I decided to write about my feelings via my own blog instead of simply commenting on hers. First things first......here are the definitions of the two words, according to www.dictionary.com
Tolerance:
1. A fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward those whose opinions, practices, race, religion, nationality, etc., differ from one's own; freedom from bigotry.
2. A fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward opinions and practices that differ from one's own.
3. Interest in and concern for ideas, opinions, practices, etc., foreign to one's own; a liberal, undogmatic viewpoint.
Acceptance:
1. The act of taking or receiving something offered.
2. Favorable reception; approval; favor.
3. The act of assenting or believing: acceptance of a theory.
Hmmm...I have read and re-read these two definitions and I have come to the conclusion that I never knew the real definition of tolerance. Who knew tolerate meant to have a fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward opinions and practices that differ from one's own? Maybe I thought tolerate meant that I didn't really agree with an issue but, for the sake of whatever was at stake, decided to not show my disagreement. Make sense?
Has anyone ever heard a friend/loved one say something along the lines of, "Well, I certainly don't approve of (whatever the issue is), but I'll tolerate it". But wait, isn't tolerance defined as a fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward those whose opinions, practices, race, religion, nationality, etc., differ from one's own; freedom from bigotry? So how is freedom from bigotry different from acceptance?
Digging deeper, how does one tolerate something that they are fundamentally against? I know I always find a way to throw in gay/lesbian issues here, but:
How does a person tolerate the gay lifestyle if they are fundamentally against the issue?
How does one fundamentally believe that abortion is wrong but tolerate another person's opinion?
How can a person be fundamentally against interracial dating and still tolerate/accept another person's choice?
How can a person be 100% Protestant and tolerate Catholicism?
How can a person disagree completely with another person's lifestyle, regardless of the issue, and still tolerate it?
My mind is boggling right now. Am I making too much out of the issue?
Maybe what I actually have a problem with is the definition of tolerance. I know what I mean when I say, for example, "I don't accept (whatever), but I think you have the right to make your own decision". And honestly, I'm okay with anyone having their own opinions/fundamental belief/biases/discriminations/etc. I know I've been hard on the Christians lately, but it's truly a call to stop being hypocritical more than a slap in the face for being Christian....but that's another blog.
What I mean when I say what I just said is that I think everyone has the right to make his or her own decisions. I really don't mind if you're fundamentally against homosexuality, if you're pro-choice or pro-life, if you're racist or just think each race should stay to themselves....we all have a mind of our own with freedom to use it, right?
But KDT does bring up several good points in her blog. How can I be friends with someone who does not accept my lifestyle? Actually, how can I be friends with someone who does not even, according to the definition, tolerate my lifestyle? Then again, who wants to be friends with ONLY people who agree with their beliefs? That sounds boring, huh?
The best part of blogging is seeing what everyone else thinks about my thoughts. I yearn for comments that make me think/expand my belief system/challenge my irrational comments. I love it. Please never think you can't comment on my blog for fear I might not like you after you share your feelings.
*************The following paragraph is for Rita and Katie only****************
In conclusion, my opinion is that I have (as has everyone else) been misusing the word tolerance. How could I have gone 30 years without knowing it's literal definition? I like to think that I accept the lifestyle choices and opinions of others. But am I accepting them? Am I tolerating them according to my definition of tolerance or am I tolerating them according to the literal meaning of tolerance? It's hard for me to understand how people can completely accept another person's choices when they disagree fundamentally, but life is not necessarily about everyone having the same opinions. I have much more pondering to do on this subject, but I needed to get some things out. I look forward to your thoughts.
