Gay Pride ad a new 'equality gap'?

Perhaps his family couldn't afford to live in such a large property.

We are all making assumptions dj you've just made another "His family were not that close, as he didn't leave it to any of them".

In which case, Smileless you do not know that

'This man left his house to the NT for the enrichment of all who wished to visit it. He did not leave the NT the right to reveal intimate details of his personal life.'

Any more than I do. You are just making assumptions. His family were not that close, as he didn't leave it to any of them.

Check the earlier link it's been LGBTQ year at the NT since January, if they were so upset about it they've had plenty of time to say so. And sorry if you don't understand how important it is to gay people that their stories are heard then you are "Unenlightened" And if one child is taken around an NT property and hears a story that makes them realise it is OK to be gay then I really don't think all this anguishing about a dead man's wishes means a thing and he would probably be pleased to think his story had helped.

How do I know what dj? No, I haven't seen his will and I haven't seen the deeds to his house, have you?

I think it's more than reasonable to assume that neither his will or the deeds to his house explicitly mention his sexual preference or whether or not he wished his very private life to be made public. If either had I'm pretty sure the NT would have made that public along with everything else.

Since when was insisting NT volunteers wear badges in support of anything other than the NT or they'll be out of the public gaze promoting equality of opportunity and inclusion? They were not given the opportunity to decline and carry on as normal, they were to be hidden away. Those not wishing to wear the badges were to be excluded from their normal role if that bought them in direct contact with members of the public.

I'm sure those who sign up as volunteers do know what they're signing up too which is why they were expecting to be able to make their own decision and not have the NT's forced upon them.

promoting equality of opportunity and inclusion.
Not a lot of opportunity or inclusion for the owner who donated the property because he is dead and can't speak for himself.

Thank goodness the NT are a more enlightened bunch than you lot.
I don't think that is a fair comment. No-one on here seems 'unenlightened'.

Telling the story without mentioning his sexuality is one thing but for the NT to use his sexuality to promote their current agenda is wrong because it is not their memory to use.
Even if homosexuality was legal when he was alive then he may have preferred to keep his private life private as do many other people.
His sexuality has been made by the NT to be the major aspect of his life and there was far more to his life than that.

Yes, the NT seem to be choosing a certain period of history or one particular owner relating to their properties, regardless of how old they are and concentrating on the 'interesting story' of that period in time. Ask a question other than that relating to that narrow period and it is difficult to find the answer.

'Annabel Smith, head of volunteering and participation development at the Trust, said volunteers sign up to the organisation's "founding principles" of promoting equality of opportunity and inclusion. '

Those who volunteer do realise what you sign up to, don't you?

dj, there were only six Tolpuddle martyrs.

Such a fuss, as well, considering it was only ten volunteers who refused to wear the badges. Obviously the ones with the loudest voices.

Equality gap, eh?

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/homosexuality-decriminalisation-50-gay-sex-unnatural-rights-british-people-believe-same-sex-a7862191.html

This is why the story of Felbrigg should be told in full.

You are exactly right Jalima1108. Both Gordon Brown and Peter Mandelson have chosen to keep their private lives private. Remember all the rumours of homosexuality that swept round Gordon Brown before his marriage? Afterwards the names of a number of his girlfriends became known and it became clear he was and always had been heterosexual. Peter Mandelson has neither come out of the closet nor hidden himself in it. He has had a number of male partners but he has never said anything.

In Ketton-Cremers day, and he did not die until 1969 at the young age of 63, there were plenty of people in the public eye who, while they never said they were homosexual, it was generally known that they were. Names that come to mind, without even thinking are Noel Coward and Stephen Tennant. Lord Behrens, the great aesthete, lived at Faringdon House near me with his boyfriend for many years, he died in 1960. There are very many more whose names could easily be found.

From everything I have heard and read. Mr Ketton-Cremer was one of life's naturally quiet and reticent people in every way. I see no reason why his sexuality should be hidden: a few casual references to it in the guide book and in the house, where relevant would seem more in keeping with his character than this flaunting of it in a way that I feel is out of keeping at this particular house.

I have complained before about the way in a number of their houses the NT decide what the story of the house is and then force feed you at every stage with that story, regardless of what story about the house interests you. I think this is part and parcel of the whole current NT belief that we, the broader British public, are too stupid and ill-educated to be able to appreciate their properties on our own terms. Challenge them and they will accuse you of being arrogant and intellectual (since when has that been an insult?). I know, because I did and was so described.

Helen Ghosh, their director is, thank god, leaving to be Master of Balliol College. They are welcome to her.

How do you know, Smileless?
Have you seen his will?
Have you seen the deeds to the house?

The hall where I volunteer is displaying it's connection with Indian independence 70 years ago. I haven't been made to wear a yellow, white and green lanyard. Should I sulk?

Apparently he left his house to the NT after the death of his brother Richard in the battle of Crete in 1941 the assumption being that he did so because he would not produce a successor.

This man left his house to the NT for the enrichment of all who wished to visit it. He did not leave the NT the right to reveal intimate details of his personal life.

As you've said Chewbacca his family and friends have respected his right to privacy, but the NT who've benefited from his generosity hasn't.

The stigma of homosexuality lasted long after it was made legal. The family who knew him were used to keeping his secret, he was used to keeping his secret, even two years would not be long enough to adjust. My friend was 40 when he came out, it had been legal for over 20 years, but it was still a big step. If Ketton-Cremer were still alive I would certainly question outing him, but as it is he is dead and the only thing that remains is the story of his life. To tell that story without mentioning his sexuality would be to tell a lie and to further the idea that homosexuality must be hidden and not spoken about because it is wrong. Thank goodness the NT are a more enlightened bunch than you lot.

People are what they are and not everyone wants to wear their sexuality on their sleeve.
Many people prefer to live very private lives whatever their sexual orientation.

Maybe he didn't trust his family to be honest about him

My word! That's one hell of an assumption! How can you possibly presume or question what he did or did not trust his family with! Unless, of course, you knew him personally trisher, in which case, I bow to your knowledge. Failing that, we have to rely on those closest to him - his family and friends.

He had two years to come out if he wanted to

It might be reasonable to suppose
It might be unreasonable to suppose too

No Jen, show it off? Hell bells , do those of us with family who are gay start wearing tee shirts.

Don't hide the fact, I agree, I also support don't celebrate th fact and don the tee shirts, just accept

None of us know trisher therefore best to respect the fact that he did not write his memoirs to be published after his death or presumably did not leave instructions in his will for that part of his story to be told.

before anyone picks me up on the word 'unfortunately' and calls me an old fart I mean because there was a lot more that we could learn about him and his life besides the one aspect of his being that the NT powers-that-be think needs emphasising.

Who else could he have told? Did you know him? It might be reasonable to suppose that he left his house to the NT knowing that his memory would be preserved and his story told and that part of that story was his sexuality. Maybe he didn't trust his family to be honest about him.

Well said Chewbacca

From accounts I have read by those who knew him he does seem to have been a kind, warm-hearted man - and generous, especially giving his property to the NT for us all to enjoy today.
Unfortunately, what most people will now know about him is his sexuality and nothing else of this essentially private man.