# Can a woman be a Freemason?



## Monica

Freemason Connect Mobile


----------



## jvarnell

No...This is nothing against women but it helps us as men to be better men. Look at eastern star for an organization but stay on the web site to help with your point of view.


----------



## 32nd is the goal

The Eastern Star is umbrella under masonry, this will be a great organization to get involved in.

Freemason Connect Mobile


----------



## OES513

OES all day......

Freemason Connect Mobile


----------



## Blake Bowden

Topic moved..


----------



## Oscar Delta

...

Sent from my SGH-I337M using My Freemasonry HD mobile app


----------



## Blake Bowden

[video=youtube;XNGhRDiNNZo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNGhRDiNNZo[/video]​


----------



## Mike Martin

Monica said:


> Cana woman be a Freemason


It depends where you live.


----------



## BryanMaloney

Mike Martin said:


> It depends where you live.



It depends upon whether one is in a Regular or bogus organization...


----------



## Mike Martin

BryanMaloney said:


> It depends upon whether one is in a Regular or bogus organization...




I suppose it depends what you choose to call a "bogus organisation". Here in England (the UK) there is the Order of Women Freemasons and the Honourable Fraternity of Antients Freemasons that have both been making women Masons for more than 100 years. In 1999 the UGLE (my Grand Lodge) made the following statement about them:
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.


----------



## JFS61

Interesting that the UGLE seems to have a bigger problem with supposedly "imitative" bodies like the OES than it does with outright Co-Masonic bodies (one would think it would be the other way around).


----------



## Mike Martin

JFS61 said:


> Interesting that the UGLE seems to have a bigger problem with supposedly "imitative" bodies like the OES than it does with outright Co-Masonic bodies (one would think it would be the other way around).


Just to ensure clarity amongst my American brethren the UGLE was NOT talking about Co-Masonic bodies but those 2 Grand Lodges in Britain that admit women ONLY.  

Co-Masonry is totally No-Go! It fails the "regularity test" set by my Grand Lodge on several of the published requirements.

The OES is a completely different kettle of fish as it is a mixed gender organisation that requires Freemasons to act in their capacity as a Freemason but outside of a proper Masonic situation. It is not acceptable either here under the UGLE or under the Grand Lodge of Ireland.


----------



## BryanMaloney

JFS61 said:


> Interesting that the UGLE seems to have a bigger problem with supposedly "imitative" bodies like the OES than it does with outright Co-Masonic bodies (one would think it would be the other way around).



OES didn't start in the UK...


----------



## JFS61

As a member of the OES, I'm more than quite aware that the OES did not start in England, but was developed by Rob Morris while he was living in Mississippi. My original point was that some American Masons might find it interesting that the UGLE seems to have more problems with an appendant body with women in it than a body of women actually working the blue lodge degrees themselves. Thanks to Brother Martin, we have an explanation as to the UGLE's objection to the OES, but as before, American Masons (on the surface, at least) might find it confusing, considering how female masonry (mixed or not) is viewed here in the States.


----------



## Mike Martin

I might be wrong but if I remember rightly you (in the US) don't have the women-only variety you have only the Co-Masonic or mixed gender Lodges, either Le Droit Humain or the American Federation of Human Rights.

It might interest you to know that Co-Masonry shares the same roots of origin as the OES, both came out of the French Rite de Adoption practised by French Lodges during the 1700s.


----------



## dfreybur

Mike Martin said:


> I might be wrong but if I remember rightly you (in the US) don't have the women-only variety you have only the Co-Masonic or mixed gender Lodges, either Le Droit Humain or the American Federation of Human Rights.



There is a female-only lodge that meets in Los Angeles.  When I searched for others I found several.  If I found them all it appears that in all of the US there are enough to form about two districts.


----------



## JFS61

I always found Macoy's attempts at forming an androgynous American three degree system after taking the reins of the OES from Rob Morris to be interesting. He planned on using the OES as the first degree, with the Queen of the South as the second, and The Order of the Amaranth as the third. Needless to say, the established OES chapters rebelled at the thought of becoming just a stepping stone in any such system, while the Amaranth didn't like the idea of their potential membership being reduced by a third (or more), with the whole idea being finished off by the inability of the Queen of the South to gain any traction whatsoever and shortly thereafter fading into oblivion.

 However, Macoy's American Rite of Adoption did catch on with, and is still worked today as he intended by PHA Masons and their female relatives (along with the Heroines of Jericho, a RAM based androgynous order driven to extinction in mainstream American Freemasonry following the aftermath of the Morgan Affair).


----------



## Levelhead

32nd is the goal said:


> The Eastern Star is umbrella under masonry, this will be a great organization to get involved in.
> 
> Freemason Connect Mobile


As long as you are related to or have heavy ties to a master mason in good standing with his lodge. Otherwise you cant join OES. At least in FL.


----------



## Tony Uzzell

Levelhead said:


> As long as you are related to or have heavy ties to a master mason in good standing with his lodge. Otherwise you cant join OES. At least in FL.



I've actually found that, in most States, the Masonic relationship requirement has gotten very watered-down. While many (probably most) female members fall into the original definitions of "wife, widow, mother, sister, or daughter", it has been spread out (in practice if not in theory) to include uncles, cousins, granddaughters, great-nieces, etc.

In fact, Rainbow Girls who have reached their eighteenth birthday and been a member of the IORG for three years are eligible without a Masonic relative. I would presume that Job's Daughters have a similar status in States where there is IOJD (Texas doesn't have IOJD any longer). At least that's what the rules are here.

TU


----------



## MoonlightMadness357

Levelhead said:


> As long as you are related to or have heavy ties to a master mason in good standing with his lodge. Otherwise you cant join OES. At least in FL.


 
I've found in the PHA side of the house that there are sometimes open sessions where any female fitting the basic requirements minus a relative my be initiated into OES... I know for a fact it has occured in FL but I would check with your local lodge to be sure before petitioning


----------



## Tony Uzzell

MoonlightMadness357 said:


> I've found in the PHA side of the house that there are sometimes open sessions where any female fitting the basic requirements minus a relative my be initiated into OES... I know for a fact it has occured in FL but I would check with your local lodge to be sure before petitioning



I've often wondered if opening OES up to any woman who believed in a Supreme Being, was of strong moral character, etc. (you know, the things we ask of a man to become a Mason), whether they had a Masonic relationship or Rainbow/Job's Daughters membership or not, would be beneficial to the membership of OES.

I also have a "selfish reason" for that idea (from a Masonic viewpoint): if a woman who's not married to a Mason joins OES, it might cause her husband to wonder about the meetings she attends or make him want to go also, so he might become a Mason to be eligible for OES membership. I've seen this happen when a woman joins OES due to her father or brother being a Mason, then her husband becomes a Mason.

Perhaps, something along the "open sessions" you mention happening in PHA in FL would be one way to make this happen.

TU


----------



## Warrior1256

Levelhead said:


> As long as you are related to or have heavy ties to a master mason in good standing with his lodge. Otherwise you cant join OES. At least in FL.


Same in Kentucky from what I understand.


----------



## ARizo1011

Levelhead said:


> As long as you are related to or have heavy ties to a master mason in good standing with his lodge. Otherwise you cant join OES. At least in FL.



