For decades, the LGBT movement demanded “toleration.” As I have noted in this space many times, that was never the goal; it was just the pitch, carefully curated for public consumption. The truth is that the LGBT movement sought—and seeks—cultural dominance. They seek to have every level of government positively affirm their agenda, to have their flags fly in front of government buildings, to enforce speech codes that constitute compelled speech (“preferred pronouns”), and to use whatever mechanisms available to punish those who oppose or stand in the way of these goals.
The LGBT movement never had any intention of promoting a “live and let live” culture. They seek to make affirmation of their ideology mandatory, although they rarely been honest about this and usually cloak their intentions with pleasant-sounding language, an iron fist in a rainbow-colored velvet glove. In recent years, we have increasingly seen the mask come off as they have achieved the cultural dominance they sought. They no longer need to talk about “tolerance.” Now, they can come out of the closet as the bullies they always aspired to be.
The still-unfolding story of Emo, Ontario is a good example. (I have covered that story here, here, and here.) The LGBT group Borderland Pride sued the tiny township for voting against issuing a “pride” proclamation and declining to fly the LGBT flag (as Australia’s Sky News pointed out in a segment that garnered over 300,000 views on YouTube, city hall does not even have a flagpole). The Ontario Human Rights Tribunal fined the town council $10,000 for their heretical vote, and personally fined Mayor Harold McQuaker $5,000. When he stated that he would not pay because he was not hateful, Borderland Pride got a court order and had the money taken right out of his bank account.
We are noticing a lot of the right-wing blogosphere talking about Borderland Pride as not being very tolerant. Aside from the fact that most of these accusations have been published by uninformed mansplainers on YouTube, let’s just get something clear:
We are not seeking tolerance. Nope.
‘Toleration’ is for when we put up with things that are inherently unpleasant or obnoxious, out of social courtesy, such as screaming infants on airplanes, telemarketers, or people who do loser laps around town on loud motorcycles.
We are not asking for your tolerance. We are not a nuisance to be tolerated, and tolerance is not our goal. Inclusion and non-discrimination are our goals.
So there you have it. Borderland Pride is not seeking “tolerance”—that is, people of different ideologies, political beliefs, and religions living together and tolerating the views of those they disagree with, even if they find those views genuinely false or even reprehensible. Their goal is to force submission; to hoist their flag over the town; to compel public servants who do not share their ideology to publish a statement endorsing their movement and its goals. Despite the fact that this group refers to me as “uninformed,” this is precisely what I have been pointing out for years. As it turns out, I am quite well-informed about their aims and what they are seeking to do.
Their use of the terms “inclusion” and “non-discrimination,” of course, is a joke. It is not “inclusion” to force people to affirm your ideology. It is not “non-discrimination” to demand public displays of fealty to your movement. That is something else entirely. Perhaps someone needs to mansplain that to them.
