# Women Freemasons



## Blake Bowden

Should women be allowed to become Freemasons?


----------



## rhitland

Masonry teaches us how to Master our own lifes, square our actions and be better people should this be limited to men, do women not deserve the same light men deserve. This fraternity was designed for the minds of men with operative tools being the majority of its symbols but we should not think women would not understand it the same way or better than men. This world can be a wicked place and such a rough and rugged ride sometimes and anything that we can provide each other to ease our pains and troubles, to me we should share; If Masonry taught me anything, anything at all it was that knowledge is to be shared and expounded upon not hidden and kept from someone. The truth is starring us right in the face our beloved S&C is an ancient symbol for the unity or joining of male and female, masculine and feminine but as the saying goes the "Lips of Wisdom are Open to the Ears of Undertanding" Our fraternity is so spiritual so deep and so profound it is our duty to share it, the times of excluding women from things that are of the greater good are long gone and we should catch up in our fraternity. I know right now it is illegall but I keep my hopes up Masonry one day will see the light on this issue. Masonry holds so many sublime truths it is just hard for me to believe it was meant to last just for men.?


----------



## JTM

it's a fraternity.  it would change everything to allow women in.


----------



## Nate C.

That kinda goes against the whole obligation, doesn't it?


----------



## rhitland

revising the words in the rituals and obligation would be the easy part as Masonry has done so many times in the past to suit the growth of society, changing minds is the tough one though.


----------



## Wingnut

I can, and have, made a good arguement for allowing women into Masonry, but in the end it would change Masonry.  Men behave different when there are women present.  The principles of Masonry are open to anyone, membership in the Fraternity is not...


----------



## ravickery03

blake said:


> Should women be allowed to become Freemasons?



Co-Masonry in America and Europe doesn't thrive any better than "masculine" Freemasonry (sometimes worse).  I do feel that women only Freemasonry would be acceptable, but due to the fact that I am a traditionalist, I resist the charges to allow women.

Or it might be because I am a jerk.


----------



## rhitland

In the times our frat was conceived it would have been laughed out of existence if it would have allowed women. Women where still rarley even let out of the house,it was not accepted even to carry conversation with women in public; so it only make since that if "they" wanted the sacred knowledge to be preserved they had to make it men only. In Egyptian times and earlier women where allowed to recieve the mystic rites to enlighten them if found worthy same as men. Most of our symbols, lessons and acts in the degrees have been taken from rituals practiced since the begining of time so do we now get to choose the truths we are comfortable with from these ancient rituals? I know this is not a corner we will turn in our near future but it is coming the Eastern Star was the first step, The thing I despise about Masonry is the fact I recieved the light I did from the 3 wonderful degrees I had and know my wife and daughter can never experience it.


----------



## Bill Lins

rhitland said:


> The thing I despise about Masonry is the fact I recieved the light I did from the 3 wonderful degrees I had and know my wife and daughter can never experience it.



That's why there's Eastern Star & Rainbow. And you can participate with them!


----------



## JTM

As a Christian, I'll put it this way.  

actually. as a philosopher, i'll put it this way.  regardless as to whether you believe in what happened in the garden of eden as to be truth or not, the people that came up with those "stories" were no fools at all.  they were converted to jewish tradition for a reason.  based on that, i'll continue my post.

god made "man" in his own image.  in thinking of the "God" of the old testament, words like "fierce," "jealous," and etc. come to mind.  in jewish traditions, he is called the "LION OF THE TRIBE OF JUDAH.  Master Masons are known to give the grip of the LION OF THE TRIBE OF JUDAH.  Men are men.  They are made in his image.  

for the majority, our tradition and ritual is based of the same teachings.  for a women to learn from the same morals and set of teachings is OKAY.  however, it will NOT apply to her in the same manner.  


Morris made the Eastern Star with this in mind.  the order has not been nearly as successful as it has for no little reason: while the mason men learned about Boaz in the EA degree, the women learn about Ruth, his wife.  This same thing continues through Adah, Esther, Ruth, Martha, and Electa.

while it may be considered sexist or anything like that at all, it is not "wrong" to think that it is okay that a man, with his own nature, desires, and needs learn something in a different way and viewpoint than a woman.

whether you believe god did this, or whether you accept the general scientific knowledge of sociology... men and women are different and need different lessons that NEED to be taught in different circumstances, from different people, and in different ways.  

/rant.

please keep in mind this is my interpretation of things and my way of thinking.  take it for whatever you will.  it's just me.


----------



## Blake Bowden

My wife is a member of the Betas and even though it's exclusively for Women, I'm perfectly content with that. I think Freemasonry should be for Men only and my wife agrees. We are both Christians, yet we are members of various Brotherhoods/Sisterhoods.


----------



## rhitland

Brother Blake I have never heard of the Betas, do they have an initiation processes and degrees like Masonry? 
If there is a website for them could you shoot it to me.


----------



## cmoreno85tx

I have mixed feelings about this.  I voted no , but would accept it if it did happen. I would hold no resentment towards any of the women joining the Lodge and would treat them as Brothers... or Sisters.....or whatever we would call them. I do feel however that a "Fraternity" should be for men only and a "Sorority" for women only. I would not try to join a sorority just like I would not want to join Women's Only Freemasonry. I think that both sexes should respect those boundaries. 

And another thing on Womens Only Freemasonry, I saw a Documentary where a WO Freemason said that unlike Modern Freemasonry their rituals had never been leaked or exposed.  So this would mean, I guess, that they have different ritual, signs and grips?  Well then how can they call themselves Freemasons?


----------



## Blake Bowden

rhitland said:


> Brother Blake I have never heard of the Betas, do they have an initiation processes and degrees like Masonry?
> If there is a website for them could you shoot it to me.




http://www.betasigmaphi.org/index.shtm


----------



## Texas_Justice85

they can try but they wouldnt make it past the door of the ea degree


----------



## cpmorgan2

Why change everything that has been devoted to man. I am not sexist, I truly believe woman deserve a lot of respect, admiration and freedom. However...Baseball, basketball, soccer, hockey, government, all these started by men, now controlled by women. Why can't we have this, why do we have to give this. It was started by men, A BROTHERHOOD, A FRATERNITY. I took upon myself a solomn obligation and I will not, ever deviate from it.


----------



## jcbonds

I dont have any problems with women. Im not sexist. But free masonry was started by men and should stay men. i agree that women have rights just like us but cant us guys have anything to ourselves? i mean women have taken just about everything over and i feel that masonry should be left to us guys. eastern star and rainbow girls are always looking for new members just as we are. i agree with cpmorgan2 i took all three obligations and i intend on deviating from them.


----------



## Texas_Justice85

then we would be called the Lions Club


----------



## JTM

jcbonds said:


> i agree with cpmorgan2 i took all three obligations and i intend on deviating from them.



you mean, not deviating?


----------



## davidterrell80

I would allow each lodge the right to set policy regarding membership--to be masculine, feminine, or mixed-gender--with the exception of special, general lodges like the Lodge of Research. 

That said, I also favor specialty lodges--those who, per their bylaws, can limit their membership to a those engaged in a particular occupation (police, firefighters, etc) or graduates of a particular school or members of a particular unit (military traveling lodges). The gender aspect simply becomes another criteria under which masons could form a lodge.


----------



## Beathard

No. My wife has no interest either.


----------



## Jacob Johnson

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.


----------



## Beathard

So mote it ever be.


----------



## tom268

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.


----------



## Jacob Johnson

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?


----------



## tom268

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.


----------



## Beathard

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 Ã‰cossaise 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) &mdash; 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.


----------



## Dave in Waco

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?


----------



## tom268

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.


----------



## MikeMay

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...


----------



## tom268

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_?


----------



## Beathard

No


----------



## tom268

I agree.


----------



## JohnnyFlotsam

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?


----------



## Beathard

How do you know how good her Masonic work is?


----------



## JohnnyFlotsam

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.


----------



## Traveling Man

JohnnyFlotsam said:


> As long as I don't divulge certain means of recognition, pretty much everything else is fair game.



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...


----------



## tom268

Traveling Man said:


> they ain't secret anymore either, as they are found in many publications and of course online.



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.


----------



## JohnnyFlotsam

tom268 said:


> 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_.


 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.


----------



## Traveling Man

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!


----------



## AnthonyBolding

No that's what oes is for.


----------



## Kristopher Wyatt

*Fraternity*


----------



## MikeMay

As I said earlier, why would a woman want to join a fraternity and be made into a better man?...we do after all take men and make them better men...just sayin!


----------



## JohnnyFlotsam

I suspect the "better man" bit was meant to be clever. Whatever...

Why would a woman want to become a Freemason? How about to have access to all the lessons and tools that we are so proud of? Is there some reason women should not want this? Or that they should be denied this outright?


----------



## Beathard

My wife said she could live her entire life without being in "that room full of testosterone !"


----------



## Beathard

I think those of us that are male members of OES have an understanding of my wife is talking about. The levels of estrogen can be deadening.


----------



## Geeksgalore

I suggest some required reading for you Brother.    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_Women_Freemasons



Blake Bowden said:


> Should women be allowed to become Freemasons?


----------



## Beathard

There are pseudo-Masonic orders all over the world. What's your point?


----------



## JJones

Freemasonry is a fraternity, meaning it's for gentlemen only.  Women have their options, such as Eastern Star, so I don't really see why they couldn't support that instead of joining a blue lodge.

Sure we could change our obligations and allow women in but what about those of us who have already taken the obligation?  You wouldn't swear on the bible and then lie in court would you?  I think it's the same principle.


----------



## Geeksgalore

Beathard said:


> There are pseudo-Masonic orders all over the world. What's your point?



Maria Deraismes (August 17, 1828 – February 6, 1894) was a French author and major pioneering force for women’s rights.
Born in Paris, Maria Deraismes grew up in Pontoise in the city’s northwest outskirts. From a prosperous middle class family, she was well educated and raised in a literary environment that led to her authoring several literary works but soon developed a reputation as a very capable communicator. She became active in promoting women’s rights and, in 1866, joined the SociÃ©tÃ© de la revendication des droits de la femme, a feminist organization advancing the cause of education for women. In 1869, she founded L’Association pour le droit des femmes with Leon Richer.Following the ouster of Napoleon III, she understood the new politics of the day meant a more moderate approach under the Third Republic in order for feminism to survive and not be marginalized by the new breed of male power brokers emerging at the time. Deraismes’ work brought her recognition in Great Britain and an influence upon American activist Elizabeth Cady Stanton who met her in Paris in 1882 following Deraismes’ breakthrough membership in the Freemasons. A year later, she and Georges Martin organized the first Masonic lodge in the world to allow both men and women as members.
Maria Deraismes was initiated—on January 14, 1882—into Lodge “Les Libres Penseurs” of Pecq, a small village to the west of Paris.
She was the first female Freemason, symbolising initiatory equality.
Eleven years later, on April 4, 1893, Maria Deraismes and Georges Martin, a well-known mason, created in Paris the first co-masonic Lodge. Out of this co-masonic Lodge came the birth of the Grande Loge Symbolique Ecossaise “Le Droit Humain”, establishing the equality of men and women, out of which, later, came the birth of the International Order of Co-Freemasonry “LE DROIT HUMAIN”.
With other support of Suffragettes such as Hubertine Auclert, Maria Deraismes worked to achieve political emancipation for women, standing as a symbolic candidate in the elections of 1885. On her death in 1894, Maria Deraismes was interred in the Montmartre Cemetery. Her complete writings were published in 1895 and much information on her work can be found at the BibliothÃ¨que Marguerite Durand in Paris.
To honor her memory, a street in Paris was named for her, and a statue was erected in a small park. The town square in St. Nazaire was also named in her honor.


----------



## Beathard

Are you arguing against co-masonry?  You are making a pretty good argument. Clandestine is clandestine.


----------



## Geeksgalore

Beathard said:


> Are you arguing against co-masonry?  You are making a pretty good argument. Clandestine is clandestine.


 
I am not one to argue, even debate can cause ill feelings, everyone is entitled to their own belief structure, in my opinion as long as it does not hurt anyone!


----------



## Michaelstedman81

I went to the link that Bro. Geeksgalore provided just to do some extra reading.  I ended up going to the website of the Order of Women Freemasons and read some stuff on thier site.  And then went to the website for the Womens Freemasonry USA which is a group of women that claim to be freemasons and are "chartered" by the "women's grand lodge of Belgium"...lol  

Ya know, after reading the stuff that is on thier site I have to wonder what they "teach" there and what the ceremonies are like.  I mean, do they say Hiram Abiff is a woman?  Does Hiram Abiff have anything to do with their stuff at all?  The first group that I looked at even has Knights Templar degrees...lol While I can't say anything about the Knights Templar because I haven't had the chance to go that route yet, I just wonder how much thier version is different from ours.  Does anyone know of a source where I can read about what their ceremonies are like or have in them?  

When I do the "lol" in here, I am not intending to mean that I am making fun of them, or anyone for that matter, but I just find this really amazing and am just really suprised at a lot of the stuff that I just read.  I had no clue that there were women "masonic" goups out there till several months ago when I saw a few women on a documentary DVD I got from Netflix stating that they were freemasons.  And with all of this, I decided to look more into this on the internet and am shocked at what I found...lol

Just curious, can I even be looking into this stuff for just pure knowledge without going against Masonry or my Obligation?  Obviously, I wouldn't make contact with any of these persons or groups, but I am just meaning by looking on the net and finding the information.


----------



## Geeksgalore

Glad you got to do some extra reading Brother Michael.  Women Masons have been around for a long time.  They also refer to each other as "brothers" not sisters.  GM Hiram is also very much part of their work, as well as everything else.  Same passgrips, same tokens and grips.  As in the Men's lodge, only women may attend a Woman's [] in each degree.


----------



## Beathard

That's why we need to do a little research prior to attending a lodge. We don't want to violate our obligations by attending a clandestine lodge.


----------



## Michaelstedman81

Geeksgalore said:


> Glad you got to do some extra reading Brother Michael. Women Masons have been around for a long time.


 

Yea, I like to try to read about things that I don't have much exposure to or that much knowledge about. Especially things that interest me like Freemasonry. A while back I got a Netflix DVD that was a Freemasonry documentary. There were a few women on there that were interviewed that claimed to be Freemasons. This did little more than just give me the old rolling of the eyes reaction. I didn't look into it too much till last night. I just really can't grasp the reasoning behind all of this women trying to be Masons stuff. 

I mean, don't get me wrong. I am in support of every person, man or woman, trying to find a way to become a better person. But the Masonic organization was started by men as a group for men. I'll give a high five to anyone that wants to go out and start thier own group to help install good morals and values into peoples' lives. But when you take the work (inner and outer) of an already established group (and even the name), that is just a bit too far. I mean, can't they come up with something original instead of trying to pretend that they are something they aren't and could never be? 

Obviously, the idea to become a better man or woman is nothing new. Kudos to any woman that is wanting to start a group for women to become better women. They can call it "The Sisterhood of the Traveling Coach Purse" or something else (not trying to sound like a sexist or anything, just making the point with a hint of humor that they can call it anything they want). They can come up with thier own system of teaching the lessons. But instead these women literally claim to be members of an organization that is only for men. I mean, we all know know that Masonry has always been an organization for men. Why do that? I just really don't understand why it is so important to them to do that that they can't start their own organization and have their own stuff instead of trying to steal literally all the ideals from another group.



Geeksgalore said:


> They also refer to each other as "brothers" not sisters.


 
Yea, that was one of the things that I read on thier sites that really blew my mind and suprised me.



Geeksgalore said:


> GM Hiram is also very much part of their work, as well as everything else. Same passgrips, same tokens and grips.


 

Thanks for posting that part. I was really curious to know what all they included in their teachings and work. I wonder how much of it is the same really. I know some of it is a bit different. Just looking at the "degrees" at one of the women's groups that are here in the U.S. The names of the "degrees" are quite a bit different than what I have in our legit lodges and organizations. 

Also, something I was curious about when it comes to clandestine groups, and now these women groups we are talking about.  Do they have any obligation stuff regarding us?  I mean, do the clandestine groups consider us to be clandestine???


----------



## Michaelstedman81

Beathard said:


> That's why we need to do a little research prior to attending a lodge. We don't want to violate our obligations by attending a clandestine lodge.


 

This brings up a question for me. What if a Brother wanted to research in depth one, or all, of these women or clandestine lodges. Obviously, there is only so far you can go by looking things up on the internet or in books and not talking to someone. How would you go about interviewing one of these members without violating the Obligation? Would you just only ask questions and not give any information from your end? Would you just conduct the research with written information? Not even do the research at all since a lot of the valuable information would come from some sort of communication with a member? Even if the topic of research is for the betterment of the Craft?  Just curious.

Another sidebar question for your Bro. Beathard (or anyone else that wants to answer).  Just to confirm my thoughts, the women masonic groups that we have been talking about in the last few posts (or at least the ones I have been posted), they are considerd "clandestine", correct?


----------



## Geeksgalore

Here is some more good reading for you Brother.

Can women be Freemasons?

The answer is YES.

To understand the role of women in Freemasonry, it is necessary to go back into the history of the fraternity. It has been said that exclusion of women from the craft forms one of the "ancient landmarks" of the order. Is this true?