So my spouse can become an Eastern star?


----------



## crono782

ARizo1011 said:


> So my spouse can become an Eastern star?


Yepper.


----------



## ARizo1011

crono782 said:


> Yepper.



Cool. Great to know. I thought you have to be married.


----------



## Brother JC

Umm, the word "spouse" implies that you ARE married.
Your best bet is to check with the local OES Chapter. Rules vary by jurisdiction.


----------



## louise evans

I'm not a freemason, however am looking into becoming one, the grand lodge in the UK excepts men and women

http://www.grandlodge.org.uk/

Anyone know about this??


----------



## Brother JC

louise evans said:


> I'm not a freemason, however am looking into becoming one, the grand lodge in the UK excepts men and women
> 
> http://www.grandlodge.org.uk/
> 
> Anyone know about this??


It is considered clandestine by all regular Masons.


----------



## Roy_

trysquare said:
			
		

> It is considered clandestine by all regular Masons.


Naturally, but there is also clandistine male Masonry.

I see that this Grandlodge is one of the spin-offs of Le Droit Humain, the first mixed Masonic organisation. LDH also exists in the UK. It could be interesting to compare the two (and possible other) organisations to see which fits your needs best. LDH works with three rites. The most-used is based on the Scotish rite. It is the most 'traditional' one. There is the so-called English rite, which is very Theosophistic (with burning incence and what not). Lastly there is the French rite or 'rite moderne' which is an atheistic rite. I can't immediately find what rite the Grandlodge uses, but the higher degrees are not Scotisch like in LDH, so perhaps it is 'all English'.


----------



## dfreybur

http://www.ugle.org.uk/ Is the web page for the United Grand Lodge of England.

There are Comason lodges in the US.  At least in LA, Chicago, NYC.


----------



## Mike Martin

louise evans said:


> I'm not a freemason, however am looking into becoming one, the grand lodge in the UK excepts men and women
> 
> http://www.grandlodge.org.uk/
> 
> Anyone know about this??


Yes the Grand Lodge for Men and Women was founded by Co-Masons (in 2005) who no longer wished to be part of the British Federation of Le Droit Humain (a French Organisation) , the same thing happened in several other countries at the same time. They have set up a separate and distinct Order which operates in a very similar way to the United Grand Lodge of England and which now has self-determination as it does not have to pay obedience to Paris.


----------



## Roy_

Ah, that recent. Le Droit Humain has a bit of a troubled past. In 2004 the order existed 100 years in my country and I'm currently reading two books that were published to celebrate that. It was founded as an atheistic Masonic organisation, but nobody wanted to join. Then the Theosophical cavallery came in which helped a lot, but there was a new problem: the order became too Theosophical and lodges started to break off. Many Theosophical elements have been deleted, but in the end there remained three possible rites for lodges, one based on the Scotish (the most used), an "English" (Theosophical) rite and an atheistic French rite. Another continuing breaking point is the hierarchy in the organisation that keep lodges feel the need to start their own organisation.
Things became more quiet in recent decades, but lodges keep splitting off indeed. Then again, the same thing happens within male Masonry. LDH does remain the largest mixed order.


----------



## coachn

_*Can a woman be a Freemason?*_ 

Yes, but only within Freemasonic Orders that admit them.  These Female Centric Orders are considered Regular unto themselves but are considered both Irregular and Clandestine to Male Centric Orders and hence these Female Centric Orders are not Recognized by the Male Centric Orders in any way, although some Recognized Male Centric Orders do acknowledge that some of the FC Orders are Regular in their practice in every way, except for the practice of admitting females.


----------



## louise evans

Yes, I've also found the order of women's freemasons, that looks like a good one for me maybe you should check it out, I'm based in uk so the UK site is http://owf.org.uk 

But you can checkout the order of women's freemason in your area its only for women who are freemasons.

I've put my name forward myself...


----------



## ARizo1011

In US any order of women is still considered clandestine.


----------



## coachn

ARizo1011 said:


> In US any order of women is still considered clandestine.


Yes, but only by Male Centric Orders. 

Keep in mind that the labels "Clandestine" and "Irregular" are relative _only_ to Orders using it in relation to how they judge other Orders.  The Orders so judged do not consider themselves that way. 

For you statement to be more accurate, it would have to be written:

*To US Male Centric Mainstream Orders (and Recognized PHA orders), any order of women is still considered clandestine.*​


----------



## ARizo1011

coachn said:


> Yes, but only by Male Centric Orders.
> 
> Keep in mind that the labels "Clandestine" and "Irregular" are relative _only_ to Orders using it in relation to how they judge other Orders.  The Orders so judged do not consider themselves that way.
> 
> For you statement to be more accurate, it would have to be written:
> 
> *To US Male Centric Mainstream Orders (and Recognized PHA orders), any order of women is still considered clandestine.*​



Thank you for correcting me brother.


----------



## Roy_

ARizo1011 said:
			
		

> In US any order of women is still considered clandestine.


This is a bit of a mantra here! But for your information, however in some countries in Europe mixed and male Freemasonry are on good terms, very good even at times, mixed and female Freemasonry are also here never regular and there is no country where official visitations take place between regular and mixed lodges. Yet, there is more to choose than an UGLE-oriented lodge. In fact, in some countries there are more irregular Masons than regular.


----------



## ARizo1011

Roy_ said:


> This is a bit of a mantra here! But for your information, however in some countries in Europe mixed and male Freemasonry are on good terms, very good even at times, mixed and female Freemasonry are also here never regular and there is no country where official visitations take place between regular and mixed lodges. Yet, there is more to choose than an UGLE-oriented lodge. In fact, in some countries there are more irregular Masons than regular.



I understand that's how it goes in elsewhere . But in my jurisdiction no female will pass brother tiler to enter lodge when open...


----------



## ARizo1011

Also I know there are a lot of clandestine mason. In Miami there are more lodges in my district irregular than regular.


----------



## Roy_

Arizo said:
			
		

> I understand that's how it goes in elsewhere . But in my jurisdiction no female will pass brother tiler to enter lodge when open...


Like I said, it's the same over here. No regular lodge accepts visitations from mixed lodges (we do the other way around), but there are irregular male lodges who are less strict, but I have not yet seen that in practice.

Ah, the eternal discussion


----------



## Mike Martin

Roy_ said:


> This is a bit of a mantra here! But for your information, however in some countries in Europe mixed and male Freemasonry are on good terms, very good even at times, mixed and female Freemasonry are also here never regular and there is no country where official visitations take place between regular and mixed lodges. Yet, there is more to choose than an UGLE-oriented lodge. In fact, in some countries there are more irregular Masons than regular.



I have heard this particular line a few times from members under the British Federation of LDH and I think you maybe have taken it all a bit at face value and getting yourself a bit confused. 

I have been told several times that UGLE Masons frequented LDH meetings but no one was ever actually able to identify one of these men and nowadays I am convinced that it is just an urban legend that the old Co-Masons tell the new ones.

The men-only Grand Lodges in Europe that have interaction with Co-Masonry are those that are either irregular or unrecognised or both.


