January 26, 2019

"The National Trust should stop emphasising the role of families in the history of stately homes because it 'privileges heterosexual lives'..."

"... one of its most senior curators has said. Rachael Lennon, the Trust’s national public programmes curator, said that 'inherited and partial' narratives about family estates meant that 'same-sex desire and gender diversity have generally been given little space.'"

The UK Telegraph reports.

ADDED: "A soap impression of his wife which he ate and donated to the National Trust...."

101 comments:

David Begley said...

That’s insane.

Coming here from England. Soon.

Bill, Republic of Texas said...

I have no idea what they are talking about. Why link to articles behind a paywall?

Ok maybe WaPo or a common site here but a site in the UK.

What's the point

Birkel said...

Facts don't matter when you're morally right.
-AOC (almost a quote)

She represents the zeitgeist of stupid in the current self-professed elites.

jimbino said...

What's also given less space are the lives of the single and childfree persons among us who pay outsized taxes and fees to support lives and reports about the married and the breeders.

Bob Boyd said...

"same-sex desire and gender diversity have generally been given little space"

If these walls could talk...

gspencer said...

"that 'same-sex desire and gender diversity have generally been given little space'"

Seems best.

Bob Boyd said...

"same-sex desire and gender diversity have generally been given little space"

In other words, they kept them in the closet.

rhhardin said...

Égalité, Fraternité, Liberacé

iowan2 said...

They keep showing the winners of the Boston Marathon, and they always have legs. The obvious intent of ignoring the handicapped with with no legs.

Ann Althouse said...

"I have no idea what they are talking about. Why link to articles behind a paywall?... What's the point"

You can see enough of it to get the point. That's all I saw? If there had been more to see I probably wouldn't have read it.

It's more that a tweet would give you.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Meade said...

"In other words, they kept them in the closet.

In a “jar with the realities of history.”

jv said...

The whole operation of preserving and worshipping rich people's old houses is not "inclusive" or "diverse" in the slightest.

Mattman26 said...

The next time someone conservative tells you that a chief goal of liberalism is to undermine the traditional family -- and the role of the traditional family as the building block of a healthy society -- be sure and tell them they're nuts.

Anonymous said...

spergino: What's also given less space are the lives of the single and childfree persons among us who pay outsized taxes and fees to support lives and reports about the married and the breeders.

I know, it's so unfair. You derive no benefit at all from other people reproducing.

If only your parents had been as enlightened as you.

Ken B said...

Those estates passed down from gay couples to gay children over centuries get too little attention.

Bill, Republic of Texas said...

I kind of understood the complaint. But what was the proposed solution? Maybe if more of the article was available I could draw a conclusion.

I guess Althouse is right. It's more like a Tweet. Tweets aren't designed for discussion only as markers of your tribe.

Conservatives will roll their eyes and liberals will feel victimized.

Freeman Hunt said...

The commenters over there are awfully excited about it.

Anonymous said...

In enjoyed this exchange in the comments:

"When will all this bloody nonsense stop."

"It will only stop when someone stops them. It's getting like Berlin the the 20,s but from the top down."

"Sorry, I’m no historian but how does this even remotely compare to Berlin in the 1920s?"

"It doesn't. Even in 1920s Berlin perversions weren't given the backing of law as is the case in 21st century Britain."


Unfortunately I don't think the bloody nonsense stops until heads start getting cracked. If you don't tell the nutjobs to fuck off right from the start - instead of letting them take over your institutions because you don't want to be mean or intolerant and have better things to do than tussle with a dedicated, loud, aggrieved and energetic activist minority - then you cede everything to them.

Once they're entrenched there's no stopping the crazy except by extreme means. That there are a lot more of "you" than there is of "them" won't decide or fix anything.

Sebastian said...

What else is new?

The left has been trying to "stop emphasizing the role of families" for a couple of centuries now.

Family ties always stood in the way of enlightened ideology, family inheritance obstructed true equality, children loving their parents meant they wouldn't love the state enough.

Modern identity politics just gives the old saw a new twist.

It's "terribly sad."

Temujin said...

