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.

reasons given by the volunteers have got "don't like gay stuff" written all over them

Nail on the head toad.

Wear badges or don't wear badges, it's up to you. Just don't spout some thinly-veiled bigoted crap and expect not to be called out on it.

reasons given by the volunteers have got "don't like gay stuff" written all over them

That is your interpretation, with your own bias.

They're not wrong to not want to wear badges, no matter what their own reasons are.

I wonder how gay or trans people would feel if at work they were told to wear a badge supporting feminism.

I'm sure some would happily do so, but I bet some would probably say they respect others choices but they shouldn't be told to support anything.

'The problem is that lots of people don't keep their feelings to themselves '

Anyone voicing bigoted opinions or behaviour should be dealt with swiftly and firmly. Not wearing a badge isn't bigotry though .

Anyone voicing bigoted opinions or behaviour should be dealt with swiftly and firmly. Not wearing a badge isn't bigotry though

Agree with this - although I do have huge sympathy for you if you were made to feel uncomfortable grannytomine

Our workplace has introduced a voluntary badge you can wear to show that you are open to having a discussion - and therefore presumably supportive of - LGBT matters.

I will not wear it because whilst I believe I'm not homophobic in any way and do not believe that anyone should be discriminated against due to their sexuality at work - but I probably have unconscious bias - I have huge issues with radical transgenderism and it's erosion of women's rights.

Also as our workplace sponsors mermaids and they have jolly chats about how great it is that young DCs can find their own gender and get f*cked for life by taking non necessary drugs as a child etc. etc. I sincerely doubt that my career is going to be enhanced in any way by a chat about such matters, seeing as if it is the cause de jour.

NT needs to realise where it's bread is buttered. It has a huge, free workforce that is made up of mostly elderly people who tend to have more traditional views. I'm glad that we live in a much more progressive society towards equality than we used to, but I can't see that forcing people to wear a badge that they feel uncomfortable about helps with anything at all. Fine to make it entirely optional.

Anyone voicing bigoted opinions or behaviour should be dealt with swiftly and firmly. Not wearing a badge isn't bigotry though

But what constitutes bigotry? Is it a lesbian saying that she does not want sex with a man who identifies as a woman even though he still has a penis? Is it a transwoman saying that a woman who tells her that it's different being born as a woman?

I think it's very wrong of the NT to have done what they did.

They shouldn't have outed him against his family's will.

We have no idea if he'd have liked to be seen as 'gay' even if he had lived to see it legalised. He might have found the term itself offensive and insulting. We've no right to put labels on people who can't speak back.

Oh, and I say that as a historian. I really think it's a shitty thing to do.

mostly elderly people who tend to have more traditional views

"Traditional" and "bigoted" are not words that can be used interchangeably. It's time we start moving away from "Oh they're just traditional" when what we mean is racist/homophobic/sexist.

really! and on the basis of one action you can judge them?
I think it's far more likely that they, as I've said, give their time for free and don't feel they should have to wear badges and lanyards supporting a particular cause any cause. Perhaps because they see it as pointless and virtue signalling.
and, in the end, so what if they're not as supportive of gay rights as you would like? What do you want to see the NT do about volunteers who don't share your world view? Public shaming maybe? Being lined up and having their membership cards torn up?

It's also time we start moving away from ageism too.

"Traditional" and "bigoted" are not words that can be used interchangeably. It's time we start moving away from "Oh they're just traditional" when what we mean is racist/homophobic/sexist

Don't assume that because you think traditional is a synonym for racist/sexist/homophobic that we all do. When I say traditional I don't mean any of those things, if I did I would say that.

I do take your point ovaries - perhaps you are right and I should have used a different term other than old-fashioned.

I guess now though as I could be labelled a bigoted old TERF, I'm somewhat reluctant to use that terminology myself.

I'm really conflicted about this.

On one hand, I think it was heavy-handed to make the badges and lanyards compulsory and am glad they're now voluntary. On the other, I think it's only a badge and a lanyard and I do wonder about the motives of some of those who were making an issue out of it.

