LafayetteLady
Posts: 7683
Joined: 5/2/2007
From: Northern New Jersey
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: GreedyTop
I saw this over on FL... and I thought it wuold make for an interesting conversation:
"Respect—not tolerance—must be our goal if we would diminish prejudice in our time. For tolerance is often but a gentle disguise for prejudice: the tolerant often behave as self-appointed connoisseurs of weaknesses in others, or self-appointed protectors of those whom they deem to be their inferiors. Psychologically, there is a strong resemblance between the stridently "tolerant" and the prejudiced. For while the one may descend to attacking whole groups of men and the other may rise to a passionate defense of them, both are equally indiscriminate in their attack or defense; and neither has any concern whatsoever for individual character." - Selma G. Hirsch, U.S. social scientist."
While I do understand the point she is trying to make, I think that she is misusing the word (or breaking it down to the most technical use) in order to promote her agenda.
From Merriam Webster:
Definition of TOLERANCE
1: capacity to endure pain or hardship : endurance, fortitude, stamina
This is definately not the one that she is talking about. Although this one certainly fits in most BDSM situations. 
2 a: sympathy or indulgence for beliefs or practices differing from or conflicting with one's own b: the act of allowing something : toleration
This, in my opinion, is the definition she is attempting. It indicates nothing about a lack of "respect," "superiority" or anything else she mentions. She is simply defining what that means to her, which, in itself, is kind of an act of superiority.
3: the allowable deviation from a standard; especially: the range of variation permitted in maintaining a specified dimension in machining a piece
4 a (1): the capacity of the body to endure or become less responsive to a substance (as a drug) or a physiological insult especially with repeated use or exposure <developed a tolerance to painkillers>; also: the immunological state marked by unresponsiveness to a specific antigen (2): relative capacity of an organism to grow or thrive when subjected to an unfavorable environmental factor b: the maximum amount of a pesticide residue that may lawfully remain on or in food
Tolerance and respect do not have to be mutually exclusive. She seems to be taking the terms "sympathy" and "indulge" as bad things.
I think we should be reasonably tolerant and respectful of other people, based on the circumstances. For instance, I don't think it is appropriate to say, "we are tolerant of the diversity of our neighborhood." That smacks of prejudice. But saying, "we 'respect' the diversity of our neighborhood," doesn't ring right either. It seems to me that we should be "tolerant" of lifestyles we don't understand or participate in. To a point. To me, that is interchangeable with "respect." I'm tolerant of people with kinks unlike my own. I respect people have kinks unlike my own. In neither circumstance, should there be respect of the individual, simply their right to choose (again to a point) what works for them.
There are things we are "tolerant" of as long as they aren't in our space. That isn't always being disrespectful either. I'm "tolerant" of those who are into the whole "toilet slave" thing. I am not "tolerant" enough, however, to have it occur in my house. Does that make me prejudice? I don't think so. It means there are some things I don't care what others choose to do, but have no desire to have those things in my presence.
|
Tolerance? Respect? - 
Profile
.gif){kind=avatar}
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread