Isn't Tolerance technically a negative?

[Zekromic 1,054]

Before you get your knickers in a twist, let me just talk about something that's gnawed at me since the beginning of my time in this fandom.

 

Tolerance in itself, isn't a great thing to base a whole culture on.  Being that Tolerance is defined as:

tol·er·ance

ˈtäl(ə)rəns/

noun

 

1. 1.

   the ability or willingness to tolerate something, in particular the existence of opinions or behavior that one does not necessarily agree with.

   "the tolerance of corruption"

 

Now it's a good thing yes, but this fandom prides itself on something that it is so far beyond ascertaining it that it boggles my mind.  I would even go as far as to guess that at least 1/3 of Bronies aren't technically, "tolerant".  A group so diverse that it can't stand its own diversity?

 

"A house divided cannot stand!"

 

Where am I getting at?

 

Tolerance is good in itself.  But wouldn't it be better to pride ourselves in something closer towards the word, "Acceptance?".

 

Where not only do you like them for who or what they are, but you have no care to disagree with it, that it shouldn't matter.  Where you can take to heart what you actually preach.

 

All we have is a bunch of people that are just upset with everyone else's standards, and that isn't tolerance last I checked.

 

So why Tolerance? That is my true and final question.  Why?

 

Why pick a sub-par term, and not even come close to that benchmark?

 

No, Tolerance isn't bad, mostly everyone has something they disagree with, and a lot of us more than others.  I am just curious about IDEALS here, not what the fandom is, but what it SHOULD BE.

This is not the first time I've seen groups of people mixing tolerance and acceptance, and it kinda tick me off for sheer ignorance, specially since it has been used to me for tolerating bullies in highASSschool ¬¬. HELL, I'VE LEARNED THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THEM THANKS TO SOUTH PARK W00T 

[IridscentNionios 1,420]

Well look at this. For example someone is an obnoxious dumbass to you... You need to tolerate him if you're to have a meaningful and respectful conversation, to keep the point of your arguement intact but that doesn't mean you have to accept them. Once they cross the line you are completely free to give them a smack in the face and a kick in the bottoms. It's all about boundaries.

[Ziggy + Angel + Rain 11,298]

I don't necessarily subscribe to the "love and tolerance" Brony motto so far as being expected (I know not by whom - just saying lol) to adopt it as a member of the fandom.  If someone is, in my opinion, an awful human being, I will neither love nor even go so far as to tolerate them.  I might ignore them, but that's about the best they can expect.  If we each simply possess differing opinions, there may come a point when I can agree to disagree and walk away.  But if someone is an unabashed, unapologetic homophobe, racist, and / or kitten-punching d-bag I will not tolerate.  And I reserve the right to hate those that truly deserve it.

 

That being said, I DO believe that acceptance is a far greater ideal than mere tolerance.  I won't go into whether or not I think either is attainable / comparably more attainable.  Sometimes tolerance - though preferable to an utter lack thereof - comes off as condescending: "I will put up with you."  I don't need that kind of tolerance.  Tolerate me silently lol.  In your own head.  But if you accept me for who I am...  Tell me.  I will consider it a gift.

[Freewave 1,145]

You can tolerate what you don't agree with, but if someone is being an asshat its easier to ignore them or explain your differences without going into a tumblr style tirade. Way too many people lash out at what they don't like about the fandom and get into altercations with others way to frequently and that doesn't help foster a community.

 

So no i don't see tolerance as a negative becasue its important to understand that diversity and alternate opinions are something we're going to encounter here. We don't need a giant chip on our shoulders that threaten to turn us into a flutterbitch but occasionally we will need to pull aside someone who is making everyone else miserable with their self-centered behavior.

[Digit 321]

Well the problem with full blown acceptance is that you accept a person's view point. Which could be just as bad if not worse. It could e seen as accepting someone else's even if you don't agree with it, which at that point simply means you are tolerating it. See these 2 words mean different thing Although they can easily loop into one another.

[Pinkamena-Pills 6,838]

Depends on whats being 'tolerated'.

 

Of course what is 'tolerable' is going to relative. 

[Kel_Grym 1,917]

I can be expected to tolerate someone's view points that I disagree with, but I should not be expected to accept their view points. To do so would be to throw my view points away. Conversely, if they are expected to accept my view points, they would have to throw theirs away.

 

If your expecting me to just accept them as a person, then yes, I accept them as a person, and may become friends with them, but should I be expected to accept all people? Should I accept a homicidal maniac or even tolerate their assumed right to kill as they please?

 

No on both counts.