You don't need to see much to note that this is just another in a long line of attacks on history and tradition. These people won't be done until all history and tradition is outlawed. But not just outlawed. To be made to be forgotten, never to be spoken about, verboten. Then re-written in their image of what's correct. (that image depends on who's making the law).

But they won't stop there. We're in a race to see who can be the most Lenin-like in today's western countries. Listen to our aspiring Democrat Presidential hopefuls. They are playing 'top this' with socialist ideas (trying to stay ahead of Ocasio-Cortez, making that the standard). And, the bonus is that they get positive reviews for it from our media.

So there's that.

iowan2 said...

I kind of understood the complaint. But what was the proposed solution?

This

Why don't interviewers ever ask that simple question????? Income inequality. That is one of the hot buttons all the Dem hopefuls identify as a problem (created by President Trump is the unspoken reason) but they never have a plan to address the invented problem. AOC says nobody should have a $billion. Never states her plan to put a stop to it. I saw one person ask how much is too much, she changed topics,then ignored the question about who decides.

Bob Boyd said...

Now that I think about it, they never talk about same-sex desire or gender diversity on 'This Old House' either...what's up with that?

bagoh20 said...

You mean to tell me that not everybody is heterosexual? I had no idea. Nobody ever talks about that. Is this a new thing?

Bob Boyd said...

I don't know about the National Trust, but Monty Python and Benny Hill have dealt with this topic extensively.

bagoh20 said...

I like cheap wine. People like me are constantly denigrated. We're told that we are not good enough, that we're stupid, and that we should stick with our own kind. I want my children to grow up in a world that tolerates and honors their heritage as much as everybody else. No, I demand it!

Michael said...

"Privilege " as a verb makes my skin crawl.

AlbertAnonymous said...

More BS.

Honestly some of the most “stately” homes I’ve ever seen are the homes owned by homosexual couples. Dual income no kids and an eye for really nice things.

Wince said...

"The National Trust should stop emphasising the role of families in the history of stately homes..."

Are "soap impressions" next?

She's well acquainted with the touch of the velvet hand like a lizard on a window pane.
The man in the crowd with the multi-colored mirrors on his hobnail boots.
Lying with his eyes while his hands are busy working overtime.

A soap impression of his wife which he ate and donated to the National Trust
.

Mary Beth said...

The problem isn't that they want to give a voice to members of the families other than the ones who maintained the line by providing descendants, it's that modern people are setting themselves up to judge the reasons and motivations of people who are long dead. I doubt they're going to have a lot of diaries saying, "I shall not take a wife because I only love men!" It's going to be guesswork and assumption, with a motivation to come to a specific conclusion.

Fernandinande said...

Same-sex desire and gender diversity have generally had no association at all with preserving historic houses.

This poor oppressed little homosexual girl would feel important if everyone else wasn't so darned mean.

Bob Boyd said...

The senior curator climbed to the cold, tiny attic of the stately old mansion. It was empty but for a dust-covered pair of sensible shoes. She put her face in her hands and wept.

Meade said...

LOL

Ralph L said...

We need to hear more about Britain's Stately Homos, said Quentin Crisp.

A lot of estates passed to nephews. If they had proof the 2nd Duke did it, you know they'd say it, and often they aren't that careful.

hombre said...

It’s a race between feminists, homosexual activists and Islamists to see who can destroy western civilization. Once it’s done, regardless of who wins the race, Islamists will take care of the feminists and homosexuals.

Annie said...

And yet heterosexual sex creates most homos. The 'others', via a turkey baster, still need something from both sexes.
Does this person not know the vast majority - 97% + - are heterosexual, so the vast majority of any family home are heterosexual, especially old family estates passed down the generations? But if you were a martian coming here for the first time, you'd think at least half were gay, going by our television, media, and political hacks.

Ralph L said...

Heterosexuality was the least of their privileges, unless you bring in droit du seigneur, which seemed to be largely voluntary in Britain, or do we need #OneAlso?

jimbino said...

@Angle-Dyne

I know, it's so unfair. You derive no benefit at all from other people[sic] reproducing.

If only your parents had been as enlightened as you.


Be informed that I've never had moral or legal responsibility for the decisions of my parents, that ad hominem and tu quoque aren't rational arguments, and that I wish that Ann Althouse had an easy way to eliminate ignorant posts such as yours.

