To feel sympathy to the National Trust volunteers at Felbrigg Hall?

ParentingEnnui don't be such a boring pedant.

lucydogz

There is no apostrophe in its as you have used it

it's means it is

HTH

We don't ALL have to accept the fucking rainbow badge or flag or whatever else . People still have CHOICE FOR NOW !

Something tells me your issue with what the rainbow stands for stretches a little beyond a flag or a badge...

somedyke the property I am at has many female staff and mostly female volunteers. I haven't enquired about who is gay, and it isn't on the application form....

I have no interest in who someone has sex with. Most of us do it with someone. So what?

So why is it a stretch that the NT want to link all of this - the history of the house, the Wolfenden report and the anniversary and commemorate it with lanyards and badges? It's all linked!

Yes it's a programme of events. Who said "a stretch"? I can't see who you're disagreeing with.

But that doesn't make the points about this particular property invalid. Does it?

it's 50 years since the legalisation of homosexuality
Not all homosexuals are male.......
And actually I find sexual orientation to be a most interesting thing about someone, usually because women, let alone lesbians, are under represented or not visible in so many areas. The more dykes the better say I and the NT should be an ideal location for laydees in tweed and sensible shoes but that could just be my Stephen Gordon fantasy.....

But this is happening this year because it's 50 years since the legalisation of homosexuality. That was a huge thing. It happened because of the Wolfenden report, something the owner of this house was aware of having an annotated copy of said report himself.

So why is it a stretch that the NT want to link all of this - the history of the house, the Wolfenden report and the anniversary and commemorate it with lanyards and badges? It's all linked!

Also what @brasty said at 11.55

I agree with what @justicewomen said at 10.55

brasty

They are all important to someone, as soon as you force someone to wear them they lose meaning.

Its the difference between I want to wear it, and I was made to wear it.

And there are many shades of grey as to why people don't wear them/

My experiences of NT and disability were around easily fixable issues and in one case the attitude of a volunteer. One of the access problems had a simple fix that I was pleased to see had been used on my next visit and I have no idea whether the volunteer was spoken to or not as I said in my email I didn't want to know what action had been taken, just that the organisation were aware and further training might be needed.
In the interests of balance I have to say that blatant racism with no relevance to what we were there to look at was not at an NT property, but a Council owned one. Equality training needs to be embedded in the volunteer code of practice in any organisation.

I am a volunteer for the nt.

There's no dress code, I try to be smart and tidy but I work outside so it is fleece and a waterproof jacket at times, heels and fashion gear would both be and look ludicrous. We don't get branded clothing, that is staff only.

Yes, we have to wear a name badge on an NT lanyard - that means visitors can spot me not just for the job but also as general help point. A brightly coloured lanyard would make it more visible. The badge also shows I am allowed in the staff areas, we don't all know each other.

I am conscious that I am giving talks about someone's ancestor as a representative of his generation. And that someone could be listening.

Ive no idea either visitors are gay or not. And sexuality is the least interesting thing about a person.

Regarding disability - the place does its best but when the only access in the house is a steep stair there are limits. People do get told what is accessible before they pay.

' a small rainbow badge isn't exactly a huge imposition.'

No it isn't a 'huge imposition', but it's the principle. Badges supporting causes should be optional not compulsory. Dress codes are totally different.

It should be optional.

It was far too heavy handed ( not to say counterproductive) to say everyone MUST wear this.

Imo The core role of the NT that volunteers need to subscribe to should be that of preserving and showing buildings, not taking a party line on sexuality.

The policy smacked of enforcing a supposed unity of thought by outward signs. It seemed quite unpleasant really.

Well yes, but presumably they also have a dress code, and wear some sort of badge identifying them as a NT room guide or whatever, and have some restrictions on the sorts of things they can say to visitors, and don't get to wear whatever they want to anyway, do a small rainbow badge isn't exactly a huge imposition.

Zzzzz Change the record, all them calling the volunteers Bigots .

WTF should they be made to wear a badge if they don't agree ? We don't ALL have to accept the fucking rainbow badge or flag or whatever else . People still have CHOICE FOR NOW !

No argument from me on that one, Angel! I pay monthly for a family membership and that encourages us to get our money's worth when we can, even if it's just in a car park for a walk. The cost of a day trip to somewhere like Quarry Bank Mill is eyewateringly expensive and I think that is a major factor in the Middle Class Membership issue. I know it isn't cheap to maintain those buildings but blimey, no wonder it prices out many families in target demographics.

I think it's fair enough for a charity that is trying to encourage a section of society to use its service to require front of house representatives to follow the marketing/branding involved, including wearing badges etc.

Obviously with volunteers there is a greater need for organizations to appreciate they need buy in from those representatives. But if a few volunteers don't buy into the organizations direction, it isn't unreasonable for the organization to say "That's very sad, but we're going ahead anyway. You're welcome to continue volunteering away from the public eye where you won't disrupt the branding/marketing."

There is of course a separate question of whether the marketing of this property to the LGBTQ community is appropriate. But it seems reasonable to me.

I don't think YABU to sympathize with volunteers who find themselves no longer able to support the direction of an organization they've put a lot of time into. But it is in the nature of large organizations that they must adapt to survive, and because of that there will inevitably be some losses along these lines. So the while sympathetic, I dont think there is anything that should be done about it.

I have friends who refuse to wear anything like the 'Cancer, we're coming to get you' badges as they disagree with the portrayal of cancer as a war. They have either been through cancer, or experienced someone very close do so and passionately disagree with the 'lost his battle to cancer' talk. A friend of mine who died spoke of how that narrative made him feel like he just wasn't trying hard enough, even though he knew that wasn't the rationale behind it.

These are all people who fundraise for cancer research, who donate in remembrance, but just can't bring themselves to endorse that message. There are many reasons why people may not wish to wear a badge, and even if every volunteer who didn't want to in this case, has done so for bigoted reasons, it still shouldn't be compulsory.

I don't know if the volunteers in question are bigoted or not. I imagine many NT volunteers in general are not supportive of homosexuality, as these attitudes exist in society.

Whether these particular volunteers are not supportive of the film because of their stance on homosexuality or because of their belief about what the previous owner of the property would have wanted is hard to determine. But how we should treat people after their death is quite a complex question. Had the story been of a straight man who had had many affairs, one with someone famous that would possibly draw interest from visitors, then possibly his children may prefer this family history to not be publicised. Equally, using someone's personal struggles with mental health issues to raise awareness for that cause may be something that the family may not wish to happen, if they knew that the person in question was sensitive about their mental health being private.

These things aren't ever simple - it's perfectly natural that people will disagree, and neither may be wrong.

'In which case it shouldn't be so expensive.'

Can't disagree with you there...

Yes, why wouldn't some posters suffice.

The NT should be trying to keep visitor numbers up
In which case it shouldn't be so expensive.

I bet people on here would not be happy to be forced to wear a badge saying WHITE POWER or some other such hate sysmbol, so why should these sysmbols be forced upon people?

Why is it ok to force badges supporting LBGT, POPPIES or PINK RIBBONS fine, but forcing other are not so?

it defeats the entire purpose of the symbol if you force people to wear them, how is it any different to germany in 1930s who forced all people to wear swastics?

Basket, exactly.