Gay Pride ad a new 'equality gap'?

Annie, I didn't say his family should be proud of him. I said they should be proud.
That's what gay pride is all about, the way that being gay is no longer to be hidden.
Be proud, show it off, accept that he is gay, do not hide the fact, like he had to all those years ago.

Nobody at Felbrigg can say they did not know about the exhibition. Volunteers took part in the Stephen Fry film.
The Spring copy of the magazine had all about it. They must have known about it before the house was open.

His family accepted him for what he was Anniebach , a kind, generous, warm hearted and very private man. All of his family and friends knew of his sexuality but respected his privacy. The NT did not.

Jen, doesn't explain why you think his family should be proud of him. They shouldn't be proud or ashamed of his sexuality surely.

Annie, I also said surely he would want people to be honest about him.
You appear not to have noticed that.

But this isn't what the NT is about is it? This is from the NT website:
"We’re a charity founded in 1895 by three people who saw the importance of our nation’s heritage and open spaces and wanted to preserve them for everyone to enjoy. More than 120 years later, these values are still at the heart of everything we do. We look after special places throughout England, Wales and Northern Ireland for ever, for everyone.

We look after coastline, forests, woods, fens, beaches, farmland, moorland, islands, archaeological remains, nature reserves, villages, historic houses, gardens, mills and pubs. We restore them, protect them and open them up to everyone. For the Trust, conservation has always gone hand-in-hand with public access. We welcome everyone to explore:
775 miles of coastlineOver 248,000 hectares of landOver 500 historic houses, castles, ancient monuments gardens and parks and nature reserves."

It doesn't say anything about political consciousness or getting involved in sociological issues. It's aim is simply to preserve buildings and estates for future generations. If one of their properties has a history that they think would be of great interest or value to the general public, it would make good sense to check with the family or friends of that property before proceeding further. On this occasion, the NT didn't and the friends and family of those who knew Ketton-Cremer the best are adamant that he would have hated having his private life made the subject of such a furore.

Trisher, if that is the bar you set for living, turning out time in Newcastle, I rest my case. I have seen what goes on in Birmingham, London etc. People relieving themselves in the street and having sex, the back of that is usually drink or drugs. That doesn't make it right because it goes on. I do not, repeat do not think homosexuality should be criminal, I think bad behaviour and base crude acts in public should be against the law. If you don't so be it. There is nothing wrong in behaving decently and having morals, so don't accuse me of being homeophobic because I don't share your very liberal moral code. As for what goes on between consenting adults in private, that is how it should stay, it is not a parcipative sport just yet.

Most gay people lived very private lives for the simple reason to be identified would mean imprisonment, treatment using hormones or at the least ostracism. After my friend came out at 40 he was able to talk openly about his feelings and the man he loved, before that he had to watch what he said very carefully. The family cannot know what Ketton-Cremer would have wanted anymore than we can, but telling his story illustrates the difficulties that he would have encountered. It is history and many of the stories told in history are possibly not the ones the person involved would have preferred.

Jen said his family should be proud of him, no explanation for this pride except he was gay, rather a silly reason to be proud if we want equality for all.

But Ketton-Cremer was a very private man, and according to his family, he wouldn't have wanted to have been "outed" for his sexuality. Did no one at the NT think to check with them first before embarking on their campaign? Surely he has a right to his privacy, alive or dead.

The phrase that struck me from the film was "as an honest biographer himself...."
Surely he would want people to be honest about him.

I looked at this film because it was relevant to this discussion. It certainly hasn't encouraged me to spend any time looking at the others.

Thinking about the history of some of these stately homes and their now dead owners their decadent life styles comes to mind , not a pleasant thought.

G.K Chesterton-“There are no uninteresting things, only uninterested people.”
What a pity you chose one film from a whole catalogue of events, perhaps you should explore further.
M0nica don't worry about it, I sometimes do it myself!!

trisher, thanks for the link to the NT film about Ketton-Cremer. A less interesting little film it would be hard to find, and it does nothing to enhance one's appreciation of the house.

Trisher, sorry I mispelt your name.

Nobody is condoning how gay people have been treated in the recent past and few of us are unaware of what has happened. However that is not a reason for saying that we all have to wear badges stating our commitment to gender equality. Wearing a badge does not necessarily prove anything, I expect quite few people who do not agree with gender equality just wore the badge because they were told to, and they were afraid to say no. And some supported the cause but refused to be labelled.

