Shriners. Masons, every last fez-wearing one of 'em.
Hate to break it to ya, pal, but there have been plenty of female Masons. The International Order of Co-Freemasonry has always admitted both genders.
Been sniffing the fumes outta that funny hat of yours again?
I’ve been an
AF & AM for 20 years and this is the first time I’ve heard of this organization of which you speak. Even though Google gives quite a few hits on the phrase, I’ve got to do a lot more research before I will accept that these folk are a legitimate branch of the Masonic organization.
MXR90 said:
To which I say, Brilliant and well said.
Nice job advocating for your brothers there. I assume you work in a public relations job?
I think one of the important points about the “women-as-masons” issue is that there is no monolithic leadership of Masonry. There are several different interpretations. In the US for example, there are:
Free & Accepted Masons (F & A M)
Ancient Free & Accepted Masons (A F & A M)
Prince Hall Masons
and many, many others.
In the US, each state (most other places it’s done by country) has a Grand Lodge composed of lodges in that state of it’s particular type. Florida has at least two that I’m aware of: the Grand Lodge of Florida, F & A M and the Grand Lodge of Florida, Prince Hall. Each Grand Lodge (GL) has a committee of members responsible for investigating other Grand Lodges to determine whether it will extend recognition and reciprocity to that Grand Lodge’s members. It is, to my knowledge, very unusual for any GL to extend that privilege to any other GL operating within the same geographic boundaries. For example, Prince Hall Masons and F&AM Masons in Florida may not visit each other’s lodges although the two GLs actually have a somewhat cordial relationship (unique circumstances). There’s at least one other GL here that does not have a particularly good relationship with either the PH or F&AM (name escapes me, International or Universal or something like that). For GLs in other areas, recognition is usually based on the committee’s acceptance that the requesting GL is a “true” lodge, not in the sense that the ritual is exactly the same (they never are), but that the core tenets of Masonry are upheld. In most branches that I am familiar with, one of those core tenets is that a woman will not be made a Master Mason.
Zakalwe, P.M.
I’m no raging feminist, but in this modern, enlightened day and age, why would anyone want to be a member of an organization that has something as distasteful as that as one of its core tenets?
Masonry is, after all, a fraternal organization.
After a little research I can say with absolute certainty that not a single Grand Lodge in the USA recognizes this group. The same is true for England. As such, the folks who are members of the cited group are NOT Masons, no matter what they call themselves.
I guess for the same reason that I have no interest in joining Junior League or some other traditionally women-only organization. Men and women are different and those differences can (and should) be recognized, acknowledged, and celebrated without denigrating either sex. Masons aren’t taught that women are inferior, in fact, honor for womanhood is also a tenet of Masonry. They just can’t be Masons.
Why does everything have to be open to everyone?
Why shouldn’t everything be open to everyone? I always thought that was one of the ideals behind the whole “freedom and equality” thing we got going on in the States. What does Masonry gain by being male-only? What would it lose by being open to both genders?
And, yes, the same goes for women-only organizations, or any other exclusive organization. What’s the appeal to that sort of thing?
I was once approached about joining the Masons, & one of the reasons I said “No” was the one sex environment.
Not being married, I neither wanted nor needed separation from the ladies.
Agreed. Fraternal as in Fraternaty.
Colleges are full of examples of this very thing. Its a private order (club), they can admit whom they please and, if you don’t like it, you can join any number of organizations that have male and female participants.
My reason for not becoming a Freemason is that I’m not fond of the ritualism (the same dislike that kept me from joining a few churches) The brotherhood thing was fine and the numerous side causes they sponsored (Hospitals to help child burn victims) were intriguing. But it wasn’t my cup of tea. I still have a tremondous amount of respect for them because of the things they accomplish.
As for the reasons that one-sex-only organizations exist, I can think of one reason that hasn’t been stated here. I remember years ago a man telling me that he had to quit his local all male Rotary Club (civic service club) because they started accepting women in the membership. Seems his wife was just fine with him going to meetings with the guys, but she wasn’t at all happy with the thought of him meeting other women there.
Just to be clear, I wan’t advocating that the Masons be forced to go co-ed, nor was I suggesting that not wanting to go co-ed was sexist. I just don’t understand why that particular aspect of the organization would be desirable, or why there would be resistance to changing it.
Psychotically suspicious spouses, I hope, would be very much a minority reason.
Resistance to becoming coed is simple: out of respect of tradition.
Now, whether Masons’ perception of their tradition is correct or not, most Masons (most, not all) believe that their traditions (rituals, symbols, catechisms, etc.) have remained unchanged since the beginning of the Craft. Masons would be just as adamant about opening their Lodge meetings to non-Masons as they are about letting women become Masons. Being all-male is not, usually, why Masons join; it’s an incidental fact that for many doesn’t bother them.
Some Masons believe that their traditions go back to the building of the Temple of Solomon. Some stretch it all the way back to the Ancient Egyptians or even Adam. It is understandable why these Masons would be resistant to change. (“If it’s been good for thousands of years, why should it change now?” kind of mentality.) Now, whether the Craft actually goes back that far is irrevelant.
That being said, single-sex organizations are quite common. College fraternities and sororities are an excellent example. So, the Masons are certainly not the only ones.
WRS/Thû
Yeah, I never understood the appeal of fraternities, either.
Guess it’s just me.
Well, that brings up an interesting question:
Are openly gay men welcomed as members of the Masons?
I don’t know of any prohibition concerning gay men. All potential members must be approved by the existing members through the casting of a ballot. Exclusion results if only one “blackball” is found in the ballot box and people being what they are, I wouldn’t be surprised if an openly gay man failed the ballot. I should note that my Masonic experience has been in the midwest, in a largely rural area. I can’t speak for San Francisco or any other more liberal areas.
I just want to say, this would make a great signature!
-Finette6
Not a Freemason
As far as gay peeps are concerned, it really depends on the lodge. If they’re generally welcoming of gay people, they’ll let him join. I would venture to guess that in IL there may not be much of a problem with a gay man being accepted; in the South (I do not know how strong the Craft remains in the South) the situation may be different.
However, as this thread shows, the argument may be made that Masons are not discriminatory against gay people. To make it more explicit, if a heterosexual Shriner has a partner, it would be his lady regardless of the status of the relationship. Since there are no women Shriners, there is no need to include “significant others” in order to refer to their partners; therefore the term “significant others” is for homosexual Shriners. The email sent referred to, explicitly, “Brethren and their Ladies or Significant Others.”
Ergo, we ain’t homophobes. IMHO, sexual orientation should never come up as a significant topic or issue amongst Masonic brethren.
WRS/Thû - just paid my 2005 dues for the Blue Lodge, Scottish Rite, and Shriners. Plus a parking ticket, health insurance, and alumni club dues. Expensive the end of the year is.
Two Blue Lodges, one Sojourner Camp, one Scottish Rite Valley (all with a little extra for charity of course) and a partridge in a pear tree.
No, just against women.