The externalities (you say "benefits") I get from the rampant breeding of others clearly include global warming, bad water and air, dying coral, flora and other fauna, forest fires, erosion, lack of lebensraum and endless traffic congestion. It wouldn't be so bad if I weren't forced to pay even more on average than the breeders do for all the induced misery.

policraticus said...

Oh, for fuck’s sake.

stephen cooper said...

My favorite parts of most novels --- and many of my favorite poems - are about relatively unattractive people, and their sentimental or passionate view of the world.
One thing I do not like about old movies is how they always picked beautiful actresses to play women who were supposedly unattractive in the plotline (Olivia de Havilland in the Heiress, Ernest Borgnine's girlfriend in Marnie, Dorothy McGuire in several movies).
The TCM guys - Clooney, Mankiewicz, et al., always noted this in the intros to the movies.
I don't watch many new movies it is probably the same today.

Unknown said...

Well, Jimbino certainly has done nothing to dispel the old saw about gay people hating humanity and those "breeders" that allow the species to survive. It's too bad that we don't just all kill ourselves, is that right?

And how far away is that from the typical leftist solution: "if you undesirables won't all just kill yourselves, allow us to forcibly help you! Gulag or Auschwitz, your choice, I'm feeling generous today!"

I would remind Jimbino to read up on Ernest Rohm and what happened to him in the great socialist leftist paradises.

--Vance

jimbino said...

@unknown ("Vance)

I would remind Jimbino to read up on Ernest Rohm and what happened to him in the great socialist leftist paradises.

I would remind Vance to read up on Jesus, St Paul and other famous never-married non-breeders, who famously abstained from promoting both marriage and breeding. Assuming that any one of us is/was gay is more than stupid.

ken in tx said...

"When will this nonsense end?" I'll tell you how it ended the last time--with a hanging. During the mid-1700s, London society was taken over by something called The Macaroni Club. It was not a real organized club. It was a group of wealthy, aristocratic, effeminate fops, who adopted extreme clothing styles, outrageous campy behavior, and Italian food (hence Macaroni). They became dominant in London high society.

It ended when the British Army Court Martialed and hung an officer for having an open affair with one of them. Their influence tended to wane after that.

BTW, this is origin of the phrase "stuck a feather in his hat and called it macaroni" being in Yankee Doodle.

Professional lady said...

Before I went to Greece in 2017 I reacquainted myself with that country's history, concentrating on ancient history. I listened to some lectures on Sparta which was for a while the most powerful city state until it fell into decline. It seems its policy of encouraging and expecting homosexual male relationships as well as it's infanticide of newborns that were determined to be weak or undersized caused such a decrease in its population that it became unable to field an effective military. Thus, its decline. Food for thought.

Mark said...

If it is impossible for two males or two females to reproduce only between themselves, i.e. create family, don't blame the National Trust.

Big Mike said...

He's right, though. It is a privilege to be married to a good woman.

Mark said...

Poor King Henry IX with his six husbands, each of whom he had to divorce or have their heads chopped off because his husbands would not produce him a male heir.

Larry J said...


Blogger Birkel said...
Facts don't matter when you're morally right.
-AOC (almost a quote)

She represents the zeitgeist of stupid in the current self-professed elites.”

Boschevik Barbie is a prime example of educational malpractice. We should all be thankful that ignorance has so mass, because if it did, she and her ilk would collase into Earth destroying singularities.

Jay Elink said...

Meade said...
"In other words, they kept them in the closet.

In a “jar with the realities of history.”
**********
Placed in a "Cabinet of Curiosities".

Skeptical Voter said...

The love that dare not speak its name now just won't shut up. And it absolutely will not stop getting in your face.

Ingachuck'stoothlessARM said...

stately homes caused an increase in heterosexual behavior, not bro-manse

Jay Elink said...

jimbino said:
"The externalities (you say "benefits") I get from the rampant breeding of others clearly include global warming, bad water and air, dying coral, flora and other fauna, forest fires, erosion, lack of lebensraum and endless traffic congestion. It wouldn't be so bad if I weren't forced to pay even more on average than the breeders do for all the induced misery."

