National Trust guides obliged to wear rainbow badges

I was at Knole, Sevenoaks on Thursday before this story brokes, we had quite a long chat with one of the volunteers, but failed to notice whether she was wearing the prescribed lanyard. Knole was of course home to Vita Sackville West and her husband Harold Nicholson who were both bi sexual and Vita was probably more famous for her affairs with women, particularly her association with Virginia Woolf.

The guides are volunteers and I think it should be up to them if they wish to wear the lanyard or not. I'm inclined to agree with Nfk Dumpling, sexuality like religion is a private and personal matter. I don't believe it would preclude the guides in talking about individuals who were gay and lived in what is now a NT property just because they aren't displaying such a badge, after all it would be part of their remit to know about the history and the people who lived in the property and talk about them openly without making judgements on their lifestyles.

Miceelf's post does compute! And is exactly so.Those who agree on here about staff being forced to wear gay pride lanyards would have to agree with staff wearing purple lanyards with crosses/crucifixes on for a Roman Catholic exhibition/ open day or whatever.
No satff should be forced into this or told to 'work behind the scenes'.......I hope they all resign.

The NT have been going down this PC path for years.

Having read the volunteers' rationale for refusing to wear the lanyard I am even more persuaded that the NT is being unreasonable.

I don't even see what the point of it is. (and please don't try to tell me, I've read all the preceding posts and am not convinced there's any merit in the 'pros')

Oh dear! Age shall not wither us, just conserve us in aspic!!

I am a NT member have been for donkeys years and fully support their renewed outlook of moving forward into the modern world and not being stuck in the conservative past. The younger membership will supersede the old relics soon enough and things will settle.

It is a total storm in the teacup, and a shame that people don't have better things to do.

Bit confusing having two threads - as I said on the other one, the NT should just get on with doing their job.

The NT volunteers are providing a free service for the NT without which they would be unable to function.
But they are also a guest in the NT property.
You can't tell a guest what to wear or not to wear.
You can only politely make a request.

I responded on that thread too.

The NT should have core values and all their staff will be aware of that, whether paid or voluntary.

National Trust Values and Behaviours:
^To give people physical and spiritual refreshment, we encourage them to come, visit, explore, respond,
collaborate, join, give, volunteer, take part. Not by preaching, but by suggesting, enabling and inspiring.^

I think they are losing sight of that and are preaching.

It is a total storm in the teacup, and a shame that people don't have better things to do.

I agree, ww, but that's because I think the NT should never have come up with such a stupid idea in the first place.

I simply am at an absolute loss over the reaction to this!!

I am a volunteer, and am requested by the organisation to wear a badge etc that supports the organisations current campaign. This month perhaps for the LGBT community, next month/ year perhaps for the heros of WW1. I am a volunteer, I don't have to turn up. Simples. Why make such a song and a dance? The membership will presumably let it be known at the AGM whether it feels it can support the NT in its campaign, or if not vote with its feet.

The end.

Did you know that you were volunteering for a campaigning organisation before you volunteered, ww? If you did, you knew what you were signing up for.

But the NT isn't really a campaigning organisation unless it's about something, like climate change or fracking, which has a direct effect on their properties. So I think people are seeing the rainbow lanyards as unusual, and surprising, and questioning why the NT is deviating from its normal practice.

I think with its clout it is effective as a campaigning organisation.

Of course things like climate change, countryside management etc sit well with it, but it's members and past owners of their property are composed of a cross section of society. The NT is supporting them as well. If as a member or volunteer you don't think that you can support a particular campaign well so be it, no big deal in the scheme of things.

Well said merlotgran

Why does the NT "moving forward into the modern world" have to involve taking a prurient interest in the very private life of a dead benefactor who seems to be fondly and respectfully remembered by some of the volunteers at what was his house? Is the enjoyment of anything on display at Felbrigg Hall (some years since I visited) likely to be enhanced by knowledge of the former owner's unavowed sexual proclivities?

Is the NT in danger of going the same way as the RSPCA?

Hear, hear grumppa, micelf, merlot and others.

So the NT has backed down
Perhaps they could have thought it through before their heavy handed decision and spared their devoted volunteers, members and themselves a lot of heartache.
I suspect it was a "right on" decision by some over enthusiastic aspiring executive..

I'm told they took Counsel's opinion.

Thank goodness that common sense has prevailed.

It is a total storm in the teacup, and a shame that people don't have better things to do.
But people do have things to do - worthwhile things like volunteering for the NT.

I am glad that they have changed their minds because the NT was in fact in danger of doing the very thing it was so anxious to be seen not to do.
ie discriminating against certain people, forcing them to conform and, if they did not, banishing them from public view.

first sentence should have come up as italics because it was a repeat of someone else's words.

GN - can the tech guys sort that or are they off on a jolly weekend?

So I see from MawBroon's post that, possibly due to public pressure, the NT have had a rethink. It was blindly obvious I would have thought, that rigidly trying to make their volunteers adhere to a prescribed viewpoint is very counter productive. NT volunteers are often of a certain age and of course people often join the NT on retirement so it's fair to say that an older demographic is over represented. There are not so many younger people who embrace the idea of going around old houses, whilst I was aware of the NT when I was younger it wasn't really on my radar and it's only in the last 5 or so years that I have been a member.

I remember when my husband was working he had two gay clients and they expressed how worried they were then about the issue surrounding the first death and not being able to pass their estate unencumbered by Inheritance Tax, I wasn't aware of that at the time and I remember my husband saying he was really pleased when the law was changed to include the Inheritance Tax exemption to those in civil partnerships. However, having said all that my husband is "old school" on marriage insomuch as he thinks it should be between a man and a woman. My catholic parents would also have thought along those lines too. I differ, I have no problem with gay marriage whatsoever and I don't see it is my place as an individual to stand in the way of anyone's else's happiness. Not everybody will hold the present day prescribed viewpoint that certain organisations are trying to promote. What do we do with dissenters then? send them away to be re-educated It's almost paradoxical that in trying to make people recognise the wrongs of the past some are enforcing quite draconian edicts that have the aura of a bygone dictatorial era about them.

Of course the way homosexuality was punished previously was appalling and reading recently about the harsh treatment of gays in countries such as Chechnya is chilling. Personally I think there should be more focus on countries and religions that still seek to harm gay people rather than alienating those who don't wish gay people any harm but perhaps don't subscribe to openly supporting gay issues.

I totally support the LGBT and am glad that we live in these more enlightened times. No-one should be made to feel different or inferior in their private life. I have known people in the past who have suffered dreadful things because of their sexuality. But, -I would also support the right of some people to feel differently.
And it seems completely wrong for the NT to make their volunteers wear this rainbow badge. It's a sort of prejudice the other way around!

Well said TerriBull and Henetha

I think the NT were right to support the commemoration of the change in the law regarding homosexuality. I think the people who refused to wear the lanyards should have had back room jobs for the duration of the campaign. I do not know exactly how wearing rainbow lanyards was put to the volunteers but I hardly think it was done in a confrontational way. It makes me feel that the volunteers are anti gay by taking that stance. That may not be true but thst is the impression.

penstemmon my thoughts exactly.