I hadn't realise that the donor had been outed against his family's wishes, though. That, if true, seems wholly wrong.

On the other, I think it's only a badge and a lanyard and I do wonder about the motives of some of those who were making an issue out of it.

That is really dangerous thinking. It's not only a badge at all. And deciding peoples thoughts because they won't go along with what someone else has decided they have to support is seriously bad.

so what if they're not as supportive of gay rights as you would like?

This is what I mean. Gay rights shouldn't be something that you can shrug your shoulders and say "ah well, some people support it, some people don't". It's the same with women's rights and the rights of people of colour and the rights of people of any age.

If you advocate for discrimination against people for their sexuality, race, age, sex, disability or any other protected characteristic, you deserve to be called out on it.

On the other, I think it's only a badge and a lanyard and I do wonder about the motives of some of those who were making an issue out of it.
Do you think that their motives are any of your business? As long as they keep them to themselves?

There are very, very few badges I would wear.

Doesn't mean I'm anti-everything else.

We have no idea if he'd have liked to be seen as 'gay' even if he had lived to see it legalised. He might have found the term itself offensive and insulting. We've no right to put labels on people who can't speak back

Yes, and we don't know a lot about what his attitudes towards the modern LGBT movement might have been. Wasn't that Foucault's point about homosexuality, taken up by a host of scholars (wasn't Halperin one???) that what counted as homosexuality in different historical periods was quite different?

but the point is, they are NOT advocating discrimination. You are jumping to conclusions about the motives of complete strangers and, as I said before, what do you think should be done about it? Re-education?

"Traditional" and "bigoted" are not words that can be used interchangeably. It's time we start moving away from "Oh they're just traditional" when what we mean is racist/homophobic/sexist

Indeed they are not. "Traditional" means long established or habitually occurring. "Bigoted" means intolerant to the views of others. So:

"If someone talks about marriage, I always assume a man and a woman" - is a traditional view. But it isn't bigoted.
"I can see no arguments in favour of gay marriage and it shouldn't be allowed" - is a bigoted view
"I am a committed Roman Catholic and, while I respect the rights of others as equal to my own, I believe that homosexuality is a mortal sin" - is not a bigoted view. It is one you may not agree with if you are not also a Catholic, but it is not a bigoted view. It is a traditional view within a particular religious group.
"Gay rights is a hugely important cause and anyone who disagrees shouldn't be allowed to work for the National Trust" - is another bigoted view.

There are generally bigots to be found on all sides of debates these days, I find....

"If someone talks about marriage, I always assume a man and a woman" - is a traditional view. But it isn't bigoted.

I've never seen people say that; only "Marriage is between a man and a woman", which is bigoted.

but the point is, they are NOT advocating discrimination

If you do not support gay rights, you are advocating discrimination.

*"If someone talks about marriage, I always assume a man and a woman" - is a traditional view. But it isn't bigoted.

I've never seen people say that; only "Marriage is between a man and a woman", which is bigoted.

but the point is, they are NOT advocating discrimination

If you do not support gay rights, you are advocating discrimination.*

A solipsistic answer to the 1st statement is not an answer.

You don't know why these people are not wearing lanyards and badges. They are strangers. It could be that, like me, they would refuse out of cussedness. That doesn't make me a bigot. And it doesn't mean I'm advocating discrimination. If you think wearing a badge makes any difference I think you're misguided.

And you still haven't told us what you want to see done with the 'bigotted' volunteers. Public shaming?

Yes, yet - it's something I think is really disturbing. People are so keen to believe that someone from the past would love their modern enlightened terminology. But you have to think that, in 100 years time, there will be new people who will want to slap their labels on us!

The NT volunteers have chosen to be volunteers for reasons other than showing solidarity for the LGBT community. It has nothing to do with their job and wearing a badge should be optional so thank goodness they've seen sense. If that had been part of the ethos and the uniform when they started volunteering, then fair enough, they have a choice to take it or leave it, but you can't force anyone, much less a volunteer, to do anything they don't want to.