************************
You are unaware that you and billions of others alive today have much longer and healthier lives, and far better living standards, than even kings and queens had 150 years ago.
Bad air in America? Pollution by all standards is way, way down from fifty years ago. Virtually all of modern medicine---drugs, procedures, diagnostic tools, therapies---were invented in the last 40 years.

Bad water? Unless you live in Flint Michigan you've likely never have drunk any. All the blather about global warming is just that...blather. The Earth has warmed and cooled over its 4 billion year history. It's been on a gneral warming trend for the last 12,000 years. Humans have very little to do with it.

There must be a lot of Kool-Aid in that bad water you're drinking.

Unknown said...

"same-sex desire and gender diversity have generally been given little space"

Same-sex desire ...etc have generally occupied a minute amount of space in society, but seem to occupy far more space in the public conscience. The vast majority of people are heterosexual and form heterosexual unions which create families, what a shock. Heterosexuality is the norm, linguistic trick words like heteronormative only serve to marginalize the normal.

Anonymous said...

spergino: Be informed that I've never had moral or legal responsibility for the decisions of my parents...

Never said that you did. I stated that, by your lights, your parents, in producing you, were not as enlightened as you are about the moral superiority of not reproducing.

...that ad hominem and tu quoque aren't rational arguments, and that I wish that Ann Althouse had an easy way to eliminate ignorant posts such as yours.

So I'd recommend working on your own reading comprehension an knee-jerk hysterical straw-man "counter-arguments" before jumping in and mischaracterizing anybody else's.

The externalities (you say "benefits") I get from the rampant breeding of others clearly include global warming, bad water and air, dying coral, flora and other fauna, forest fires, erosion, lack of lebensraum and endless traffic congestion. It wouldn't be so bad if I weren't forced to pay even more on average than the breeders do for all the induced misery.

To all of which you contribute by existing. And I guess you're too stupid to understand that the rampant illegal immigration into the U.S. you support encourages the irresponsible breeding of net tax-eaters here you deplore. (Look at the stats on the TRF of illegals in First World countries.) You think it's great when other taxpayers have to subsidize your labor costs via the welfare state; you're just too stupid to understand that you'll end up having to support their children.

Anyway, can't you find some libertarian paradise to live in, where there's no government abusing you with tax policies advantaging "breeders"?

The Cracker Emcee Refulgent said...


“I would remind Vance to read up on Jesus, St Paul and other famous never-married non-breeders, who famously abstained from promoting both marriage and breeding. Assuming that any one of us is/was gay is more than stupid

Equating yourself to Jesus or St.Paul, in any context, is more than stupid. Perhaps you could turn that bad water into MD 20/20.

William said...

Random thoughts on stately homes: I saw Downton Abbey. It was fun to watch but had as much to do with reality as Blandings Castle in P.G. Wodehouse.......I have read that Randolph Churchill, Winston's father, caught syphilis from one of the maids and not a prostitute. If so, who is the victim in this tale of sexual exploitation?....... Versailles is the ultimate in stately homes. I have read that the entire cost of its building was equal to about the cost of two months' campaigning in the Low Countries, Versailles was the better investment for Louis XIV......Then and now there's a lot of criticism to those who erect stately mansions, but there are dumber and less enduring things to blow your money on. This is the first time I have heard the owners criticized for being heterosexuals. It's a new angle of attack, but the rich prick angle is far more effective.

Drago said...

jimbino: "The externalities (you say "benefits") I get from the rampant breeding of others clearly include global warming, bad water and air, dying coral, flora and other fauna, forest fires, erosion, lack of lebensraum and endless traffic congestion"

Your parents were the "others".

Bay Area Guy said...

We are all cocksuckers now.

Fernandinande said...

Disclaimer: I had a "National Trust" sticker on my motorbike to indicate some sort of membership or privileges, but it was in the 1980's, long before there were any BLTs in Old Blightly.

YoungHegelian said...

'same-sex desire and gender diversity have generally been given little space.'

Hey, Winston Churchill bucked the trend. He knew what role gender diversity had played in building the traditions of the Royal Navee. See, everyone thought that Ol' Winnie was insulting the RN with his Rum, Buggery, & the Lash comment, but it was not so.

