Tolerance vs. acceptance
I'm sure you've all read in various news sources about the "backlash" of attitudes in society concerning gay citizens and gay issues. Many very smart people have been analyzing this phenomenon trying to figure out why the sudden shift. Many think that it stems from the overturning of sodomy laws in this country. Their theory states that once the laws were overturned, gay marriage was just a matter of time. In fact sodomy laws being overturned never made my mind think about gay marriage. I saw very little correlation between the two. But, talk started about gay marriage now having no obstacles and that straight America should start getting ready for gay marriage. This theory states that the concept of marriage being perverted by same sex people getting marriage led to the attitude of "enough is enough".
Then, roughly the same time the sodomy laws were overturned, all the new gay-themes television shows came out. These shows generally made Will and Grace look very tame. Bravo came out with two very out shows. One called Queer Eye for the Straight Guy and the other was Boy Meets Boy. One was about five gay men making over a straight man who is usually portrayed as being a slob without any idea on what to do to make himself more presentable. Boy Meets Boy is a dating game just like the other new dating games that have sprung up on TV in the last few years. The difference, it's about a gay guy who has to choose his dream date from 15 men. The twist, some of the 15 men are straight. If he happens to choose a straight man, that man will be able to claim a cash prize instead of going on the date with the gay man. If that be the case, I guess the gay bachlor loses out entirely, or maybe he gets a cash prize as well.
All these shows portray gay men in unusual and for the most part, unrealistic caricatures of what it is to be gay. This is what America is seeing. I'm not saying that some of us aren't flamboyant. I'm saying, we shouldn't care! America is in a rut and is used to one way of life. Out of many factors of how gay people have had to live, we look at the world differently or we sometimes act somewhat different. That doesn't mean that we should hide that from America. It may mean that America isn't ready for it.
I think that one thing America could learn from is the terrible burden that is put on gay Americans by having to hide our identities. In many jobs and with our families, many of us hide who we are, not so much out of shame, but the horrifying fear of being rejected by those we love, or losing our jobs. This makes us good at adapting to being in a war zone a good part of our lives. On Boy meets Boy, Jim, one of the men being eliminated from the show, happens to be secretly straight (on the show). One of the most touching moments for me was when he mentioned how difficult it was to hide amoung all these gay men that he was straight. He said he didn't realize how awful that would be to have to live your life like that and that his experience on the show have blown a lot of stereotypes he sees in society away. As Jim said, "My experience here is kind of a mirror image of how people who are in the closet, still, are experiencing daily life."
In recent years, there have been some strides and improvement in these areas. More people are coming out to their families and many places of work are becoming more accepting of their gay workers. In my opinion, the ONLY way for change to take place is for all of us to come out to everyone. It is scary and can be physically and emotionally risky, but it is worse to live a life built on lies and half-truths! Who the hell needs that? Is it any reason, with recent events of more media coverage on gay issues, that gay people are jubilant over the openness of gay issues in America?
One person said something to the effect "....I'm ok with gay people, but now everywhere I turn it's gay gay gay. Enough is enough". I can see where he is coming from. But, people have to realize that what they are seeing is only a small fraction of what gay people have had to put up with their entire lives. Everything has been geared towards straight society and we have adapted to that. We have had to pretend that we are interested in the opposite sex. When talking to others in any situation, we have had to constantly filter what we have said as to not give away our deep dark secret. Most people have no idea how much energy that takes or what a burden that puts on the mind and ego. Many of us don't make it to adulthood and give up on life. The ones who stuck with it are now just beginning to see that life can be better than empty promises and the danger of ending up like Matthew Shepard. As Harvey Milk once said, "You have to give people hope. Hope that tomorrow will be better." This will only happen when America is not only tolerant of its homosexual citizens, but also accepts them as equal peers.
1 Comments
Leave a comment
“Tolerance” may actually intensify hatred, new study finds
Ending The Violence, an anti-violence education and training center in Dover, NH recently released the results of a study that brought into question the wisdom of promoting “tolerance” as solution to inequality, hatred and discrimination.
