Fraternal/sororal/social organizations in public sphere: morality thereof, esp if secretive?

In My Humble Opinion
1

This thread is not about fraternities and sororities in colleges and universities (though that is a great discussion topic on its own, probably covered extensively over the years on this board).

It’s about when grown individuals form social groups that have at least some elements of exclusivity, most likely at least slightly similar to their college-level counterparts: you have to be invited to join, you get voted in, there is a secret handshake/password, you are sworn to secrecy about certain aspects of the organization, etc.

The goals of said groups seem to be two-fold: building a strong social network among members, and helping the wider community through philanthropic activity.

Not having ever been a member of the Masons, Shriners, Knights of Columbus, or many other such groups, I am not in a position to characterize those organizations in detail, and I don’t know if they fit the description I am aiming for.

But to my astonishment and bemusement, I did recently get inducted into that kind of organization. (And I can’t identify who it was, because I took a solemn vow to keep it sooper sekret. Yeesh. But I promised I would, and I don’t intend to break my promise.)

I’m a little weirded out. There is some dissonance here: I only joined the organization at the behest of people I care about, but they couldn’t give me the low-down on the secretive policies until I joined, because, well … it’s a SECRET. (This organization is closing in on 100 years old, so it is understandably rooted in some rather traditional values.)

My dad was a Shriner and loved it. I don’t know if he was initiated the way I was, though I suspect he was. (I know my mother was fond of rolling her eyes at their secret handshake, silly hat, parades, and whatever.)

Help me through my cognitive dissonance. Have I inadvertently contributed to exclusivity and societal stratification, the way the worst of fraternities/sororities do? (In my particular organizational case, diverse members are absolutely welcome, as are all income levels … still, you DO have to be invited, interviewed, and voted on in order to join.)

Or am I simply participating, with a certain amount of detached amusement, in a natural human social behavior, whose strengths (providing community for members, serving the public) outweigh any silliness of their paswords/handshakes/barriers to entry?

I’d be fascinated to hear stories from others who have participated in such organizations.

2

By any chance, was it the Stonecutters?

3

I wish. Then I’d get to meet a real live Martian!

4

An organization that is serious about philanthropic activity is well-served by vetting it’s members to ensure they are committed and willing to participate. There’s nothing worse than being in a volunteer group where only a few people show up to an event. I can see how an adult that really wants to have an impact would want to make sure they join a team where everyone else does too.

As long as the vetting is based on dedication it seems fine to me.

I’ve never been in a secret organization FWIW.

5

ISTM “secret” and “philanthropic” are just about opposite ends of the spectrum when it comes to human motivations.

Being selective about membership is one thing. And can be done for either good and evil reasons. But secret is almost all evil. With maybe a bit of ritual silliness thrown in.

6

To the extent that it’s secret, how can we tell?

7

My view is an organization’s desire for secrecy is itself indicative of ill intent. The ill intent comes before the secrecy and causes it. Not vice versa.

So when you observe secrecy you can reliably infer ill intent with no need to penetrate any of the secrets. Organizations with nothing bad going on have no reason to even think of adding secrecy to their mix.

8

It feels weird to have this discussion anonymously on a message board.

9

Is the group itself secret? Or just some traditions – like handshakes, mottos, etc.?

10

Back in the ‘70s, my dad joined the Order of the Alhambra, which is ersatz Shriners for Catholics, because Catholics aren’t supposed to join Freemasonry. It was for business networking, of course. Like the Shriners play up Islam-inspired themes, the Order of the Alhambra themes itself around Islamic Spain - which, implicitly, leads to the Catholic Reconquista - you see the sleight of hand? My dad joined the local “Carmona Caravan” and for his admission was required to submit a 100-word “thesis” on the history of Carmona. He assigned me to ghostwrite it. The saga of Pedro the Cruel. To get initiated, he had to submit to a hazing ritual, which was physically strenuous and involved getting a banana smashed onto his head - those 40 and up were exempted from it, but Dad was 39½. (Pedro the Cruel strikes again!)

11

Secret socities aren’t what they used to be. I bet they didn’t even dress up like indians and electrocute you.

