|
Post by leonardo on Nov 19, 2004 15:03:14 GMT
This is new, and most refreshing, a Mod enticing a "fight". Good on ya, Lee. You're like meself, you like an auld scrap ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by Hubert (N. Z.) on Nov 19, 2004 20:09:43 GMT
Ingo. You must have your tongue in your cheek!
Yoki would not be the only one deemed insulted. The implication is that the only men joining Co-Masonry do so to meet womem. In many cases it is these same females that have brought enlightend males into the Craft.
Broadly, the only people I have encountered making such statements are cowans or ignorant Male Masons who cant concieve of any reason for women to enjoy the friendship that the Lodge provides.
Nothing in the rituals, ceremonials or organisation would suggest anything other than high moral standards. The vast majority of Co-Masons are like any other section of society, they communicate, interact both outwardly and at meetings in rational , respectful and natural manners.
I've obviously taken the bait - BUT why must we continue to regurgitate such ridiculous accusations on such a forum? - I've never seen it suggested that male only meeting are dens of homosexual iniquity.- so why cast dispersions the other way?
|
|
|
Post by Yoki on Nov 20, 2004 19:28:44 GMT
I maybe wrong but I think Ingo is speaking in the second person. In other words this applies to certain Male Mason who will not accept Co Masons.
|
|
staffs
Administrator
Staffs
Posts: 3,295
|
Post by staffs on Nov 20, 2004 19:32:56 GMT
Ingo !you really need to get in touch a little bit more with your feminine side luvvie ;D ;D
Only joking although there is a whole load of material there
|
|
|
Post by ingo on Nov 20, 2004 22:22:58 GMT
I am sorry: I am not a native speaker! I caused some terrible missunderstanding! These are NOT MY opinions. I just gave you the inquiries of more than a dozen GERMAN regular masons concerning Co-Masonry in general!! They really said that co-masonry is no more than a swingers club for people with esoteric interests. Maybe they referr to Aleister Crowley and his OTOs..
|
|
|
Post by whistler on Nov 21, 2004 17:46:58 GMT
Sorry Staff, You Can't wind up Co-masons as easy as that. For every bit of rubbish you can find about Freemasons, You will also find rubbish about Co-freemasons. Let the knockers Knock. I love the concept of Comasonic swingers, if there are I am sure it is be more socially acceptable than Gentlemen Regular Male Freemasonic Couples swinging. I can't imagine any Co-freemason getting upset by the comments like those Ingo reported on, most would just shrug, smile at the ignorance and get on with their Masonry. I repeat I like eating Black Boy Jelly Babies. I Also would report that swinging on the swings in the Parks are much safer now they have replaced the gravel under them, with a rubber compound so the children don't grase their knees when they fall off
|
|
|
Post by leonardo on Nov 21, 2004 18:11:02 GMT
[quote author=whistler: I love the concept of Comasonic swingers, if there are I am sure it is be more socially acceptable than Gentlemen Regular Male Freemasonic Couples swinging. [/quote]
Whistler, you have a lovely way with words. Great stuff!
|
|
staffs
Administrator
Staffs
Posts: 3,295
|
Post by staffs on Nov 21, 2004 18:15:44 GMT
Whistler,
Just be careful who you are on the swings with
|
|
|
Post by ingo on Nov 22, 2004 20:21:09 GMT
|
|
|
Post by foxcole on Jan 30, 2005 8:06:57 GMT
I'm only in the first step of applying to a Co-Masonic lodge, so am not speaking with much knowledge, but I have heard dispersions about male-only Masonry and am also aware of the attitudes between all the different orders of masonry (including female-only and mixed), and find it both disturbing and amusing that humanity cannot agree even in its highest endeavors. Christians splintered on similar grounds: Irenaeus dictated almost single-handedly the officially accepted content of the New Testament--albeit in an effort to unite Christians, but he based the decisions on his own beliefs and views, and denounced as destructive and evil any who disagreed or followed other ideas. Although Masonry had, it seems, in the beginning involved both sexes (not genders; gender is grammatical word form; sex indicates a human configuration), it too has been divided and shaped by attitudes and opinions, and refuses to acknowledge any others. How very human.
