The National Trust - is it losing ours?

If you want to find bias and descrimination you can always find it, but all of us when we are expecting to get rejection, often see it where none existed, the simplest remark can be misinterpreted as offensive when that is what you are expecting. I have done it myself, taken deep offence at some remark that with hindsight I realised what entirely innocent. Victim blaming at its finest, we imagine being ignored, we imagine how we were treated when moving into a very "white" area, we are too sensitive, we misunderstand, when the bullies at school called my daughter "n****r nose" it was meant with great affection. Heard it all before.

Kali2

it all fitted in nicely together, over a period of time. On thing led to another.

I am sorry, my first para should have appeared as a quote- thus

The history of the Enclosures is so cruel and so deliberate, to find slave labour for the growing industrialisation* Denying that is just nonsense.

I am also laughing at people saying that people take offence too easily whilst at the same time being apoplectic with offense over pride week.

Anyone who is trying to downplay the discrimination that theworriedwell and her husband experienced is part of the problem.

Your absolute determination to try to convince us that it was just complete coincidence that they were treated badly, is just shocking, in this day and age.

"Theworriedwell", I think you are responding to this with dignity.

Alegrias1, thank you. I think what people miss is they can say black people don't realise it happens to everyone but I experience both so I absolutely know it is different.

Galaxy

I am also laughing at people saying that people take offence too easily whilst at the same time being apoplectic with offense over pride week.

Galaxy that is so true and you made me laugh. Thank you.

Wow, love this thread, off to google Enclosures Act.
Anybody help with the century that Churches sold slaves from England to Barbados?

I have read almost all of this thread and find it interesting, although like in many conversations it has veered off from the original post.

In the last few years it seems every company has jumped on the 'rainbow' marketing, and I find it to be virtue signalling and promotional marketing. Just update your human resources policies to include everyone, and recognize relationships of all sorts. We just had a case in the news where a widower was not granted his partner's pension benefit and had to fight for it. Time for companies to walk the walk, instead of just wearing rainbow shoes.

CanadianGran

I have read almost all of this thread and find it interesting, although like in many conversations it has veered off from the original post.

In the last few years it seems every company has jumped on the 'rainbow' marketing, and I find it to be virtue signalling and promotional marketing. Just update your human resources policies to include everyone, and recognize relationships of all sorts. We just had a case in the news where a widower was not granted his partner's pension benefit and had to fight for it. Time for companies to walk the walk, instead of just wearing rainbow shoes.

Doesn't this just prove that drawing attention to Pride is important because much as we may assume we have triue equality things in some areas still remain discriminatory. If a bit of glitter, facepaint and rainbow flags make people think about it isn't that a good thing?

I’ll ask again.

Why would glitter and face paint make anyone think about gay equality issues?

The connection is..........?

T

MawBe

trisher

I wonder Mawbe if you would be so upset if volunteers had been asked to dress in 1940's outfits or uniforms to commemorate the end of WW2? As long as no one is forcing anyone to do this (and I think that is true for any sort of dress-up) I can't see why it should be so controversial.

Actually I would Trisher - I also resent the “Lucy Worsley School of History” which I see as patronising and dumbing down for intelligent adults.
School parties, maybe (primary) might like to see the dressing up, but I would walk briskly in the opposite direction.

Maw - entirely agree with you. Well said.

I’ll ask again.
Why would glitter and face paint make anyone think about gay equality issues?
The connection is..........?
T...

For tokenism?

Yeh, I started to type that and then thought maybe someone else (you? thank you) ought to say it!

It maybe I was going to type T for Trisher. ?

I can’t remember now. Definitely bedtime?

Peasblossom

I’ll ask again.

Why would glitter and face paint make anyone think about gay equality issues?

The connection is..........?

T

Maybe they've seen a Gay Pride Parade with lots of people who are either LGBT in rainbow colours with face paint and sparkles and fancy costumes and it reminds them of that.

There are lots of photos if you google it.

Should have been "Maybe they've seen a Gay Pride Parade with lots of people who are either LGBT or supporters in rainbow colours with face paint and sparkles and fancy costumes and it reminds them of that."

Or they might have been to Nottinghill and seen lots of people who weren’t gay dressed up in glitter and face paint. Or Glastonbury. Or a a Village fete. Or a children’s party.

Glitter and face paint do not equate with being gay.

Or only in some peoples minds.

Glitter and face paint do not equate with being gay.

It's fun
But perhaps not environmentally frendly

Having read through most of this thread I realise that when people talk about slavery what they actually mean is the slave trade that took people from Africa to the Americas from the 16th to the 19th century. A terrible crime against humanity that was abolished in 1833 by act of parliament.
What people never seem to appreciate is that slavery has (and is still) a way of life for many people throughout history. Some would say that most people who have ever lived have been subjected to some form of slavery. Those who were thrown out of their homes to make way for sheep or grand houses were not free men as we understand the term today. The miners and cotton workers of the industrial revolution were not technically slaves but they were nonetheless subject to inhumane treatment and had little choice about the work they did. The term "modern slavery" is used for people who are trafficked from other countries into Britain and forced to live and work in terrible conditions.
It is right that the history of our historic houses is interpreted correctly but too often what we see is virtue signalling and incorrect. Often it is a crass attempt at attributing 21st century values to people of a different age and culture, or condemning them for not sharing our views.
People can be horrible to other people - always have been always will be- until we find a way of live together in harmony and cherish the hard won freedoms that we have.
IMO spoiling a lovely walk in a beautiful garden by telling me it was built on slavery is no way to do this. Getting peoples backs up will not have the desired effect but there are other, more sensitive and more effective ways to educate people about our past.

As for the other issue, I don't mind if others want to wear loud clothes and use spray paint and glitter, but please don't ask me to join in.

Good posts GrannyRose15. Beautifully put.

I dont think they are asking you to join in.

I don’t understand why the NT explaining the history of the houses and gardens is seen as controversial. If it was built by the wealth of owning plantations and slaves in the Caribbean then that’s part of that particular property and shouldn’t be swept under the carpet. I remember seeing Monty Don’s American Gardens programme where he visited the amazing gardens of Thomas Jefferson which were built by slaves, the guides there explained this very clearly, and they told how some visitors didn’t want to know the facts.

Is it really that much different today, we havn’t had “enslaved people” in the UK for many centuries, the freedom to move and seek a better life has been available to all. The local landowner didnt own you, but if you wanted housing or work you had to toe the line, until very recently tie housing was common as well. Villages have been depopulated over the years even in recent times, to make way for new developments, uprooting the lives of many. Probably the worst depopulation was in Ireland and the Scottish Highlands where many thousand were made destitute, there’s no defending what happened then.

So what has changed, now the state provides support, we still have good and bad employers, still economic changes create large scale unemployment and movement in labour. The government raises tax and uses that to provide a level of support for those that need it.

The big changes came when women got the vote and politicians had to take notice, today women and families get a great deal of state help that simply did not exist 100yrs ago. Still more to be done, the changes in my lifetime have been massive, rightly so.

IMO spoiling a lovely walk in a beautiful garden by telling me it was built on slavery is no way to do this.

Heaven forbid that people's pleasure should be impaired by having to face the ugliness underlying the beauty.