Women Freemasons

Discussion in 'The Voting Booth' started by Blake Bowden, Sep 7, 2008.

?

Should women be allowed to become Freemasons?

  1. Yes

    21 vote(s)
    8.7%
  2. No

    205 vote(s)
    85.1%
  3. Doesn't matter either way

    15 vote(s)
    6.2%
  1. Beathard

    Beathard Premium Member

    1,627
    18
    0
    No. My wife has no interest either.
     
  2. Jacob Johnson

    Jacob Johnson Registered User

    200
    0
    0
    I think Beathard has hit the nail on the head... The truth is that I think *most* women wouldn't be interested anyway. Sure there was a time in every girl's life when she tried to break into the "NO GURLZ ALLOWEDD" meetings in the treehouse... But we're past that, right?

    For me, Masonry meant a lot, and was exciting and deep and beautiful. I was initiated into the OES, and while it was deep and beautiful, it didn't have the same impact on me; didn't grab me like blue lodge did. So I think it's accurate to say that masonry is really intended FOR MEN and won't have the same impact on women, in the same way that OES is for women and their MM husbands. As an unmarried man, OES didn't fulfill any necessary roles in my life, like the lodge does, and I'd be willing to bet that on the other side of the coin, most women would feel the same way about the Craft degrees as I felt about the OES.
     
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2011
  3. Beathard

    Beathard Premium Member

    1,627
    18
    0
    So mote it ever be.
     
  4. tom268

    tom268 Registered User

    233
    2
    0
    Another poll on women masons? The question is not valid at all, as there are numerous female and mixed-gender grand lodges in the world. So, I voted yes, because it is not possible to "get rid of them". The valid question should be, if we give recognition to them. Recognition is a technical term in masonic language and always includes visitation rights. Therefore I vote No for recognition. But I would vote Yes for acceptance, acceptance of their existence, and a possible way for women to experience freemasonry.

    If female masons have their own GLs, their own lodges, we don't need to argue in ways of fraternity and brotherhood, because there is no intersection of the two organizations. They could live without our acceptance either, but could help the profane to discern rightful lodges from frauds.

    In Europe, female masonry is a growing movement.
     
  5. Jacob Johnson

    Jacob Johnson Registered User

    200
    0
    0
    Tom, that's a good point. In Texas, we "recognize" the Texas Grand Lodge PHA, but we don't have visitation rights (which actually, I disagree with), but the same could be done with legitimate Co-Masonry lodges... BUT how would a MM even find out which lodges of Co-Masonry are legit, and which ones frauds, when the inquiry itself would be a violation of his O:.? how would something that big even work?
     
  6. tom268

    tom268 Registered User

    233
    2
    0
    How are they considered with male unrecognized bodies? How do grand lodges discern regular PHGLs from fraud ones? There has to be a way, and I think, that only can work on grand master's level. I don't know, how that works practically, but I guess, there must be a way to cjeck, if an organization works by the same tenets as we do. I think, a GL has to decide, what ancient landmark - except for male membership, of course - must be served to declare a female GL "real masonry". The great lights and lesser lights? The obligation? Whatever it is, that must be in place to consider one a regular and "acknowledged" (maybe we need a special term for that status) female grand lodge.
     
  7. Beathard

    Beathard Premium Member

    1,627
    18
    0
    I'm not sure I agree with the "they exist, therefore we should recognize them" thought process. Lots of bad things exists that we should not recognize. Who created the co-masonry lodges and why? Were the originally recognized? If not why? If there were, why are the not now? I doubt it is just because of the females. Does anyone have the facts?

    According to wikipedia, not the most academic source, 'Shortly after, on April 4 of the same year, the first Grand Lodge of Co-Freemasonry was established, the Grande Loge Symbolique Écossaise Mixte de France (Grand Lodge of Mixed Scottish Rite Freemasonry of France), which would later become known as the International Order of Co-Freemasonry "Le Droit Humain". This was a radical departure from most other forms of Freemasonry, for not only did the new order not require belief in a Supreme Being (the Grand Orient de France had discarded this requirement in 1877) — it opened its doors to all of humanity who were "... just, upright and free, of mature age, sound judgment and strict morals."'

    No requirement for a belief in a supreme being sounds irregular.
     
    Last edited: Mar 9, 2011
  8. Dave in Waco

    Dave in Waco Premium Member

    764
    2
    0
    The bigger question is how do you recognize a co-masonry lodge if by the very definition it violates the landmark of being a man?
     
  9. tom268

    tom268 Registered User

    233
    2
    0
    To make my POW clear, I'm not a friend of mixed-gender masonry, and I'm not much interested in female masonry, as it does not affect me in any way. I'm even opposed to the OES, as it is "co-masonry through the backdoor", in my opinion. But as the brothers of regular lodges tend to discuss this matter over and over again, it is my opinion that this discussion should base on more than "we are fraternity, not soroity" or "I want to see an initiation of those" *giggle-giggle*".

    The brothers shoul know what they are talking about, not expressing vague feelings on cloudy information. A discussion, if there "should be female masons" does nor make any sense, as there ARE already female masons in the world - without asking us, what a surprise! A discussion about, if we should allow female masons is also nonsense. What should allow mean? Recognition? Or just exaptance of their existence?

