Tolerance, Comedy and Mr. Slave's tight ass

Neil Simon, arguably the most popular American playwright of the 20th century delved into what many described as "serious comedies." His philosophy is summed up in his quote: "I used to ask, 'What is a funny situation?'Now I ask, 'What is a sad situation and how can I tell it humorously?'” 

...

The depth of social commentary offered by Matt Stone and Trey Parker is often overlooked. Behind the vulgarity of “Team America” was an excellent metaphor for the state of international relations and American exceptionalism. Likewise, their flagship series “South Park” expresses some truly culturally critical gems. In many ways, comedy is truer to life than tragedy.

One particular episode “The Death Camp of Tolerance” is a neat summation of the ongoing academic debates about “tolerance” in education.

Brown (2008: 8) describes tolerance to be conceived as “an individual virtue, issuing from and respecting the value of moral autonomy and acting as a sharp rein on the impulse to legislate against morally or religiously repugnant beliefs and behaviours”. Our willingness to abide the disturbing predilections and tastes of others, is surely an inarguable good in many settings right?

...

In an earlier episode, Mr. Garrison was fired from his job for being homosexual. Such events aren't exclusive to the realm of fiction. This has happened many times as evidenced here and here and here. An intolerant and all around unjust act right? When someone’s sexuality has no bearing on their ability to do their job, why should they be fired because of it?

One argument a school made for firing a gay teacher in one of the links above was that “public displays of behavior that are directly contrary to church teachings are inconsistent with these values”  Apparently, you’re allowed to be gay you just have to hide it.

As discriminatory as this argument is, there is a point. Most gay teachers are fired from catholic schools and homosexual teachers publicising their homosexuality would be at odds with the school’s agenda. This blog post isn’t about religious vs secular education as that is an entirely different debate, but seeing as the schools were willing to tolerate his behaviour as long as it wasn’t so outwardly expressed it begs the question: what exactly is the true nature of tolerance and where is the line drawn in regards to it?

Well, South Park explores this issue rather graphically. Once Mr Garrison gets his job back, he learns he can make millions suing the school for discrimination if he gets fired again. He then tries to push the limits of tolerance to achieve his aims:

Rather than being fired for traumatising the children, Mr. Garrison goes on to receive an award  for his "courage" in the face of his "intolerant" classroom. During the ceremony Garrison's frustration at his failures to get fired lead him to perfectly express Hage's argument (1998:96)

“To tolerate is not just to accept, it is to accept and position the other within specific boundaries.  This concern with limits and boundaries emphasises, above all, the empowered spatiality that is part of tolerance”

NOTE: I am not arguing that homosexual teachers should be fired nor am I saying they should be free to go gerbilling in front of classrooms.

But what this episode highlights is that tolerance has limits and expresses a relation of power. Just like Mr. Garrison can be tolerated as long as he's not "too gay", people are said to tolerate ethnics as long as they're not "too ethnic".

Tolerance IS NOT a transcendental virtue and you are not Jesus for being tolerant. Tolerance is an act of liberal governance expressing that you are okay with something as long as it is under your control.



Brown, W. (2006). Regulating aversion: Tolerance  in the age of identity and empire. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Hage, G. (1998). White nation: Fantasies of white supremacy in a multicultural society. Armidale: Pluto Press.