National Trust AGM

[PRAMtran]

I’ve received an email from the National Trust inviting me and all other members to vote in their AGM. Does anyone know if there are any things a woman’s rights advocate should vote for or against. Eg TWAW by stealth.

'Queering' is a political strategy designed to radically transgress boundaries. It is most often not consensual.

'Queering' results in a medieval portrait of Mary Magdalene having a plaque beside it describing her as a 'sex worker'. A highly contested and provocative descriptor.

Of course you do. You may think your beliefs are “natural” or simply the product of your inner self, but like everyone else they will be heavily influenced by the discourses you are exposed to, hegemonic belief systems, power and so on and so on.

For instance, supporting democracy, capitalism and the NHS is an “ideological” stance, although you will have perhaps internalised these beliefs to the extent that you aren’t aware they are ideological stances.

I don't have the words to explain how awful this is.

It's sickening.

'Queering' is a political strategy designed to radically transgress boundaries. It is most often not consensual.

^^ Yes.

It is the new form of snobbery, classism, religious zealotry and colonialism.

It operates from a position of superiority, assumes a right by righteousness and being better to destroy and do unto others for their good while framing those others as lesser, inferior kinds of humans they are entitled to control for their own betterment and do not have to care about the consent, feelings, voice or needs of. It aims to sweep away the world and replace it with a better one framed as this superior breed deem it.

It is infact DARVO on crack, as it's everything social justice bores rant on about, but do themselves with enthusiasm like a bunch of upper class Victorian Eton twats on crack sorting out a backward country and converting the native animals into their own image approximating civilisation.

It involves quite exceptional lack of social and emotional skills, respect for others, or capacity for empathy, and often also involves quite fantastic levels of naivety and ignorance mixed with an ego you couldn't get into Wembley stadium without folding it up a bit.

Yes, this is all rudimentary A-level Sociology discourse; but as a result of the growing imposition of authoritarian wokeism - in its many forms - particularly Queer Theory in the guise of Gender Identity Theory - many here have seriously questioned many previous assumptions and loyalties they clung to, and let go of many tribal loyalties.

Of course, we all operate within broader frameworks associated with our time in history and our culture - but 'wokeism' is a wilful imposition intent on radical re-structuring - that feels directly lifted from another culture ( American culture)

For instance, supporting democracy, capitalism and the NHS is an “ideological” stance, although you will have perhaps internalised these beliefs to the extent that you aren’t aware they are ideological stances.

They're not "ideologies" in the same way as "queer theory" is. I don't "support capitalism" any further than living in a capitalist society. I'm open to any alternatives which improve on the NHS model.

I acknowledged feminism was an ideology.

Queer theory is a top down ideology, not shared by most people.

All this 👏

If it’s “rudimentary” then many posters here need to get themselves back to school, no?

No thanks. Not at any school you and your friends are teaching at.

It aims to sweep away the world and replace it with a better one framed as this superior breed deem it.

I would add that this is the post modern psuedo intellectual academic end of the market though.

Quite a lot of the 'queering things' followers of this political movement are people with personality disorders and behaviour disorders who have no real political interests or desires and just like smashing things, exhibitionism, having no boundaries, having a lot of power over others, and enjoying other people's distress, harm and exclusion. Like the ones currently investing vast amounts of time and energy into preventing a rape survivor from accessing any support or even being able to meet with other women in her own time in a group she has organised. And the ones who just hug themselves with glee when women can't use a toilet or a changing room, or when women get raped in prisons by a serial severe convicted sex criminal and rapist who has a wig and pink leggings on.

@GodessOfThunder
If Gender, sexuality, queer, race, power and so on aren’t new analytical categories. they are standard stuff for university students and at my DC’s school,
then how can this:
In my extensive professional experience in this field I would say “most people” are not aware of the sources of wealth that some NT homes were built with also be true?

Most NT visitors are middle class. The vast majority of middle class people are educated. They know about the sources of wealth.

The snobbery about the women on this thread is hilarious. Plenty of more thoughtful, intelligent posts have been made on this thread than yours, @GodessOfThunder

I think everyone who believes in gender identity ideology should probably learn to think more critically. So I guess we're all going back to school.

Don't vote for the likes of the Reform Trust candidates unless you would also vote for whatever the UKIP successor party is called. They're the same people.

I don't see how anything about trans rights comes into it.

I love going to NT places that discuss the links to where the wealth came from. Not only slavery, but local industry and the tensions within that, overseas trade, patronage from royalty etc. It's usually the most interesting thing and puts the whole property in a different light.

I disagree that middle class typical NT types know about this stuff - each place has its own unique story, you should be able to learn about that story by going to the place and seeing the information presented there.

Are you arguing for no historical interpretation, because the middle classes know it all already?