----------



## Roy_

Mike, we're saying the same. There's no official visitations between Grand Orient of the Netherlands Freemasons and us co-Masons. (I know for a fact that there are who visit us unofficially, but that is not important.) Further there are countries with good relations (and even visitations?) between irregular male-Masons and co-Masons, but I have no idea who that works with women who want to visit. I suppose they are no welcome in male-only lodges.

Anyway, in the short time I have been here, most questions about women or mixed are answered with "clandestine". I know they are, and I don't argue, but I want to let people who ask about these subjects know that there are more options than regular Freemasonry.


----------



## Levelhead

Well then another forum would be appropriate.

The last i checked this forum is called
"My FREEMasonry".


----------



## ARizo1011

Honestly I don't know why I would become an irregular mason... Makes no sense to me.... -_-


----------



## Brother JC

Levelhead said:


> The last i checked this forum is called
> "My FREEMasonry".


And the last time I checked, it was open to anyone, regardless of affiliation.


----------



## Roy_

Levelhead said:
			
		

> Well then another forum would be appropriate.
> The last i checked this forum is called
> "My FREEMasonry".


Thank you for your hospitality.

It is highly offtopic in this thread, but one reason to become an irregular (Free)Mason could be that you're a woman, right? Another that you have a woman that wants to join too (my reason). Yet another that you consciously or unconsiously joined a lodge of an order that is not recognised by UGLE. The chance for that is big in Belgium or France, since the largest number of lodges are irregular. Perhaps the Masonic way of working appeals to somebody who also sees the value of the womens perspective.

The rest is just a play of words. Most orders call themselves Freemasons, also women and mixed orders and members say they are Freemason. For the 'outside world' Freemasonry is one organisation (/current/whatever), so people looking for it might come here and get bombarded with the "clandestine" mantra. Since I am frequently told that I am welcome here, why would I not be allowed to answer a woman inquiring that there are options for her too? Irregular, certainly, but once she knows this, she can make up her mind, not?


----------



## Levelhead

dalinkou said:


> Dialogue concerning what is clandestine or irregular is quite a bit more than a mantra.  In fact, using the word "mantra" is rather interesting word play.  The outer world does consider Masonry to be one organization; however, we know that one can find a counterfeit alternative for everything in the world of true value.  And so it is with Masonry.  There are regular Lodges, all of which can be traced back to a common and recognized root.  My brothers in other states and abroad may work a bit differently that we do in Texas, but there is no doubt about the common lineage.   So, when we delineate between regular Masonry and any other alternative, we do not intend to be unfriendly to you or anyone else.  We do however intend to protect the genuine article so much as we are able.
> 
> After all is said and done, if one still wishes to join an irregular or a clandestine lodge after knowing better, or even to remain in one after learning the difference, that is a matter of free choice.   I do not believe any of us have any real problem with that.  Just do not expect us to stop differentiating between regular and irregular anymore than we differentiate between gold and lead.


Yes!


----------



## Roy_

Dalinkou said:
			
		

> Just do not expect us to stop differentiating between regular and irregular anymore than we differentiate between gold and lead.


Indeed, you should not!
Just a little sidenote though. When a woman asks about Freemasonry there is no reason to differentiate "gold and lead", she can only inquire about "lead". Instead of answering the first question of an honoustly inquiring woman with "*clandestine!*", the reply could also be: "However we do not regard the organisations as regular Freemasonry, there are other kinds of organisation you could be interested in." Or something similar. At least be helpfull instead or scaring a searching person away with disapproval. The inquiring person (whether female or male) might not be aware of the 'two kinds'. Perhaps the fact that there is regular and irregular Freemasonry is a lesson that we need to teach the outside world in the first place.



			
				Dalinkou said:
			
		

> After all is said and done, if one still wishes to join an irregular or a clandestine lodge after knowing better, or even to remain in one after learning the difference, that is a matter of free choice.


That's the spirit.


----------



## coachn

Good God My Brothers!  When any Female is attracted enough to what I have done for myself through my Freemasonic Work, why on God's Green Earth would I NOT encourage and support her to do the same for herself and give her good orderly direction to a Female Craft Lodge that would be very appropriate for her best interest?!?!?! 

Seriously!  I won't sit in a Lodge with a female mason because of my Obligation, but that same Obligation points me toward common sense decency, not dogmatic insanity.  I'm doing everything RIGHT by trying to make this World a better place through supporting females to do the same.  This includes being positive about their Craft possibilities.


----------



## Warrior1256

ARizo1011 said:


> I understand that's how it goes in elsewhere . But in my jurisdiction no female will pass brother tiler to enter lodge when open...


Same here in Kentucky. I'm new but to the best of my knowledge there are no co-Mason lodges here.


----------



## Brother JC

Remember your obligation; nowhere does it say a woman cannot be a Freemason. It says you can't be at her degrees or discuss them with her, or sit in her lodge (or she in yours), but it doesn't say she can't follow a Masonic path.


----------



## Companion Joe

"By being a man ... "

Don't ask to join a 300-year-old party then tell the hosts they to change to suit your needs.


----------



## Levelhead

Companion Joe said:


> "By being a man ... "
> 
> Don't ask to join a 300-year-old party then tell the hosts they to change to suit your needs.


YES!!


----------



## coachn

Companion Joe said:


> "By being a man ... "


That is for Male Craft Orders only.


> Don't ask to join a 300-year-old party then tell the hosts they to change to suit your needs.


I'm never amazed any more as to how dense some Brothers can be. 

What you wrote here refers strictly to a Male Craft Order.  This sincere female has no interest in changing ANYTHING about any Male Craft Order and yet you assume and act like she is asking to change the whole of Male Craft masonry in her simple and innocent question.  Isn't it clear to you that she is not asking anything like that?  She only wants to know if a woman can be a Freemason.  The answer is "Yes", just not one that is a member of Male Craft Masonry.

Females who ask this simple question are only wanting to know how they can benefit from practicing the same life changing principles that you and I have been offered and espouse.  They want to change themselves for the Better.  They may have seen the change in a friend, brother, father or uncle who was a Freemason and decided that they want the same changes for themselves.  Much like many males do when they seek to join Male Craft Orders. 

Why on earth would you NOT refer a female to a Female Craft Order?  Don't you WANT a better world?  Don't you want to have more females practicing the same principles you espouse?  Isn't civility one of the things us guys are supposed to show toward our fellow humans, not just especially Brother Masons?  It take so little effort to simply let these females know the options available to them and encourage them to pursue any direction that will make everyone better. 

Honestly, some of you guys are so dense.  It takes so little to make the world a better place yet you're blowing up the road in front of you believing you're doing the right thing.


----------



## Levelhead

I refer them to the Eastern Star.


----------



## coachn

Levelhead said:


> I refer them to the Eastern Star.


WOW!  Knowing we should treat others how we would want to be treated, you're telling me that you would be totally satisfied being referred to the eastern star when you asked to join Freemasonry.  Interesting.


----------



## Levelhead

If a woman asked me about joining the craft. I would tell her to look into the Eastern Star. I dont see whats wrong with that?


----------



## Brother JC

Levelhead said:


> If a woman asked me about joining the craft. I would tell her to look into the Eastern Star. I dont see whats wrong with that?


