Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Aug 22, 2007 7:51:37 GMT
I see a movie on the horizon with the two "protagonists" in the lead roles FWIW, I suggest Aunt Karen's Lodge as a working title Yes. There is a vast, left-wing-feminist conspiacy here that I intend to expose utilising my razor-sharp sarcastic hyperbole powers! I will leave no stone unturned, no rabbit-hole unexplored (along with my trusty sidekick Mouse-Girl, she just fits better in them rabbit holes), in my neverending quest to expose the sinister plans for world domination through subjugation of the male Freemason! Noting that Bro. TWS, has progressively retreated from a civil, rational discussion of the issue with which we were dealing, until it now seems to be off the radar, I hope to be able to bow out again.
|
|
|
Post by penfold on Aug 22, 2007 8:50:23 GMT
Wayseer, et al, don't forget bretheren, all anybody can do is express their opinion, as an individual. None of us are equipped or authorised to speak for masonry universal, or our governing bodies.
As long as we all remember and respect that, even when we disagree, then their is great hope for all human kind (and mousey's too)
|
|
bod
Member
UGLE - MM (London), MMM RAM(Middx), OSM (London)
Posts: 1,296
|
Post by bod on Aug 22, 2007 8:58:57 GMT
I've heard it seriously 'explained' that the reason to exclude women from attending sport venues in Iran is in part due to 'Male Bonding' and the detraction women present would otherwise bring to the arena... what a load of rubbish. But then, we need to put our own house in order too! There were also similar concerns to given women the vote - and we saw where that got us! Really? Who 'explained' it that way? I ask because it suggests to me a fundamental lack of understanding of the regime and the ethos towards women in Iran, which is predicated on the Islamic traditionalist view of womeon as objects that inflame men's desires, and thus should be shut away.
|
|
jmd
Member
fourhares.com
Posts: 1,081
|
Post by jmd on Aug 22, 2007 9:28:05 GMT
...yep, that was the other part, which gets in the way of men being with men.
|
|
|
Post by tws on Aug 22, 2007 15:23:46 GMT
I see a movie on the horizon with the two "protagonists" in the lead roles FWIW, I suggest Aunt Karen's Lodge as a working title Yes. There is a vast, left-wing-feminist conspiacy here that I intend to expose utilising my razor-sharp sarcastic hyperbole powers! I will leave no stone unturned, no rabbit-hole unexplored (along with my trusty sidekick Mouse-Girl, she just fits better in them rabbit holes), in my neverending quest to expose the sinister plans for world domination through subjugation of the male Freemason! Noting that Bro. TWS, has progressively retreated from a civil, rational discussion of the issue with which we were dealing, until it now seems to be off the radar, I hope to be able to bow out again. Hopefuly, you are able to exit stage left with a chukcle. ;D
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Aug 22, 2007 21:23:58 GMT
Hopefuly, you are able to exit stage left with a chukcle. ;D Yheee Ahhh!
|
|
imakegarb
Member
One wee, sleeket, cowran, tim'rous beastie
Posts: 3,573
|
Post by imakegarb on Aug 22, 2007 22:16:56 GMT
Bro. Philip, I will miss you
|
|
jmd
Member
fourhares.com
Posts: 1,081
|
Post by jmd on Aug 22, 2007 22:37:40 GMT
A left-wing-feminist conspiracy? Is that similar to the view that "If you're not with us, you're enemy!"?
In any case, Freemasonic membership transcends political divide, I would have thought, with membership across a broad political spectrum, and without falling into conspiracy theories or being hoodwinked to the blinkered view that all that one does not like is a consequence of a conspiracy.
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Aug 22, 2007 23:38:01 GMT
Bro. Philip, I will miss you Bro. Karen, Bless you.
|
|
bod
Member
UGLE - MM (London), MMM RAM(Middx), OSM (London)
Posts: 1,296
|
Post by bod on Aug 23, 2007 9:41:56 GMT
No, not really JMD, it is simply the same as everything elese expressed here, an opinion, expressed and shared by some of the inhabitants of planet earth.
