I'm Intolerant of Tolerance

I would be lying if I said that there was a tiny part of me that didn't want to write this simply because I get to use "literally" properly, if a bit hyperbolically.

But I'm getting ahead of myself.

Words have meaning.  This is probably something we should agree on before we continue.  Then again, if this is a point of derision for us, I don't know what you're doing here.  The world in general, that is, not just my blog.  That is literally what language is, and if you've got another definition... no, wait, that... I think... Yeah, do-over...  Too much words for my brain-mind.

Ah, sweet relief...

Words have meaning.  They imply objects, actions, descriptions, all that stuff you learned in middle school and forgot in high school.  But as our ideas get more complex, so our words get more complex too.  Take your pick: equality, freedom, liberty, rights - you could right entire essays using just those terms as your jumping-off point.  And, indeed, those particular words also make another point, which is to say that words inevitably become politicized, despite (or perhaps because of) our best intentions.  Again: marriage, guns, life...  You could do this all day.

And with politicization comes polarization.  No matter where one falls on the political spectrum (cartesian plane? multi-dimensional polyhedron? how complex are we these days?), those words carry some general meanings, but also some more specific ones as well.  Marriage and equality are practically linked in the public discourse these days.  But they're also linked to other words, depending on what "side" you're on.  Do you think "love, cherish, honor" or "Bible, abomination, sin" or some combination thereof?  Is it Paul or HRC that flashes across the blackboard in your mind?

Now there are some who would argue that "tolerance" is kind of a dirty word.  I do not generally sit with them on that particular side of the fence.  Or operate in those spheres.  Or whatever it's called when we remember the world isn't black and white...  However, I find myself agreeing with them on this point, but for entirely different reasons.

I'm gonna make like a shitty paper-writer for a second here and go back to the definition of the word.  However, as someone with a master's degree, I feel I should at least be a little bit more appropriate and look up "tolerate" on etymonline.com along with dictionary.com.  Surprising no one, tolerate means pretty much what you'd expect it to mean.  It's allowing something to exist without interference, probably something you're not generally fond of in the first place.

Attempting to continue this discussion in broad terms is gonna become difficult, so let me try my best to address a particular conversation in moderately nuanced terms.  Needless to say, this links back to the discussion around gay marriage.  For those spheres in which I do operate, "tolerance" is a kind of totem.  It is an attempt to wrap up in a single word the concept of letting bygones be bygones.  Whether you are morally or politically opposed to the idea of a same-sex marriage, or are simply weirded out by gay sex, whatever your reasons, the request is that you let it go in the name of peace.

Hence, those who are opposed to marriage equality tend to find tolerance to be a tool of those who support it.  There are the occasional battles where someone tries to reclaim the word, to show how those seeking to allow same-sex marriage are actually being intolerant, and it doesn't go over super well.  But for the most part, that word's current usage is set for a while.

Still, there's a part of me that, as I said, kind of agrees with those with whom I disagree.

Wait, let me try again...  See, words have meaning...

Tolerance really should be a dirty word.  Or, at the very least, we should be working on removing it from our vocabulary.

At this point, I can probably return back to a slightly more nebulous discussion, because the same thing remains true across the board.  With the occasional exception, no one ever wants to be "tolerated".  That's the bottom rung of civilization when you get down to it.  That means that someone, no matter how they feel about you, has deigned to allow your existence to register.  They don't have to speak to you, hell, they don't even have to be nice to you.  Tolerance is someone telling you they're "colorblind."  Tolerance is "I have a gay friend."

Tolerance cannot possibly lead to cooperation or peace.  I doubt it will even lead to acceptance (which, come to think of it, only sounds like it'd be about a rung up the ladder anyways).  From what we've seen, tolerance has really earned more ire than it has appreciation.  I mean, shit, attempting to gain tolerance seems to have led to intolerance, and at this stage that actually has its benefits (the devil you know and all that).

Obviously, our eyes should always be on the greatest good we can achieve.  We should want peace and love, whatever that might mean.  We should want to form a greater society, and we should want cooperation and a will to work together.  We should be hoping for good things, or at least an end to bad things.

Because, honestly, tolerance is literally the least you can do.  And it damn well shouldn't be on our goalposts.