It's not an answer to her question. She asked about the Craft, not some sidebar that still has a man riding herd on it. There are outlets outside of _our_ Freemasonry for her to explore. What's wrong with pointing her in that direction?


----------



## Companion Joe

coachn said:


> That is for Male Craft Orders only.
> 
> I'm never amazed any more as to how dense some Brothers can be.
> 
> What you wrote here refers strictly to a Male Craft Order.  This sincere female has no interest in changing ANYTHING about any Male Craft Order and yet you assume and act like she is asking to change the whole of Male Craft masonry in her simple and innocent question.  Isn't it clear to you that she is not asking anything like that?  She only wants to know if a woman can be a Freemason.  The answer is "Yes", just not one that is a member of Male Craft Masonry.
> 
> Females who ask this simple question are only wanting to know how they can benefit from practicing the same life changing principles that you and I have been offered and espouse.  They want to change themselves for the Better.  They may have seen the change in a friend, brother, father or uncle who was a Freemason and decided that they want the same changes for themselves.  Much like many males do when they seek to join Male Craft Orders.
> 
> Why on earth would you NOT refer a female to a Female Craft Order?  Don't you WANT a better world?  Don't you want to have more females practicing the same principles you espouse?  Isn't civility one of the things us guys are supposed to show toward our fellow humans, not just especially Brother Masons?  It take so little effort to simply let these females know the options available to them and encourage them to pursue any direction that will make everyone better.
> 
> Honestly, some of you guys are so dense.  It takes so little to make the world a better place yet you're blowing up the road in front of you believing you're doing the right thing.



Quite clearly you are familiar at density.

You refer to Male Craft Orders (whatever the heck that is), but anything else is clandestine. I have never heard of a Female Craft Order before reading this thread.

Freemasonry is a FRATERNAL organization. The world doesn't have to be an all inclusive place where everyone holds hands and sings songs. There are dozens of women-only organizations men can't join. As already noted, if a lady was interested in something Masonic, I'd refer her to the OES.

Your assertion that groups that allow women are regular in their own right is ridiculous. Sorry, but they don't get to decide that. It would be no different than if I declared myself a regular citizen of Albania, the Albanian government saying "No, you're not," and me saying "Yeah, I think I am because I want to be and say I am."

If your group can't trace its lineage back to 1717, then you have arrogated your claim to Freemasonry.


----------



## coachn

Levelhead said:


> If a woman asked me about joining the craft. I would tell her to look into the Eastern Star. I dont see whats wrong with that?


Yes.  I get it.  You do not see what's wrong with what you are stating. And that is the problem.  You have not addressed her question but rather, you have by your reaction made effort to impose your world view upon what you believe she should accept rather than encourage her and direct her to get what she truly wants.  Interesting.


----------



## bupton52

Levelhead said:


> If a woman asked me about joining the craft. I would tell her to look into the Eastern Star. I dont see whats wrong with that?




That is typically the same path that I follow. I wouldn't intentionally send someone down a path of practicing irregular or clandestine masonry just for the sake of helping them feel good about what they desire to do. At this point, at least in the United States, there are organizations for a woman to get a "masonic experience", for lack of a better term.


----------



## Brother JC

The problem with the OES path is that they generally need a Masonic connection. Unlike a man seeking the Craft, a woman can't come in off the street and petition OES.


----------



## coachn

Companion Joe said:


> Quite clearly you are familiar at density.


 Yes, I come across dense people quite often, hence my ability to recognize them when I encounter them.


> You refer to Male Craft Orders (whatever the heck that is), ...


Good!  An educational moment:  They are those Freemasonic Orders that limit there  membership to Males only.  I belong to one that is recognized by UGLE.  You might be familiar with it.  It's the GL of Florida.  What you might refer to as mainstream or State Masonry.


> ...but anything else is clandestine.


Only to those who do not recognize them.


> ... I have never heard of a Female Craft Order before reading this thread.


Good!  Then you can no longer claim to not know about their existence into the future and hopefully you shall refer those who would benefit accordingly.


> Freemasonry is a FRATERNAL organization.


Only the one that you and I belong to.  There are others that exist that are not defined by your narrow definition.


> The world doesn't have to be an all inclusive place where everyone holds hands and sings songs.


You're dismissing the issue.  You're deviating from the path.  Your tactic is not working. 


> There are dozens of women-only organizations men can't join.


Yes!  And a few of them are FREEMASONIC.  If you asked to join, they would direct you toward a Male Craft Order.  They know how important the principle are, even to males.


> As already noted, if a lady was interested in something Masonic, I'd refer her to the OES.


You are changing her wording.  She was not interesting in "something masonic".  You are perhaps incapable of hearing her.  Fortunately, there are others who can.


> Your assertion that groups that allow women are regular in their own right is ridiculous.


Only to you my Brother.  I'm okay with it though.  Your ridicule doesn't do anything but confirm specific things about your character.


> Sorry, but they don't get to decide that.


Actually, they do decide that.  Just not for us.  Which is the way that regularity works.  It is decided by the Order itself as they judge other orders.


> It would be no different than if I declared myself a regular citizen of Albania, the Albanian government saying "No, you're not," and me saying "Yeah, I think I am because I want to be and say I am."


It's clear by your insufficient example that you truly do not know how it works.  You are correct on one issue to which you allude in your example:  Governments govern their own boundaries, and this applies to organizations. Regularity can only be judge in relation to the organization judging.  Hence an outsider cannot judge another to be regular in any way shape or form other than I relation to themselves.  It's strictly an internal measure. 


> If your group can't trace its lineage back to 1717, then you have arrogated your claim to Freemasonry.


But only as your organization judges regularity.  Others have different measurements, untethered by you preconceived notions.


----------



## bupton52

trysquare said:


> The problem with the OES path is that they generally need a Masonic connection. Unlike a man seeking the Craft, a woman can't come in off the street and petition OES.



In some jurisdictions, the masonic connection has been lifted. I would have to assume that, at some point, the GC would have died if that hadn't happened.


----------



## coachn

bupton52 said:


> In some jurisdictions, the masonic connection has been lifted. I would have to assume that, at some point, the GC would have died if that hadn't happened.


It STILL would not answer the question posed.


----------



## Companion Joe

coachn said:


> Yes, I come across dense people quite often, hence my ability to recognize them when I encounter them.
> 
> Good!  An educational moment:  They are those Freemasonic Orders that limit there  membership to Males only.  I belong to one that is recognized by UGLE.  You might be familiar with it.  It's the GL of Florida.  What you might refer to as mainstream or State Masonry.
> 
> Only to those who do not recognize them.
> 
> Good!  Then you can no longer claim to not know about their existence into the future and hopefully you shall refer those who would benefit accordingly.
> 
> Only the one that you and I belong to.  There are others that exist that are not defined by your narrow definition.
> 
> You're dismissing the issue.  You're deviating from the path.  Your tactic is not working.
> 
> Yes!  And a few of them are FREEMASONIC.  If you asked to join, they would direct you toward a Male Craft Order.  They know how important the principle are, even to males.
> 
> You are changing her wording.  She was not interesting in "something masonic".  You are perhaps incapable of hearing her.  Fortunately, there are others who can.
> 
> Only to you my Brother.  I'm okay with it though.  Your ridicule doesn't do anything but confirm specific things about your character.
> 
> Actually, they do decide that.  Just not for us.  Which is the way that regularity works.  It is decided by the Order itself as they judge other orders.
> 
> It's clear by your insufficient example that you truly do not know how it works.  You are correct on one issue to which you allude in your example:  Governments govern their own boundaries, and this applies to organizations. Regularity can only be judge in relation to the organization judging.  Hence an outsider cannot judge another to be regular in any way shape or form other than I relation to themselves.  It's strictly an internal measure.
> 
> But only as your organization judges regularity.  Others have different measurements, untethered by you preconceived notions.



