National Trust and JKR

[SlackJawedDisbeliefXY]

National Trust angers its members by covering up feminist artwork after JK Rowling's name was removed | Daily Mail Online

So the feminist statement of stitching a strikethrough of JKR's name is OK to display but another feminist un-stitching the strikethrough is unacceptable for display?

Not all feminist statements are equal

It wasn't a debate about who deserves to be celebrated, with the option of crossing out ones you didn't like

Great post @MarieDeGournay

Please go and explain it to the NT!

You reap what you sew

very well done!

Agree - total misrepresentation of whats happened

Actually two of the seven J K Rowling stitched names were stitched over. No one else was, and names included Margaret Thatcher and Kemi Badenoch.

There has been a suggestion of what happened which I guess is why the NT are still looking into it. I was given a bland response at first but last week they told me that head office was now involved and would get back to me.

The National trust are a law unto themselves, I volunteered for 10yrs no issues then one day out of the blue I am told to stay away from a member of staff , I asked why but wasn’t told just a odd request.
i did all I could to make sure I didn’t bump into the member of staff.
After a month I got informed at home I had had my volunteering paused as I had not respected boundaries both physically and emotionally, I was lost.
i asked for evidence never did I get any only that they believed I probably did it.
i had one of the volunteers husband who had experienced defending people, well he wrote letters to the NT and questioned them .
When we met the management they could not tell me or my representative what dates I had committed an offence, the original manager could not remember which week he had been informed, in fact despite me asking they had no evidence.
There was I admit banter which I took part in and the person also took part in , and at one point I was accused of something at Christmas time but no details.
so at the final meeting I was told I was disrespectful and disruptive I showed no remorse, I said remorse for what and all I have done is try and defend myself.
i was told I was finished at the trust, I wrote to the Chairman of the trust.
The reply from some manager, thanked me for all my help and my voice had been heard,also she admitted there was areas in the inquiry that could have been done differently.
she said under the circumstances let us all move on and couldn’t have been more polite.
i had been taken for a ride , there is no appeal so be careful if you say anything.

I’m sorry you were treated like that ThatSillyAmberSnake unfortunately charities don’t always treat volunteers very well, they don’t value what they get for free. If a member of staff dislikes/complains abo a volunteer the easiest solution is to get rid of the volunteer however unfair that might be.

After seeing this in the news I cancelled our family membership. We will vote with our feet - respect my sex if you want my x!) or annual subs in this case 🤣)

I think the point was that it was an ongoing piece of 'group participation' art and the artist intended that it be changeable but had agreed nothing would be erased (so if someone had sewn in 'India Willoughby is a bloke' that too would have remained (probably stitched out in pink and blue, too!). The proper response to stitching out JKR in trans colours was to stitch in her name again...and again...and again. This should have been acceptable.* But unstitching someone else's contribution is not acceptable. All opinions count, even the ones we disagree with. Thus Layla Khoo refused to both unpick JKR's name and the crossing out, which is entirely reasonable but for which she has got stick from both sides as a transphobe and a traitor to her gender (I think this means sex, here). Article in the Critic. https://thecritic.co.uk/against-the-new-witch-hunt-in-the-arts/
However you look at it the NT is at fault for putting the art work away. The TRAs have scored an own goal with this one since it is trans ideology that looks (as it is) intolerant.
I like visiting NT properties but get irritated by their wokeness. Bess of Hardwick would probably given the lot of them short shrift. House is amazing. btw.
*Or one could have stitched in The Silkworm, which gives a picture of how JKR views transmen at least - an entirely sympathetic portrait albeit done before she was branded a transphobe! I doubt many would get the reference in the TRA crowd since they don't read outside their own box.

Poor you. It's good advice, however, to never engage in banter. Also, remember some people are so entitled they see any difference of opinion as an attack. NT should have had everything written down and you should know your accuser. Very poor behaviour. Glad I am not a member and I will bear in mind not to volunteer for them.

Bloody National Trust have continued to take membership fees even though I’d very clearly stated I was cancelling my membership and why. I’ve got back to them to complain but I suggest anyone who cancelled their membership checks the NT aren’t still taking money.

I notice that there was a bit of PR campaign by NT yesterday - the annual report arrived in May but is being spun now..

Seems that the trust has seen 39% surge in young people (18-25) joining. That's a huge change for a single year - their new DEI based approach must really be pulling in the next generation.

The Radio 4 report seemed to suggest that the uplift in membership was 40,000+ i.e. 40,000 more than expected new members joined. Another article

National Trust sees 39% surge in young people joining as members | Messenger Newspapers

suggests that the total number of members in the 18-25 was 40,000 - meaning that the uplift is around 11,000

The NT has a total membership of around 5.4 million with people 18-25 paying £48 and older people paying around £100.

At 40,000 people, the 18-25 age group represents less than 1% of total NT membership. The group pays around half the subscription of others so they contribute less than 0.5% to the NT's bottom line

In other news (as per article) overall NT membership fell by 89,000

(I also liked the talking point

The findings, released in May, also suggest that younger adults aged 18 to 44 were more likely to visit heritage, landscape and culture sites than older generations.

Younger adults, 44?)

44 is not a young adult, in fact it is a middle aged person 😍

I think that they may have just kept shifting the upper age higher until the range included enough members.

The need might be to show that 'young adult' members are more significant than out of touch old folk

Please leave it at 44? I don't want to be middle aged.

"us"

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5407701-reddit-children-on-mn?reply=147034673

Do you really think deploying the lazy and misogynistic slur "Karen" is going to be a good way of getting your point across on a site for women who weren't born yesterday?

I think that poster's been kicked off for, oh I don't know, loads of reasons I should imagine

I gave him the benefit of the doubt over the TW in the loo thread, since there are still a lot of men using the women's toilets and a goon squad defending it. Oh well. And nothing of value was lost.

I think there is an upsurge (slight) in being interested in history. Not sure moral anachronism is a good look for the NT, though, which had as its original remit preservation of houses and landscape that reflect the history and culture of the UK, if I remember it right.
Edit for spelling

From my observation of NT properties over the holidays, the ones with parks and nice grounds are very popular with families who want a pleasant place to picnic and let the kids run around and let off steam. I believe membership would be worth it in those situations just for the grounds entrance and free parking alone. Would explain the uptick in “younger” membership anyway if it’s parents of families with children in that age range.

I resigned from the NT about three years ago after decades as a member. They have become a highly politicised organisation. Not what they were instituted for.

A group of members has been set up to reclaim the Trust and fight against its capture by the elitist band that want to take it in a different direction. I toyed with joining but TBH I can't be arsed. The Trust is a lost cause. If I have an overwhelming desire to visit a Trust property I will pay the one-off fee but refuse to spend hundreds of pounds to support their political shenanigans.

The artist must be thrilled. Art is supposed to stir emotion and it's certainly doing that. Just not in the way the artist intended.

That aside, the NT cannot afford to lose more membership and needs to give its head a wobble.