    Le Droit Humain is the oldest organization, that initiates females into masonry, founded by former regular masons. But just like male masonry, they started to spread, and the new GLs took in their own regulations. So, from a ritual and symbolic point of view, it is not correct to intend, that they do "something, but surely not masonry", as their founders came from the originally regular and accepted Grand Orient de France.
    Some of the new founded GLs do require the belief in a supreme being, some do not. Some let it to their particular lodges to decide. No female masonic organization was ever recognized. But it is also a fact, that recognition is given or taken from grand bodies from time to time, and the status of recognition is not that straight, as one might think.

    One example from the male masonic world. The United Grand Lodges of Germany, as well as the United Grand Lodge of England, recognize the Grand Lodge of Greece AF&AM. The GL of Scotland recognizes the National Grand Lodge of Greece. As we do of course recognize the GLoS, I can meet a brother of the National GLoG in a scottish lodge, but not in a german or a greec or english lodge. So much for clear recognition.

    So, in summary, I don't advocate for female masonry, but I would like to discuss based on facts, not feelings. I can't understand it at all, that so many brothers want to discuss that issue, as it is seldom discussed by female masons. They can live fine without our benefaction, and do so, at least in Europe.
     
  10. MikeMay

    MikeMay Premium Member

    595
    9
    0
    Freemasonry takes a good man and makes him better...this is one of the first things we tell people when we're asked "What is a Mason or what does Freemasonry do...?" Not sure why a woman would want to be made into a better "man"...but hey, who am I to judge...

    I've have been told there are women masons just as there are clandestine masons...and the TXGL recognizes neither. I may be wrong, but to me, by definition, a woman mason would be a clandestine mason and the obligation addresses that...

    If I am wrong, correct me brothers...
     
  11. tom268

    tom268 Registered User

    233
    2
    0
    You are right, but there are other grand bodies, that were once clandestine, and now are not, like the Prince Hall GLs in many states. So, the status quo is not hammered in stone. There was also the rule of "one GL per country" (or state, for those large federal constructs like USA or Brasil). With the recognition of PHGLs, this rule is no longer unquestionable.

    To un-clandestine an organization IS possible, so the discussion goes into: can or should this be done to female masonry as well?
     
  12. Beathard

    Beathard Premium Member

    1,627
    18
    0
  13. tom268

    tom268 Registered User

    233
    2
    0
    I agree.
     
  14. JohnnyFlotsam

    JohnnyFlotsam Premium Member

    485
    62
    28
    I'm solidly in the "I don't care what they do" camp. I know that I don' want to be compelled to sit in a mixed gender Lodge, but there is one and only one reason for that; it would change the dynamics that make a Masonic Lodge what it is. I like those dynamics (generally speaking) just they way they are. That's not to say that the dynamic in an all-female or in a mixed-gender Lodge would be bad, just different. And again, I like my Lodge the way it is. Had I the opportunity (healed obligations and all that) I might be inclined to visit mixed-gender Lodges, but that would be my choice and it would not be changing something that works just fine for me the way it is now.

    As others have observed, there are women Freemasons. Lots of them. The UGLE notes that there are at least two "women only"
    grand lodges that are, other than that they admit women, "regular" in their practices. That's not the same as "recognized", of course, but there it is.

    I know one woman Mason personally. Her mastery of the Craft would put most of her mainstream brethren to shame. Other than that, her being a Mason, recognized or not, affects us not in the least. So what's with all the anxiety?
     
  15. Beathard

    Beathard Premium Member

    1,627
    18
    0
    How do you know how good her Masonic work is?
     
  16. JohnnyFlotsam

    JohnnyFlotsam Premium Member

    485
    62
    28
    There's a great deal more to our "work" than those few portions of our ritual which we are obliged to keep secret, wouldn't you agree? "Masonic Communication" refers to sitting in Lodge, not the discussion of Freemasonry, it's principles, etc. As long as I don't divulge certain means of recognition, pretty much everything else is fair game.
     
  17. Traveling Man

    Traveling Man Premium Member

    465
    7
    18
    Although I wouldn't publicly acknowledge it; they ain't secret anymore either, as they are found in many publications and of course online. And don't be too surprised to find their modes of recognition are...
     
  18. tom268

    tom268 Registered User

    233
    2
    0
    Keeping silence over the modes of recognition, is, in my opinion, not a matter of secrecy, but of discipline. We swore to hold them secret, and therefore, it is a question, if I am able to hold my oath. It does not matter, if they are publicly known. With keeping the silence, I show to the other brothers, that every part of my oath is dear to me, and that I am trustworthy. If I would not be able to keep silence over something so important, how could I keep the silence over something personal, a brother told me.
     
  19. JohnnyFlotsam

    JohnnyFlotsam Premium Member

    485
    62
    28
    I should think that by now this would be more than obvious (that they are no longer "secret"), so your point about it being more a matter of discipline is well made. I am obliged to not divulge certain things. Other things, many of us chose to not talk about with non-Masons, but with other Masons, recognized or not, such a choice is beyond moot.
     
  20. Traveling Man

    Traveling Man Premium Member

    465
    7
    18
    I have to agree; keeping our obligation is our bond. I was just pointing out the facts. It's is in the same vain as the very subject of this thread. "It is what it is", whether we want to acknowledge these facts or not. Denial is not only a river in Egypt!
     

Share My Freemasonry