Then by your measure, I can print up some "Joe's Dollars" and go shopping at Walmart.

Cashier: "I'm sorry sir, that's not regular money. We can't accept it. It isn't guaranteed by a dedicated line."
Me: "Sure you can. I deem it to be regular. The government disagrees, but I don't like its stance, so I'm going to say this is real."


----------



## coachn

Companion Joe said:


> Then by your measure, I can print up some "Joe's Dollars" and go shopping at Walmart.
> 
> Cashier: "I'm sorry sir, that's not regular money. We can't accept it. It isn't guaranteed by a dedicated line."
> Me: "Sure you can. I deem it to be regular. The government disagrees, but I don't like its stance, so I'm going to say this is real."


I see now by your contribution that you have used a flawed argument technique to make a point. 

Along with that technique you have put forth the point that you don't want to seriously continue this discourse. 

I accept your proposal to end it.  Thank you for acting as a catalyst for those who have followed this thread and want to know their options rather than blindly accepting inapplicable dogma.


----------



## Companion Joe

OK. Bye.

But I fail to see why an analogy that calls to task your claim that just because someone wants something to be so, even though it flies in the face of established lineage, it is.

Here is another one:

Let's say I go buy a gray and red uniform, declare myself to be a branch of the Salvation Army, go ringing a bell outside of stores at Christmas, and accept money from people. If the real Salvation Army shows up, do I get to say, "It's OK, I declare myself to be the Salvation Army," or do you thing they'd have something (legitimate grounds) to say about it?


----------



## Glen Cook

Companion Joe said:


> I have never heard of a Female Craft Order before reading this thread....
> ...



Really?


----------



## coachn

Companion Joe said:


> OK. Bye.
> 
> But I fail to see why an analogy that calls to task your claim that just because someone wants something to be so, even though it flies in the face of established lineage, it is.


Yes Brother.  You fail to see and furthermore cannot see what is hidden in plain sight.  You have admitted that you were ignorant as to there being female Freemasonic Organizations until this thread and  that you admittedly responded to her question in ignorance.  Once you were shown the Light and errors of your ways, you dogmatically insist that your original response was the most correct and dismissed the legitimacy of what is clearly a legitimate path option for her, saying that the only legitimate path is to accept that she could never be a Freemason and should accepted OES as a substitute and put away any thoughts of becoming a Freemason. 

WHY not continue?  I turn the question back around.  What would be the benefit in continuing discourse with you when your mind is steadfast in it's preconceived notions?  Your cup is too full to accept anything more.  There is clearly nothing that could be tendered that would fit your well-entrenched view.

Furthermore, your examples cry of desperation.  Female Craft Orders do not claim to be a branch of any Male Craft Organization.  Neither do they want to be accepted by Male Craft Organizations.  Once again, you speak in ignorance and do so admittedly.  Seek Light my Brother.  You'll be better informed for your efforts.


----------



## Glen Cook

Levelhead said:


> I refer them to the Eastern Star.


I note there are both co masonic and feminine lodges.  If asked. I will provide contact information.


----------



## Glen Cook

Companion Joe said:


> "By being a man ... "
> 
> ....



My UGLE ritual does not include that language.


----------



## Levelhead

Im familiar with it.


----------



## Glen Cook

Levelhead said:


> Im familiar with it.


Do you work Emulation?  If so, refer me to the page.


----------



## Levelhead

Companion joe is referring to an answer to a question.


----------



## Levelhead

Edited. Not sure about being able to put that in a responce.


----------



## Glen Cook

Levelhead said:


> Companion joe is referring to an answer to a question.


Yes, I am aware he is. I still don't see it in my ritual. Do you work Emulation?  If so, what page are you on?  Which Province are you in?


----------



## Levelhead

I work out of the state of florida Masonic code book.


----------



## Glen Cook

Levelhead said:


> I work out of the state of florida Masonic code book.


My point was that the companion was citing ritual as if it were a universal response. I was indicating I do not in my ritual as a UGLE Mason.


----------



## Mike Martin

I can see that this topic has become a little polarised along the line of personal opinion, now noting that one contributor cited a lineage back to 1717 as a proof of regularity and therefor making the opinion of the Grand Lodge of England important I refer back to my second posting on this topic where I wrote:

"I suppose it depends what you choose to call a "bogus organisation". Here in England (the UK) there is the Order of Women Freemasons and the Honourable Fraternity of Antients Freemasons that have both been making women Masons for more than 100 years. In 1999 the UGLE (my Grand Lodge) made the following statement about them:

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."


----------



## coachn

Mike Martin said:


> I can see that this topic has become a little polarised along the line of personal opinion, now noting that one contributor cited a lineage back to 1717 as a proof of regularity and therefor making the opinion of the Grand Lodge of England important I refer back to my second posting on this topic where I wrote:
> 
> "I suppose it depends what you choose to call a "bogus organisation". Here in England (the UK) there is the Order of Women Freemasons and the Honourable Fraternity of Antients Freemasons that have both been making women Masons for more than 100 years. In 1999 the UGLE (my Grand Lodge) made the following statement about them:
> 
> 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."


Brother Mike,

If one would take the Light that you provided and connect the dots, as Freemasonic Instruction Inculcates continuously, one could not legitimately call upon any lineage to the UGLE to support one's opinion and argument to not legitimately inform females when they ask if there are female Freemasons because by calling upon this lineage, one opens the very door that one is trying to close because UGLE openly states that there exists Female Freemasons who exist and have been Regularly Practicing within the UK for more than 100 years. 

Furthermore, if one were to call upon the lineage of the UGLE to condemn and dismiss Female Freemasons, one could not legitimately and authentically refer any female OR MALE to the OES because that same UGLE Lineage CONDEMNS the OES as incompatible with UGLE.

Interesting!

Thanks for sharing this Light.

Coach


----------



## Levelhead

Well if the OES is not recognized then thats new light to me, because i was told that it was! So thats understandable about the OES.


----------



## Glen Cook

Levelhead said:


> Well if the OES is not recognized then thats new light to me, because i was told that it was! So thats understandable about the OES.


It is not allowed for UGLE members. It is for GL of Scotland members. Each GL decides what bodies its members may play in.  For instance, Texas and Utah do not allows Widows [sic] Sons. Others do.


----------



## Mike Martin

Just for completeness: of the three "Home" Grand Lodges only Scotland accepts the practise of OES Chapters, it is proscribed both in England and Ireland.

I remember reading some years ago that the GL of Scotland was blindsided and accepted OES before liaising with the other 2 "Home" Grand Lodges who recognised the implications of expecting a Freemason to act in a Masonic capacity outside of regular Freemasonry.