12

Hardly. The “secret” bits really arent so secret (Big Secrets etc having let many cats out of their bags, not to mention the Internet). They are just to make the member feel like they belong.

13

I’d say they’re about as exclusive and meaningful as a Costco membership.

14

More or less.

However, the networking can be valuable. The "secrets’ are not really secrets. We all have secrets, doesnt mean any evil intent.

15

“Ritual silliness” seems to be at the root of the secretiveness in what I’ve observed. Personally I don’t get the appeal, but it definitely isn’t malicious. And the organization is genuinely philanthropic.

16

I don’t think they are evil or malicious. I do think they’re dumb and silly. We used to play music at a Moose Lodge every few months. Hubster was thinking about joining. Then they told us that I could not enter the sacred space of the moose hall without a male errmm supervising me ‘cause I’m a woman. I thought that was pretty rich considering the little women were the ones that cooked and clean the place up, but couldn’t be trusted to roam around the lodge freely without escort. Hubster declined the invitation.

We also played at an Elk lodge once. That was just odd. We gotten all the equipment set up did light and sound checks and were sitting at a table talking. The lights suddenly dimmed to almost dark. Someone was striking a little gong and they were all chanting some thing about the sacred somesuch of the Elk. It was sort of creepy. We all looked at each other uncomfortably and shut up. Weird. Anyway I don’t get why there has to be pseudo religious mumbo jumbo and secrecy to these clubs. I would think adults could gather together and do philanthropy and socialize without that stuff.

17

Truthfully, ISTM that the “secrecy”* and silliness are all just shtick, designed to add some flavor to the experience of joining/being a member of [Secret Organization]. A sort of Rite of Passage. As in, if I were to join the local Moose Lodge (or whatever), I don’t just pay the dues and sign on the dotted line. Where’s the fun in that? I at least have to endure some mild hazing ritual (like the aforementioned banana smushed onto the forehead) and swear not to tell anyone about The Secret Shrine (which is an ancient teddy bear surrounded by offerings of empty beer bottles). It’s all in fun.

*Obviously, some modern fraternal societies originated in societies where secrecy was important, such as the Masons, which kept things secret and exclusive, at least in part, to keep outsiders from learning trade secrets.

I’ve said it before, but it bears repeating: I wish fraternal/sororal societies played a bigger role in the social lives of Americans, and in particular lower-middle-class Midwestern Americans, such as myself. Were it not for the fact that I’d be surrounded by conservative old Good Ol’ Boys, I’d join my local fraternal society (Fraternal Order of Eagles) in a heartbeat. They won’t have me though - see: conservative.

NB: I could probably pull enough strings to join the Masons, but for the fact that you’re required to profess belief in a Higher Power, and I don’t. But I do know a couple, which seems to be the biggest barrier to entry (knowing one and asking). Do I think their secrecy and mystique are dangerous or [a word like that]? Probably not. Do I think it’s all silly? Probably more silly than that of, say, the Loyal Order of Moose, but not eggregiously so.

18

wow @HeyHomie , in the case of this particular organization, you’ve absolutely nailed it.

Plus, while philanthropy in the community is a huge part of what this organization does, it is also an important support network for the members. I would not necessarily ascribe that role to the entire organization (it exists in all US states and Canada), but here in Hawai’i it can be a lifeline for people who moved here fairly late in life and need to make friends - our high school BFFs and college roommates aren’t exactly close by. Even in the short time I’ve been a member, I see that the group takes its responsibility to help each other very seriously.

So, I’m okay with it, even though some of the rituals perplex me. (I wish we had a teddy bear surrounded by beer cans. That’d be fun.)

19

If you haven’t heard of it, I recommend reading Bowling Alone by Robert Putnam. There is also a pretty decent documentary about the book and author on Netflix called Join or Die. The basic thesis is that the decline in our political satisfaction in America is directly correlated with the decline in participation in social organizations. I’m not 100% sure I buy that the correlation is causative (at least not exclusively). I saw the documentary first (and vaguely remembered someone mentioning the book to me recently) and was skeptical, but it piqued my interest enough to read the book, and I have to say that Putnam is onto something.

20

I haven’t read Bowling Alone but am familiar with its thesis and the splash it made when it was published - in 2000! I’m sure matters have only gotten worse since then.