What he was really doing was praising the RN for its ahead of its time policies on same gender sexuality, alternative sexualities (BDSM), and its use of consciousness expanding substances.

It's true. I read it on the internet.

Birkel said...

jimbino:

You should curse all those excess people who cursed you with modern medicine and other conveniences unavailable to prior generations.

As with all Leftist Collectivists, you fail to recognize the dynamism required over the last 250 years that was required for you to experience the world as it stands now. Your inability to recognize that you are so pampered as to complain about the great fortune you now experience is sad. And I mean sad in a non-sarcastic way.

You are pathetic.

Ingachuck'stoothlessARM said...

Heinous atrocities, such as heterosexual reproduction, are often part of the history of historic landmarks, as we see with the Great Pyramid of Tenochtitlan, the Tower of London, etc.

Howard said...

this post helps dull the pain of trump betraying his deplorable base. be sure to thank ann and meade for softening the blow by hitting the bezos button on your way out

YoungHegelian said...

In honor of Churchill's famous quotation on the traditions of the Royal Navy, I've always wanted to create a mixed drink called a "Rum Buggery". Instead of having a little folding paper umbrella, though, I wanted there to be a little plastic arm holding a whip stuck in every glass.

It might sell in leather bars...

Marcus said...

"It ended when the British Army Court Martialed and hung an officer for having an open affair with one of them. Their influence tended to wane after that."

Pictures are hung. Men are hanged (to death). Unless it is in effigy. Then they are hung. Past tense after the gallows is used? Either is appropriate. I enjoy pointing this out, like a junior high student who just learned this in English class. Now, bring on the sophomoric jokes.

THEOLDMAN

Lewis Wetzel said...

Blaming the existence of people who are unlike ourselves for all the ills of the world seems childish.

Anonymous said...

Jay Elink: There must be a lot of Kool-Aid in that bad water you're drinking.

Nah. "Kool-Aid" suggests he's adopted some internally conherent (even if entirely crazy) political philosophy or world view. To the contrary, our jimbino is essentially just a resentment-filled snot-nosed kid who's in a chronic state of rage at not being the center of the universe.

So he presents here with a big whiny mishmash of incompatible philosophies. E.g, he waxes Randian and glibertarian on "free markets" and individual liberty when he's defending his own free-loading on existing welfare states, then goes all retard-with-a-Grievance-Studies-degree when he wants to get his "I hate whitey" freak on, or turns into Mr. Green Avenger or LGBTQXYZ Man when he wants to rage about the oppressive horror that is Amerikkka, or....in other words, he's an angry snot-nosed kid who doesn't really know what he's angry about.

(As is typical for that type, he's read the wikipedia page on logical fallacies and likes to throw the terms around, even if he doesn't quite understand what they mean.)

Ingachuck'stoothlessARM said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

Marcus: Pictures are hung. Men are hanged (to death).

Thank you Marcus. Pet peeve of mine. Irrationally bothered by it almost as much as the epidemic of people writing "loose" when they mean "lose".

(Yeah, I know..."get a life, Angle-Dyne...")

iowan2 said...

The externalities (you say "benefits") I get from the rampant breeding of others clearly include global warming, bad water and air, dying coral, flora and other fauna, forest fires, erosion, lack of lebensraum and endless traffic congestion

Every item on your list has improved over time, as the population grew. Including traffic. As compared to cites like London, and Rome. Except Lebensraum, a practice associated with Nazism

Laslo Spatula said...

Rachael Lennon has evidently consumed the soap impression of history and is now in the process of donating it to the National Trust.

I am Laslo.

Laslo Spatula said...

Ah. I just read the thread and saw EDH was already there at 9:59.

In my defense, I am pushing the defecation aspect more to the fore.

I am Laslo.

chickelit said...

Why single out the British aristocracy for scorn? Why emphasize biological families in the history of the world? It just privileges heterosexuals everyone.

I hope this woman has her prize turkey baster enshrined on a rack over her mantlepiece. What a piece of work.

Gahrie said...

same-sex desire and gender diversity have generally been given little space.'