----------



## Levelhead

Ok so me being in florida.. If a woman asks me if she can become a freemason "IN FLORIDA" i will say "no". 

Seems like im right back where i started!


----------



## coachn

Levelhead said:


> Ok so me being in florida.. If a woman asks me if she can become a freemason "IN FLORIDA" i will say "no".
> 
> Seems like im right back where i started!


You assume that she is asking to join one of the male craft jurisdictions that reside in Florida of which the GL FL is but one.  Yes, that specific one is not an option, neither is the PHA GL an option.  But there are other options that are viable to her that do not fit your example.


----------



## Levelhead

Never heard of one in florida, nor would i know of or care for a non recognized origination either. 

So i would have NO recommendation.


----------



## coachn

Levelhead said:


> Never heard of one in florida, nor would i know of or care for a non recognized origination either...


Well understood.  When one does not care, there is little that others can do to provide light that could ever help.


----------



## Glen Cook

Well, I've wondered about that, given the usual coordination that occurs. 


Mike Martin said:


> Just for completeness: of the three "Home" Grand Lodges only Scotland accepts the practise of OES Chapters, it is proscribed both in England and Ireland.
> 
> I remember reading some years ago that the GL of Scotland was blindsided and accepted OES before liaising with the other 2 "Home" Grand Lodges who recognised the implications of expecting a Freemason to act in a Masonic capacity outside of regular Freemasonry.


ll


----------



## Glen Cook

Levelhead said:


> Never heard of one in florida, nor would i know of or care for a non recognized origination either.
> 
> So i would have NO recommendation.


While we cannot sit in lodge with any but regular Masons, why would you not want an inquiring individual of any sex to have the benefit of a craft system?


----------



## Companion Joe

It's not about not benefitting from a craft system. I'm all for it. Just call it something else. In the U.S., most Masonic organizations have an equivalent group for ladies, but they have their own name. Apparently it isn't worldwide, but in my state and others I have visited, there is a question asked when a candidate first comes to the door of the lodge. The reply is "by being a man..." Therefore, any female Freemason is clandestine. If they want to have lodges and use the ritual word for word, so be it. Just don't call it Freemasonry.


----------



## Mike Martin

Companion Joe, the difficulty is that it is a bit late to say they can't call it "Freemasonry" as they've already been doing that for over 100 years.


----------



## coachn

Companion Joe said:


> ...Therefore, any female Freemason is clandestine. ...


So, you admit that *females CAN be Freemasons*, some *females ARE Freemasons*, and that upon meeting any one of them, you would summarily label her a irregular and clandestine *Freemason*.


----------



## Levelhead

Mike Martin said:


> Companion Joe, the difficulty is that it is a bit late to say they can't call it "Freemasonry" as they've already been doing that for over 100 years.


So in the past 200 + years theres an approximate 5 million freemasons living among us. And I've never ever met a female freemason and ONLY seen 1 on tv from England. 

This 100 years of female masonry must be a well kept secret!


----------



## Levelhead

Glen Cook said:


> While we cannot sit in lodge with any but regular Masons, why would you not want an inquiring individual of any sex to have the benefit of a craft system?


They can have the same benefit my wife has. Coming down and enjoying good people, fun get togethers, volunteering right next to me and being around the brothers!


----------



## coachn

Levelhead said:


> So in the past 200 + years theres an approximate 5 million freemasons living among us. And I've never ever met a female freemason and ONLY seen 1 on tv from England.
> 
> This 100 years of female masonry must be a well kept secret!


Unless you reconnoitered elsewhere, you yourself did not know the Secrets until you joined the Craft. Female Freemasons are few and far between, but they do live among us, doing their own thing and doing so regardless of any judgments from outside their Craft.  Why not simply wish them well and keep no ill-will toward their efforts?  Would you not want the same for yourself?


----------



## coachn

Levelhead said:


> They can have the same benefit my wife has. Coming down and enjoying good people, fun get togethers, volunteering right next to me and being around the brothers!


If you believe that is what Freemasonry is about, instead of engaging in a effort to transform yourself from good to better, then I can see why you harbor your views.  The females that I know who practice Freemasonry within their Order are not there for the reasons that you put forth.  They want to actually do the Work that Transforms them from Good to Better. 

What your view offers is not what they seek.


----------



## Levelhead

It seems like your very passionate and driven on your co ed Masonic organizations!  So why don't you find such an organization , petition to get in (since they do it like we do right?) and contribute to the relief of the non flourishing female membership and help bring your word and strong passions into a greater light to the brethren and your all male home lodge!


----------



## coachn

Levelhead said:


> It seems like your very passionate and driven on your co ed Masonic organizations!  So why don't you find such an organization , petition to get in (since they do it like we do right?) and contribute to the relief of the non flourishing female membership and help bring your word and strong passions into a greater light to the brethren and your all male home lodge!


Ah! If you are indeed referring to me, you are assuming things about me that are not.  It's clear that you're desperately making effort to personalize the discourse; nice try but I shan't be misdirected by your absurd recommendations.  I proudly belong to a Male Craft Order recognized by the UGLE.  I recognized very early on that the education that most males receive in male craft orders is limited, biased and incomplete.  I have merely not let this reality hold me back from understanding the world better and fuller, Freemasonic or not.  My passion is for Light, not filtered and biased dogma.  I have no interest whatsoever in changing my affiliation; that would be silly.  Furthermore, I have no interest in drinking the kool-aid of narrow Craft dogma either.  Females Craft Freemasons are doing very well without us male-craft interfering, especially since they are more interested in quality than quantity and focus upon this aspect always.  We could learn a lot from their focused practice, but we won't since we are well-entrenched in our ways.


----------



## Brother JC

Levelhead said:


> They can have the same benefit my wife has. Coming down and enjoying good people, fun get togethers, volunteering right next to me and being around the brothers!


Is that what you sought when you knocked on the door? Is that the culmination of the Masonic Experience to you? Or is that all you feel women are worthy of?


----------



## coachn

Light Seeker: I want a Mustang.
Blind Man: Have you considered this Rock over here?
Light Seeker:  I want a Mustang.
Blind Man: You can be fulfilled enough by this Rock.
Light Seeker:  I want a Mustang.
Blind Man: You can get everything you need from this Rock.
Light Seeker:  I want a Mustang.
Blind Man: This Rock is your only option.
Light Seeker:  I want a Mustang.
Blind Man: You should really want this Rock instead. 
Light Seeker:  I want a Mustang.
Blind Man: The Rock is much better for you.
Light Seeker:  I want a Mustang.
Blind Man: The Rock is all that you shall ever need.
Light Seeker:  I want a Mustang.
Blind Man: Mustangs are not good for you.
Light Seeker:  I want a Mustang.
Blind Man: Your passion is your problem. 
Light Seeker:  I want a Mustang.
Blind Man: The Rock will satisfy your passion.
Light Seeker:  I want a Mustang.
Blind Man: You're not listening.
Light Seeker:  I'm not being heard.


----------



## Roy_

Dalinkou said:
			
		

> Do you happen to know the specific names of the women's lodges or the co-Mason lodges you mention (or even their websites)? I would like to find out more about this subject since merely applying definitions of 'regular' and 'irregular' leaves out much information.