The question is answered in five parts:

17th Century: THE ANCIENT LANDMARKS
Proof that women were made Masons in ancient operative lodges
18th Century: WOMEN AS SPECULATIVE MASONS
Women Freemasons prior to the formation of the Grand Lodge of England
19th Century: THE DEVELOPMENT OF CO-MASONRY
A brief history of mixed-gender orders of Freemasonry
20th Century: CO-MASONRY AND FEMALE MASONRY TODAY
Mixed-gender and all-female Masonry around the world
FREQUENTLY-ASKED QUESTIONS ANSWERED
And where you may enquire with further questions
17th Century: 
THE ANCIENT LANDMARKS
Proof that women were made Masons in ancient operative lodges

Let us begin with the historical record. The following was sent to me by Brother Bill Edwards in 1995. It consists of a short excerpt from a long talk that the Very Worshipful and Reverend Neville B. Cryer, Past Provincial Grand Master of Surrey, Past Grand Chaplain of the Grand Lodge of England, Chairman of the Heritage Committee of York, and member of the Quator Coronati Lodge of Research, gave to the Finger Lakes Chapter of the Philalethes Society in March, 1995.

WOMEN AND FREEMASONRY 
BY V:. W.: and Rev. NEVILLE B. CRYER 
MASONIC TIMES, May, 1995, Rochester, New York
In 1693 we have the York Manuscript No. 4, belonging to the Grand Lodge of York, which relates how when an Apprentice is admitted the 'elders taking the Booke, he or _shee_ [sic] that is to be made Mason shall lay their hands thereon, and the charge shall be given.' Now I have to tell you, that my predecessors in Masonic Research in England from Hughen and Vibert and from all the rest onward, have all tried to pretend that the 'shee' is merely a misprint for 'they.' I now am the Chairman of the Heritage Committee of York. I know these documents; I've examined them, and I'm telling you, they say 'she,' without any question.

Of course, we have a problem, haven't we; to try to explain that. My predecessors would not try to explain this; they were too male oriented. The fact remains that, there it is, in an ancient document of a 17th century date. That this could have been the case seems all the more likely as that in 1696 two widows are named as members in the Operative masons Court. Away in the South of England, we read in 1714 -- that's before the Grand Lodge of England -- of Mary Bannister, the daughter of a barber in the town of Barking, being apprenticed as a Mason for 7 years with a fee of 5/- which she paid to the Company.


Return to the top of this page 

18th Century: 
WOMEN AS SPECULATIVE MASONS
Women Freemasons prior to the formation of the Grand Lodge of England

Turning next to the subject of actual cases of women who were made Masons in speculative rather than operative lodges, there is quite a bit of evidence to support the contention that this was at one time permitted. The most famous (and best-documented) of these women Masons was Mrs. Aldworth, made a Mason in the 1700s. Here is a brief account of her Masonic career, as written in 1920 by Dudley Wright and posted to the internet in 1994 by William Maddox.

WOMEN FREEMASONS
BY BRO. DUDLEY WRIGHT, ENGLAND
THE BUILDER, August 1920
Although the Antient Charges forbid the admission or initiation of women into the Order of Free and Accepted Masons, there are known instances where as the result of accident or sometimes design the rule has been broken and women have been duly initiated. The most prominent instance is that of the Hon. Elizabeth St. Leger, or, as she afterwards became, on marriage, the Hon. Mrs. Aldworth, who is referred to sometimes, though erroneously, as the "only woman who over obtained the honour of initiation into the sublime mysteries of Freemasonry."

The Hon. Elizabeth St. Leger was a daughter of the first Viscount Doneraile, a resident of Cork. Her father was a very zealous Freemason and, as was the custom in his time -- the early part of the eighteenth century - held an occasional lodge in his own house, when he was assisted by members of his own family and any brethren in the immediate neighbourhood and visitors to Doneraile House. This lodge was duly warranted and held the number 150 on the Register of the Grand Lodge of Ireland.

The story runs that one evening previous to the initiation of a gentleman named Coppinger, Miss St. Leger hid herself in the room adjoining the one used as a lodgeroom. This room was at that time undergoing some alterations and Miss St. Leger is said to have removed a brick from the partition with her scissors and through the aperture thus created witnessed the ceremony of initiation. What she saw appears to have disturbed her so thoroughly that she at once determined upon making her escape, but failed to elude the vigilance of the tyler, who, armed with a sword stood barring her exit. Her shrieks alarmed the members of the lodge, who came rushing to the spot, when they learned that she had witnessed the whole of the ceremony which had just been enacted. After a considerable discussion and yielding to the entreaties of her brother it was decided to admit her into the Order and she was duly initiated, and, in course of time, became the Master of the lodge.

According to Milliken, the Irish Masonic historian, she was initiated in Lodge No. 95, which still meets at Cork, but there is no record extant of her reception into the Order. It is, however, on record that she was a subscriber to the Irish Book of Constitutions, which appeared in 1744 and that she frequently attended, wearing her Masonic regalia, entertainments that were given under Masonic auspices for the benefit of the poor and distressed. She afterwards married Mr. Richard Aldworth of Newmarket and when she died she was accorded the honour of a Masonic burial. She was cousin to General Antony St. Leger, of Park Hill, near Doncaster, who, in 1776, instituted the celebrated Doncaster St. Leger races and stakes.

This picture of Elizabeth Aldworth dressed in her Masonic regalia was published in Robert Freke Gould's "Concise History of Freemasonry." The original from which the engraving was made is said to be a portrait painting in the possession of her descendents. The image was scanned and sent to me by Sandra Hesse.


In his talk to the chapter of the Philalethes Society, cited above, Neville B. Cryer described the well-known particulars of the initiation of Elizabeth St. Ledger (later Elizabeth Aldworth) as a Speculative Mason -- and he noted that this occurred in 1712, before the Grand Lodge of England was formed -- and thus before it was declared that the exclusion of women was an "ancient landmark," and a stop was put to female participation in the Craft.

Numerous other examples of females joining Masonic lodges could be given here (Cryer and Wright cite several each), but lack of space forbids. The pattern set by Elizabeth Aldworth -- of rare and exceptional cases of women being made Masons -- was the norm from the time of the establishment of the GLoE until the 19th century advent of Co-Masonry, a mixed-gender order of the Craft.


Return to the top of this page 

19th Century: 
THE DEVELOPMENT OF CO-MASONRY
A brief history of mixed-gender orders of Freemasonry

Here is a history of the Co-Masonic fraternity as supplied by Brother Wright and posted to the internet by Brother Maddox:

CO-MASONRY
BY BRO. DUDLEY WRIGHT, ENGLAND
THE BUILDER, November 1920
In 1879 several Chapters owning allegiance to the Supreme Council of France of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite, at the instigation of the Grand Orient, seceded from that allegience and reconstituted themselves as La Grande Loge Symbolique de France. One of these Chapters, bearing the name of Les Libres Penseurs, meeting at Pecq, a village of Seine et Oise, in November 1881, proposed to initiate into Freemasonry, Mlle. Maria Desraimes, a well-known writer on Humanitarian and women suffrage questions, which they did on 14th January, 1882, for which act the Lodge or Chapter was suspended. Mlle. Desraimes was instrumental in bringing into the ranks of Freemasonry several other well-known women in France, with the result that an Androgynous Masonic body, known as La Grande Loge Symbolique Ecossaise was formed on 4th April, 1893 although its jurisdiction at that time extended over only one lodge, that known as Le Droit Humain, which came into being on the same day, and which, in 1900, adopted the thirty degrees of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite.

One of the principal workers in the formation of this new Grand lodge was Dr. Georges Martin, at one time a member of the Lodge Les Libres Penseurs. The schismatic movement spread to Paris and Benares and afterwards to London, at which last-named place, in September, 1902, the Lodge "Human Duty," now No. 6 on the Co- Masonry Register, was consecrated. The title "Co-Masonry" in lieu of the earlier term "Joint Masonry" was adopted in 1905.


Return to the top of this page 

20th Century: 
CO-MASONRY AND FEMALE MASONRY TODAY
Mixed-gender and all-female Masonry around the world

In 1903, Co-Masonry came to the United States. In 1918, according to Neville Cryer, Elizabeth St. Leger Aldworth's direct descendent, Alicia St. Leger Aldworth, joined the mixed-gender order. By 1922, there were more than 450 Co-Masonic lodges around the world, according to Masonic historian Arthur Edward Waite, writing in "The New Enclyclopedia of Freemasonry."

Here are some 20th century female Masons in full regalia. These photos were printed in the Regina (Canada) Leader-Post newspaper on January 6, 1939. Thanks to Ray Salmon of Swift Current, Saskatchewan, Canada, for the scan.


The original newspaper caption was as follows [with my comments in brackets]:
With old appropriate ritual and formality, Mrs. Seton Challen (left) was recently enthroned for life as the most worshipful, the Grand Master of the Honourable Fraternity of Ancient Freemasons, at the Masonic temple in London. [It is unclear from context whether this is London, England, or London, Ontario, Canada.] This 25-year-old organization [founded in 1914] works from the first to the 33rd degree, and claims to give women Masonry in its pure form and in its entirety.
Mrs. Challen is a daughter of the organizer of the lodge, and is herself the last of the founders. At the right is the lodge's grand sword bearer [i.e. Tyler], Mrs. Phylis Sutton Vane, during the installation ceremony, which lasted three hours.

There are at present Co-Masonic lodges in at least 50 nations, including the U.S., Canada, Britain, Australia, Greece, Holland, Brazil, Chile, Peru, Mexico, Belgium, and Venezuela. Androgynous jurisdictions worldwide include Le Droit Humain, based in France, and the American Federation of Human Rights, based in the U.S.A. All-female jurisdictions include the Grand Loge Feminine de France and the Lady Masons of Great Britain.

Although official "recognition" does not exist between bodies such as the United Grand Lodge of England and The American Federation of Human Rights, there are cordial relationships and mutual respect between Masons and Co-Masons, particularly on the internet.

Neville Cryer ended his talk to the Finger Lakes Chapter of the Philalethes Society with a call for male Masonry to recognize female Masonry. "After all," he said, "if a woman is good enough to be the wife, mother, sister, or daughter of a Mason, she ought to be good enough to be his 'Brother.' The Men's order recognizes the coloured races, but refuses recognition to their own kith and kin." Until such recognition comes, women who wish to become Masons -- and men who wish to work "on the level" with women -- are encouraged to seek out a Co-Masonic lodge.


Return to the top of this page 

FREQUENTLY-ASKED QUESTIONS ANSWERED
And where you may enquire with further questions

Here are the answers to the most frequently asked questions about Co-Freemasonry:

A) Do Co-Masons believe in a Supreme Being?/Do they have an open VSL in lodge?/Do they operate clandestine lodges?/Do they allow men to join?

The answers to these and similar questions are contained in the Principles of Co-Freemasonry, as listed by Brother Dudley Wright and posted to the internet in 1994 by William Maddox:

THE PRINCIPLES OF CO-FREEMASONRY
BY BRO. DUDLEY WRIGHT, ENGLAND
THE BUILDER, February 1921
1. Co-Freemasonry asserts, in accordance with the ancient declarations of Freemasonry, the existence of a Creative Principle, or Supreme Being, under the title of "The Great Architect of the Universe."
2. It maintains an open "Volume of the Sacred Law" in every lodge, when duly formed for Masonic purposes.

3. It maintains the ancient landmarks of Freemasonry.

4. It withholds recognition from all irregular and clandestine meetings, or lodges not holding proper charter.

5. It imposes no restrictions on the free search for Truth, and to secure that freedom exacts tolerance from all its members.

6. It is open to men and women, without distinction of race or religion, who are free, of good report, and abide by strict morals.

7. It pledges its members to obedience to the laws of the country, loyalty to their nation or national sovreign, silence with regard to Masonic secrets, a high standard of honour, and ceaseless endeavour to promote the welfare of humanity.

8. Every Freemason is bound faithfully to observe the decisions of the Supreme Council to which he or she owes allegiance.

B) Why was Co-Freemasonry started?

Those who do not fully appreciate the seriousness of purpose that links the origins of Co-Masonry to the Female Suffrage movement of the late 19th and early 20th centuries may enjoy this quote from the August 7, 1907 Certificate of Incorporation of The American Federation of Human Rights in Washington, D.C. (and as such on file as a matter of public record):

"The particular business and objects of this society are to demand equal rights for both sexes before the law, to labor according to the Constitution and General By-Laws to be made and adopted by the society for the mutual improvement of its members by combating ignorance under all its forms, the building of human character, the pratice of solidarity, the upholding of high standards of honor and of social justice with a kindly feeling towards all, and a ceaseless endeavor to promote the moral and material welfare of the human race, and to that end, to organize and to conduct throughout the United States of America, branches or Lodges of Co-Masonry..."
(Similar language persists in modern AFHR articles of incorporation, all of them also on file as matters of public record.)

C) Are Co-Masonic rites the same as American male Masonic rites?

According to Masonic historian Arthur Edward Waite, writing in "The New Encyclopedia of Freemasonry" (1922), American and British male Masons would recognize and follow Co-Masonic work with ease, for the allegories and symbols are universal throughout Freemasonry. However, in keeping with its European origin, Co-Masonry makes use of a European-style Chamber of Reflection prior to initiaiton -- which the majority of British and American male Masonic lodges do not.

D) I am interested in joining. How can i locate the Co-Masonic lodge nearest to me?

For more information on Co-Freemasonry in the United States and around the world, go to the google search engine and enter key phrases such as Co-Masonry, Co-Freemasonry, Freemasonry Women, Women Masons, and so forth.

And, finally, as suggested by a dear friend in male-Masonry, here is one last tongue-in-cheek question:

E) So...what about the preparation of the candidates, huh?

Sorry, my obligation forbids me to reveal that! ;-)





Michaelstedman81 said:


> Yea, I like to try to read about things that I don't have much exposure to or that much knowledge about. Especially things that interest me like Freemasonry. A while back I got a Netflix DVD that was a Freemasonry documentary. There were a few women on there that were interviewed that claimed to be Freemasons. This did little more than just give me the old rolling of the eyes reaction. I didn't look into it too much till last night. I just really can't grasp the reasoning behind all of this women trying to be Masons stuff.
> 
> I mean, don't get me wrong. I am in support of every person, man or woman, trying to find a way to become a better person. But the Masonic organization was started by men as a group for men. I'll give a high five to anyone that wants to go out and start thier own group to help install good morals and values into peoples' lives. But when you take the work (inner and outer) of an already established group (and even the name), that is just a bit too far. I mean, can't they come up with something original instead of trying to pretend that they are something they aren't and could never be?
> 
> Obviously, the idea to become a better man or woman is nothing new. Kudos to any woman that is wanting to start a group for women to become better women. They can call it "The Sisterhood of the Traveling Coach Purse" or something else (not trying to sound like a sexist or anything, just making the point with a hint of humor that they can call it anything they want). They can come up with thier own system of teaching the lessons. But instead these women literally claim to be members of an organization that is only for men. I mean, we all know know that Masonry has always been an organization for men. Why do that? I just really don't understand why it is so important to them to do that that they can't start their own organization and have their own stuff instead of trying to steal literally all the ideals from another group.
> 
> 
> 
> Yea, that was one of the things that I read on thier sites that really blew my mind and suprised me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for posting that part. I was really curious to know what all they included in their teachings and work. I wonder how much of it is the same really. I know some of it is a bit different. Just looking at the "degrees" at one of the women's groups that are here in the U.S. The names of the "degrees" are quite a bit different than what I have in our legit lodges and organizations.
> 
> Also, something I was curious about when it comes to clandestine groups, and now these women groups we are talking about.  Do they have any obligation stuff regarding us?  I mean, do the clandestine groups consider us to be clandestine???


----------



## Beathard

Co-masonry lodges are not recognized by the Grand Lodge of Texas, therefore they are clandestine. No amount of plagiarism and sloppy copy and paste from co-masonry friendly sites can change that fact. We can discuss them. We can research them. But as far as Masonic communication goes, it is a direct violation of the obligation (at least in Texas.)


----------



## JTM

In regards to Co-masonry, the discussion is pretty moot, like Beathard says, but it's fun to talk about 

In my opinion, as hashed out through my friends, is that while the ritual may be valuable to women, there is more to a lodge than the value found in the ritual lessons.  An all-male fraternity has many purposes and values that would be lost by the introduction of women.


----------



## Geeksgalore

well thank goodness we are not all as ignorant and archaic as Texas.  You are living in the past, it is no wonder your generation left a sour taste in peoples minds regarding Masonry.  Well here's a news flash for you, the younger ones will be replacing you shortly and we will fix what you have destroyed.  So now if you want to blast me for this post I strongly recommend that you read the discriminative post you just posted.  Time to grow up and realize that the civil war is over and it is now 2011, we even have a Black President now!!



Beathard said:


> Co-masonry lodges are not recognized by the Grand Lodge of Texas, therefore they are clandestine. No amount of plagiarism and sloppy copy and paste from co-masonry friendly sites can change that fact. We can discuss them. We can research them. But as far as Masonic communication goes, it is a direct violation of the obligation (at least in Texas.)


