because nobody would like losing power.
A rebuttal to this article might be that the āPC Peopleā are also being hypocritical: They expose hurtful language, but theyāre not concerned about whether āprivilegeā or similar rhetoric is hurtful. If weāre to avoid āhandicappedā (which I personally, having a handicap, prefer to ādisabledā), why shouldnāt we also avoid āprivilegeā?
This is a reasonable criticism, but itās like comparing a splinter to a broken leg. Itās impossible to choose words to be completely inoffensive. Talk of āprivilegeā did not start out with offensive intent: The blame and the finger-pointing that is interpreted is often the creation of the interpreter. āCheck your privilegeā is not usually intended as an exhortation to give all your possessions to the next person of color that you see and live on the streets; itās a reminder to reflect on how your situation of birth may have impacted your life experiences.
Racist, sexist, and otherwise derogatory language, meanwhile, comes from a history of deliberate societal oppression. While the āPCā crowd do go overboard sometimes (I changed ādenigratingā to āderogatoryā in the previous sentence because some people falsely tie ādenigrateā to a racial slur), most of us simply want people to reflect on their words and to avoid patently offensive terms and concepts.
At its heart, so-called Political Correctness is about taking personal responsibility for your words. Take ownership of your position. Stand by your words.
If thatās being a āpussy,ā then Iām with Flea: Count me in.
RSVP for #StopRacism Calls
What’s Next? Talk with others. Take action.
We are proud of our SOCIAL INTEREST GROUPS—WEEKLY PHONE CALLS to discuss, gain insights, build communities— and help solve some of the most difficult challenges the world has today. Calls are for Members Only (although you can join the first call for free). Not yet a member of The Good Men Project? Join now!
Join The Good Men Project Community
All levels get to view The Good Men Project site AD_FREE. The $50 Platinum Level is an ALL-ACCESS PASS—join as many groups and classes as you want for the entire year. The $25 Gold Level gives you access to any ONEĀ Social Interest Group and ONE Class–and other benefits listed below the form. Or…for $12, join as a Bronze Member and support our mission, and have a great ad-free viewing experience.
Register New Account
Please note: If you areĀ already a writer/contributor at The Good Men Project,Ā log in hereĀ before registering. (Request newĀ password if needed).
āā¦ā
ANNUAL PLATINUMĀ membership ($50 per year) includes:
1. AN ALL ACCESS PASS — JoinĀ ANY and ALL of our weekly calls, Social Interest Groups, classes, workshops and private Facebook groups. We have at least one group phone call or online class every day of the week.
2. See the website with no ads when logged in!
3. MEMBER commenting badge.
***
ANNUAL GOLD membershipĀ ($25 per year) includes all the benefits above — but only ONE Weekly Social Interest Group and ONE class.
***
ANNUAL BRONZE membershipĀ ($12 per year) is great if you are not ready to join the full conversation but want to support our mission anyway. You’ll still get a BRONZE commenting badge, and you can pop into any of our weekly Friday Calls with the Publisher when you have time. This is for people who believe—like we do—that this conversation about men and changing roles and goodness in the 21st century is one of the most important conversations you can have today.
ā¦āā¦
We have pioneered the largest worldwide conversation about what it means to be a good man in the 21st century. Your support of our work is inspiring and invaluable.
āā¦ā
āHereās the thing about The Good Men Project. We are trying to create big, sweeping, societal changesā–overturn stereotypes, eliminate racism, sexism, homophobia, be a positive force for good for things like education reform and the environment. And weāre also giving individuals the tools they need to make individual changeā-with their own relationships, with the way they parent, with their ability to be more conscious, more mindful, and more insightful. For some people, that could get overwhelming. But for those of us here at The Good Men Project, it is not overwhelming. It is simply something we doā–every day. We do it with teamwork, with compassion, with an understanding of systems and how they work, and with shared insights from a diversity of viewpoints.ā —ā Lisa Hickey, Publisher of The Good Men Project and CEO of Good Men Media Inc.
—
More by author Paul Hartzer on The Good Men Project:
Photo credit: Getty Images/Mark Wilson

There are a lot of things to unpack here. First, the best explanation I’ve ever heard in defense if Blacks Lives Matter is that there is an implicit Too. It’s black lives matter too. I asked then why not just make the implicit too explicit. There in lies the problem. It isn’t just the absence of the explicit too, but a resistance to the explicit too. Two students at my school were suspended for fighting. I has asked why both students were suspended. The dean replied that he couldn’t determine who started it and if he simply suspended the student… Read more »
Yes, absolutely when the privilege is a system rigged in your favor and it was “earned” by ancestors through slavery, genocide, and outright thievery. Yeah, super wrong to build a world for your children with that as the foundation. When we talk about privilege as a person from the dominant social group, it’s an appeal to our humanity and our integrity. If we want to a claim to be the land of the free, a nation that believes in the American Dream and prizes democracy, having that fine-grained caveat (but only for people who are like me) makes US the… Read more »
There are a lot of things to unpack here. First, the best explanation Iāve ever heard in defense if Blacks Lives Matter is that there is an implicit Too. Itās black lives matter too. I asked then why not just make the implicit too explicit. There in lies the problem. It isnāt just the absence of the explicit too, but a resistance to the explicit too.
Now contrast that with the the insistence of adding that implicit “Too” to the point that its pretty much explicit.