Here are a few listed:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Co-Freemasonry


----------



## Brother JC

For Levelhead: same equation, different variables; if a man asks you about Prince Hall Masonry, would you summarily shoot him down and tell him your Lodge was the only viable option? I mean, you consider PHA to be clandestine, even though it flies in the face of the majority...


----------



## Levelhead

trysquare said:


> For Levelhead: same equation, different variables; if a man asks you about Prince Hall Masonry, would you summarily shoot him down and tell him your Lodge was the only viable option? I mean, you consider PHA to be clandestine, even though it flies in the face of the majority...



In MY state.They are Not recognized. Not clandestine. Ive corrected myself in a prior thread. 

If someone inquired about masonry and they were a MAN i would direct them accordingly.


----------



## Brother JC

Levelhead said:


> If someone inquired about masonry and they were a MAN i would direct them accordingly.


"Accordingly?" A man has two options in your state, based *solely* on his choice in the matter. Would something about a man cause you to point him in one direction or another?

I realize this is getting off-base to some degree, but I feel it's germane to the conversation. More than one Grand Lodge (or Grand Orient) exists in Florida, and whether you, personally, consider them clandestine, regular, or recognized, is beside the point. They exist, and they make Masons. You can't sit in *any* of these Mason's Lodges, yet some you consider clandestine, some you don't. You've admitted that you'd send a Seeker to one, but not the other. I personally find this thinking hypocritical and intolerant, but that's just my opinion.


----------



## Levelhead

Yes "ACCORDINGLY" maybe i spelled it wrong.

Your original  question was what i would do or say to someone asking about prince hall?

And i would give him whatever info i had knowledge of. Thats the best i can do.


----------



## dfreybur

coachn said:


> What your view offers is not what they seek.



In business there's a concept of satisfying a client's requirements.  Sometimes that means doing what the client wants.  Sometimes the client asks for something that doesn't make sense on the surface and it's time to step back and ask "What are you actually trying to accomplish?"

There is an issue of accessibility.  I'm currently in San Antonio, TX which is not a large metropolitan region.  Our airport isn't even a regional hub.  Here is San Antonio I can offer contacts for a list of recognized Masonic related orders that do admit women.  I can list both Prince Hall and "George Washington" branches all a easy local commute to get there.

In comparison the nearest CoMason lodge to where I am appears to be in Chicago, and the nearest female only lodge to where I am might be in Los Angeles.  Either one of those is an extremely long way to go in comparison to a local commute.  The only female CoMason I know that I've met took her degrees in England before she moved to the US.  The only female Mason I know that I've met took her degrees in Los Angeles and was attending a lodge social not wearing any regalia just as I would not wear any regalia should I attend one of her events.

So it becomes time to ask the question "Is it worth it to you to take a 3 hour flight to get the *real thing* when you can get membership in one of our orders closer than across town?"

We haven't even gotten to the question of what the expression "real thing" means here.  In the context of distance does it make any sense at all to tell a women to go somewhere other than local?  Who's going to be able to fly 3 hours each way every month to attend most of the meetings?  In comparison to who's going to be able to drive to a place that isn't even across town every month to attend most of the meetings?  What really are the requirements here?

And then we get to the next level.  Are lodges of CoMasons and female only obedience the "real thing".  On a social level I can say they are.  On a lodge level I can't.  They are real in the sense they teach the same lessons that I learn at my lodges, but that's also true of the Star and Amaranth chapters a short drive away.  But while I can attend their social events just like I can go to church socials of someone's religion other than mine, I'm never going to try to cross their tiler so I'm never going to be able to attend a tiled event together with a woman who flies out to petition one of these lodges.

Why is a woman asking for the "real thing" anyways?  I can hand her a can of soda and do that, knowing full well it's an answer that is technically truth but fundamentally irrelevant.  But isn't taking a 3 hour flight to a group I can never attend just as fundamentally irrelevant?

Life's not fair.  Woman can't join my lodges.  The fact that women can join some other lodges out there somewhere often isn't the question that's really being asked.

Can a woman become a Mason?  The answer may be yes, but most of the time that answer is theoretical and rather irrelevant.  That answer doesn't satisfy the requirements most of the time.  There's no getting past that.  There exist female only groups that I can't join.  That's not fair either.  Sometimes women want a local answer - Go local go Star.  Sometimes women want a theoretical answer - Get on a plane and fly to a lodge that admits women.  Sometimes women want a fairness answer - There are female orders that won't permit me to be a member so that balances the issue out.  Somethings women want a sympathy answer - Life's not fair.  Folks get in our way all the time.  I know how you feel.  I used to feel that way.  I found there isn't any real answer to this mystery of life.


----------



## Levelhead

dfreybur said:


> In business there's a concept of satisfying a client's requirements.  Sometimes that means doing what the client wants.  Sometimes the client asks for something that doesn't make sense on the surface and it's time to step back and ask "What are you actually trying to accomplish?"
> 
> There is an issue of accessibility.  I'm currently in San Antonio, TX which is not a large metropolitan region.  Our airport isn't even a regional hub.  Here is San Antonio I can offer contacts for a list of recognized Masonic related orders that do admit women.  I can list both Prince Hall and "George Washington" branches all a easy local commute to get there.
> 
> In comparison the nearest CoMason lodge to where I am appears to be in Chicago, and the nearest female only lodge to where I am might be in Los Angeles.  Either one of those is an extremely long way to go in comparison to a local commute.  The only female CoMason I know that I've met took her degrees in England before she moved to the US.  The only female Mason I know that I've met took her degrees in Los Angeles and was attending a lodge social not wearing any regalia just as I would not wear any regalia should I attend one of her events.
> 
> So it becomes time to ask the question "Is it worth it to you to take a 3 hour flight to get the *real thing* when you can get membership in one of our orders closer than across town?"
> 
> We haven't even gotten to the question of what the expression "real thing" means here.  In the context of distance does it make any sense at all to tell a women to go somewhere other than local?  Who's going to be able to fly 3 hours each way every month to attend most of the meetings?  In comparison to who's going to be able to drive to a place that isn't even across town every month to attend most of the meetings?  What really are the requirements here?
> 
> And then we get to the next level.  Are lodges of CoMasons and female only obedience the "real thing".  On a social level I can say they are.  On a lodge level I can't.  They are real in the sense they teach the same lessons that I learn at my lodges, but that's also true of the Star and Amaranth chapters a short drive away.  But while I can attend their social events just like I can go to church socials of someone's religion other than mine, I'm never going to try to cross their tiler so I'm never going to be able to attend a tiled event together with a woman who flies out to petition one of these lodges.
> 
> Why is a woman asking for the "real thing" anyways?  I can hand her a can of soda and do that, knowing full well it's an answer that is technically truth but fundamentally irrelevant.  But isn't taking a 3 hour flight to a group I can never attend just as fundamentally irrelevant?
> 
> Life's not fair.  Woman can't join my lodges.  The fact that women can join some other lodges out there somewhere often isn't the question that's really being asked.
> 
> Can a woman become a Mason?  The answer may be yes, but most of the time that answer is theoretical and rather irrelevant.  That answer doesn't satisfy the requirements most of the time.  There's no getting past that.  There exist female only groups that I can't join.  That's not fair either.  Sometimes women want a local answer - Go local go Star.  Sometimes women want a theoretical answer - Get on a plane and fly to a lodge that admits women.  Sometimes women want a fairness answer - There are female orders that won't permit me to be a member so that balances the issue out.  Somethings women want a sympathy answer - Life's not fair.  Folks get in our way all the time.  I know how you feel.  I used to feel that way.  I found there isn't any real answer to this mystery of life.