----------



## JJones

If it isn't broke, there's nothing to fix.  Making changes in the name of 'progress' when things are already fine will ultimately do more harm than good.

I'm a young mason (younger than 30) and I see no problem with the way things are.  I'd never vote for changes like you're suggesting and if passed I'd probably leave Freemasonry.  I'm not a woman-hater or a sexist but if you change something around too much you'll end up with something far different than what you once had.



> we will fix what you have destroyed



Who destroyed what?  I think that warrants some elaboration but I'll say it can't have to do with the topic of the post since women were never allowed to join.

Honestly I don't get why anyone would press this agenda.  There's a Grand Lodge in France that allows atheists to join but just because a few lodges allow something doesn't mean we should all adopt it.


----------



## kwilbourn

Geeksgalore said:


> Time to grow up and realize that the civil war is over and it is now 2011, we even have a Black President now!!



Huh?  You realize this thread is about women in Masonry, correct?

Civil Rights is another issue, and the existence of 2 organizations that practice Masonry (Prince Hall and the Grand Lodges) in America is nothing new.  In fact it is as old as America itself.  The history of the Prince Hall lodges alone is enough for me to say that they should remain separate and retain their proud heritage.  Should the Grand Lodges mutually recognize?  Absolutely, and many already do or have the wheels turning in that direction.

With regards to the topic at hand however, no Co-Masonic Lodge is listed in the List of Lodges Masonic in my jurisdiction, which happens to be Texas.  I think you will find the same in your jurisdiction; they are by definition clandestine.

I'm part of that "new generation", and I became a Mason because in our changing world, Freemasonry is one thing that has remained consistent.  I can share what I have gained and learned with prior generations.  That means something to me.  Changing something so fundamental to the tenants of the Craft would remove that consistency.


----------



## Geeksgalore

They are not Clandestine in our district, thank goodness.  Change is a constant and without it you become stagnant.



kwilbourn said:


> Huh?  You realize this thread is about women in Masonry, correct?
> 
> Civil Rights is another issue, and the existence of 2 organizations that practice Masonry (Prince Hall and the Grand Lodges) in America is nothing new.  In fact it is as old as America itself.  The history of the Prince Hall lodges alone is enough for me to say that they should remain separate and retain their proud heritage.  Should the Grand Lodges mutually recognize?  Absolutely, and many already do or have the wheels turning in that direction.
> 
> With regards to the topic at hand however, no Co-Masonic Lodge is listed in the List of Lodges Masonic in my jurisdiction, which happens to be Texas.  I think you will find the same in your jurisdiction; they are by definition clandestine.
> 
> I'm part of that "new generation", and I became a Mason because in our changing world, Freemasonry is one thing that has remained consistent.  I can share what I have gained and learned with prior generations.  That means something to me.  Changing something so fundamental to the tenants of the Craft would remove that consistency.


----------



## kwilbourn

Geeksgalore said:


> They are not Clandestine in our district, thank goodness. Change is a constant and without it you become stagnant.



That's fair; in my world view progressive and changing doesn't necessarily mean improvement is happening. 

Allow me to put forth this analogy: some people like to take classic cars and turn them into hot rods.  It flicks their switch or whatever.  Change is definitely occuring, and they definitely see this as a change for the better, however an outside observer might look at the same car and weep for the loss of what it once was.

Neither are _wrong_, but you won't have a very warm reception bringing that hot rod to the Concours d'Elegance.


----------



## JTM

And someone gets to take 24 hours off from posting.

Lively discussion is great.  Off topic rambling and insulting people, however, is not.


----------



## Michaelstedman81

Beathard said:


> Co-masonry lodges are not recognized by the Grand Lodge of Texas, therefore they are clandestine. No amount of plagiarism and sloppy copy and paste from co-masonry friendly sites can change that fact. We can discuss them. We can research them. But as far as Masonic communication goes, it is a direct violation of the obligation (at least in Texas.)




Thank you for that answer.  It clears things for me quite a bit in regards to what qualifies a group as clandestine.  And I am glad that I am not the only one that saw that someone likes to copy/paste things on here.  I hope that none of the newer Brothers don't see all that co-masonry friendly stuff that he copied on to here and get confused about things.  As soon as I read it, I poked the same holes as you did into it and just came up with the same conclusion that you posted.  Hopefully, the newer Brothers will see the rest of the posts on there and not accept the words he posted as truth about the Fraternity.  Thank you for answering my questions.


----------



## Michaelstedman81

JJones said:


> I'm not a woman-hater or a sexist but if you change something around too much you'll end up with something far different than what you once had.




I agree with you totally.  Yes, some change is good and is needed at times.  But when you change the fundamental basis of things, then the original idea or object is no longer the same.  To me, that would be "destryoing" the Craft.  Just like you, I would like to see some elaboration on who he thinks destroyed what.  Your right.  Why would anyone press this agenda about women being Freemasons?  I mean to be a real Freemason, they are lacking one major requirement and that is to be a man.  That is not being sexist at all, but it is being real.  If we start allowing women in to adapt to the times, then we have just given away one of the most basic things about our Fraternity.


----------



## S.Courtemanche

Geeksgalore said:


> well thank goodness we are not all as ignorant and archaic as Texas.  You are living in the past, it is no wonder your generation left a sour taste in peoples minds regarding Masonry.  Well here's a news flash for you, the younger ones will be replacing you shortly and we will fix what you have destroyed.  So now if you want to blast me for this post I strongly recommend that you read the discriminative post you just posted.  Time to grow up and realize that the civil war is over and it is now 2011, we even have a Black President now!!


 

Wow, was this really called for? Bashing people for their beliefs, Civil War statements, ignorant and archaic Texans, and things that older masons supposedlydestroyed ...Wow dude seriously... As for the portion you state, "we even have a Black President now!!” Do you not reside in Canada, so that means thathe is not your president, right? Do the math on this one!!!

Geeksgalore you might want to seek light from your brothers at your lodge, on proper respect and Masonic Edicate, no one is perfect, and I am far from it but this bashing in various threads is pretty childish.

Steve


----------



## MikeMay

Geeksgalore said:


> They are not Clandestine in our district, thank goodness.


 
Well, if your lodge is #48 Madoc Marmora Tweed, as you posted, then I must as a brother point out that you're under the Jurisdiction of the Grand Lodge AF&AM of Canada in the Province of Ontario...and yes, they are clandestine. It really wasn't that hard to look up.


----------



## kwilbourn

S.Courtemanche said:


> I am far from it but this bashing in various threads is pretty childish.



I have to agree, Brother; we should all take a lesson from this behavior and seek to better ourselves by applying this lesson.  If geeksgalore is indeed a Brother Mason, which I would consider impossible to truly verify through this venue, I hope his journey is bright and he finds the peace to better accept opinions that do not coincide with his own.  I do not wish to defame another person, nor wish ill upon them, but the behavior that he has exhibited recently has not been in any way indicative what I would consider Masonic behavior.


----------



## S.Courtemanche

kwilbourn said:


> I have to agree, Brother; we should all take a lesson from this behavior and seek to better ourselves by applying this lesson.  If geeksgalore is indeed a Brother Mason, which I would consider impossible to truly verify through this venue, I hope his journey is bright and he finds the peace to better accept opinions that do not coincide with his own.  I do not wish to defame another person, nor wish ill upon them, but the behavior that he has exhibited recently has not been in any way indicative what I would consider Masonic behavior.


 
Hey brother, will you be at Lodge on Monday? How is your proficiency going?


----------



## kwilbourn

S.Courtemanche said:


> Hey brother, will you be at Lodge on Monday? How is your proficiency going?



I'll be there Brother, and it is going very well.  I PM'ed you with some details.


----------



## Michaelstedman81

Lol, I wish I could give multiple "Thumbs Up Thanks" to a few of the Brothers' posts on here...lol  I can't believe how quickly all that got out of hand.  But I am glad to know that the thoughts I had regarding the women freemasonry were correct.  

I do wonder, though.  Since we call those women lodges (and co-masonry lodges) "clandestine", do they call us the same?  I mean, since we are the "real deal" (at least I believe we are the real deal...lol)  and pretty much everything about them was taken (copied or stolen) from our organization and they appearantly want to be like us in every way, would they call us clandestine?  Do they possibly think that they are the original real deal and that we took our stuff from thier organization in the past?

This whole thing with the women freemasons just boggles my mind totally.  One thing Geeks said that was true (which I had read just before he posted it) is that some of these women groups DO refer to each other as "brother".  I just don't understand why a group of women would call each other "brother".  Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to knock these women for trying to be part of something to better themselves and the world, I'm just trying to ask the questions that are coming up in my brain to try and understand why they are going the route they are.  Of course, this may be like trying to understand any other thing about women...lol  

Then again, maybe I have the wrong idea of what "recognized" really is and my calling us the "real deal" is all mixed up....


----------



## Ashlar

MikeMay said:


> Well, if your lodge is #48 Madoc Marmora Tweed, as you posted, then I must as a brother point out that you're under the Jurisdiction of the Grand Lodge AF&AM of Canada in the Province of Ontario...and yes, they are clandestine. It really wasn't that hard to look up.


 
The internet is a wonderful thing is it not ? 

Now , on topic . I do not care if there is co-masonry or all Female Freemasonry . If they are happy doing their own thing , then more power to them , it is a big world out there . What I do not like is having it shoved down my throat or told that I am wrong for not wanting women in my lodge by some opinionated person  looking for an argument . I like my all male Freemasonry and would not want it any other way .


----------



## Beathard

Remember that clandestine doesn't mean they are wrong or bad.  It means that we cannot masonically communicate with them.  They can do their thing and we can do ours.  We just can't do it together.  I can live with that.


----------



## Michaelstedman81

Beathard said:


> Remember that clandestine doesn't mean they are wrong or bad. It means that we cannot masonically communicate with them. They can do their thing and we can do ours. We just can't do it together. I can live with that.




Good point


----------



## Bro.BruceBenjamin

A fraternity  (Latin frater : "brother") is a *brotherhood*, though the term sometimes connotes a distinct or formal organization and a secret society. Sororities - An association or a society of *women*.


----------



## JohnnyFlotsam

Michaelstedman81 said:


> Then again, maybe I have the wrong idea of what "recognized" really is and my calling us the "real deal" is all mixed up....



In the context of "mainstream" Freemasonry, the term "recognized" has a fairly specific meaning. Using that definition, no Lodge or Grand Lodge that admits women can be recognized by any mainstream Masonic body. That said, there is nothing in that definition which broadly states anything like, "Women can not be Freemasons". Indeed, the UGLE has flatly stated, "..._Freemasonry is not confined to men (even though this Grand Lodge does not itself admit women)_". Therefore, it would seem absurd to suggest that any person, regardless of gender, who has undertaken to be initiated in a regular manner, under an obligation such as each of us has taken, is not a "Freemason". 

Consider your answer to the question, "Where were you first prepared to be made a Mason?" Arbitrary distinctions, like gender, sexual orientation, religious persuasion (atheism excepted), or say... _skin color_, have no bearing on what lies within that first place of preparation. We should be happy, nay, _proud_ to name anyone who has sworn to pursue and uphold Masonic ideals "Brother", for with them we have more in common than any number of inconsequential differences.


----------



## Beathard

What is the fourth word after the "by what further right..." question?


----------



## Bill Lins

JohnnyFlotsam said:


> We should be happy, nay, _proud_ to name anyone who has sworn to pursue and uphold Masonic ideals "Brother", for with them we have more in common than any number of inconsequential differences.


 
While I have no doubt that my wife shares my feelings about Masonry, neither I nor my children consider the fact that she is of a different gender than am I to be an "inconsequential difference".


----------



## jwhoff

Bill_Lins77488 said:


> While I have no doubt that my wife shares my feelings about Masonry, neither I nor my children consider the fact that she is of a different gender than am I to be an "inconsequential difference".


 
Rather, you seem to have chosen a _consequential difference_. Which, I'm very sure your children agree most heartedly with. After all us guys, for the most part, are short on maternal instincts.

:12:


----------



## JohnnyFlotsam

Sadly, these are exactly the kind of disingenuous and "totally missed the point" responses that I expected.

Surely we aren't really arguing that, when it comes to an individual's ability to identify, value and pursue Masonic ideals, gender is of any consequence whatsoever. Right? 

Surely we aren't going to lean solely on the landmarks of this or that jurisdiction to define an "us" and a "them" for the purpose of setting the them apart as something lesser. Right.


----------



## Beathard

Yes we are. It is a fraternity. By definition a male organization. I believe that most masons joined a fraternity and not a couples dinner club. I believe women can have the same moral and ethical qualities in their own organization that I will not run out and seek to join. 

I find it amazing that with all the talk about woman in masons we have no women on the site complaining. It is only the men that are always complaining about everything that keep bringing it up. If one is desperate for female companionship from a moral and ethical woman, go to church or eastern star.


----------



## Bill Lins

JohnnyFlotsam said:


> Surely we aren't going to lean solely on the landmarks of this or that jurisdiction to define an "us" and a "them" for the purpose of setting the them apart as something lesser.


 
Not "lesser" but "different". And, no, _by definition_ women cannot be "brothers" nor belong to a fraternity. If they wish to be a part of a group which espouses Masonic principles, they can always join OES.


----------



## Beathard

Bingo, Bill, Bingo!


----------



## rhitland

This has already happened, Women are being taught the principles of masonry in groups that are themselves Freemasons just not the same lineage as our fraternity.  If anyone feels the need to place a right or wrong title on one or the other more power to them it does not change my group in the least unless I parade around saying mine is better in some way or another.  I have my lodge others will have theirs.  Is variety not the spice of life?


----------



## Benton

Well, I think most people understand that there are female jurisdictions, and they aren't going to go away if we close our eyes and stick our fingers in our ears. 

I think the real question becomes, "Should we allow them in our jurisdiction?", to which I think most would answer with a resounding no. Not trying to speak for everyone, but having females in the lodge would change the dynamic significantly. Not saying it would be in a negative way, but it does change the dynamic. In college, I belonged to both a coed fraternity and a true blue all male fraternity. While I greatly enjoyed both, the experience was certainly different in the coed fraternity. 

So, I think everyone acknowledges that there will be female and mixed jurisdictions. They won't go away, and frankly, I don't think anyone is fool enough to 'lead a charge' to get rid of them. What all regular Grand Lodges must decide is whether or not to recognize them, and if so, whether or not to allow visitation. Or I suppose whether or not to become mixed themselves. But if the GLoT ever did that, I'd probably demit. If I wanted to join a mixed organization, there are plenty out there. Not what I signed up for.


----------



## Michael Hatley

I have similar oppositions to women in freemasonry as I do for women in the infantry.  

I'm left of center, politically.  Solidly so.  Carried an ACLU card for a number of years.

But I am a practical man underneath it.

I  served in the infantry, and I know the culture.  I can see clearly that  the tensions from a bunch of different directions would absolutely  diminish the fighting effectiveness.  Not just sexual relations, but in  over protectiveness and the natural divisiveness that will come from  courting favor, spoken and unspoken, acted upon and not acted upon,  etc.  I think we are all smart enough to understand that what I'm  talking about isn't exaggerated or imaginary, but very real.

It would be divisive.  And the infantry is a place where unity is priority.

Freemasonry is one of those very, very, *very*  rare places, like the infantry - where unity must be the priority over  everything else in order to accomplish its stated mission.

And in  my view, that central mission is to make better men.  In order to  accomplish that, we must not have the distraction that will come with  integration of the sexes.  If we are to be able to lay bare our souls to  one another, to be absolutely, 100% honest and on the level with each  other, then no.

Now - separate lodges that are all female, with  visitation between them? I'd support that, down the road.  After the PH  division is sorted for well and true.

But co-ed lodges, no.  For the reasons I've stated and others.   Skin color, religion, and all of those things are insignificant in  comparison.  Not because I view women as lesser, incapable, or any of  that.  But because the stated goal must take precedence, and because I  believe having the majority of freemasonry made co-ed would reduce its  effectiveness in a big way.  The mission first.

Just my opinions.


----------



## Jacob Johnson

Michael Hatley said:


> Now - separate lodges that are all female, with  visitation between them? I'd support that, down the road.  After the PH  division is sorted for well and true.



I like this. I had never even considered that option.


----------



## Mike Cameron

Beathard said:


> Yes we are. It is a fraternity. By definition a male organization. I believe that most masons joined a fraternity and not a couples dinner club. I believe women can have the same moral and ethical qualities in their own organization that I will not run out and seek to join.
> 
> I find it amazing that with all the talk about woman in masons we have no women on the site complaining. It is only the men that are always complaining about everything that keep bringing it up. If one is desperate for female companionship from a moral and ethical woman, go to church or eastern star.





Thank You!!! This is a fraternity!! I am amazed sometimes how often we consider totaly turning Masonry into something different in an attempt to gain membership.


----------



## Frater Cliff Porter

Well, given that the only thing we can control is ourselves....then, I answered doesn't matter.

I like male only Masonry.

I have no beef with feminine or mixed Masonry.

If you read "Haunted Chambers" it becomes clear that there were woman Masons whether we think there should be or not.

What I don't understand is why we would be so vehemently against the female or mixed orders.  They do their own thing and are just people trying to get together to help each other and to grow.