I applied to a Co-Masonic order because I feel that it would be more fulfilling and meaningful with an inclusive, balanced body of participants, more than a female-only order could offer. Of course, I could be completely ignorant about this and I'm sure if that's true, someone might set me straight.
I have no knowledge of why male-only Masons do not consider females worthy or able, or when or why that came about, but I'm equally sure I don't care. Their beliefs and activities don't bother me as long as they don't harm me. It was a male-only Mason who set me on this path, and--assuming I'll be accepted to follow it--I will always consider myself indebted to him.
|
|
|
Post by taylorsman on Jan 30, 2005 10:51:14 GMT
Some interesting points there Foxcole.
Before going on to discuss the role of women in the olden days in Stonemason's Lodges etc, I would have to beg to differ with you on the "Sex" Vs "Gender" debate.
Words change their meaning, just look at "Gay" . When I was a kid, (I am 52 this year) it meant happy , vivacious and had no sexual connotation. Now it almost exclusively means Homosexual. So with Sex and Gender. Most forms these days use the latter , but the meanings I have found are now attributed to those two words are that "Sex" means the purely physical aspects, e.g. which organs the person has , but "Gender" can vary from that physical characteristic. I know a person who is a pre-operative transexual. For the last 15 years they have lived as a woman and have had silicone breasts, female hormones etc, but still has, albeit atrophied, the primary male sexual organ. Thus their Sex is still male but their Gender is female. Both will be female when they have the operation.
Now what role did women have in proto Freemasonry in olden times? I would not have thought a lot in the KTs as they were a religious order and under a vow of Chastity. The Stonemasons on the other hand lived in encampments near the great cathedrals etc they were building and son would follow father or even grandfather on the work which took decades. They obviously had their wives and children with them, though I do not know if the females actually worked on the buildings, dressed the stone etc. If they had not been present then all the words in the Regular-Male Only- Masonic Third Degree about preserving the honour of a Brother in the persons of his wife , his sister or his child, would be pointless.
Has anyone knowledge of women being known to have worked on the Buildings as Stonemasons in olden times?
I feel that the opposition to women in Freemasonry may be partly historical, e.g. "They didn't have women working on the great buildings in olden times" and partly for the same reasons opposed Women Priests in the Anglican Church. Another factor woud be that Speculative Freemasonry was formalised in tiomes when women took a very subservient role in society, despite Queens such as Mary II, Anne and later Victoria, it was a "Man's World".
|
|
Michael
Member
... as you have passed through the ceremony of your initiation...
Posts: 326
|
Post by Michael on Jan 30, 2005 12:21:05 GMT
Women as working Freemasons? Have just found this:- hfaf.org/womenmsns.htmon the HFAF web site and thought it might be of interest. Though I have no way of authenticating I would certainly be interested in whether it is based on truth (Steve?).
|
|
|
Post by taylorsman on Jan 30, 2005 22:05:06 GMT
Now that is of interest and would shoot down the Historical Objection.
|
|
|
Post by whistler on Jan 30, 2005 22:20:08 GMT
Now that is of interest and would shoot down the Historical Objection. I don't think there can be any histroical objection. Masonry goes back into the mists of time. There are social objections formed by our recent social climates, but slow the winds of change are starting to appear - nothing dramatic - it will proably be a numbers game. Slowley over time more and more will seek their Freemasonry in a mixed environment , one day the balance will change, until then we just keep on working in harmony with common goal of spreading the light
|
|
|
Post by foxcole on Jan 31, 2005 3:45:11 GMT
Yours is an astute answer--if I may be allowed to so comment.
(I'm tentative about offering any ideas here because, in present company, I might be fully unqualified to express any. I might be a child, and perhaps tolerated as such. Or perhaps I'm better qualified than I realize but am unable to recognize a receptive connection, so remain tentative. I don't know, so am not confident at all about what I may say here. Nevertheless, I forge blindly on because that's what I do.)
Balance is the end, IMHO. Polarity has its place, as all human and spiritual existence comprises polarity but also all intermediate variations, all out of necessity.
