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.

'I find it so utterly depressing that LGBT+ rights are still seen as a "cause" that people can just shrug their shoulders and say "Well, they can choose whether to support it or not".'

But it's not about it being fine to choose whether or not gay people should have equality. It's about having the choice whether or not to wear a specific badge in a specific context. And not wearing the badge doesn't mean you don't believe in that equality.

I've said it on other threads and I'll say it again. I am sick to death with hearing about who people choose to have sex with. I don't give a shiney shite where you want to stick your bits as long as you don't do it front of me and don't expect me to be interested in hearing about it.
I agree.

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

Yes, all this angst bout being treated differently.
The NT volunteers are trying to do their jobs. They probably don't give a rat's arse what your sexuality is.
Times have changed. Nobody cares anymore.
People.need to stop inventing problems where there are none.

'but I think the very fact that we're discussing LGBT+ rights as though it's a charity that you can choose to care about or not'

Not a 'charity', but a cause, like feminism. We aren't saying people can choose whether to care of not, more if displaying symbols in support should be compulsory or indeed even necessary.

As a feminist and a woman I would think it was great that the NT wanted to celebrate women's history. I really would not want a sexist volunteer to wear a badge celebrating a cause he didn't believe in - it would cheapen it for me. And if I felt like the organisation wasn't actually good at supporting women, I may choose not to wear it, as I wouldn't want them to profit from an association with the cause.

It is interesting that you include the "T" in rights and compare them to women's rights, especially given the threads that have been across the boards.

I wasn't going to spell out the entire acronym minus the "T", and LGB+ rights looks weird. I don't know where I stand on the trans arguments.

As I said in my previous post, it's not about the badge - it should be up to the individual whether they wear it or not. It's more the idea that if they don't agree with the cause, they shouldn't have to wear the badge. It should be as simple as "if they don't want to wear the badge, they shouldn't have to wear the badge", but I don't think it's excusable for people to "not agree with the cause" of people being allowed to love whoever they want.

I don't agree with the increasingly intense enforced poppy wearing so I must apply the same logic here I think.

Well I guess those of us who don't fit the demographic the white middle class volunteers approve of can continue to stay away. The volunteers matter more than paying customers.

Who said that?

Your sexuality, colour , religion whatever don't get you barred from places in the UK! It is illegal.

Sexuality is invisible anyway, assuming you aren't having a shag in the ticket office.

The interviews I'm reading quote some of the 10 who disagreed. They felt that the ex benefactor's privacy should be respected. They are motivated by support of who he chose to be (a private person) rather than commenting about gay rights or equality.

Tonnes & Tonnes of projecting on this thread & elsewhere of other Agendas, so it's worth tracking down what the actual dissenters said why not.

Well, haven't RTFT (it's massive) bu the first I've heard of it and the NT have backed down and I think that's a good move. Eve though i would choose to wear the rainbow lanyard, myself, I do believe that this sort of display should always be a matter of choice. It should be encouraged but not mandatory.

I found the opposite when I read the interviews. At first glance, I thought they were right, but then there were lots of people who didn't really know him all that well saying "it's private, and I didn't know he was gay, and how do you know he was gay anyway?" but evidence form his close circle that he was out to them, and left the relevent documents to the NT.

And as with Squoosh, I feel the same about poppy wearing.

Making these things mandatory within an organisation borders on making them meaningless as a gesture.

Bloody hell - you have a bit of interest in architecture, gardens, antiques and artifacts and happen to have a 'stately' nearby and with some time on your hands you give some of it. Next thing you know your being asked to wear socio-politico-artismo-whateveryou know badges and bandanas.

And banished to 'downstairs' duties if you don't.

I'd be fuming, drawing diagrams, calling CAB and LTB.

OvariesBeforeBrovaries

"I find it so utterly depressing that LGBT+ rights are still seen as a "cause" that people can just shrug their shoulders and say "Well, they can choose whether to support it or not" ."

Interesting that you then say

I don't know where I stand on the trans arguments.

As you infer that in the first instance that you should automatically support them.

Its a conundrum when everything isn't black and white.

I find it hard to feel sympathy for bigots

This is a serious fucking problem. If you don't wear our badge you're a bigot. If you don't use the exact words we say you're a bigot. If you don't think the exact same way you are a bigot.

There is no reason to think these people are bigots, and its fucking offensive to assume they are. And unbelievably arrogant and self centred as well.

Nicely said, babybarrister

Mmmm. I think someone telling me that I must wear a badge promoting a cause would make me really not want to wear that badge, even if were a cause that I would usually espouse. Or perhaps I might want to support a different cause....perhaps "Black lives matter", or "Rights of Women", or "Autism matters", or "Combat Stress", or "Support your NHS", on a particular day, rather than LGBT. And yes, as a feminist, I have a problem with how the extreme end of the "T" part of that has thrown the rights of women in general, and lesbians in particular, under the bus. LGB? Absolutely fine. I completely support the rights of consenting adults to have sex with each other in the combinations and permutations of their choice. T...well, firstly that isn't a sexual orientation. Secondly, I support people with gender dysphoria to have the help and support that they very much need and deserve. But don't get me started on the male privileged autogynophiles. Actually, technically, they haven't just chucked women and especially lesbians under the bus. The bastards have also chucked the poor sods with gender dysphoria under the bus as well. And it's the acts of that very loud group that would also give me a hesitation over the rainbow. Despite having happily, by choice, worn one in the past.

I think the best thing is to ignore all this virtue signalling and just do your own thing. LGBT have more rights now than some others like down and outs living in squalor on our streets.

The National Trust is bonkers though, and they rightly stood down. Lesson to any other entity who tries to enforce their own views on anyone.

LGBT have more rights now than some others like down and outs living in squalor on our streets

So they should button it and be grateful?

Wow, yes, look at all the equality .

(that's to rosey, btw)

Is LGBT some kind of religion now?