We may not consider it Masonry, but they are welcome to call it what they like and I don't see how it hurts us.

I gave a speech at an untyled event at the Grand Lodge for the Co-Masons here in the United States.  I was well received, treated very kindly, and was accompanied by the Deputy Grand Master of my state....a nice night.

I don't want to run out and become a Co-Mason, don't believe I am going to Masonic hell, and didn't see a single person I believed to be the devil with boobs trying to temp good regular Masons from their Craft....just good ol' fashion people trying to be better than they were when they joined.


----------



## Mike Cameron

Sure it matters. We are the oldest *Fraternal* organization in the world. I know that there were women in and around Masonry throughout history. However, these were isolated incidents. There is a big difference when we start allowing it for any woman. You don't see sororities opening there doors to men. Come on guys there is rainbow, OES, and other organizations through which the ladies can make a difference. Call me a purist but I think we are losing our identity somewhat. Just my humble opinion.


----------



## Txmason

Bro. Cameron,

I agree with you. Plus if you join the Shrine your lady can also participate. Just like OES and Rainbow etc., masonry should be kept as a male organization. After all we are a fraternity. Having said that, I am grateful for OES and them helping us as we help them.


----------



## Jamesb

I would have a tough time calling a woman "Brother"


----------



## Bill Lins

Jamesb said:


> I would have a tough time calling a woman "Brother"



Ain't gonna happen.


----------



## MikeMay

Jamesb said:


> I would have a tough time calling a woman "Brother"



You obviously haven't seen some of the Women Marines I served with...   LOL!


----------



## Aleister

Lol


----------



## choppersteve03

No,nnnnooooooo.


----------



## kabbah357

Brother...there are lodges that accept women. Most are located in Europe.  Women have received the first degree as you may know under some circumstances.  The idea of women in masonry is becoming more talked about in many jurisdictions.


----------



## tbone1321

I don't understand why we should try to change what has been in place hundreds of years why are we conforming masonry to ourselves rather than conforming ourselves to masonry


----------



## khilles

No. There are Eastern star and rainbow girls for the ladies


----------



## Frater Cliff Porter

> I don't understand why we should try to change what has been in place hundreds of years why are we conforming masonry to ourselves rather than conforming ourselves to masonry



I happen to like my lodge the way it is, but Masonry has radically changed over the years.  We tend to believe or convince ourselves that Masonry is the Masonry we know and this simply isn't true.

The Masonry of our forefathers would be hardly recognizable right now.

Masonry is supposed to change and will.  It is progressive and needs to be, the day it fails to progress and remain relevent...it will die.  In the places that refuse to change period (usually out of fear or ignorance or both) Masonry is dying.

In fact, it is funny, but some of the more "radical" changes brothers seek today are more about returning the Craft to its tradtions....and breaking down artificial "traditions" implemented during the glory days of American Fraternalism.


----------



## Mike Cameron

Progressive change in some areas is great. With this I fervently agree. However, Freemasonry is the oldest FRATERNAL order in existence. "Fraternal" being the key word. Evolving to remain relevant is good. Changing the fundamentals of our organization is losing our identity. Call me a purist but I believe in keeping our craft ANCIENT,FREE, And ACCEPTED, not modern, open, and accepting. We are free to have a fraternal brotherhood. Why would we give up any freedom we have? "Fraternally"

I have edited this post because my use of the words Ancient, And  Modern may be misunderstood. I meant no coronation between them and the terms Ancient, and Modern in regards to the first lodges in Europe. I simply meant that our fundamentals should not change due to pressure from today's society.


----------



## tbone1321

I just don't understand conforming to anyone Masonry has always been a fraternity and why do we need Women in this because some men can't have there own time without a wife or girlfreind telling them that they can't be apart of it if they don't accept women.


----------



## Mike Cameron

I have actually seen that happen. I regret that it does. My girlfriend / fiancÃ© is very respectful in this regard. She also is considering OES after we are married. I am blessed.


----------



## cemab4y

This is an interesting thread. The fact is there _are_ women Freemasons. There have been women Freemasons for many years. Their lodges are not recognized, so they are considered "clandestine and irregular", but they are Masons notwithstanding. See http://www.co-masonry.org


----------



## MikeMay

Walking like a duck, quacking like a duck does not make one a duck...nor does being in a unrecognized and clandestine lodge make anyone (man or woman) a mason.  True these women have there own website and organization...okay, but that doesn't bring legitimacy to their effort to infiltrate our "FRATERNITY".  

I realize some people think it is okay to call them masons, I do not.  (that's my opinion, and anyone is free to disagree)


----------



## BEDickey

*Imho*

In my honest opinion, I feel there should be an Order just for women, just as Accepted Freemasonry is male only. I think the ideas presented in our Craft are truly universal, but the lessons themselves have been developed by men, for men, and is in many ways a way for men to bond on a level rarely seen outside the Lodge. I believe the future will hold such an Order and maybe even one day the 2 will become 2 halves of one amazing enlightening whole that will help the world itself come to the Light of our true reasons of being.


----------



## Bill Lins

*Re: Imho*



BEDickey said:


> In my honest opinion, I feel there should be an Order just for women


 
It already exists- the Order of the Eastern Star.


----------



## BEDickey

*actually*

Actually, it does not, only a woman who has a relationship to a Freemason may belong to the OOES. I'm talking about an independent order that accepts woman, who don't need a Freemason in there life to join. The Weavers in Europe are a better example. An Order they can join of there own freewill. OOES did start with the right idea, a female branch of Freemasonry, but the opposition was to great at the time, and it was morphed into what it is today., a co-ed group rather then a female branch of Freemasonry.


----------



## thor9541

*No way!*

I don't think so. Women don't really want to be freemasons, they just want somehow to be equal to men. This is a feminist idea I'd vote it down everytime. OES will do just fine. I have even heard there is a lodge in south Florida with a woman WM of course this is an international lodge but still I remeber my obligation that I swore to uphold .


----------



## BEDickey

*sorry*

Let me preface this by saying I am in no way racist, and mean no disrespect in this post but feel I must speak on it. 

I find it a bit odd that a man of color is using the excuse that " they don't really want to be Freemasons, just equal to men" when the same exact thing could be said, and no doubt has been said to keep people of color out of "mainstream" Freemasonry. Who are we to say  such things? I will agree freemasonry itself is a mans organization , but that does not mean that women do not wish for a group of their own. The creator made us all equal, men and women of every color and shape. Being equal do they not deserve a chance to learn similar ideas to what Masonic education provides, with out having to go threw man to get it?


----------



## thor9541

*Not so!*

Sir ,God never made man and women equal pick up any Holy book of scripture and share that with me.


----------



## BEDickey

*well...*

Brother, I can pick up a Holy book and show you stuff you never even knew was there, and probably wouldn't believe it even with it right in front of you. I myself understand scripture in a different way. But here is not the place, feel free to private message though and we can go into it deeper if you wish, or start a new thread in the appropriate forum. What I will say is that I believe thinking any person is not equal with any other person has led to the sanctioned murder of countless men and women of differing faiths, and currently causes suppression across the world even to this day. Thus I would agree that women should not join Freemasonry, I believe a separate order of there own would be appropriate.


----------



## Mac

*Re: Not so!*



thor9541 said:


> Sir ,God never made man and women equal pick up any Holy book of scripture and share that with me.


 And this, my brother, shows how diverse our fraternity can be.

Sitting in my professional classroom setting, I have no doubt that my female classmates are my equal.  After we graduate and serve the community and hospital settings as pharmacists, I know they will be just as well prepared and competent as I am.  The thought that they are somehow innately lesser beings has never once crossed my mind.  But I understand your view, and though I disagree with it, I respect it.


----------



## dconaway

*Freemason women*

I would leave the brotherhood if women were to be allowed in like the Elks lodges have done


----------



## jwhoff

*Re: Not so!*



Mac said:


> Originally Posted by thor9541
> Sir ,God never made man and women equal pick up any Holy book of scripture and share that with me.
> And this, my brother, shows how diverse our fraternity can be.
> 
> Sitting in my professional classroom setting, I have no doubt that my female classmates are my equal. After we graduate and serve the community and hospital settings as pharmacists, I know they will be just as well prepared and competent as I am. The thought that they are somehow innately lesser beings has never once crossed my mind. But I understand your view, and though I disagree with it, I respect it.


 
I'd just like to be able to keep up with a few of those members of the other gender in the work place.  As it is, I just try to get out of the way.

:13:


----------



## RedTemplar

I may be wrong, but maybe the term "equal" is not appropriate in this case.  When I was a boy, my friends and I would sometimes start a club of some kind. One of the first rules that was agreed upon by everyone was "No girls allowed". Even then we recognized there were differences in male and female.  Later in life we found out that could be a good thing. However good these differences may be, we do not need to share them in a FRATERNITY. Just like little boys, big boys need space sometimes, too.  And it has nothing to do with equality.


----------



## jwhoff

RedTemplar said:


> Even then we recognized there were differences in male and female. Later in life we found out that could be a good thing. However good these differences may be, we do not need to share them in a FRATERNITY.




So Mote it Be.  And too, who wants to belong to some _FRA-ority_?


:001_rolleyes:


----------



## Kratz

I was talking with some of the wife's of my group. The woman said to me: don't be so stupid. Man are not easy talkers.. This is finally a night where they can do that with help of symbolism. When I have a girls night with my friends it's also a closed part for only women. We talk easier about problems with each other. So I think it should stay like this. It's just a mans night.
But I think it should not be in the rules. You should decide yourself is you want women with it or not


----------



## ezeelivin

*Women in Masonry*

Eastern Stars is the sister group to the Masons, that's a great establishment for women in masonry


----------



## Ryan.A.Martin

I'm old school from the hills of KY I say no


----------



## dreamer

NO! I would demit.


----------



## K.S.

I'm with you brother dreamer, I would demit!


----------



## BryanMaloney

I would also oppose women in Freemasonry--what would be the point of it? I should point out that Eastern Star is a USA-only (or nearly USA-only) group, not typical of Regular Freemasonic allied groups, worldwide. All that being said, in this day and age, there is nothing at all stopping women from forming a sororal and symbolic organization, replete with Hermetic and Orientalist references and antiquarian claims that cannot be verified to modern historiographic standards.

My only fear is that they, being women, and women being who they are, would do it with far more dedication and systematic spirit than what men do with the Freemasons.


----------



## dreamer

Yes, women might, but being a member of the OES, I might tell you that I don't think it would be any different based on what I see.
Young men in this Fraternity will make it better.


----------



## maypearlflash

I have to say as an Eastern Star and as the Daughter and Grand Daughter of Master Masons...that it needs to remain the way that it is...BUT...There is a BIG BUT...the Men need to make it more friendly to families of the Masons and children of Masons. My dad's lodge didnt do that...they didnt invite the wives or children to eat the meal with them before their meeting...it would be nice in that sense if women could come and see kinda what their Husbands and children could see what their dad's are doing on the one or 2 nights a month whatever the case may be. That is the only way that the women should be involved. They should be able to come and have time to meet with their Husbands or dad's friends wives and children.


----------



## maypearlflash

dreamer said:


> Yes, women might, but being a member of the OES, I might tell you that I don't think it would be any different based on what I see.
> Young men in this Fraternity will make it better.



I second that! Any young blood will make all of these organizations better!


----------



## chauffe

maypearlflash said:
			
		

> I have to say as an Eastern Star and as the Daughter and Grand Daughter of Master Masons...that it needs to remain the way that it is...BUT...There is a BIG BUT...the Men need to make it more friendly to families of the Masons and children of Masons. My dad's lodge didnt do that...they didnt invite the wives or children to eat the meal with them before their meeting...it would be nice in that sense if women could come and see kinda what their Husbands and children could see what their dad's are doing on the one or 2 nights a month whatever the case may be. That is the only way that the women should be involved. They should be able to come and have time to meet with their Husbands or dad's friends wives and children.



 I agree with you on this at my lodge all wives and children are welcome and encouraged to come and eat and most of them stay down stairs while we are in our meeting and they play cards and have coffee. I think it helps with the way some look at the lodge and takes some of there doubts about what there husbands are doing on there nights away from home


----------



## RedTemplar

I would never accept my wife or daughter as members of my lodge.  However, I am in full favor of the idea that both belong to my lodge.


----------



## Star Mztyk

Bathsheba who was the mother of King Solomon built that Temple.....and there was not heard the sound of axe, chisle or any tool of metal in Her womb...the Bible states who created this stupendous edifice.  Does that make her a Mason?.....or at least an Entered Apprentice?


----------



## SeeKer.mm

My opinion on the topic is this...there are sororities, there are fraternities, and there are co-ed organizations.  A place for everything and everything in its place.


----------



## BryanMaloney

Star Mztyk said:


> Bathsheba who was the mother of King Solomon built that Temple.....and there was not heard the sound of axe, chisle or any tool of metal in Her womb...the Bible states who created this stupendous edifice.  Does that make her a Mason?.....or at least an Entered Apprentice?


 
No. She is a mother. Why pretend no differences exist?


----------



## Cigarzan

These organizations, Regular Freemasonry,co-masonry and women's masonry, are like delicatessens. You got yer Kosher deli and yer Kosher-_Style _delis. One is and one ain't. Kosher, that is.


----------



## Ol Kev

Just a little historical perspective to the discussion that I ran across this morning:

"London. Honourable Fraternity of Ancient Freemasons, founded by women  for women, celebrates its 'coming of age' by dedicating new Headquarters  and consecrating new Temple." - 1933

"Women Freemasons - Installation of Grandmaster in London." - 1939

"Women Freemasons" - 1939

For the record, I voted "No" in the poll . . . 
*
*


----------



## Mike Cameron

SeeKer.mm said:


> My opinion on the topic is this...there are sororities, there are fraternities, and there are co-ed organizations.  A place for everything and everything in its place.


 Ditto


----------



## BryanMaloney

As has been already stated, of women wish to form an honorable and mystical sorority, they are free to do so. However, I would think that they would derive more historical grounding and meaning from it were it to be based on the distaff crafts rather than a speculative masonry.


----------



## Bill Lins

BryanMaloney said:


> if women wish to form an honorable and mystical _*sorority*_, they are free to do so.


 
Roger that.


----------



## dhouseholder

I love OES, BUT if any of you have been to an Eastern Star meeting, you'd see what would happen if women were let into lodge.


----------



## jwhoff

hmy:

 :33: :49:

 :6: :41: :53: :7:


 :32: :15:


... I see what you mean.


----------



## jvarnell

I know I am just a EA and new to this but I think of the other Brother as the compus that keep us in bonds.  If I do something I want a mans point of view to help me know where the limits are.  Women thinks of thing differently and may not have the same bonds as men have to share with me.


----------



## MarkR

There is no shortage of places in my life where there are women willing to tell me how to be a better man.  Freemasonry is about men helping other men become better.


----------



## Bill Lins

MarkR said:


> There is no shortage of places in my life where there are women willing to tell me how to be a better man.



Beginning @ home!  Now that's funny right there, Bro. MarkR!  :lol:


----------



## jwhoff

yeah, bro bill_lins, SO MOTE IT BE!

 :13:, :19:,:3:, :31:,:7: , _etc._, and, of course, _etc_.


I guess you can boil it all down by just sayin' ... a brother never breaks the skin when reminding one, in the most tender manner, of an error.

While the ladies ... just sayin'.

 :15:


_NOTE:  get a cat ... keeps HER from focusing all her attention on U!_


----------



## Phre-massen.nash

That is what OES, HOJ, DOI, and such organizations are for . . .


----------



## BryanMaloney

The initials are abbreviations of specific womanly codes:
OES: Oughta Eat on the Sidewalk--the result of not noticing that she had her hair done, today.
HOJ: Heaved Out the Jar--when you forget the anniversary, that's where the food comes from.
DOI: Dead On Instant--what you become should you ever give an honest opinion of this year's fashion trends.


----------



## jwhoff

I can see you brethren, though young, are quick learners!


----------



## Tony Uzzell

My wife and I were talking about this the other day, actually.

I had read an article about co-Masonry in the US and Europe, and I brought it up for her opinion (she's a Past Matron in the OES and a Past Worthy President in Beauceant).  She told me that she liked the fact that there were places in the Masonic Family where it was all-men, mentioning a number of the arguments already mentioned in this thread. Her opinion ended with the idea that Masonry wouldn't really be Masonry if there were women in the Lodge.

Just thought I would share that.

TU


----------



## Ashlar

Tony Uzzell said:


> My wife and I were talking about this the other day, actually.
> 
> I had read an article about co-Masonry in the US and Europe, and I brought it up for her opinion (she's a Past Matron in the OES and a Past Worthy President in Beauceant).  She told me that she liked the fact that there were places in the Masonic Family where it was all-men, mentioning a number of the arguments already mentioned in this thread. Her opinion ended with the idea that Masonry wouldn't really be Masonry if there were women in the Lodge.
> 
> Just thought I would share that.
> 
> TU


 
I too have had this conversation with my wife . She sees no problem with all male Masonry . As a matter of fact she has stated that men (just like women) need a place to go that is male only and is very supportive of the idea . And since there is already co-Masonry and all female Masonry , then there is no problem , period . Also , she said that women  in the  lodge would not change Masonry , but it would change the dynamics of our lodges .