Given that the two behaviors represent less than 5% of the population...just how much space should they be given?

Gahrie said...

Assuming that any one of us is/was gay is more than stupid.

Not when you repeatedly use an insult commonly and usually used by gays to refer to heterosexuals.

Rusty said...


Blogger Howard said...
"this post helps dull the pain of trump betraying his deplorable base. be sure to thank ann and meade for softening the blow by hitting the bezos button on your way out"

Shhhh. Calm down and put your little pecker away. Pay attention a wall is going to happen.

Darrell said...

consumed the soap impression of history

What does this mean?

Jupiter said...

Where's rhardin when you need him? He needs to come along and explain the problem is not the National Trust, it's those Soap-Opera Womyns. Sorry, Little Rachael, but the SOWs don't like to watch gay porn. You and your "partner" cavorting on the lawn of a Great Estate are not their idea of watchable content. You can probably find some cis-het guys who will take an interest, if you and the Mrs. are at all good-looking. Of course, chances are you're not, aren't they.

loudogblog said...

What's the point of discussing historical things if you don't want to talk about the fact that things were different back then? That's what makes studying history important and interesting.
Things actually were different in the past and we need to examine that to appreciate the differences between the past and the present.

Darrell said...

Her views would carry more weight if she dressed like an androgynous urban street clown like the new Doctor Who. Gurning and hand waving optional.

todd galle said...

As a museum curator myself (over 27 years - just checked earlier this week for retirement purposes), this is just painful, for a number of reasons. Standards of conduct change through time - look at James I. Personal and political smear jobs aren't new - research Edward Hyde for an example. This movement to push PC history over what used to be 'normal' is killing my industry. Regular people don't want to pay to be told that they are bigots and Neanderthals when touring an historic house because the people who built and lived there weren't an acceptable sexual minority. I give special tours of my historic site, and often the people who pay through the nose for a 'curator's tour' are gay couples - think decorative arts stereotypes. I talk about gay 17th Century people when someone brings it up, but it's not pertinent to where I work, we've no record of homosexuality. We do have a record of slavery, which we recognize and discuss in our interpretation.

Ralph L said...

I enjoy pointing this out, like a junior high student who just learned this in English class. Now, bring on the sophomoric jokes.
THEOLDMAN

Don't be fresh, you senior citizen.

For some reason, Lesbianism and interior decoration don't seem to go together. Maybe gardening does.

Gordon Scott said...

Among other things, the National Trust rents out some of their properties. If you want to stay in an old fisherman's croft on the shore of one of the Scottish lochs, you can, and it's fairly inexpensive. They have properties all over the UK from castles to little huts.

In the listing for a little cottage in County Down, there's this advisory: "there is a working sheep pen behind the cottage. It is used for a maximum of 8 days a year for 2 hours a day. Also for 1 night a year the sheep will be kept in the pen. We do not know which days in the year this will be but if you are concerned we can contact the property for further information."

This is northern Ireland, of course, but a lot of former Scots live in NI, and there's this thing about Scotsmen and sheep....

Paco Wové said...

"What's the point of discussing historical things if you don't want to talk about the fact that things were different back then?"

Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past. — G. Orwell.

You re-invent the past to push your ideology. That's the point.

William said...

If the Pharaohs had been into simple, unpretentious funerals, would anyone want to visit Egypt.

Paco Wové said...

Like 1984, The Whig Interpretation of History wasn't intended as an instruction manual, but here we are.

William said...

Cromwell kicked the Irish off the lands they owned. He distributed those lands to the soldiers in his New Model Army. Those soldiers didn't want to stay in Ireland. The sold their land parcels back to their aristocratic officers. Those aristocrats erected fine new homes for themselves. These beautiful homes were hated by the Irish as symbols of their oppression. During the Troubles many of these stately homes were torched. I believe the current thinking is that these homes were built with Irish labor and skill and are as Irish as anything in Ireland. They are representative of something ambiguous about Irish history, but who gives a shit about the sexual orientation of their owners.

mandrewa said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
mandrewa said...