Philip, hope to see you here again soon. Very soon.
|
|
|
Post by leonardo on Sept 7, 2007 6:44:37 GMT
Sorry Brother, re-writing rules is simple. I do agree that the UGLE does not "need" to rewrite their rules. That is not in question. The question I had was intellectual honesty and the usefulness of the rules. I am still wrestling with that, it is entirely a personal issue and perhaps I should not have bothered you good Brethren with my musings on the matter. Just to clarify my own stand-point on all this and hopefully avoid the usual tag of "UGLE apologist". I think that there should be some form of concordat between the Obediences practising within the UK, not necessariy recognition but they should work together at GL level and get to understand each other better. I know that I am quite unique with what I know of them. Mike It would certainly be a good start
|
|
|
Post by AndyF on Apr 27, 2008 10:54:03 GMT
In my opinion (and I'm guessing a lot of others as well), the most harmonious way forward would be for all male, female, and co-masonic GLs to acknowledge each other as regular masons, and merely respect the wishes of male-only & female-only lodges to only accept visitors/initiates of their gender. We are all equal, regular, and valid, and should be able to choose whether our Lodges are male only, female only, or co-masonry.
In cases where women would like to become Freemasons, and there are no female or co masonic lodges near by, I would like to think male lodges could somehow assist in the formation of such a lodge, rather than force male-only lodges to abandon lodge harmony. I'm only new to Freemasonry, so I have no idea how this could be achieved, but surely we could work something out?
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Apr 27, 2008 12:04:09 GMT
Welcome Bro. Andy, I acknowledge your good intentions, but ask, Is it not remarkable that one takes for granted the prospect of mixed gender within a lodge disrupting harmony? I wonder how well such reasoning would be received if one were speaking of a racial divide rather than a gender divide. Finally, I recommend, The Intolerance of "Intolerance" , by W. Bro. C Shawn Oak.
|
|
|
Post by lauderdale on Apr 27, 2008 12:44:26 GMT
Bro Andy, I agree. Nobody wishes to force themselves on others uninvited.
One day perhaps these distinctions will be abolished in all but a few places. Until then I accept that, subject to the approval of my RWM and their being able to "prove" themselves, I can invite a Brother from a male-only GL such as UGLE, GL of Scotland etc to attend one of my Lodges but the reciprocal is not unfortunately available, far less so for my female Brethren.
To my mind Bro Bill is a Freemason, as are you, Bros Tamrin, Russell, Peter of GLAE, Maat, Karen, Jeff, etc, etc, etc. That we cannot all intervisit is to be regretted but that does not stop us being Brethren in our hearts.
|
|
|
Post by leonardo on Apr 27, 2008 17:09:51 GMT
Welcome Brother Andy to the forum. I had an interesting conversation along the lines you mention at a recent UGLE Ladies Night in Bournemouth (UK). The UGLE brother I spoke to on learning I am a Co-Mason echoed very similar sentiments to your good self, I mention this only to point out minds ae already changing
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Apr 27, 2008 21:09:44 GMT
Nobody wishes to force themselves on others uninvited. One's wishes regarding discrimination against an individual may not hold true when discriminating against a group. For instance, in a case of racial discrimination, the responsible Grand Master directed the ballot be set aside. Sadly, as the situation stands in relation to gender, if a mainstream lodge balloted to admit a woman, the Grand Master in that case would almost certainly set that ballot aside.
|
|
imakegarb
Member
One wee, sleeket, cowran, tim'rous beastie
Posts: 3,573
|
Post by imakegarb on Apr 27, 2008 21:51:26 GMT
Greetings AndyF and welcome to MFOL. What you've said is being said by many. And if it sounds simple, that's because it is. It can, however, be *made* difficult. And so it has been. Still, there are a number of Male-Only lodges that have provided (in exchange for rental) shelter to Co-Masonic lodges. This has been going on for quite some time and does not require recognition. I imagine we'll see similar progress in future. Again, welcome to you. I look forward to reading more from you
|
|
|
Post by brandt on Apr 27, 2008 23:27:20 GMT
Bro:. Karen, No Mason needs recognition though it is nice. We are all regular in our own paradigm as you so aptly pointed out in that great paper of your's. Nice work by the way. The various Masonic bodies do not require recognition of their regularity in order to work. The world is well big enough for all of us to work and prosper. As that proceeds, as it will, I will continue to open my door to you as a fellow Master Mason - no strings attached.
Brandt
|
|
imakegarb
Member
One wee, sleeket, cowran, tim'rous beastie
Posts: 3,573
|
Post by imakegarb on Apr 28, 2008 5:21:25 GMT
Thank you
|
|
|
Post by AndyF on Apr 28, 2008 9:31:26 GMT
Theres a difference between discrimination and personal preference. I don't go down to my local women only gym and demand membership, when there are unisex gyms all over the place. Not just because its easier to join another gym, but out of respect for their wishes. Male-only and Female-only Lodges are no different in my opinion.
If women were disrespected at all in a male-only lodge, I'd be the first to kick up a stink.
oh, and thanks everyone for the kind welcome.
|
|