We used to just have Marge, Merlin and Maddy berating us for wrongthink. GOT seems to have taken on the baton here. Prepare to be educated (at length and repeatedly) ladies…

As an old, uneducated woman please can you advise me how you became so educated yourself? Did I perhaps go to the wrong university back in the day when one had to have good grades to be accepted?

I’m also a church warden in a C of E church. Now you’ve explained just how useless and unwanted I am, despite giving many hours to my unpaid job each week, can you advise me who will replace me? Obviously they’ll be young, diverse and chant all the trendy, nonsensical mantras, but where will I find them? I’ll need to hand over the keys so it would be extremely useful if you could point me in their direction because they’ve not made themselves known to me yet. Thanks in anticipation 😆

Sociology was the main part of my degree, and I have subsequently taught it at A-level. What I'm saying is that you are assuming that people have no awareness of how ideology and hegemony operates; of how historical narratives are arrived at.

But most people here do. Narratives evolve and grow to include many different factors. The issue here is the forceful and radical imposition of a certain mono- narrative to the exclusion of many others. Furthermore - the intention is not 'truth' so much as imposition.

As already suggested many times, as a country Britain has long taught about its involvement in the atlantic slave trade - it is nothing new. There are museums dedicated to it. It is not new or radical information - but the way it is being imposed is.

Interesting facts from the voting booklet

around 8% of the population are members (5.37m people)

trust income last year was £682m, £276m from membership

I’ve already set aside my remaining years in order to be lectured by the ideologues du jour. I hope I don’t accidentally turn off my (admittedly non existent hearing aid) and forget to bring along my (very real) reading glasses 🤓

Really? Because: a) Not everyone has a history degree and b) Not everyone has had the same topics included in their school education.

There are levels of historical knowledge. Yes, the majority of the population may be aware some rich people made their money through slavery, plantation ownership and colonial connections in the 17-19th c. But, few will likely be aware of the specific source of wealth that led a specific family to build a specific NT property, whether it was from, say, being a director of the East India Company, the North American fur trade, being a plantation owner etc (often alongside other economic activity).

I find it bizarre their wealth wouldn’t be discussed, after all that is what facilitated the existence of the property. What exactly is your objection to a caption saying, for instance, “X Hall was built between 1800 and 1805 by Lord Y. His family had made their fortune investing in Cornish tin mining, ships engaged in the transatlantic slave trade, the East India Company, where he was a director, and through local land holdings.”

What Is “shoehorned”? Why would the guidebook be better without this information? Why do you object to it? Why, perhaps do you feel threatened in some way by this information?

My city has a history which revolves around being a major port city. Port cities tend to be cities on the edge. They are open to influence and diversity, and act as a kind of thresholds. The city has a population with many diverse origins. The oldest chinese community in Europe; the largest Roman catholic population in England on account of its large Irish immigrant population; one of Britain's first Somali communities, and many other communities too.

On one road there is a Greek Orthodox Church; a Jewish synagogue; a Welsh methodist church - and a few hundred yards away a Scandinavian church, a little further Britain's first mosque. The city has Britain's oldest Black community. this community was not the result of slavery, but of sea farers arriving here from around the world and inter-marrying with local populations - hence a large population of mixed heritage/race people.

Generations of men worked on the docks in chronically insecure, dangerous and low paid work - many more escaping off to sea as merchant seamen -and consequently suffering many losses during during the Second World War. The city was the most bombed outside of London.

People really resent the whole of the city's history being turned into a single narrative about the impacts of the Atlantic Slave trade, as terrible and consequential as it was in its own right. There is a dedicated museum to tell of that story - but there are many other stories of exploitation and suffering too; as well as much to celebrate.

You mistake me Burnttoast, I probably expressed myself badly. I believe that there is a group within the nt that believe in 're-education ' for people that don't agree with then. As evidenced here.
And , as a fellow (ex) church warden, I think that there are factions in the c of e church that believe the same.

How is this information being “imposed” on you? A few lines on an information board? A passage in a guidebook?

I make the same response to
you as above:

I find it bizarre their wealth wouldn’t be discussed, after all that is what facilitated the existence of the property. What exactly is your objection to a caption saying, for instance, “X Hall was built between 1800 and 1805 by Lord Y. His family had made their fortune investing in Cornish tin mining, ships engaged in the transatlantic slave trade, the East India Company, where he was a director, and through local land holdings.”

What Is “shoehorned”? Why would the guidebook be better without this information? Why do you object to it? Why, perhaps do you feel threatened in some way by this information?

Also, if you visit an NT property from the 18th and 19th c you will see a lot chinoiserie and objects with colonial connections in the decor. You can’t really understand these properties properly without understanding the global connectedness and tastes of their owners. It’s not just a peripheral factoid.