Background:
May 17, 2004 marked the fiftieth anniversary of the Brown v. Board of Education decision in which the U. S. Supreme Court ruled against educational segregation, noting that separate was inherently unequal. But while de jure segregation has been outlawed, de facto segregation, discrimination and hatred persist. According to The Southern Poverty Law Center’s Intelligence Project, there were 751 hate groups active during 2003.
Human rights groups have struggled to develop effective strategies to address this epidemic of hatred. One of the most recent additions to those efforts is the campaign to promote tolerance. Despite having secured a significant following, however, tolerance is not without its detractors. Many civic and religious leaders have expressed concerns that tolerance, like segregation, is inherently unequal and therefore might undermine our efforts to combat hatred.
For example, according to Victor Kazanjian, Dean of Religious and Spiritual Life at Wellesley College, “[t]olerance is not a basis for healthy human relationship nor will it ever lead to true community, for tolerance does not allow for learning, or growth or transformation, but rather ultimately keeps people in a state of suspended ignorance and conflict. . . .Tolerance has not protected us from acts of hate but rather cast us in a frozen state of societal fragmentation with no apparent change in sight."
If his concerns (and those of others like him) are valid, tolerance would never lead to the racial integration, ethnic harmony and gender equality sought by visionaries such as Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. (A review of Dr. King’s sermons and speeches could find no instance of his promoting tolerance as a solution to hatred or as a solution to any other social ill he addressed.)
The purpose of this study was to begin a critical examination of tolerance by asking 111 students enrolled in an antiviolence educational program to compare tolerance with five other interpersonal values, namely, respect, appreciation, understanding, acceptance and trust.
Key findings:
• Overall, “tolerance” was considered to be a more negative concept than all the others combined by a four-to-one margin. “Respect” was considered to be the most positive;
• “Tolerance” was seen to be consistent with (rather than a solution to) hatred and violence;
• “Tolerance” was seen as inconsistent with “acceptance,” “respect,” and “equality;”
• “Tolerance” was the concept that subjects reported “least wanting to get from anyone;”
• “Respect” was what they “most wanted to get from anyone;”
• “Tolerance” was considered to be the “least effective in making the world a great place to live.” “Acceptance” was considered to be “the most effective.”
In addition, several comments made by subjects in the study also suggested that the promotion of “tolerance” may interfere with efforts to achieve an integrated society. Those comments included:
• “Tolerance? Are you kidding? It’s in insult! It’s how white people feel better about themselves while continuing to hate blacks.”
• “I don’t want charity. I want equality.”
• “It’s [tolerance] what we will have to settle for, since we won’t get respect.”
• “Tolerance is just politically correct racism.”
• “You only have to tolerate people you don’t like.”
• “What makes them think they’re so much better than us?” (A comment from an African American man referring to how he feels when whites “tolerate” blacks.)
• “Why would anybody want tolerance?”
Recommendations: Results of this study suggest a need for anti-hate organizations to carefully examine the approaches they employ. The study proposes a two-part test that would assist in conducting that examination.
Part one. Necessity: Does the approach (e.g., promoting tolerance) offer anything not provided by other established concepts (e.g., acceptance, respect)? This study found nothing to suggest that tolerance provides any unique and beneficial contribution to anti-hate initiatives.
Part two. Cost vs. Benefits: Even if there are unique benefits to promoting a particular concept such as tolerance, are there unintended consequences that outweigh the potential benefits? The promotion of “tolerance,” while well intended, seems to carry with it, a condescending attitude that offends the very people it is supposed to help. Consequently, it may undermine, rather than support anti-hate initiatives.
For more detailed information about the study and its results please contact Dr. Hampton.
Scott Hampton, Psy.D., Principal Investigator
Director, Ending The Violence
90 Washington Street, Suite 305
Dver, NH 03820
(603) 742-2954 phone
(603) 742-2959 fax
beyondtolerance@aol.com (E-mail for this project)