Tolerance? You’ve got to be kidding. San Francisco is many things, some of them quite wonderful, but I can’t quite see it as a bastion of “tolerance” nor of “wide-open encouragement to be as independently minded … as you can possibly be”. Maybe I’m missing something…
To me, tolerance suggests that one not only embraces anything and everything which is outside the mainstream, but that one also has respect for those who DO choose to live their lives in a relatively mainstream fashion. This includes people who shop at Wal-Mart, people who work for a living and want to own homes, people who (for whatever reason) actually watch Fox News, and (gasp) even people with conservative religious or political views…
The writer babbles on and on about our “tolerance” while his whole article rather reeks of the direct opposite. About the only people worthy of tolerance, it seems, are the ones who live here, think like he does, and are terrified of stepping out of line by getting out of the city and seeing something different once in a while…
And how come his idea of “independent mindedness” only seems to apply to those who agree with the “tolerant” (and, of course, left of center) party line? I’d always thought that critical thinking (you know: analyzing ALL sides of an issue and coming up with your OWN opinion rather than adopting a pre-packaged one) might play a small part in that definition as well. Frankly, I’d argue that San Franciscans are no less intellectually lazy than anyone else in the country, just somewhat more inclined to walk down the granola aisle at the dogma store…
While I like to think of myself as “independent minded”, I’ve never really considered myself “tolerant”. If I think something is a crock of shit or that someone is a flaming idiot, I’m probably going to say so. Say what you will about my weakness of character, but at least I’m not a hypocrite about it…