I have said it before and I will say it again .... I have no problem WHAT SO EVER with all female Masonry and co-Masonry , to each their own . I only ask that they leave us to our own devices . And from my years of traveling around on Masonic forums I have found that the only people who have problems with our male only policy are other men . The women are more than happy to be left alone and carry on with their business at hand but these men feel they have to show how progressive they are .


----------



## CajunTinMan

I am getting really tired of this unisex world. Everyone is trying to make everything the same.  They're trying to take the mysteries out of the differences we have. That would make life so boring.  Differences are a good thing and should be a enjoyed and appreciated.  I know I don't want to spend my life with someone who thinks like me and is like me.  We need to celebrate our differences that way we can appreciate one another better.  I know everyone's feelings are different but my wife married a man and she expects me to act like a man.  And my wife is by no means weak she's a former SWAT officer.  She just wants to be a woman and thinks it's crazy when women want to try to be man.


----------



## new observer

There are women Freemasons.
http://www.glff.org/


----------



## Brent Heilman

They are clandestine and not recognized. They call themselves "Masons", but in truth are far from it.


----------



## crono782

Disclosure: I'm am not a brother yet. Still waiting on the vote. Also, my opinion on women in fraternities is no, fraternities are men specific and to be otherwise would defeat much of the purpose.

I do love a good debate though, so food for thought...
I wonder if back in the day, the operative masons had this same exact discussion about speculative masons. In particular them saying "it's always been a fraternity for men doing literal masonry and it's been that way for years, why change?". Although the sense I get from hearing from others is that speculative was accepted about the time that less building projects in Europe lead to the decline of opeative masons, etc. So maybe I debated my own point. Still...


----------



## jwhoff

Brent Heilman said:


> They are clandestine and not recognized. They call themselves "Masons", but in truth are far from it.




So say the laws we swear to and abide by brother.  Thus ends to conversation.


----------



## jwhoff

crono782 said:


> Disclosure: I'm am not a brother yet. Still waiting on the vote. Also, my opinion on women in fraternities is no, fraternities are men specific and to be otherwise would defeat much of the purpose.
> 
> I do love a good debate though, so food for thought...
> I wonder if back in the day, the operative masons had this same exact discussion about speculative masons. In particular them saying "it's always been a fraternity for men doing literal masonry and it's been that way for years, why change?". Although the sense I get from hearing from others is that speculative was accepted about the time that less building projects in Europe lead to the decline of opeative masons, etc. So maybe I debated my own point. Still...



Good question brother.  But to be honest, I believe the topic of discussion among the operatives was money based.  You see, they had fallen upon very hard times once most of their work throughout Europe had withered down.  

It's the same old story, we now face.  Does more mean less?   Or, does a lack of funding mean sure death?  I don't think mankind is capable of not jumping quick answers to such extreme questions so I don't think we'll ever wait long enough to find out if there is truly middle ground.


----------



## MajaOES

From a women's perspective and opinion -

NO we shouldn't be allowed to receive the degrees of Masonry.  However, we need to design our current affiliated organizations like that of Masonry.  York Rite, Blue Lodge, and Scottish Rite all have degrees which allow for a personal journey to occur before becoming a full fledged member. The women's affiliated bodies do not have this.  It used to be that they had three degrees  but it was removed several decades before I joined OES.  The answer to resolving membership in the masonic organizations is not by unifying the groups but restructuring them to make them meaningful to both young and older members.  By giving them a personal journey that makes the teachings of the ritual meaningful to them instills a deeper commitment than by being able to complete it in a couple of hours.

Maja


----------



## CajunTinMan

I agree fully.


----------



## jwhoff

Really nothing like a woman's touch ... or logic!

Thanks Maja.


----------



## jwhoff

Bill_Lins77488 said:


> That's why there's Eastern Star & Rainbow. And you can participate with them!




Really!  Any safer there?


----------



## Bill Lins

jwhoff said:


> Really!  Any safer there?



Oh. no- you ain't throwin' me in THAT briar patch!  :48:


----------



## jvarnell

jwhoff said:


> Really nothing like a woman's touch ... or logic!
> 
> Thanks Maja.



Is this discussion starting up again?  I so I will coment on one thing   "logic"??????????????

No mater what the sexes use deferent parts of there brain when thinking logicly so the logic is deferent.  so "logic"??????? not the same.


----------



## jwhoff

I'm more than sure we can all agree to that statement.

Thanks for the clarification.  Remember, take nothing with a grain of salt.

:40:


----------



## Michael Neumann

As seen here http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20729972 and here http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9041858 " RESULTS: The volume of the superior temporal cortex, expressed as a proportion of total cerebral volume, was significantly larger in females compared with males (17.8% increase; P = .04). This was accounted for by 1 section of the superior temporal cortex, the planum temporale, which was 29.8% larger in females (P = .04). In addition, the cortical volume fraction of the Broca area in females was 20.4% larger than in males (P = .05). In contrast, no significant differences were found in the proportional volume of the frontal pole or in regional volumes between the left and right hemispheres in either sex group."

The female brain is different than the male brain... also we find that the female body is different than the male body. They carry a higher percentage of body fat, they generally have a smaller stature, among numerous other differences. They are not men and men are not women, we are different... period. How many times have you seen a man breastfeeding their child? How man times have you seen a woman impregnate someone? 

We are different yet equal, our bodies and brains behave differently. Understanding that with all these differences we are still equal, how do we resolve this debate? We already have, there are a wide variety of masonic organizations designed by both men and women and for both men and women. Girl Scouts are for girls, and Boy Scouts are for boys. When my wife wanted to become involved I pointed her to OES and the other options. 

Just my humble opinion open to debate and change depending on the information presented.

Michael


----------



## BryanMaloney

At one time, there were entirely female institutions that had esoteric work, degrees, sorority, and charitable activity. They were independent and freestanding, with their own histories and mysteries. Why these died in the USA, I don't know. There are a few still around in the UK.


----------



## cemab4y

There are women Freemasons. See http://www.co-masonry.org 

There are lodges that are for women only, and there are lodges that accept both men and women. None of these organizations are recognized by the mother Grand Lodge of England, and all of them are considered "Clandestine and Irregular".


----------



## MarkR

cemab4y said:


> There are women Freemasons. See http://www.co-masonry.org
> 
> There are lodges that are for women only, and there are lodges that accept both men and women. None of these organizations are recognized by the mother Grand Lodge of England, and all of them are considered "Clandestine and Irregular".


And if a person or his/her Lodge is considered clandestine and irregular, then I don't consider them Freemasons.  They are people claiming to be Freemasons, but they're not.


----------



## RHS

Mark r... I agree to an extent but....Would you consider PHA non masons then??? 


RHS

Freemason Connect Premium App


----------



## crono782

PHA is not considered irregular though


Freemason Connect Premium App


----------



## Bro. Stewart P.M.

RHS said:


> Mark r... I agree to an extent but....Would you consider PHA non masons then???
> 
> 
> RHS



Yes there are Clandestine PHA Masonic groups in many states, just as there are in mainstream Masonry... It is also important to remember that even the irregular/clandestine consider themselves to be legitimate masons.



crono782 said:


> PHA is not considered irregular though



Partially correct. Not all PHA Masonic groups are irregular/clandestine. It is important that we place more emphasis this point.


----------



## crono782

Hah yeah. I meant PHA is not irregular as a generality. There are certainly irregular PHA lodges though. 


Freemason Connect Premium App


----------



## bupton52

crono782 said:


> Hah yeah. I meant PHA is not irregular as a generality. There are certainly irregular PHA lodges though.
> 
> 
> Freemason Connect Premium App



Those would probably be lodges that style themselves PHO or Prince Hall Origin. 


Freemason Connect Premium App


----------



## Cblack

PHA is not irregular in any sense....the NGL (National Compact or PHO) is irregular being that the GLs in each state are not sovereign..they have National Grand Titles which are over the GM...now there is a group that has broken off from PHO which styles themselves PHT (Prince Hall Tradition)..this group allows women into their org..

Freemason Connect Premium App

They are some jurisdictions that have deemed PHA and any other body of freemasons in their state as clandestine because of the doctrine of ETJ (at least that's what they say) but in my opinion its a load of crock

Freemason Connect Premium App


----------



## Bro. Stewart P.M.

Cblack said:


> PHA is not irregular in any sense....the NGL (National Compact or PHO) is irregular being that the GLs in each state are not sovereign..they have National Grand Titles which are over the GM...now there is a group that has broken off from PHO which styles themselves PHT (Prince Hall Tradition)..this group allows women into their org..
> 
> Freemason Connect Premium App
> 
> They are some jurisdictions that have deemed PHA and any other body of freemasons in their state as clandestine because of the doctrine of ETJ (at least that's what they say) but in my opinion its a load of crock
> 
> Freemason Connect Premium App



Opinions or not, Prince Hall or Mainstream, irregularity depends on being recognized. Jurisdictional guidelines for each of our Jurisdictions dictate recognition. We must, as free men and Masons abide by our Grand Lodge's Laws and Edicts.

No one here on this site is stating that one recognized Grand Lodge is better than the other.


----------



## appzdude

Any lodge with female members is clandestine. Any brother sitting in it is in violation of their obligation. Nuff said!

Freemason Connect Premium App


----------



## Cblack

Bro. Stewart said:


> Opinions or not, Prince Hall or Mainstream, irregularity depends on being recognized. Jurisdictional guidelines for each of our Jurisdictions dictate recognition. We must, as free men and Masons abide by our Grand Lodge's Laws and Edicts.
> 
> No one here on this site is stating that one recognized Grand Lodge is better than the other.



Bro Stewart...I have to partially disagree with you...Irregularity does not depend on being recognized....The UGLE has recognized PHA as being a regular masonic body but will only recognize it in each state if the GLoState agrees to share the state territory because it chooses to not interfere with the ongoing matters here in the states...This leaves out 9 states that have yet to be recognized by their mainstream brethren. ..the excuse is ETJ...now in the case of the PHGLoAlaska..it was formed before the mainstream GL but because the UGLE did not recognize PHA it chose to recognize the mainstream one..


----------



## Bro. Stewart P.M.

Cblack said:


> Bro Stewart...I have to partially disagree with you...Irregularity does not depend on being recognized....The UGLE has recognized PHA as being a regular masonic body but will only recognize it in each state if the GLoState agrees to share the state territory because it chooses to not interfere with the ongoing matters here in the states...This leaves out 9 states that have yet to be recognized by their mainstream brethren. ..the excuse is ETJ...now in the case of the PHGLoAlaska..it was formed before the mainstream GL but because the UGLE did not recognize PHA it chose to recognize the mainstream one..



Regardless. We must uphold the Laws and Edicts of our own Jurisdictions, work to make changes, OR join the other(s).

It takes time to change. 99.82% is not a bad start.


----------



## Cblack

Bro. Stewart said:


> Regardless. We must uphold the Laws and Edicts of our own Jurisdictions, work to make changes, OR join the other(s).
> 
> It takes time to change. 99.82% is not a bad start.



Bro. Stewart....I fully agree with you on that aspect...

Freemason Connect Premium App


----------



## Cblack

Loving the dialogue in the forum

Freemason Connect Premium App


----------



## JohnnyFlotsam

Bro. Stewart said:


> Regardless. We must uphold the Laws and Edicts of our own Jurisdictions, work to make changes, OR join the other(s).
> 
> It takes time to change. 99.82% is not a bad start.



With respect, Brother, calling that "a start" is being overly generous. I would call it "where we are stuck after centuries of racism, sexism, and petty turf wars". On the bright side, progress continues. We should not lose sight of that and run the risk of allowing frustration and despair to dampen our zeal for the change that we all know is so sorely needed. By the same token, that it has taken this long for our fraternity to get to this point should be a source of shame, not pride.


----------



## dfreybur

cemab4y said:


> There are women Freemasons. See http://www.co-masonry.org
> 
> There are lodges that are for women only, and there are lodges that accept both men and women. None of these organizations are recognized by the mother Grand Lodge of England, and all of them are considered "Clandestine and Irregular".



UGLE calls them "regular with the exception of gender issues".  It's in the gray zone between regular and irregular.  They are not recognized and as such we should not try to pass the tiler at any of their meetings.  Their social events have no such issue.  We have social events were non-members are welcome.  So do they.  We have no bars to attending such open social events.  If such a lodge can be found.  Ah, now there's the key that can be used for a pragmatic approach to the issue.

But where are these lodges?  There are very few CoMason lodges in the US.  There's at least one women only lodge somewhere in California but have fun trying to actually find a women only lodge or a CoMason lodge.  To me that is how the matter gets settled.  Whether I consider them Masons is irrelevant given their rarity.  We are a hundred or a thousand times more popular in size of membership.  Taken in that perspective it's a tempest in a teapot.  Should we start accepting women?  The result may well be shrinking to one percent our current size.  I'll pass on the suggestion.  Are the organizations Masonic?  By GL technicality no.  If I see a grand hailing sign I'm not taking time to check dues cards.  Once I have time to check dues cards I will not try to pass the tiler in such an organization.  Do I care if they call themselves Masons?  Not really given their tiny size.

There is something in the constitution of some men that values associating with other men.  We're the ones who keep coming back.

There is something in the constitution of some women that values associating with other women.  They are the ones that join groups for women.

But how popular are men in groups designed for women that happen to allow men (or boys/girls in the case of Girl Scouts allowing boys because they sell cookies and are therefore technically a business subject to non-discrimination).  Turn this around and that's exactly why lodges that admit women are one percent of less of our membership.


----------



## JGMarto PM

I am a traditionalist.   I reject allowing women in and i will not recognise any women claiming to be a Freemason.  I think Grand Lodges have made enough changes (good or bad) for various reasons and sometimes just for the sake of change.  Our obligation is against it and that is what I swore to. My word is stronger than politaical correctness.

Just my opinion. 
Bro. Joseph G Martoccio PM.


Freemason Connect Mobile


----------



## Cblack

There is a co-mason lodge in Austin, TX

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Freemasonry mobile app


----------



## Dame357

Love it!

Freemason Connect Mobile


----------



## dfreybur

Cblack said:


> There is a co-mason lodge in Austin, TX



There are 8 of our lodges in Travis county and I haven't looked up PHA lodges to add to the total.  Where's the next nearest Comason lodge?  Le Driot Domain doesn't list any lodges in Texas but they have 16 in all of the US.  Co-Masonry.org does not offer a list of lodges but they aren't going to be any larger. So both CoMason jurisdictions together in all of the US are 4 times the size of the districts near Austin.  The difference in population is that big.  If we ignored them it would be like NATO ignoring Liechtenstein.

That said if you want to attend one of their non-tiled social events there's no problem.  Don't pass their tiler; don't have an issue.  if you can find their meetings at all.


----------



## JGMarto PM

Doesn't attending one of those lodges violate the oath we took?  Certainly the one I swore to.

Freemason Connect Mobile


----------



## Ol Kev

JGMarto PM said:


> Doesn't attending one of those lodges violate the oath we took?  Certainly the one I swore to.
> 
> Freemason Connect Mobile



Was just thinking the same thing - Don't see how it could be classified as anything but clandestine.


----------



## dfreybur

JGMarto PM said:


> Doesn't attending one of those lodges violate the oath we took?  Certainly the one I swore to.



Social events are not tiled lodge and thus do not fall under the oath.

Has a woman ever attended an open installation or lodge sponsored ladies night dinner at your lodge?  The way you appear to have phrased it you swore an oath to not let that happen either.  You understand that it works exactly the same in reverse, right?  If you think it's not allowed to attend a non-tiled social event by some random organization not considered Masons just because there are women there you're going to have troubles going to social events sponsored by work.

Closer to home, this same principle applies to PHA non-tiled social events.  They aren't tiled and therefore the rule against visitation does not apply to any Texas Mason of either of the two regular jurisdictions.  In Masonry "visiting" a lodge means going past the tiler and giving the modes of recognition.  Attending social events is not visiting.  Keep an eye out for any such social event.


----------



## JGMarto PM

I wouldn't consider a social event against my oath.  But in Pa co-masonry is considered clandestine and I personally would not attend an event sponsered by them.  Prince Hall lodges are recognised in Pa and not against our oath to visit.  

Freemason Connect Mobile


----------



## Michael Hatley

This is something I've seen a couple of lodges doing around in my area, involving the wives a lot in the meal and whatnot.  I like that a lot and would like to see it happen at my lodge, we'll see.  I think what it likely takes is 3-4 of the ladies of the fellas at the lodge hanging out and growing genuinely fond of one another, or else being drug up to lodge is a chore proposition.

Like take my Shrine unit.  Everything practically is co-ed.  When we have our stated meeting, the ladies have a little business powwow too, and do fundraisers all on their own and whatnot.  Its awesome.  My wife keeps me informed on all the upcoming events and looks forward to going up to the Shrine.  And a whole room full of ladies are like my adopted Aunts who are glad to see me.  Its just really familial feeling and comfortable.

So I'd love to bring that kind of environment to our lodge.  But when I've floated the idea in some circles I get a bit of pushback, so dunno - like I say we'll see.