Differences of opinion and ideals are fundamentally a requirement of humanity, and therefore beliefs must differ, even though those differences result in conflict. People *must* uphold their own beliefs or ideas because they are required to believe something (even to deny having any beliefs). Differing beliefs run contrary to the tenets of the believer, so naturally conflict is the result. Neither difference nor conflict are inherently evil, undesireable, or otherwise contrary to the natural order of things.
The world in all its diversity reflects the Creator who lives in us and through us. We are, I deem, placed at birth into the world where we can best find and fulfifll our own personal and spiritual potential, whatever this entails; we are born into an environment that offers us the most accessible means to turn our eyes to God. We must uphold and defend our own understanding, but humanly should recognize the reality and necessity of others' understanding and access.
We humans in the world must differ, but should agree to differ, preferably without mutual condemnation yet understandably without mutual support--because we believe our own beliefs. Naturally, any differing beliefs are unacceptable and unimagineable to us. This is the tragic yet comic conundrum of humanity; it is why our highest human endeavors can be so distressing but at the same time amusing.
Just a few simple thoughts... I apologize if I've offended anyone or caused any uncomfortable or unwholesome reaction.
I started out supporting the idea of wholeness and balance in the experience of Co-Masonry (of which of course I am unqualified to comment except through my own semi-informed imagination) and found myself expressing philosophies of the reality and necessity of diversity. I firmly hold to both, however... it's a terribly complex and difficult equation, but the world's vastly unimagineable diversity and depth, eventually all works out and simplifies to two halves--which equal one.
|
|
|
Post by Hubert (N. Z.) on Jan 31, 2005 6:42:02 GMT
Foxcole, I originally joined CoFreemasonry for similar reasons as you have mentioned, not being aware then that the "male" side would find this unacceptable for visiting them.
Whilst that is a pleasure I have to forgo at present, there are the odd occasions that intermingling is begining to occur.
By becoming actively involved in all that CoM offers, I would find limited time, in any case, to attend many other meetings, and after over 25 yrs in the craft do not feel that we miss out on any thing that they do.
I wish you well in your endeavours and am sure that mixed masonry will give you a richer experience of both life and the masonic ideals.
BTW, what part of this globe are you in. Are you aplying to LDH (French origination) or the new Eastern Order of Int. CoM?
|
|
|
Post by Yoki on Jan 31, 2005 8:15:03 GMT
Fox wrote-Just a few simple thoughts... I apologize if I've offended anyone or caused any uncomfortable or unwholesome reaction.
There is nothing to apologize for Fox, what you write is succinct and makes common sense. Its great to have a bit of female company on the forum.
|
|
|
Post by middlepillar on Jan 31, 2005 9:16:23 GMT
Foxcole
Can I concur with all of the above, your observations not only add to our own understanding, but in an almost invisible way show just how neccesary it is to have feminine influence involved in what we do. (This is coming from a Male only member!).
I am sure with you and Yoki posting we will all learn a lot, and I know Yoki will enjoy the company. It is the freedom and your willingness to speak your minds that breath fresh air in to these Forums and enable a lot of us to increase our understanding and I do sincerely thank you for that.
Just for the record, I belong to several 'esoteric' orders two of which admit women, I would not still be a member of these two if it was not the case. Some of these Orders need the feminine influence to function, and I am speaking from experience. And perhaps another Topic.
|
|
|
Post by foxcole on Jan 31, 2005 18:30:49 GMT
Thank you, everyone, for your very kind comments and support. What a pleasant reception! Thoroughly warm and welcoming; I am both humbled and blessed. Thanks, Yoki, for bringing me here from another forum.
Hubert asked about my location and what Order I'm applying to... I live in a suburb of Minneapolis, MN--and am applying to the Eastern Order of International Co-Masonry (with grateful thanks to Hubert for making me aware of that option). It's a 7-hour drive or so to the nearest Lodge, but I love to drive (no exaggeration) and that's an easy enough distance, especially once a month on a weekend.
|
|
bod
Member
UGLE - MM (London), MMM RAM(Middx), OSM (London)
Posts: 1,296
|
Post by bod on Jan 31, 2005 18:52:51 GMT
7 hours is quite a commitment! Good luck with your journey and thank you for your posts - it's great to have another female voice on the forum.
|
|