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

[lucydogz]

<a class="break-all" href="https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-england-norfolk-40825660&ved=0ahUKEwjXzYeYwb_VAhUDB8AKHfOABAsQiJQBCJcCMCU&usg=AFQjCNESdvsFPzoWQVu_7i8WHq_3mutfKA&ampcf=1" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">link
I'm pro-inclusion of minority groups, but think the NT should stick to doing it's job - looking after old houses. As most of its volunteers are retired, who might not want to be representatives of whatever right-on case the Trust decide to espouse,it's also short sighted of them to treat volunteers this way.

Huh? Care to elaborate?

It's not like they've "sacked" them though - some have taken a break during the campaign, some have switched to backroom duties. Nobody's been punished.

They've been told to wear rainbow badges I. Support of Pride. A film is also being shown about a previous owner who was apparently gay. They feel this is wrong as he was a very private man. OP. Yes I completely agree with you. I think it's unnecessary. And I can imagine that some older volunteers may feel very uncomfortable.

I find it hard to feel sympathy for bigots.

They are volunteers. Why are they moaning? Why don't they go and volunteer at a homeless shelter, drug rehabilitation centre or women's refuge or something they do believe in instead?

LGBTQ rights are not a "right-on" passing phase.

The National Trust is in receipt of public money and so should be held to the same standard. They are already aware that they don't do enough to be inclusive of people from minority ethnic backgrounds for example.

They are massive landowners, including land that may be perceived as public access, they don't just look after stately homes.

Volunteers can't make up the rules for an organisation, if they are volunteers they should commit to the organisation, not expect it to be another way around.

It's a bit silly. It's just a badge and a lanyard. Both sides have overreacted, they shouldn't be forced to wear it but really, what's the harm in wearing it? You won't catch the gay.

Mind you, it's possible that the volunteer's views have been somewhat misrepresented, if the quote about the owner of the house being 'a very private man' is anything to go by.

Maybe they disagree with the massive focus on his sexuality because he wouldn't have liked that and are uncomfortable with it for that reason.

Or maybe they're bigots. Hu noez.

No one should be forced to virtue signal.

I feel the same about poppies. If people choose to wear them, that's fine but no one should be forced to.

The volunteers and members of the man's family are angry that the NT chose to "out" him. Not the NT's place to do that.

I don't think any of the volunteers are anti gay rights, just furious at being forced into this position. I agree with them.

If they're volunteers they should be owed a bit more gratitude for the time they've given for free in support of the house so far. They should be able to choose to wear it or not and clearly some of them have reasons for thinking it's disrespectful to the previous owner.
PS Stripy that's such a childish comment.

I do feel sympathetic to them as I think the NT has gone overboard in this property.

The property was gifted to them by a man who was as far as his family, who are still alive, single all his life. He was incredibly private. This may or may not have been because he was gay and due to laws about homosexuality at the time - we can't know if he would have been just as private now.

The NT has had access to his diaries and discovered he had gay relationships and decided Felbrigg will be it's LGBT flagship property, with everyone wearing badges etc. His family are furious saying they had known nothing about his private life, he was a private person - they really don't care that he was gay but he wouldn't have wanted this this.

I would guess (hope) this is the angle the volunteers are coming from. I think the NT has looked at the past through the eyes of the present.

Storm in a NT tea cup I am afraid!

Using the phrase virtue signalling says a lot about a person.

Using the phrase virtue signalling says a lot about a person.

Being snide and bitchy says even more about a person.

How about the NT pop a few rainbows up in the tearoom or the shop and offer staff badges and lanyards if they want them? I'd say the same for poppies, reindeer horns or not that it will ever happen women's symbols or purple, white and green ribbons for a suffragette's premises.

How is it childish Littlechip? People can choose to be homophobic if they like, everyone is entitled to their private thoughts but if they're then disadvantaged because of those thoughts I've got no sympathy for them.

Has anyone considered that the previous owner was a 'very private man' because had he not been he would have ended up in jail.

From the BBC website:

Annabel Smith, head of volunteering and participation development at the National Trust, said: "All of our staff and volunteers sign up to our founding principles when they join us - we are an organisation that is for ever, for everyone.

"We are committed to developing and promoting equality of opportunity and inclusion in all that we do."

...but if you're a long standing volunteer that doesn't want to promote LGBT rights in an out of context environment with the aim of nothing more than virtue signalling, you'll be banished to a role away from the public. Got it, NT.

There's a recent trend for the NT to focus on one aspect of the long history of a property. It's gimmicky and irritating and masks the huge range of history many properties have.
I agree the volunteers aren't necessarily being bigoted. There are many houses, in their ownership and private, where you can have a fair guess at the private lives of the family. To highlight one particular person like this is crass.

I can sympathise with the volunteers here, who presumably feel they have a loyalty to the house, its previous inhabitants and their descendants more than they do to their employer.

If this chap had kept his homosexuality as a well-guarded secret, and his remaining family are uncomfortable with the celebration of it, I think these volunteers are being loyal to them. That's OK.

I'm very far from being homophobic or anti-gay rights/gay equality and I am not sure that I would be comfortable with wearing this pin.

Firstly, I am not sure I am OK with some of the stuff that has become extremely prominent in the whole LGBTABCDEFG area in the past few years (especially some of the things associated with the trans issue, and the continued expansion of the general area to include a lot of stuff which I don't particularly think should be there, like weird made-up identities that look a lot like heterosexual attention-seeking).

Secondly, as others have said, wearing pins can come across as being virtue-signalling and annoying.

It sounds gimmicky to me and the NT should respect the wishes of the previous owner's family.

For instance, look at the 5th Marquess Of Anglesey. Much speculation there but the NT just include him as part of the history.

Saucery - you've partly articulated what I was thinking. Someone who had quite a few accomplishments is reduced to 'being gay', even though that wasn't a major public part of his life.

It's like going to Hilltop and surrounds and seeing Beatrix Potter reduced to those damn rabbits in waistcoats. I remember asking a NT staff member if there was anything about her scientific work or even (ironically) her conservation work in setting up the NT and was told basically that there wasn't much (just bits here and there), and this was frustrating for the staff, but the books sold the property, as it were.

Oh my god Stripy, the irony. So, it's ok to marginalise people if they won't conform in public because it conflicts they think (or get up to) in private, despite that having no negative impact on anyone else?

God I wish I could think of an analogy for that..

I've decided to cancel my NT membership because of this.