I will say that over the last couple of years my views have become more conservative.  To me, co-masonry or some kind of new thing in the US is just not needed.  The OES is cool, all set up with a history and all of it, and do good things.  Whats wrong with it?  Is it the relation to a MM that is at issue?  

The idea of calling a lady "Brother" just seems silly to me.  To me its like the goofy Star Trek where they call female officers "Sir" rather than "Ma'am", as if Madam was an inferior word.  To me its like they go so far to reject inferiority that they create it by lessening the importance of the word "Sister", you know?  

But anyhow, thats just me - and like I say over the last couple of years I've become more conservative on the issue.  Mostly because I've learned a wee bit about OES and seen the awesome ladies at the Shrine.  They run the place, or at the very very least are most certainly not thought of as "lesser".  Every man up there treats my wife like the Lady she is in fact and name, and I do the same to the other Ladies.  And by that I mean with the very deepest respect.  Where is the problem?  

Plus there is the Daughters of the Nile and so on and so forth.


----------



## JGMarto PM

Yes OES is a fantastic organization.  I worked hand I'm hand with them the 2 years I was WM.  Great group of ladies and gentleman.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Freemasonry mobile app


----------



## Randy Joe

Being neither naked nor clad may be interesting.


----------



## MajaOES

So I voted "no".  The problems that exist in the "fraternity" also exist in all the other masonic affiliated organizations.  Personally if I want to become a mason and learn masonry, I want to go to England to do it and visit one of the lodges the UGLE approves of that are all women.  Clandestine or not for me learning the work is more for reference to the other rituals and degrees I have learned.  Sad part is that even after I gain my PhD and do my dissertation on Eastern Star and Masonic History.  I feel that the only way to share enlightenment on the craft or any of the degrees of any order and being taken creditable is to use a pseudonym.  Sad as that is to say.  I feel we can all share in the knowledge of the craft, women bring enlightenment into the order by being able to view it as an outsider.  Not that much is hidden any longer.  The thing that remains true like all good secrets I get the answer "I can not confirm or deny that is what that means"  when I ask about what I have discovered on my own about the order.


----------



## WB Hayes

Read your mm ob 



Freemason Connect Mobile


----------



## Mason653

UGLE doesn't have too much of a problem with all female masonry. 

If a lady ask to join kindly point her to female masonic organizations. If she has not the privilege of having a mason as a father, etc. 

Why not? It's not our business. Right? 

My aunt (RIP) was an OES and she knew a lot about the male craft side (grips, signs, etc...all of it). Not from computers, Duncan, etc. <----before all of that.  A brother told me he had similar happen to him with a OES relative....where she referred to a certain penalty to him. 

So...

IMO People take the OB's...TOO serious....if that's the case don't wear rings, use auto emblems, get tattoos...all of those are engraved...carved....moveable or immovable.....whatever. I hear way back when we couldn't wear rings. Now we do so 24/7. 






/G\
FHC
357
FLT


Freemason Connect Mobile


----------



## WB Hayes

I hear you bro I just simply take mine seriously  my wide is Oes  and we seriously try and respect the craft. I would gladly point a woman in the right direction.  But one thing if you don't take you on seriously than where is the respect for the craft? 


Freemason Connect Mobile


----------



## Mason653

WB Hayes said:


> I hear you bro I just simply take mine seriously  my wide is Oes  and we seriously try and respect the craft. I would gladly point a woman in the right direction.  But one thing if you don't take you on seriously than where is the respect for the craft?
> 
> 
> Freemason Connect Mobile



Of course take it serious. I said don't take it TOO serious. 


/G\
FHC
357
FLT


Freemason Connect Mobile


----------



## Bro. ricardo hardy

I feel that women should not be masons. There are other organizations out there for the woman to be a part of


Freemason Connect Mobile


----------



## dfreybur

MajaOES said:


> Personally if I want to become a mason and learn masonry, I want to go to England to do it and visit one of the lodges the UGLE approves of that are all women.  Clandestine or not for me learning the work is more for reference to the other rituals and degrees I have learned.



You don't have to go to England to find one of the tiny lodges that admit both men and women or women only.  There are several in the US.  As our lodges do they have events that are open to non-members.  Anyone can go to such an event without violating any obligation.  Passing one of their tilers is an entirely different matter.  Join such a lodge, pass one of their tilers and you can't attend one of our lodges and vice versa.  The difference in population is enormous and that says much about the effectiveness of female and coed lodges in general but they are sure to have top notch individual members.


----------



## Randy Joe

I too voted no. Like I said I'm a member of the OES. I have the highest respect for the ladies, but they do have their own lodges.


----------



## Dame357

dfreybur said:


> You don't have to go to England to find one of the tiny lodges that admit both men and women or women only.  There are several in the US.  As our lodges do they have events that are open to non-members.  Anyone can go to such an event without violating any obligation.  Passing one of their tilers is an entirely different matter.  Join such a lodge, pass one of their tilers and you can't attend one of our lodges and vice versa.  The difference in population is enormous and that says much about the effectiveness of female and coed lodges in general but they are sure to have top notch individual members.



What GL are you apart of?

Freemason Connect HD


----------



## dfreybur

Dame357 said:


> What GL are you apart of?



My jurisdictions are listed in my signature on each post.


----------



## GeNomeZ

dfreybur said:


> My jurisdictions are listed in my signature on each post.



I think he is probably using the iOS app. I don't see your signature in the app either unless I look at your profile. I opened your post on the website and then I see it in the post. 


Freemason Connect HD


----------



## FlBrother324

Blake Bowden said:


> Should women be allowed to become Freemasons?



Br. Bowden,

Men and women are fundamentally different, as stated in previous posts. Those Brothers that are OES (like myself) know how different those meetings are compared to regular Blue Lodge tiled meetings, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with it. That being said, we shouldn't be coerced into political correctness which will fundamentally change our Fraternity. 

People seek out others with similar mindsets, because we enjoy interacting with them on that specific level. Unfortunately, there will always be individuals who believe they are Entitled to, or have the Right to belong, whether they do or not. 

It would be like having a private family function at your home, and an individual walking by, believes they have the Right to join in the festivities because they live in the same town as you do. Should you be required to admit or accept them just because they wanted to join in so as not to be left out of the festivities?

A question that has been raised by others I have spoken with about this subject is; What do you do about the degrees? They would have to be modified from there present configurations, for obvious reasons! 

Don't get me wrong, I believe in equal rights for all, but that does not include the invasion of Private groups, whether they be male, female, religious sects, or any other orders.

Why do people feel the need to homogenize every aspect of society? We are all different, which is healthy! Otherwise we would be a Collective of mindless robots walking lock-step  through our collective existence.

If they want to form a separate organization great, more power to them. But just because a Swallow has wings and flies south for the winter, doesn't mean it can call itself a duck
and expect to be reclassified as a duck, because it says so. No more so, than a duck expecting the same in return.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with wanting to be in a Private group or organization. They have limited access to non-members, with a set of rules and guidelines of their choosing. If they chose to abide by and maintain them such as they are, without the threat of outside invasiveness being expected from those that feel they have the right to belong, so be it.

Yours, in His service.


----------



## dfreybur

Dame357 said:


> What GL are you a part of?



California and Illinois at present.  Currently waiting on the dual membership paperwork to wind through the offices of 2 lodges and 2 GLs to affiliate with a Texas lodge.  All 3 states soon enough.  Boss Lady says - I am not to go through the line again while here.  We'll see how long it takes her to relent on the point.


----------



## kauff.'.

Brasil! Algum Ir.'. Por aqui? 


Freemason Connect HD


----------



## knight_templar

Are'nt the co freemasonry lodges for women considered clandestined?

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Freemason Connect HD mobile app


----------



## jasper7788

In keeping with tradition and oaths. I do not think women should be allowed in the fraternity. There are fraternities that are women only. There are sororities. I believe the sanctity of freemasonry should stay the way it is.


Freemason Connect HD


----------



## knight_templar

But are they still clandestined

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Freemason Connect HD mobile app


----------



## jasper7788

Most are to my belief. I could be wrong.  I have seen women with Masonic rings and necklaces, but I personally don't engage in Masonic conversation with them. 


Freemason Connect HD


----------



## knight_templar

That is true

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Freemason Connect HD mobile app


----------



## eze357woods

No women that's what OES is for

harmony#1, Brother Woods


----------



## Steve1mufc

Women can not become masons. Not recognised by the grand lodge of England and is clandestine. I think you can be expelled from freemasonry if you enter one of these lodges. 


Freemason Connect HD


----------



## mas2500

This is just a thought, but why don't we give Women there own Lodges?... 


Future mason from born from the past ones.


----------



## Steve1mufc

I think they have they do but they can't be recognised as masons. They have the eastern star I think but i don't think women will ever be allowed into freemasonry it would upset a lot of people and cause problems. 


Freemason Connect HD


----------



## mas2500

Steve1mufc said:


> I think they have they do but they can't be recognised as masons. They have the eastern star I think but i don't think women will ever be allowed into freemasonry it would upset a lot of people and cause problems.
> Yet we are in a time of change, anything is possible
> 
> Freemason Connect HD






Future mason from born from the past ones.


----------



## Steve1mufc

I think especially under UGLE it would definitely upset senior masons, I have spoken about this before in the lodge and it was dismissed straight away and laughed at. Personally I can't ever see it working. The history and traditions of masonry could be jeopardised allowing women into the craft. 


Freemason Connect HD


----------



## Steve1mufc

Plus fundamental elements of each degree would have to be changed to accommodate women. I'm not sure why a women would want to join a fraternity anyway. 


Freemason Connect HD


----------



## mas2500

Steve1mufc said:


> Plus fundamental elements of each degree would have to be changed to accommodate women. I'm not sure why a women would want to join a fraternity anyway.
> 
> 
> Freemason Connect HD



Equality, part of being human.


Future mason from born from the past ones.


----------



## Steve1mufc

Some are more equal than others. If I attempted to join the women's institute it would be rejected as its only open to women. To much of this liberal nonsense these days. 


Freemason Connect HD


----------



## mas2500

Steve1mufc said:


> Some are more equal than others. If I attempted to join the women's institute it would be rejected as its only open to women. To much of this liberal nonsense these days.
> 
> 
> Freemason Connect HD



True, but you have tomboys/ tomgirls


Future mason from born from the past ones.


----------



## Steve1mufc

Yeah it's a grey area. How would they get through the degrees though without embarrassment. Plus as part of the oath, fundamental changes would be required which I can't see happening, 


Freemason Connect HD


----------



## BigDre357

I actually have a documentary on Freemasonry that has Janet Wintermute a female Master Mason and I was stunned when I first saw it

SMIB /G\


----------



## FlBrother324

mas2500 said:


> Equality, part of being human.
> 
> 
> Future mason from born from the past ones.



What does belonging to a fraternity have to do with equality? Does that mean that college men should be able to join and live within the sororities, and vice versa for the college women to join and live in the fraternities? 
Some things are just what they are! 
This politically correct homogenization of our country is absurd! 

Private means private; existing under their set rules and guidelines they choose.

As I said previously,  just because a Swallow flies South for the winter with the ducks, doesn't mean it can call itself a duck or join in their flocks.


----------



## FlBrother324

mas2500 said:


> This is just a thought, but why don't we give Women there own Lodges?...
> 
> 
> Future mason from born from the past ones.



They have their own branches of our Masonic order: Job's Daughters and Rainbow Girls for the youngsters, and Order of Eastern Star, and Amaranth for the adult ladies. We are not the Rotary or Elks clubs.


----------



## Brother JC

FlBrother324 said:


> They have their own branches of our Masonic order...


*devil's advocate moment*
In all fairness, Brother, you can't call these "their own" as they require the presence of at least one Master Mason, and are effectively open to any Master Mason who wishes to drop in. Perhaps if their Charters were changed to reflect "members only," and their rituals kept sacrosanct, as ours are...


----------



## JohnnyFlotsam

trysquare said:


> *devil's advocate moment*
> In all fairness, Brother, you can't call these "their own" as they require the presence of at least one Master Mason, and are effectively open to any Master Mason who wishes to drop in. Perhaps if their Charters were changed to reflect "members only," and their rituals kept sacrosanct, as ours are...



Quite right. To call these organizations "Masonry for women" is an insult, to women and to Masons. 

It is unfortunate that there are not recognized Lodges for women only, and for mixed membership. I don't know that I'd be inclined to regularly attend a mixed membership lodge, but the idea that it would be an option is attractive. Make no mistake, I like the dynamic that can exists only in a males-only lodge and am not in any way advocating an end to that, but I know women, including one Master Mason, whom I would be proud to sit in Lodge with were that an option. Of course such lodges already exist, but lacking recognition, they are not an option for any Mason who was initiated in a regular and recognized lodge. Their existence in no way threatens "traditional" or "mainstream" Masonry, and if done properly, recognition for them would not change that.


----------



## FlBrother324

trysquare said:


> *devil's advocate moment*
> In all fairness, Brother, you can't call these "their own" as they require the presence of at least one Master Mason, and are effectively open to any Master Mason who wishes to drop in. Perhaps if their Charters were changed to reflect "members only," and their rituals kept sacrosanct, as ours are...



I'm not sure of the regulations or membership requirements in your jurisdiction for these organizations i mentioned, but in our Grand Jurisdiction you are not allowed to attend a tiled meeting of OES or Amaranth unless you are a member in good standing of said Appended Bodies. I am a member of a local Chapter of OES that my wife and daughter belong to, and though they have a Worthy Matron and Worthy Patron, the Chapter's business and meetings are run and organized by the elected and appointed officers which are all women. The Worthy Matron governs the Chapter in the same capacity as a W:.M:. does  his Blue Lodge. The only other position in the Chapter that can be held by a Brother ( and is not required to be ) is the Sentinel. The reason for the Worthy Patron is to be affiliated to a Blue Lodge, just like any other appended Masonic body requires ( i.e., Scottish Rite, York Rite, Shrine (except in Arkansas), etc...) them to have.  It is strictly for affiliation purposes. It is similar for Amaranth as well. 
The rituals are to be kept sacred and in violet just as in all  Masonic bodies. Disclosure of the rituals is unMasonic and should be dealt with accordingly.

Regarding Rainbow Girls and Job's Daughters they are run by the young ladies and supervised by a Chapter Mom with the support of the local Blue Lodges. 

So as far as our State is concerned,  these are operated by, and for the Women of our Masonic family. 
 If you've ever attended one of these meetings ( OES  & AMARANTH ) you would see just how different they are regarding their protocols and ceremonies, I only attend when I'm asked to because it is definitely geared for the women !!   They are completely independent of the Blue Lodges. I assure you they run things as they see fit, as they should. 

I'm not sure why J. Flotsam finds this insulting to both women and Masons alike. I don't know how much working knowledge he has regarding same. It appears from his bio information he may not even be a Mason?   

I thank you for your input and understand how you feel, like you, I feel our Masonic Fraternity shouldn't change its' heritage foundations to reflect women in the Lodge. There is nothing that is stopping them from forming a similar organization that is a Sorority based quasi- Masonic entity. They just shouldn't be referred to as "Masons". That is our heritage and it shouldn't be infringed on, or changed otherwise. IMHO.

I am so tired of activist and the like thinking they should Homogenize all of society. There is absolutely nothing wrong with having a PRIVATE organization with the type of membership they so choose to have, without having to "water it down" to be politically correct. Why can't people accept that?


May the GAOTU bless you and keep you under his protection and care.

Yours, in His service.


----------



## JohnnyFlotsam

FlBrother324 said:


> ...I assure you they run things as they see fit, as they should.
> 
> I'm not sure why J. Flotsam finds this insulting to both women and Masons alike. I don't know how much working knowledge he has regarding same.



I said that "...To call these organizations 'Masonry for women' is an insult, to women and to Masons..." because it is. I have no issue at all with these organizations themselves, but to suggest that they are something equivalent to a Lodge of Masons is just silly. 



> I am so tired of activist and the like thinking they should Homogenize  all of society. There is absolutely nothing wrong with having a PRIVATE  organization with the type of membership they so choose to have, without  having to "water it down" to be politically correct. Why can't people  accept that?



Quite right. There is absolutely nothing wrong with a private organization determining the criteria for membership in that organization. I've not read anything here that would suggest otherwise. 

Why then, can't people accept that a desire for equality does not have to mean the same thing as a demand for homogeneity?


----------



## ChaplinMike277

Learn what the apron is for

Freemason Connect HD


----------



## dfreybur

JohnnyFlotsam said:


> Why then, can't people accept that a desire for equality does not have to mean the same thing as a demand for homogeneity?



That's the rub.  Why then, can't people accept that forgiveness has nothing to do with forgetness?  I figure these two common confusions shared a basic cause having to do with the shallow nature of sound bites and the need to ponder the differences to give their deeper meanings to seep into our minds.


----------



## hidonmesahj

Women cannot be masons. We can respect eachother without bleeding so many lines. Masonry is not a right. It's an private fraternity with regulations.

Sent from my HTC One SV using Freemason Connect HD mobile app


----------



## JohnnyFlotsam

hidonmesahj said:


> Women cannot be masons. We can respect eachother without bleeding so many lines. Masonry is not a right. It's an private fraternity with regulations.



