Tragic dimensions to what we do?

[Undertow]

I think the problem with "tolerance" is that it implies "well, we *tolerate* you, but you're still One Of Those Other People." Too many people today are so busy congratulating themselves for being "tolerant" that they can't see the hypocrisy involved. If they actually, deep down, considered Those Other People their true equals, they wouldn't have to fuss so much about "tolerating" them.

Exactly, which is why I think "Inclusion" is a better word than "tolerance", and even then, trying to put a word to the concept is still tough.

Everyone knows a guy makes makes racist jokes, followed by, "Yeah, but I have [x] friends, so it's cool."

What's so sad about that is how indicative it is that folks still split people in their minds. Hey, I'm by no means the most tolerant or inclusive person (believe me, I'm just a big, mean curmudgeon), but when it comes to race or nationality, I can't even see that in front of my eyes. Who knows, maybe I have subconscious drawbacks based on race...

...but if you're car is stuck in a snow bank, I'm going to pull over no matter what color your skin is. That doesn't even factor into my mind.

 

[Miss sofia]

Very interesting thread indeed, i have to agree with Lizzie's point that it is the hypocrisy of 'tolerance' as a pose to respecting someone as your equal regardless of social standing, religon, race etc that is the major problem here.

I'm of the 'cut us all and we bleed school', you respect everyone equally regardless of race or religon, class etc, until they deserve otherwise, then you let them get on with it, that's how i was brought up, i mean, i live in a small town, we had the only Asian family in our town move in a couple of doors up and i took some produce from the allotment and a bottle of wine, that kinda thing, not because i was trying to portray myself as being 'tolerant of their ethnicity', but simply because i had new neighbours and that's what i was brought up to do, be welcoming, no more than that.

 

[The Lonely Navigator]

Undertow: I don't want to step on any toes, but your story is so unfortunate.

I know if a person has principles they should stand up for those beliefs, defend them if necessary and they shouldn't allow social change to sway them unreasonably.

On the other hand, although tolerance and diversity are subjective terms that carry alot of emotional weight with people, I think history has shown just how dangerous ignorance and intolerance can be.

I believe if you have a professional obligation, or professional responsibility, ethics dictate you should fulfill your contract to the best of your ability and not allow personal distaste to cloud your obligations.

I feel the same way you do Undertow. Personally I'd rather have someone stand by their beliefs, even if it may be diametrically opposite to my own, rather than 'waffle' back and forth just to gain popularity - we see too many politicians doing that already.

Richard Warren: Must be tough to live in a town with that many churches. Maybe you should move somewhere else.

It is - it always has been. I would like to move closer to the coast. I had thought of moving to MA - as I went with my mom on a visit to Salem that lasted a few days and we both enjoyed the area. During the trip, we also went up to Gloucester (I hope I spelled that right). I was also told by a nurse who helps the cafe owner's son about how Rehoboth is. The nurse, who is gay, said that Rehoboth area is nice. The closest I got to it was when I went to Ft. Miles at Lewes - and I loved it there. I like to be able to have 'the land' and 'the sea' as I do like things like co-op farms/local farming which is typically organic but also be able to have my maritime stuff and visit the waterfront.

 

[TheLibrarian]

I began getting back into the music and the material culture once I discovered I didn't have to scratch and twitch away in stuffy libraries for whole days at a stretch.

Obviously, you hang out in the wrong libraries. Or archives. The day mine gets stuffy we are staging an intervention.

 

[TheLibrarian]

I'm getting ready to leave for Las Vegas in a couple of hours, to attend the Viva Las Vegas weekender, which is a Rockabilly music and lifestyle festival.
My wife is not joining me( she has zero interest), and is NOT happy that I am going.

Now, see, I have the opposite reaction. I refuse to get involved with anyone who has the same passions I do. One classic car nut in a relationship is plenty!

If nothing else, all the car parts would bankrupt us. And I appreciate the occasional call to return to sanity. Although not when I am seriously considering going into massive debt for the "perfect" car, even if that is when I need the reality check the most.

So I would be telling my significant other to go away and enjoy his thing. Or would go along and do something unrelated. With the understanding that he would not be able to interfere in my trek to the Packard National.

The tragic part comes in when I realize that I resent my cousin, who is more like a sister to me, for choosing to get married the weekend of the National this year. I am missing the cars - and the hats, and the chance to hang out with my fellow car geeks - for her.

Although I might recover once I actually get to the wedding. I already know what hat I am planning to wear. And it's quite something. Even by my standards.

 

[Amy Jeanne]

Who else here thinks their passions might have limited them somehow

Me.
My husband pointed out to me recently that I was getting way too into vintage. I was. My interests were very limited and I didn't give much of anything else a chance. I was turning into an unlikeable snob and people just couldn't relate to me so no one bothered.

I've since shed the "all vintage, all the time" shell. If others can be dynamic people being all vintage, all the time then I am totally jealous of them. But for me, it was ruining several things in my life. I had no friends and I was feeling depressed at work -- turning my nose up at everyone. I was always in a bad mood.

I still love vintage -- ALWAYS WILL! I'll always prefer it to new in most cases. But I'm giving "new" more of a chance and it's not so bad.

 

[sheeplady]

I grew up going to country auctions- the kind where you have to bring your own chair and sit in the mud and rain and cold for hours on end. They would have two-day auctions and at the second day start selling off rooms starting at $5 when they ran out of time. If you bought a room you had to take everything away, some people would discover large pieces of furniture in the room that were buried. These people saved EVERYTHING- as in the dining room you would find old rusted pipe and electrical wire. I must have seen 100s of houses like this- so packed you couldn't walk through during the preview. I really felt sorry for those people- living in a house you can't walk through packed to the ceiling because of your saving stuff. I didn't know any of these people, but I can't imagine it felt good to live this way.

Most of the stuff I own is not valuable in itself, but I like it. There- I said it- I like stuff. That is supposed to horrible and consumeristic- to like stuff. For a while, I started to wonder if this was indicative of a problem I had, as I am surrounded by extreme minimalists, who basically throw away or sell everything they own before they move- even if they are moving across town, the stuff is really valuable or it is family heirlooms. I finally realized that although minimalist people like this may be normal, having different tastes for how I decorate is not a problem. I am not near the packing house phenomeon. It's not bad if things make you happy any more than if not having things makes you happy.

It is the happy part that is key. If your collection doesn't make you happy or leads you to be unhappy in other areas of your life, then it isn't worth having.

 

[Foofoogal]

There- I said it- I like stuff.

:eusa_clap:eusa_clap:eusa_clap

Kudos to you.