As I said very early on this thread, I would have refused to wear the badge/lanyard, not because I did not agree with the cause but because, as I have said above I distrust all kinds of value signalling To spare anyone having to page back to find what I said, I quote:
'I do not wear badges advertising my religious or political beliefs nor do I wear T shirts with slogans or advertising on. I couldn't care less what anyone's sexual preferences are and never have. '

Trisha you sound very hide bound and prejudiced. If you had looked you would have seen quite a number of interviews - and names and photos of the volunteers involved in the papers and online. You also assume that all those who refused to wear the badge did not agree with values it advertised. That is an assumption that cannot be made without proof.

I assume your later remarks are meant to suggest that all homophobes are elderly, you must live a very sheltered life. The amount of homophobic bullying that occurs among young people and in schools is quite horrific and often reported in all the media.

Looking at the picture, just tells me that the NT suffers from institutionalised ageism, despite its reliance on retired people as volunteers

Chewbacca, I doubt visitors to NT properties are interested in the volenteers views, just the properties ?

Thankfully some of the NT support these ideas. And where have the boring oldfarts volunteers involved in this dispute been hiding? Did they not realise it was a celebration for the NT and LGHBT rights? www.nationaltrust.org.uk/features/exploring-lgbtq-history-at-national-trust-places
Scroll down for a photo- all young people of course- which tells you something!

paddyann surely that is Anniebach's point. It is possible to legislate against discrimination and, indeed, to enforce it, but you cannot change what people's private views or, sometimes, behaviour are.

More importantly people who think against the norm are entitled to their views and to express them, even if you or I do not agree with them. What they cannot do is use their views to incite others to hate or commit violence against a group or with views they do not agree with, nor can we use the same tactics to silence them.

Free speech breaks both ways.

w e cant force them to think Annie but we can make it aginst the law to discriminate and although there are laws it still happens and often its ignored.Everyone shoulld have the right to equal treatment ...I hear young boys using "gay" as an insult and I have spoken to their headmaster about it....lets hope what he had tosay stops them in their tracks

Not sure what you mean when you say "apparently the NT have to allow volunteers to wear anything they want and do what they like? I would have thought that the only thing that a volunteer of the NT has to do is to be easily identifiable as a guide (or whatever their role is) and to do the job that they've volunteered to do. Personally, when I visit a NT property, I'm not interested in the political or sexual persuasion of the lady who checks my membership card or that man in the car park.

Lisalou, if you think marching and telling people to wear badges supporting guys will change people's views on homosexuality then I think you are so mistaken.

Trisher compared gay marches with anti apartheid marches, has Dr King changed the views of racists ?

Dismissing people as old farts is a sure way to express one's tolerance .

There has always been racists, homophobics, wife beaters even thought there has been changes in the laws, always will be . Wrong? yes, but we cannot force people to think as we believe they should think.

maryeliza54, I stand by what I said. The mere fact that you think that we can make value judgements about who it is acceptable or unacceptable to coerce emphasises my point.

Do you condemn those who coerce those who are gay, while treating with less opprobrium those who coerce people who, for example, belong to a particular religion, because that is a personal opinion. The Yazidhis in Iraq, Christians in Pakistan, or Muslims in Britain. Once you make value judgements like that anything is permissible. Just turn it into an 'opinion' and it is OK.

Penstemon reactionary old farts have as much right to be heard and to have their views treated with respect as anyone else. To some you too may appear to be yet another reactionary old fart.

Luckylegs9 In my youth, when all comments were about heterosexuals, there was a phrase quite common at the time, that we didn't mind what people did in private as long as 'they did not do in the streets and frighten the horses'. If we are to treat all with absolute equality this phrase can quite reasonably be applied to all types of gender display.

Issuing a proclamation that everyone who meets the NT public MUST wear a badge to demonstrate that they don't discriminate against anyone for their sexual preferences is insulting to their volunteers. It is like insisting that cafe assistants wear one saying "I do not spit in the coffees I serve".

OF COURSE a proper waitress doesn't spit in the coffee, and her training should have ensured that if she had started off with any such ideas she would know better than to indulge in them. A proper NT volunteer has presumably undergone training, during which the NT policies have been explained, and if they hadn't agreed with them, they would not be there. If they displayed any negativity while on duty, that should be tackled at once.

You don't improve the treatment of one lot of people by treating another lot like naughty children who must wear "I have promised to be good today" labels or be banished from sight.

Thanks Lisalou I worked for many years with someone who didn't come out till he was in his 40s. What his early life was like I can't imagine. Your statements about what gay people want are so true. I am amazed that people haven't watched and listened to the stories being told on the Beeb about the persecution that took place within living memory. And if they have listened I can't understand how they can't appreciate that there are still levels of discrimination and real hatred in our society.