Tell that to the many female Masons around the world. 
Perhaps you meant to say that women Masons are not members of regular Lodges in recognized jurisdictions. In that you would be completely correct. 

Where were you first prepared to be made a Mason? Do you think your answer is different because of your gender? Do think that females can not grasp the lessons of our order?


----------



## jasper7788

As correct as that statement is. Just as I would not recognize a clandestine mason I will not recognize a woman Freemason. This has nothing to do with sexism but rather tradition. 

I've seen our ancient degree work take on many changes in my short time. There are just things that need to stay to keep the fraternity sacred. 


Bro Jason Moreland
Barger Lodge #325
Stroudsburg, PA


----------



## Dis1Recording

A woman can become a Eastern Star. Not a Freemason. Your oath speaks about that. 


My Freemasonry HD


----------



## JohnnyFlotsam

Dis1Recording said:


> A woman can become a Eastern Star. Not a Freemason. Your oath speaks about that.


My _obligation_ enjoins _me _from making a woman a Mason and from being present at such an event. Period. It makes no mention of Eastern Star. The fact remains that there are female Masons and that I have not broken any obligation in recognizing that.


----------



## JohnnyFlotsam

jasper7788 said:


> As correct as that statement is. Just as I would not recognize a clandestine mason I will not recognize a woman Freemason. This has nothing to do with sexism but rather tradition.
> 
> I've seen our ancient degree work take on many changes in my short time. There are just things that need to stay to keep the fraternity sacred.



Whether or not that view is sexist depends a great deal on what you mean by "recognize". If you mean that in the sense that we, as "regular" Masons, may not have "Masonic communication" with female Masons (or any clandestine Mason, for that matter), then I would agree completely. But if you mean to suggest that we simply should not discuss Masonry, it's lessons, etc., then, at the very least, you misunderstand the nature of our obligation. If you mean that women should not have, or are not capable of, such discussions, then that is a very sexist statement.


----------



## R4M1R0

I would vote no, 

Not only due to tradition, the definition of fraternity, or because men, biological, would act differently and treat them differently. Nor, due to some smug idea that men are superior than women.

But, because it has been shown that men learn and thrive best when they are in tribe, brotherhood, due to deeper connections and security. That in these modern times we have lost a piece of our manhood and masculinity, due to the shift from bronze to intellect, as well the to our politically correct society, and the idea that equal means no boundaries.

Masonry, allows men from many backgrounds to meet and learn from each other, a system wherein  feelings of joy and tranquillity grabs the hearts of two brother whom have identified each other.


In my lodge the last brother who knocked even stated that due to his age (56) that he had little to no friends and found it difficult when approaching others, but Masonry relieved him of that difficulty. Now I see him every month talking to everyone. His wife was the one who pushed to our door. Before Freemasonry, I would never had expected to hang out with other men who were 30+ years than me, but thanks to her I have learned to value the advice of my elders, as well as to enjoy the time with them.

We are not here to take over the world, control the minds of children, or destroy the belief in God. We are just a group of men trying to men good men better, through brotherhood, moral teachings, and etiquettes of being a gentlemen. 



My Freemasonry HD


----------



## jasper7788

That all depends on what parts of freemasonry you are saying can be discussed. I know the lessons I learned in the degrees are not for discussion. 

What I meant is that in my third degree I was taught certain items pertaining to this topic which I wi never violate. Further, I won't engage in conversation with a woman Freemason as it is not recognized. 

Tell a woman I am a mason is about as far as I would take it if I am to obey the oaths and obligations. Certain historical items are fine. But details no. 


Bro Jason Moreland
Barger Lodge #325
Stroudsburg, PA


----------



## FlBrother324

JohnnyFlotsam said:


> Whether or not that view is sexist depends a great deal on what you mean by "recognize". If you mean that in the sense that we, as "regular" Masons, may not have "Masonic communication" with female Masons (or any clandestine Mason, for that matter), then I would agree completely. But if you mean to suggest that we simply should not discuss Masonry, it's lessons, etc., then, at the very least, you misunderstand the nature of our obligation. If you mean that women should not have, or are not capable of, such discussions, then that is a very sexist statement.



I couldn't agree with you more Br. Moreland, there is nothing sexist about your statement. The bottom line is: no matter male, female, duck, or swallow. Just as no clandestine mason can be received as a Mason in a "regular" Lodge, or have lawful communication with a regular Mason; no matter the similarities of the "women masons" they can' t be a Mason. 
Which I believe, both of you agree with.

Like similarities of life patterns a Swallow has with a Duck, it can never be called a Duck. The Duck wins by default, because he had the name first and still does. 

So it should be vehemently maintained under "Our" heritage, and precepts that we hold the title Mason, and shouldn't except or acknowledge those that would try to horn in on our rights to be the sole usury of said sovereign title. MASON. 

IMHO, however sharing any of the Masonic teachings past generalities, I believe to be a direct violation of our "oaths" taken during our 1st, 2nd, and 3rd degrees in the Lodge. If asked specifics,  I politely advise the individual that I can neither confirm nor deny, regarding same,  and either change the subject or end the conversation. 

My Freemasonry HD


----------



## JohnnyFlotsam

jasper7788 said:


> That all depends on what parts of freemasonry you are saying can be discussed. I know the lessons I learned in the degrees are not for discussion.



How do you know this? 

Think back again on your obligations, in particular those things that you promised and swore not to divulge. That's actually a pretty short list. 
And this is a very common misconception, due at least in part to the fact that, as a matter of custom, most of us will not talk in much detail about those parts of our ritual that are non-monitorial. That leaves a lot of common ground for two Masons to talk about without either violating his or her obligation.


----------



## JohnnyFlotsam

FlBrother324 said:


> I couldn't agree with you more Br. Moreland, there is nothing sexist about your statement. The bottom line is: no matter male, female, duck, or swallow. Just as no clandestine mason can be received as a Mason in a "regular" Lodge, or have_* lawful communication *_with a regular Mason...



"Lawful communication" or more precisely, "Masonic communication" refers to those things that can only happen ("lawfully") in a tyled Lodge. They do _not_ refer to conversation about this or that Masonic topic. Again, a very common misconception.


----------



## Brother JC

Everything discussed in this thread or on this forum has been discussed with women, cowans, eavesdroppers, irregulars, and the clandestinely made. Have any of us gone against our Obligations? I think not.

There is a wealth of transformational philosophy inherent in our gentle Craft that can be shared with any interested seeker.


----------



## BryanMaloney

If it's for sale through Macoy, it's legal to tell to anyone.


----------



## Brother JC

BryanMaloney said:


> If it's for sale through Macoy, it's legal to tell to anyone.


Yep, same with plain text in your Monitor.


----------



## thewise1

Brothers the women's orders are intricate and deep if you true delve through them. It is a women's  version of freemasonry  there is no reason to merge them or to consider 
Co-masonry when there is already a path for that. anyone who truly learn depth of the labyrinth of the Star or HOJ  will see that it is a female version  of Freemasonry 


My Freemasonry HD


----------



## BryanMaloney

JohnnyFlotsam said:


> Tell that to the many female Masons around the world.
> Perhaps you meant to say that women Masons are not members of regular Lodges in recognized jurisdictions. In that you would be completely correct.
> 
> Where were you first prepared to be made a Mason? Do you think your answer is different because of your gender? Do think that females can not grasp the lessons of our order?



If that is so important, there are Comasonry organizations already extant.


----------



## Brother JC

The original poll would have been better worded "Should women be allowed in *our* Masonic system." To which I would vote no. There have been women Freemasons since at least the early 1700s, and no amount of arguing will change that.


----------



## JohnnyFlotsam

BryanMaloney said:


> If that is so important, there are Comasonry organizations already extant.


  No one has suggested otherwise. I believe you've missed the point of my rhetorical questions...


----------



## tjmonty32

Hello

My Freemasonry HD


----------



## BigDre357

BryanMaloney said:


> If it's for sale through Macoy, it's legal to tell to anyone.



I can go to local book stores and buy the stuff on Macoy, I bought my Duncan at Books a Million they have a full sized leather backed version there also I have a book shelf full of material bought on Amazon and ebay so even the things we are not supposed to mention are available to anyone, I have the Duncan and the Lester both in digital format on my phone thru the Android market/play store so so everything we are obligated to not speak of is already it there for the world to see so it is no big secret anymore. 

SMIB /G\


----------



## Brother JC

As my mentor told me after I was Raised, even if I wanted to tell you the true secrets of Masonry, I couldn't, because they are different for each of us and locked within our hearts.


----------



## dfreybur

trysquare said:


> As my mentor told me after I was Raised, even if I wanted to tell you the true secrets of Masonry, I couldn't, because they are different for each of us and locked within our hearts.



We also have the sort of secret that can be shouted from the rooftops and it remains a secret to folks who have not seen them in action.  We call each other brother not as some habit or rule.  We do it to remind ourselves that we actually treat each other as kin.  Try shouting that from the rooftops and see if anyone gets it.


----------



## BroBook

Wingnut said:


> I can, and have, made a good arguement for allowing women into Masonry, but in the end it would change Masonry.  Men behave different when there are women present.  The principles of Masonry are open to anyone, membership in the Fraternity is not...



To add to that ,the spiritual lessons are taught to women in the female auxiliaries if I am not mistaken!!!

BroBook


My Freemasonry HD


----------



## BroBook

Beathard said:


> What is the fourth word after the "by what further right..." question?



Now that's my point and the one about chastity !!!


My Freemasonry HD


----------



## Brother JC

Chastity? Nothing about that in my Jurisdiction. I'm a Mason, not a monk.


----------



## BroBook

trysquare said:


> Chastity? Nothing about that in my Jurisdiction. I'm a Mason, not a monk.



As to relates to your brothers female relatives!


My Freemasonry HD


----------



## bupton52

BroBook said:


> As to relates to your brothers female relatives!
> 
> 
> My Freemasonry HD



Let's not continue to dig into what it says, but there is one very important word that is being missed. Skipping over it causes you to misunderstand what is being said. Having a relationship with a brothers female relative is fine.


----------



## Mike Martin

Co-Masonry should not be confused with women-only Orders as they are very different ideas.


----------



## dfreybur

trysquare said:


> Chastity? Nothing about that in my Jurisdiction. I'm a Mason, not a monk.



You're affiliating in one more jurisdiction according to one of your other posts.  There will be something about it when the paperwork settles.

Thank brother Byron for pointing to a very important word that is not often considered in discussions of this sort.


----------



## Brother JC

dfreybur said:


> There will be something about it when the paperwork settles.


I should find out soon enough, the Secretary is putting the paperwork into the snail-mail today.

And reading over the Emulation Ritual, they use chastity. NM is a bit more blunt. hmy:


----------



## scw538

If I remember correctly  "We make good men better men" .......nothing should be twisted they have o.e.s. .... 


My Freemasonry


----------



## MajaOES

Female perspective:  As a researcher I want that knowledge.  I spend a lot of time assisting the Lodge with fundraising and even sharing knowledge about the history of freemasonry. I dedicated my academic PhD career studying freemasonry and the affiliated bodies.  The research will always be incomplete without having the basic understanding and full knowledge of the ritual of the Lodge. However, it is the one place I am not allowed to enter and partake in.  I would be ok with that, if I could actually be part of the Lodge of Research.  I fail to see why women can not belong to the Lodge of Research.  The Lodge of Research is not able to publish anything that anyone is not allowed to see.  Therefore, my opinion is why should the Lodge of Research be dedicated to men only?  Shouldn't the Lodge of Research to exploring the other facets of masonry?  All affiliated bodies of Masonry were written by Master Masons or female relatives of Master Masons.  I accept the fact as a women I will not be allowed to share in the mysteries of freemasonry beyond what is already published and general knowledge.  But to promote understanding and advancement in our knowledge to seek the truth, would it not be more beneficial to research more than just masonry but what the other bodies teach as well?  Just a thought.


----------



## scw538

MajaOES I do very much respect your want for more light.  I think it is very cool that you are writing your dissertation on masonry and other affiliations. I do feel that behind most good masons stand a equally good woman. You in yourself are discovering light through your research.  With that being said I return to " Masonry makes good men, better men" 


My Freemasonry


----------



## BroBook

JohnnyFlotsam said:


> My _obligation_ enjoins _me _from making a woman a Mason and from being present at such an event. Period. It makes no mention of Eastern Star. The fact remains that there are female Masons and that I have not broken any obligation in recognizing that.



After all these years I just. Realized that in Oder for there to be an injunction against it it must have already been done 


My Freemasonry


----------



## BroBook

MajaOES said:


> Female perspective:  As a researcher I want that knowledge.  I spend a lot of time assisting the Lodge with fundraising and even sharing knowledge about the history of freemasonry. I dedicated my academic PhD career studying freemasonry and the affiliated bodies.  The research will always be incomplete without having the basic understanding and full knowledge of the ritual of the Lodge. However, it is the one place I am not allowed to enter and partake in.  I would be ok with that, if I could actually be part of the Lodge of Research.  I fail to see why women can not belong to the Lodge of Research.  The Lodge of Research is not able to publish anything that anyone is not allowed to see.  Therefore, my opinion is why should the Lodge of Research be dedicated to men only?  Shouldn't the Lodge of Research to exploring the other facets of masonry?  All affiliated bodies of Masonry were written by Master Masons or female relatives of Master Masons.  I accept the fact as a women I will not be allowed to share in the mysteries of freemasonry beyond what is already published and general knowledge.  But to promote understanding and advancement in our knowledge to seek the truth, would it not be more beneficial to research more than just masonry but what the other bodies teach as well?  Just a thought.



Hello dear sister if you go seek his star visit the queen and find the flower you have more light than the "average" mason although I need healing I have truly been enlightened through those bodies my wife went first and I followed !!!!!


My Freemasonry


----------



## BroBook

BroBook said:


> After all these years I just. Realized that in Oder for there to be an injunction against it it must have already been done
> 
> 
> My Freemasonry



Just wondering!!!

Questions : if Adam was one did it occur before or after Eve was taking out ? Second any ideas on how long exclusion of females madmen and such has been part of the oath!!


My Freemasonry


----------



## scw538

BroBook said:


> Just wondering!!!
> 
> Questions : if Adam was one did it occur before or after Eve was taking out ? Second any ideas on how long exclusion of females madmen and such has been part of the oath!!
> 
> 
> My Freemasonry



Yes Adam was one and Eve was formed after.  As Americans and society as whole we have changed every walk of our life to keep from excluding or offending any gender,race or religion. But there are certain things I do not believe in and breaking an oath or promise is defiantly not what I will do. Do you think it would be fine for straight college male to join and live in a sorority house.  Yes I hate to even compare our fraternity to a college social club but think about it. 


My Freemasonry


----------



## BroBook

scw538 said:


> Yes Adam was one and Eve was formed after.  As Americans and society as whole we have changed every walk of our life to keep from excluding or offending any gender,race or religion. But there are certain things I do not believe in and breaking an oath or promise is defiantly not what I will do. Do you think it would be fine for straight college male to join and live in a sorority house.  Yes I hate to even compare our fraternity to a college social club but think about it.
> 
> 
> My Freemasonry



No sir be at nor give my consent but its like saying women cannot be preachers
When they already are


My Freemasonry


----------



## scw538

Bro book surely you do not recognize any woman that claims to be Freemason.  I do not and never will. I also believe any lodge that does is clandestine. 


My Freemasonry


----------



## BroBook

scw538 said:


> Bro book surely you do not recognize any woman that claims to be Freemason.  I do not and never will. I also believe any lodge that does is clandestine.
> 
> 
> My Freemasonry



No sir never met one would not !!!


My Freemasonry


----------



## dfreybur

MajaOES said:


> Female perspective:  As a researcher I want that knowledge.  I spend a lot of time assisting the Lodge with fundraising and even sharing knowledge about the history of freemasonry. I dedicated my academic PhD career studying freemasonry and the affiliated bodies.  The research will always be incomplete without having the basic understanding and full knowledge of the ritual of the Lodge. However, it is the one place I am not allowed to enter and partake in.  I would be ok with that, if I could actually be part of the Lodge of Research.  I fail to see why women can not belong to the Lodge of Research.  The Lodge of Research is not able to publish anything that anyone is not allowed to see.  Therefore, my opinion is why should the Lodge of Research be dedicated to men only?  Shouldn't the Lodge of Research to exploring the other facets of masonry?  All affiliated bodies of Masonry were written by Master Masons or female relatives of Master Masons.  I accept the fact as a women I will not be allowed to share in the mysteries of freemasonry beyond what is already published and general knowledge.  But to promote understanding and advancement in our knowledge to seek the truth, would it not be more beneficial to research more than just masonry but what the other bodies teach as well?  Just a thought.



As an OES sister you can join the OES chapter of research.  If our state does not have one yet you can work to get one chartered and/or you can join one in another state.  Your point that research lodges should consider female members is an interesting one.  The annual meeting of LofR is tiled in the two jurisdictions I've attended so far.  That's why female members are not admitted.  That is of course circular reasoning and thus a weak reason.

The question becomes how much effort would it be to convince the GL to recharter LofR to allow guest members and who would be motivated to do that work.  The fact that OES has or can have its own Chapter of Research reduces the motivation significantly.  The fact that OAS CofR do exist in some states is also circular reasoning relative to GL LofR and thus a weak reason, but it further reduces the motivation.