17 comments:
I would say tolerance is conditional and acceptance is not. "We" use the word tolerate incorrectly, as you have pointed out. I see this blog as an attempt to measure one's response to diverse or deviant behavior. It's statistical and moot. The use of these terms is an attempt by the government to cause us to analyze the analysis. Noah Webster: Communist. That is all :-)
Definitions per Merriam Webster:
Tolerance:
1.: capacity to endure pain or hardship : endurance, fortitude, stamina
2a : sympathy or indulgence for beliefs or practices differing from or conflicting with one's own
b : the act of allowing something : toleration
Acceptance:
1.: an agreeing either expressly or by conduct to the act or offer of another so that a contract is concluded and the parties become legally bound
2: the quality or state of being accepted or acceptable
3: the act of accepting : the fact of being accepted : approval
For the sake of this comment, I am going by Webster's definition. Because apparently I don't agree with dictionary.com
I do not believe in abortion. I do not accept a person's decision to get an abortion. However, I do tolerate it.
Because the right to choose is a Constitutionally protected right.
I am 100% not affiliated with any religious denomination. I do not accept most person's beliefs, but I do tolerate them.
I guess the point that I am trying to make is that I am not a very accepting person (per your definition a person that assents or believes). However I am an extremely tolerant person (per my definition).
.........I had a lot more fluff written here, but I felt like I was getting into the realm of "couldn't see the forest for the trees..." kind of situation. I am not going to sit here and tell you 18 different ways on how I am not an accepting, but tolerant person because I think what we are not agreeing on is just semantics.
P.S. Webster was not a Communist.
I think I agree with Rita...You can tolerate but not accept. We use the words interchangeably sometimes but they aren't! I am glad you're blogging!
Ok, I concede; he was a Federalist.
"Words, words, words I'm so sick of Words! I get words all day through, first from him, now from you. Is that all you blighters can do?" ~Eliza Doolittle
Fuck Semantics.
"A man of knowledge uses words with restraint." Proverbs 17:27
My vocabulary is limited. I can pull out a few words in Spanish and can manage my way through a conversation in English. But what kills me is that I have to limit the words that I say because of their associated meanings. There are so many words in our daily vocabulary that connotates a certain behavior or belief that we need only speak the word and the response is "uhh huh." Instant knowing of what is meant.
So what are we asking for when we ask for tolerance or when we ask for acceptance? I think we are asking for love. Not infatuation. Love. Agape. (Did you just think of Jesus? I didn't say Jesus, but maybe you thought of Him because I said Agape.)
What we want from the world is a people population that loves themselves and therefore loves us. We want everyone to be able to love themselves enough to then be able to love us enough to allow us the privilege of choosing how we want to live our own lives. If we speak of agape love, we are speaking of a selfless love. One that does not love for sake of being loved in return. But loves for sake of loving.
I love you enough to accept that you are different from me and that that difference makes us unique. I can learn from you and you can learn from me. I don't have to come over to your house and you do not have to be my best buddy. I celebrate our differences.
Did I make you angry by saying "fuck" and then quoting scripture the very next line? Did you think in your head that I had done something wrong?
Please don't accept me for who I am or tolerate my way of life. For in putting words like accept and tolerate, you are limiting yourself. You are saying there is a pro and a con and you are choosing the pro. However, what would it take for you to turn and start to chose the con instead.
Simply, love me.
Namaste.
Kim-What?
What is a word if it is not associated with a meaning?
I think I get what you are saying when you mention asking for acceptance/tolerance = asking for love.
However I don't think when I ask someone to accept (or tolerate) me for who I am, I am in turn asking for love. All I want is understanding.
Rita, I'm not speaking about the actual and literal meaning of the words. I'm speaking of the "assummed" meaning of the words.
i.e.
He lived across the tracks.
or
I dated a guy that lived in the S curve.
or
Agape
or
They got married right out of high school.
All of these mean something to us. We do not look at the literal words that are being said. We look at the underlying meanings that we as a society have hinted at so as not to say "the exact thing"
What we really meant to say was:
He was black and lived in the poorer part of town.
or
I dated a guy that was drug addict
or
Unconditional love
or
She was pregnant so her religious parents paid for them to get married so that the family would not be seen as being so scandalous.
When I say what we want is love. I am not saying that what we do not have love and therefore need/want others to love us. What I am meaning is that we want others to love and therefore love us. Om Mani Padme Hum.