Very well put brother.


----------



## dfreybur

Levelhead said:


> Yes "ACCORDINGLY" maybe i spelled it wrong.
> 
> Your original  question was what i would do or say to someone asking about prince hall?
> 
> And i would give him whatever info i had knowledge of. Thats the best i can do.



http://www.conferenceofgrandmasterspha.org/gjlinks.asp

Sometimes questions are easy to answer once you have some information, as in this particular post.  Sometimes questions are not so easy to answer even when you do have the information (links to various orders get posted to this forum every so often so they are in the archive), as in this large and popular thread.


----------



## Zack

Levelhead or anyone else that is interested,
do a search for Karen Kidd/author.
She has written 2 books. one co- masonry and one on women in Freemasonry.


----------



## Mike Martin

Levelhead said:


> Ok so me being in florida.. If a woman asks me if she can become a freemason "IN FLORIDA" i will say "no".


That would be a fair answer yes.


----------



## Mike Martin

Levelhead said:


> So in the past 200 + years theres an approximate 5 million freemasons living among us. And I've never ever met a female freemason and ONLY seen 1 on tv from England.
> 
> This 100 years of female masonry must be a well kept secret!



Well in America maybe but here in England my Grand Lodge Library & Museum ran an exhibition to run at the same time as the Centenary celebrations of the OWF.


----------



## Levelhead

Mike Martin said:


> That would be a fair answer yes.


Ok so in this thread i am done as I've given an answer from my jurisdiction. Thank you.


----------



## Mike Martin

dalinkou said:


> Do you happen to know the specific names of the women's lodges or the co-Mason lodges you mention (or even their websites)?  I would like to find out more about this subject since merely applying definitions of 'regular' and 'irregular' leaves out much information.


Yes and if an enquirer identified themselves as being in the UK I give them the details and have done so many times on my own forum in the UK since its launch in 2000.


----------



## Brother JC

Levelhead said:


> Ok so in this thread i am done as I've given an answer from my jurisdiction. Thank you.


Not long ago there was a Co-Masonic lodge in St. Pete's, but I don't know if it still exists. If I lived in FL, I'd help our theoretical woman a bit more.
I, too, am done. None of us is really right or wrong. The simplest answer to the original question is "yes, but not in my lodge."
At the end of the day we're Brothers. We may not always (ever) agree, but when push comes to shove, hopefully we have each other's backs.


----------



## Levelhead

100% brother.


----------



## coachn

Mike Martin said:


> That would be a fair answer yes.


Actually, there is a Co-mason Lodge in Miami. St. Germain _*Lodge*_ 1737, _*Miami*_, Florida


----------



## coachn

dfreybur said:


> In business there's a concept of satisfying a client's requirements.  Sometimes that means doing what the client wants.  Sometimes the client asks for something that doesn't make sense on the surface and it's time to step back and ask "What are you actually trying to accomplish?"
> 
> There is an issue of accessibility.  I'm currently in San Antonio, TX which is not a large metropolitan region.  Our airport isn't even a regional hub.  Here is San Antonio I can offer contacts for a list of recognized Masonic related orders that do admit women.  I can list both Prince Hall and "George Washington" branches all a easy local commute to get there.
> 
> In comparison the nearest CoMason lodge to where I am appears to be in Chicago, and the nearest female only lodge to where I am might be in Los Angeles.  Either one of those is an extremely long way to go in comparison to a local commute.  The only female CoMason I know that I've met took her degrees in England before she moved to the US.  The only female Mason I know that I've met took her degrees in Los Angeles and was attending a lodge social not wearing any regalia just as I would not wear any regalia should I attend one of her events.
> 
> So it becomes time to ask the question "Is it worth it to you to take a 3 hour flight to get the *real thing* when you can get membership in one of our orders closer than across town?"
> 
> We haven't even gotten to the question of what the expression "real thing" means here.  In the context of distance does it make any sense at all to tell a women to go somewhere other than local?  Who's going to be able to fly 3 hours each way every month to attend most of the meetings?  In comparison to who's going to be able to drive to a place that isn't even across town every month to attend most of the meetings?  What really are the requirements here?
> 
> And then we get to the next level.  Are lodges of CoMasons and female only obedience the "real thing".  On a social level I can say they are.  On a lodge level I can't.  They are real in the sense they teach the same lessons that I learn at my lodges, but that's also true of the Star and Amaranth chapters a short drive away.  But while I can attend their social events just like I can go to church socials of someone's religion other than mine, I'm never going to try to cross their tiler so I'm never going to be able to attend a tiled event together with a woman who flies out to petition one of these lodges.
> 
> Why is a woman asking for the "real thing" anyways?  I can hand her a can of soda and do that, knowing full well it's an answer that is technically truth but fundamentally irrelevant.  But isn't taking a 3 hour flight to a group I can never attend just as fundamentally irrelevant?
> 
> Life's not fair.  Woman can't join my lodges.  The fact that women can join some other lodges out there somewhere often isn't the question that's really being asked.
> 
> Can a woman become a Mason?  The answer may be yes, but most of the time that answer is theoretical and rather irrelevant.  That answer doesn't satisfy the requirements most of the time.  There's no getting past that.  There exist female only groups that I can't join.  That's not fair either.  Sometimes women want a local answer - Go local go Star.  Sometimes women want a theoretical answer - Get on a plane and fly to a lodge that admits women.  Sometimes women want a fairness answer - There are female orders that won't permit me to be a member so that balances the issue out.  Somethings women want a sympathy answer - Life's not fair.  Folks get in our way all the time.  I know how you feel.  I used to feel that way.  I found there isn't any real answer to this mystery of life.


Obviously you would be the wrong person for females to ask such a question.  Time to move on.


----------



## Glen Cook

Levelhead said:


> So in the past 200 + years theres an approximate 5 million freemasons living among us. And I've never ever met a female freemason and ONLY seen 1 on tv from England.
> 
> This 100 years of female masonry must be a well kept secret!


Well, you've lived a sheltered Masonic life.  I've had any number of meals at which female Freemasons were present, both in the US and England.


----------



## Glen Cook

Companion Joe said:


> .... Just don't call it Freemasonry.


And, yet, UGLE says in the 1999 statement, in part,m "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).


----------



## Glen Cook

Levelhead said:


> They can have the same benefit my wife has. Coming down and enjoying good people, fun get togethers, volunteering right next to me and being around the brothers!



In other words, not the same benefit you.  To put it another way, why don't you just do the activities your wife can do?  Why do you go to lodge meetings?  Why shouldn't women want the same benefit as you?  Are they not deserving?

I _almost_ feel this a rehash of civil rights arguments when I was a child.


----------



## Morris

Lots of good thoughts in this thread. Thanks for the spirited conversation.


----------

