Your position is that tolerance is non-resistance. To tolerate something, according to you, means to offer no resistance to it.
My position is that tolerance is a form of resistance where the object of destruction is the most immediate cause of harm.
Tolerance, in this sense of the word, is often contrasted with resistance. Both are defensive strategies. They are both forms of resistance. Even though the second strategy takes the word resistance for itself incorrectly suggesting that the first strategy is not a form of resistance.
Both strategies are useful. One has to learn when to apply them. Nonetheless, I think that tolerance is the fundamental strategy in the sense that resistance is built on top of it and cannot function without it.
If resistance means destroying the person using the gun that shoots the bullet that hits the body negatively affecting it (= destroying the mediate cause), tolerance means destroying the negative effect created by the bullet hitting the body (= destroying the immediate cause.)
Tolerance destroys, resists, counters, rejects, attacks, eliminates, nullifies, removes, bans no less than its opposite strategy. The difference merely lies in the object of destruction. Tolerance attacks the immediate (peripheral) cause. Resistance attacks the mediate (central) cause.
In this sense, tolerance is the most natural, the most direct and the most courageous form of resistance.
Tolerance is synonymous with endurance which means "to harden" or "to thicken". Its symbol is camel.
You invert the concept when you define it as non-resistance.
The cause of confusion is the fact that there are multiple causes to resist and that we have to choose which ones to resist.
When you tolerate, you do not resist the central cause because you choose to resist the peripheral cause.
Tolerance is a form of resistance that is invisible because its movements are micro-movements not visible on macro-level. It's hard to distinguish it from passivity.
Intuition and logic have a similar relationship as that between tolerance and resistance.
Intuition being peripheral, holistic, event-centric, present-minded, best effort driven method of prediction.
Logic being central, reductionistic, theory-centric, future-minded, correctness driven method of prediction.