I personally do not care if people understand me. Actually, I probably do not want them to understand me. I do not want them to "care" if i am this or that. I simply to balance our respective lives around "agreeing to disagree" but loving each other none the less.
Thanks for clarifying Kim.
I was not attempting to be combative, but was a little confused because I was talking about the actual literal meaning of " acceptance" and "tolerance".
"balance our respective lives around 'agreeing to disagree'"...I 100% agree with this. Great statement.
When I say I want someone to understand me, I do not mean that I want someone to fully "get me" but rather have a sympathetic and tolerant attitude towards my nature.
Rita, I was not trying to be defensive. I hope it did not come across that way. I get a little passionate sometimes.
Great blog babe...
Kim- You said it better than I. It is loving people in spite of differences. SB and I have some very different opinions on alot of things but I accept and love her. There is no judgement of her opinion. That is what I think people don't understand from me when I ask that if you can't be ok with seeing my arm around SB we shouldn't be friends. In this way, I feel like there is no way for you to truly be a friend without unconditional love. If that is what I am offering you, that is what I deserve in return. If that isn't possible, we should just go seperate ways.
Rita, Kim, SB.... All three of you make me think too much...Smart ladies. :)
I tolerate you not calling me back in an appropriate length of time just like you tolerate me mouth breathing on the phone. I tolerate a lot of things you do in order to accept you on a whole and vice versa.
I guess what I am having a problem with is the whole unconditional love statement. Not because I think Kim is incorrect, but because I have a problem relating.
Blame it on the way I'm wired or whatever, but it is more important for me to feel understood then it is for me to feel loved..... Weird, huh?
Also, the only experience I feel I have had with unconditional love is with my children. (and maybe with God but even then it is almost that I feel if I do a certain thing or act in a certain way God won't love me anymore)
Sure my husband loves me. But do I think he will love me no matter what? No.
Psychoanalyze away.
On the flip side, I don't known I can give unconditional love freely (excluding my children).
Ugh! I'm a horrible person.
I'm going to be the politician and say that I agree with both Kim and Rita.
Kim: I completely understand what you're saying and I think you said it well. You cracked me up by saying that you can "manage" your way through a conversation in English when you have a way with words that would make many people jealous. Not that the goal is to provoke jealousy, but, I digress...
I would love to live in a world where everyone loved each other and we all did our own thing but that was okay. I also understand the connotation of words and their implied meanings. Kinda like a text message. A person could text "Hey, what you doing?" and it could mean "do you wanna talk" or "wanna meet somewhere and get it on", or literally "what are you doing?"
I can say I tolerate something and what I mean is that it gets on my nerves, I don't agree with it, that's not the way I would do it, but I tolerate it because we are different people and as of yet, "they" haven't decided to let me rule the world. But when that day comes..... :)
You made excellent points that have had me pondering for two days. Thank you.
Rita: I also understand why you can't really relate to Kim's response. From my life experiences, I know that it's hard to desire love when most people in your life do not freely give love nor do they show you how to receive it. And that make unconditional love a foreign concept. And no, you are not a bad person for having the feelings you have. I get it.
Thank you for digging even deeper into the issue and for discussing the other side of it. I'm glad we're friends.
This is how completely oblivious I am.
I didn't realize that Kim and I were taking different stances....
What I got out of it was I was saying there is a difference between acceptance and tolerance by definition and that I am more of a tolerant person than an accepting person.
I thought Kim was expressing that both words have a different connotation than their meaning and to hell with words and just be a loving society.......
I am in severe need of going back to a critical thinking class. To be proven yet again if I ever finish my post on capital punishment....
I think I agree with Rita's thinking. I really was just trying to say come on people now love on your brother everybody in the world gotta love one another right now.
But maybe we can't say something and just let it be. Dare I say it?? Dare I? Just like the little boy on the hill with the potato salad problem.
Tired of it yet?
What the world needs now is love, sweet love. Love will, indeed, keep us together. Throw a Barney song in there as well.
Post a Comment