Lodges of Research around the country are usually hurting for papers.  Have you confirmed they only take papers from members?


----------



## Ol Kev

How does the female perspective on this have any bearing on a fraternity which is exclusive for men, certainly in the Texas jurisdiction? Our fraternity is not based on some academic exercise to facilitate one's research. It is much deeper than that and it is by its very nature, exclusive.

I do not see why this is even an issue for discussion given the history of the fraternity and our current obligations.


----------



## MajaOES

Brother Ol Kev,


I understand your concern.  I respect and understand the obligations of you oath probably more than most people taking two in my youth and six as an adult.  However,  the personal journey I go on only provides me the insight the founders had at the time of my rituals creation.  The paths and lights of insight are different for every organization and the original insight was shared and was once possessed by the one organization I can't belong to.  I took obligations to not to disrupt the principle fraternity that gave me our order. Personal enlightenment gets you only so far.  If allowed with the same insight, enlightenment, and personal experience you have had as a brother, I can expand and share further the advancement of the craft with those that come behind me.  Although I understand in Texas the prospects of sharing in this fraternal knowledge is slim I still peruse the knowledge I am allowed to share in to further myself, my path to the Supreme Architect, and for the development of humankind.


My Freemasonry


----------



## dfreybur

MajaOES said:


> The paths and lights of insight are different for every organization and the original insight was shared and was once possessed by the one organization I can't belong to.  I took obligations to not to disrupt the principle fraternity that gave me our order.



You could join a female only or mixed lodge.  As such orders are clandestine that would cost you your OES membership.  It would be a tough choice to make if such a group were local.  The nearest such group is not in commuting distance.  Probably not the way to go.


----------



## Bro.Joseph.Rossi.Pa.Mason

Its called a brotherhood for a reason


----------



## Bro.Joseph.Rossi.Pa.Mason

Its called a brotherhood for a reason


----------



## Ol Kev




----------



## Sammcd

My obligation does not permit it.


----------



## BryanMaloney

If women want to form a real-world Bene Gesserit in parallel with our real-world Mentat's Guild, good for them. They don't seem to be eager to start.


----------



## Kalip78

Brethern,

This is statement issued by United Grand Lodge of England on 10th March 1999. The second sentence is very interesting. It seems that itâ€™s â€œnot about womenâ€ from UGLE perspective. In the light of this statement I would say that Order of Women Freemasons  (http://www.owf.org.uk) is masonic body even if not recognised by male GLs and the Grande Loge FÃ©minine de France (http://www.glff.org/) is not as it follows irregular teaching of Grand Orient de Franceâ€¦ 

UGLEâ€™s statement: 

There exist in England and Wales at least two Grand Lodges solely for women. Except that these bodies admit women, they are, so far as can be ascertained, otherwise regular in their practice. There is also one which admits both men and women to membership. They are not recognised by this Grand Lodge and intervisitation may not take place. There are, however, discussions from time to time with the women's Grand Lodges on matters of mutual concern. Brethren are therefore free to explain to non-Masons, if asked, that Freemasonry is not confined to men (even though this Grand Lodge does not itself admit women). Further information about these bodies may be obtained by writing to the Grand Secretary.

The Board is also aware that there exist other bodies not directly imitative of pure antient Masonry, but which by  implication introduce Freemasonry, such as the Order of the Eastern Star. Membership of such bodies, attendance at their meetings, or participation in their ceremonies is incompatible with membership of this Grand Lodge.

source: http://www.sussexmasons.org.uk/about-freemasonry/women-and-freemasonry.html


Sent From My Freemasonry Pro App


----------



## brother josh

It is a BROTHERHOOD love my women to death but u got the star if u choose to join a faternal order 


Sent From My Freemasonry Pro App


----------



## ej6267

As much as I love my wife, and we've been together for 33 years now, now that I am retired I am grateful that there is one part of my life in which she cannot share. When I go to Lodge, she stays home.


Sent From My Freemasonry Pro App


----------



## Warrior1256

ravickery03 said:


> Co-Masonry in America and Europe doesn't thrive any better than "masculine" Freemasonry (sometimes worse).  I do feel that women only Freemasonry would be acceptable, but due to the fact that I am a traditionalist, I resist the charges to allow women.
> 
> Or it might be because I am a jerk.


If you're a jerk then so am I. I am not in favor of this. I joined Masonry for a variety of reasons, one being that it is a fraternity. If women were to be admitted to the lodge then I would demit.


----------



## admarcus1

I don't understand why anyone has a problem with comasonry. If it is not for you (or for me, which it isn't), no one is asking you to join it. They are not trying to co-opt you lodge, and they are not asking for recognition.  It is a completely separate organization that operates separately and is just different. Unlike some clandestine organizations, they are not trying to trick anyone or take people's money. Thry are doing something very much like what we do, but because they depart from Landmarks we deem important, we do not recognize them masonically.  Other than that, we are completely unaffected. To some, a male-only environment is not important. Great. If it adds something to their lives, that is a wonderful thing. If they are learning and finding happiness, and becoming better people at the same time, God bless 'em.


----------



## Brother JC

I think many Brothers have misunderstood the conversation. Women joining our lodges isn't the point, women having an option is.
Remember that the first female Freemason (that we know of) was initiated more than two centuries ago.

Carry on...


----------



## Warrior1256

admarcus1 said:


> I don't understand why anyone has a problem with comasonry. If it is not for you (or for me, which it isn't), no one is asking you to join it. They are not trying to co-opt you lodge, and they are not asking for recognition.  It is a completely separate organization that operates separately and is just different. Unlike some clandestine organizations, they are not trying to trick anyone or take people's money. Thry are doing something very much like what we do, but because they depart from Landmarks we deem important, we do not recognize them masonically.  Other than that, we are completely unaffected. To some, a male-only environment is not important. Great. If it adds something to their lives, that is a wonderful thing. If they are learning and finding happiness, and becoming better people at the same time, God bless 'em.


You misunderstood my comment. The way I understood the question was should the rules be changed making women eligible to join ALL Masonic lodges. This I am 100% against. If the question was refering to those unrecognized co-mason lodges that already exist then I don't care one way or the other.


----------



## admarcus1

Warrior1256 said:


> You misunderstood my comment. The way I understood the question was should the rules be changed making women eligible to join ALL Masonic lodges. This I am 100% against. If the question was refering to those unrecognized co-mason lodges that already exist then I don't care one way or the other.


My bad.  That is what I get for answering without looking and thinking first.  Clearly, I did not subdue my passions!  Thank you, Brother, for pointing out my error.

I agree that I would keep things the way they are.  I grew up in a very feminist household and believe men and women should be equal in all things.  However, I do think there is value in an all male environment, especially one that is not focused on sports (bit of a joke there).  I do encounter a lot of sexist attitudes within Masonry, but I think that is a function of generational change, not a function of it being all male.  I think there is room for changes in attitude without coming even close to changing Landmarks.


----------



## Warrior1256

admarcus1 said:


> My bad.  That is what I get for answering without looking and thinking first.  Clearly, I did not subdue my passions!  Thank you, Brother, for pointing out my error.
> 
> I agree that I would keep things the way they are.  I grew up in a very feminist household and believe men and women should be equal in all things.  However, I do think there is value in an all male environment, especially one that is not focused on sports (bit of a joke there).  I do encounter a lot of sexist attitudes within Masonry, but I think that is a function of generational change, not a function of it being all male.  I think there is room for changes in attitude without coming even close to changing Landmarks.


I agree with you brother. I am not sexist or anti-women by any means. I think not only should women be treated as equals but that they ARE equals. However, I see nothing in the least wrong with fraternities or sororities. But for some reason many people see something wrong with fraternities, feeling somehow that this is sexist. However, I have never heard anyone criticize sororities as being sexist.


----------



## masson

.... A man free born etc. just saying ;-)


----------



## Roy_

However I'm irregular I receive the journal of our regular Grand Orient. In it they also publish articles of people of Le Droit Humain and in the prelast issue of this year there is a call of a Belgian Freemason for what he calls "universal Freemasonry". I have said it a couple of times before, but in the Netherlands we have one, major, regular male only organisation, the Grand Orient of the Netherlands. Belgium has several male only orders, only the smallest of which is regular. The author of the article is a member of the Grand Orient of Belgium, the biggest, male-only, order. He describes how much he dislikes orders/obediences and wonders why there can't just be a "universal Freemasonry" with a much smaller role for the grand lodges/orients. In Belgium all but the regular order allow their lodges to decide themselves who they allow to visit, being member of other male orders, mixed or women-only. Some orders allow their lodges to decide if they require the GOATU and use the Bible or another book. The author would expand this to the question who a lodge wants to initiate and all this under one umbrella, a bit like the Grand Orient of Austria or Lithos who have male, female and mixed lodges.
(For your information, in the Netherlands the different orders are not hostile towards eachother as you can see that the Grand Orient publishes texts of other orders, but we can't visit eachother officially.)

However some see my precence on this forum as co-Masonic proselytising, I do not entirely agree with the man. I think regular Freemasonry should stick to the Landmarks. Good/better relations with other Masonic organisations is sometimes in place and of course it would be nice if Freemasonry would be less splintered, but I think that organisations that do not hold up the Landmarks _should_ work under another umbrella.


----------



## Warrior1256

cpmorgan2 said:


> Why change everything that has been devoted to man. I am not sexist, I truly believe woman deserve a lot of respect, admiration and freedom. However...Baseball, basketball, soccer, hockey, government, all these started by men, now controlled by women. Why can't we have this, why do we have to give this. It was started by men, A BROTHERHOOD, A FRATERNITY. I took upon myself a solomn obligation and I will not, ever deviate from it.


Exactly! As I said before, no one accuses a sorority of being sexist and I don't know of any men clammering to join one.


----------



## twhaley67

Nope, no girls allowed!


----------



## jwardl

I love women in general and one in particular -- and ladies are just as capable of practicing the precepts of Masonry as men are. That being said, I'm not in any hurry for us to start accepting them. This isn't misogyny or anything even close. Rather, look at police and military training -- as well as some of the finer paid schools. The attendees are separated by gender. This not only helps both sides focus on higher pursuits rather than that rather striking member of the opposite sex, but at least with us men, the fact is we carry ourselves differently when ladies are present -- even if they're merely friends or relatives.

In addition, in modern society, we men rarely get to immerse ourselves in the rituals and mental relaxation that comes with the company of other men. We've also, over time, become somewhat feminized and confused about what it means to BE a man because we're lacking for role models and the mutual re-enforcement of definitive behaviors that our forefathers experienced. Just think: how many of you didn't actually FEEL like _men_ until you were much older -- or still don't?

This is part of the benefit of being a Freemason. Introduce women, and it's lost. Not to mention the necessary changes we'd have to make to our esoteric rituals that I can't go into here in an open forum. As they currently stand... well, that wouldn't work


----------



## Glen Cook

JamestheJust said:


> I vary between two positions:
> 
> - Freemasonry is so important that the GAOTU restricted it to men
> - Freemasonry is so unimportant that it does not matter that half of the human race is excluded.


I like the clever comparison, but bridle at the suggestion that God had anything to do with founding Freemasonry.  And, your definition of freemasonry as male only is not one that all accept, as the discussion shows. However, this won't stop me from using the second clause as a quip!


----------



## Kalip78

To be honest I have no problem with the second position... The first one is false at its roots - Freemasonry isn't God's institution, it is human in every aspect.


----------



## jwardl

My girlfriend is on the fence about Masonry, as she doesn't care for any group that excludes others, whatever the reason. Fortunately, she simultaneously supports my membership and associated goals.

As I see it, every group has requirements of their members -- a de facto exclusion of those who don't meet those requirements. So long as that exclusion isn't hate-based, I don't see the problem, and that includes groups I don't qualify for. Knights of Columbus must be Catholics, P.E.O. members must be women, etc. Even as Masons, we don't accept _all_ men.


----------



## pointwithinacircle2

JamestheJust said:


> I vary between two positions:
> 
> - Freemasonry is so important that the GAOTU restricted it to men
> - Freemasonry is so unimportant that it does not matter that half of the human race is excluded.


Disclaimer: As always, the following is only my opinion.
Freemasonry comes from a time when the roles of men and women in society were much more distinct than they are today.  (And a very good argument can be made that this division of roles and duties has specific advantages for society)  Freemasonry was specifically designed to teach men the skills that were attributed to men in those days.  Using this explanation I agree with both statements.  In the past teaching men to be men was considered so it was important that it was restricted to men.  Today teaching men to be men is not considered to be important.


----------



## Morris

jwardl said:


> My girlfriend is on the fence about Masonry, as she doesn't care for any group that excludes others, whatever the reason. Fortunately, she simultaneously supports my membership and associated goals.
> 
> As I see it, every group has requirements of their members -- a de facto exclusion of those who don't meet those requirements. So long as that exclusion isn't hate-based, I don't see the problem, and that includes groups I don't qualify for. Knights of Columbus must be Catholics, P.E.O. members must be women, etc. Even as Masons, we don't accept _all_ men.



My wife is a Zeta Tau Alpha but when I met her in college they wouldn't let me into their sorority, no matter how hard I tried! Haha


----------



## vangoedenaam

Groups define themselves by limiting who is part of it. Even the largest and least limited group, society itself, sets limits on who can be part of it, and who needs to be excluded (eg by being put in a jail). It is typically unfair to judge any group on membership policies. I cant join the women's football team too.


----------



## dfreybur

pointwithinacircle2 said:


> Today teaching men to be men is not considered to be important.



Neither is teaching women to be women.  Both are needed in our society even though, maybe even especially because, both roles are evolving rapidly.

Other than Masonry, teaching role models have been ceded to families with societal evolution happening too fast for most to react plus sports that seems too focus too much on winning to put value on sportsmanship and trade off between cooperation and competition.  Now the type of sport focus on winning is now being taught to girls as well.

It's getting to the point were women need groups that teach a wide perspective on femininity even more than men need groups that teach a wide perspective on masculinity.  We've got lodge and Boy Scouts (until folks notice that they are now a popcorn selling business).

In my Mom's generation there were all sorts of groups only for women.  Now my wife has trouble finding even one.  The cookie selling business aspect of the Girls Scouts long ago triggered anti-discrimination rules to force them to start taking boys.  Masonry emerged in a time when women had more groups to chose from than men.  Now that table has turned.


----------



## Ripcord22A

Dfreybur are you saying that winning isn't important?


----------



## dfreybur

jdmadsenCraterlake211 said:


> Dfreybur are you saying that winning isn't important?



Sports are supposed to be taught primarily for sportsmanship and secondarily for competition.  Winning is less important than sportsmanship.

A man wins or loses gracefully in sports.  A man works hard to win in sports.  The order and relative importance of these two matters.

"It's not whether you win or lose it's how you play the game" to some extent.  "It's not whether you win or lose but how you act when either happens" to a greater extent.

Out society has gotten to the point that we need to teach sportsmanship in Disney movies like the ending of Cars.

There are values more important than winning.  There are values less important than winning.  This type of relative judgment is important to learn.


----------



## Ripcord22A

I see your point brother but the way i look at it if we teach our children that winning isnt important then they will transfer that in to.other aspects of.life...ie school, job/career.  They will be like "eh i didnt pass but i tried" or " eh the other guy got the promotion i deserved but at least i tried real hard...good for him!"  No.  Obviously you didn't try hard enough.  If you aren't taught during your primary years that winning is important you won't live up to your full potential....just my opinion


----------



## pointwithinacircle2

I had to re-read this page twice to find the point of disagreement.  I believe it is here:





dfreybur said:


> There are values more important than winning.  There are values less important than winning.


What I disagree with is the words "more" and "less".  For me, saying that winning is "more" important or "less" important is like saying that the pillar of Strength is "more" or "less" important that than the pillars of Wisdom or Beauty.  Each Pillar expresses a specific attribute of man.  Masonry is supported by Three Great Pillars.  If the Pillars are not equal how will our Masonry be level?  





dfreybur said:


> This type of relative judgment is important to learn.


When I was a boy my brother and I used to spend a week at my aunt and uncle's farm in the country.  The summer that I turned 12 they took in two foster children.  They were older, 14 and 15, tough kids from bad homes.  They were intruders in my family and I didn't like them from the moment I saw them.  One night after chores we were playing tag in the barn.  I was the youngest and smallest and when I got tagged I was out of breath and didn't have a chance of catching the older, faster kids.  I took off after one of the hated foster kids anyway, even though he was the oldest and I didn't have a chance of catching him.  I was frustrated and wanted to cry but I didn't give up.  He was laughing and whooping, knowing I didn't have a chance of catching him.  As he glanced over his shoulder to see me falling further and further behind the look on his face changed, he stopped, and I ran into him.  He looked down, smiled at me, screamed "I'm it", and took off after the other boys.  Maybe he lost that footrace, or maybe just wanted to win something different that day.  In those few seconds I learned something that you couldn't have explained to me with 10,000 words.  You can call him a loser if you want, but if you do it in front of me you are going to have an argument on your hands.


----------



## Ripcord22A

FPoF?


----------



## Ripcord22A

Ah ok, just re-read your post.....so you are an irregular mason?


----------