I find myself thinking of "United States of Tara." That is a rather remarkable TV series whose protagonist is an amazingly good actress who portrays someone with a multiple-personality disorder. (I'll skip the question of where there really is such a thing as multiple-personality disorder.)

The show also explored sexuality without making it look especially good. In one of the episodes they briefly showed a homosexual encounter with a stranger in a park. Or actually they didn't show the act, but they gave enough information to show that it had happened and something of the circumstances.

I thought at the time, "My god, you guys are going to get yourselves cancelled!" and of course they were.

The same show had previously shown unromanced heterosexual acts, again not explicitly, but with enough information so that we knew what is going on.

I thought that was bold and decades ago it would have been taboo. But I knew the people making the show would not get in trouble for it. But homosexuality? I immediately knew they were in trouble.

The threat to the show would have originated in Hollywood itself, and not, if it isn't clear, from people opposed to homosexuality.

So I'm somewhat cynical that this business for the National Trust in England has anything much to do with accurately portraying the past. No, it's about deprecating families and male/female relationships and emphasizing homosexuality and finding it everywhere while covering up whatever is uncomfortable about that reality.

todd galle said...

William,
That stuff started in Elizabethan times, then in 1641, then in 1690, ad infinitum. The 20th C. Troubles were merely a continuation of the same. I fear that is where the US is heading, with Liberals and Conservatives becoming the Catholics and Protestants.

ALP said...

The phrase "Stately Home" conjures up an image of terribly repressed and uptight people. Thus not giving any perceived deviance 'space' sounds about right.

n.n said...

Sex, gender, and even life are negotiable for the sake of social progress.

Molly said...

I guess nobody else is troubled by this, but is it:

A. 1. He made a soap impression of his wife; 2. He ate that soap impression; 3. He then donated a regurgitated or excreted form of the soap impression to a museum.

or

B. 1. He made a soap impression of his wife; 2. He donated that soap impression to a museum ; 3. He then (breaking into the museum? or stealing it from a display? or otherwise retrieving the soap impression from the museum?) he ate the soap impression.

or

C. Or is there some grammatical error in the sentence, so that 1. He ate his wife and he made a soap impression of her (in some order); 2. He donated the soap impression to a museum.

BJM said...

This is mindbogglingly disingenuous, a National Trust curator would know that entailment preserved the "stately homes", not primogeniture (aka gender preference). Once entailment ended and post-WWI massive land taxes levied, hundreds of stately homes went to ruin, or to auction.

The Brits have never much cared who was snogging whom as long as it doesn't scare the horses in the street.

Howard said...

Rusty ready to believe virtual wall paid by virtual pesos is a winning bigly Triumphant.

Oso Negro said...

It's fun to imagine what life would be like today if we had set about mainstreaming a different sexual deviancy 40 years ago. Voyeurism, for example. By now you might be considered a bigot if you closed your curtains at night. Pederasty, for another. You could be considered a hater if you didn't allow your children to be dressed up in rubber socks and buttered up like corn. Pony play. All children could be required to wear appropriate costumes to school to help others feel part of the mainstream.

Michael McNeil said...

If it is impossible for two males or two females to reproduce only between themselves, i.e. create family, don't blame the National Trust.

It'll be happening inside 10 years, is my prediction.

West Texas Intermediate Crude said...

It's called heteronormative for a reason.

Gahrie said...

If it is impossible for two males or two females to reproduce only between themselves, i.e. create family, don't blame the National Trust.

It'll be happening inside 10 years, is my prediction.


What's funny to me, is women think this will be good for them.

Nichevo said...

Gahrie said...
If it is impossible for two males or two females to reproduce only between themselves, i.e. create family, don't blame the National Trust.

It'll be happening inside 10 years, is my prediction.

What's funny to me, is women think this will be good for them.

1/27/19, 9:51 AM


Lyrane never sees Kalonia coming.

tim in vermont said...

How did the Cultural Revolution end in China? Were there a lot of dead? Why are we better than them?

In 1981, the Party declared that the Cultural Revolution was "responsible for the most severe setback and the heaviest losses suffered by the Party, the country, and the people since the founding of the People's Republic". - Wikipedia

The trick, I guess, is to accumulate enough power during the cultural revolution so that you can declare it over and make it stick.