Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Sept 15, 2007 23:20:46 GMT
Those who profess to favor freedom and yet deprecate agitation, are people who want crops without plowing the ground.Frederick Douglass Do not suppose the present “choices” (and the lack thereof), with which many here appear content, in relation to women and Freemasonry, were achieved without “force” against strong resistance. For instance, as recently as 2000, I was bluntly told by my Grand Registrar (chief legal officer) at the time, “ That part of the discipline of being a Freemason who is a member of a ‘regular’ Grand Lodge ... includes firm opposition to ‘co-masonry’.”—I resigned. I am often told, “ The time is not right,” which suggests the speaker concedes there is no absolute objection to women being admitted to mainstream Freemasonry but contends it is not practical at this time. I contend the appropriate time is long past and there will never be a time when there is no opposition at all, especially if mainstream Freemasonry is allowed to become a magnet for misogynists, precisely because it stands out in the community for its unwarranted and idiosyncratic exclusion of women. While Freemasons are told, “ The heart may conceive and the head devise in vain if the hand be not prompt to execute the design,” we find the following examples of the, “Not yet” argument: I wouldn’t say that this [exclusion of women] is a situation that will necessarily persist forever...H.R.H. the Duke of Kent, Grand Master UGLE However, we live in a changing world and Freemasons have learned to adapt over what is now nearly three hundred years of activity as Speculative Masons. But that speculation could not predict what the future may hold or how the winds of change may blow to influence its course, in the future, or even what the next century will bring.Roy Wells in “Freemasonry - Men Only!” But what of the future? Evolution is strongly at work and the female sex is coming very much to the fore. I think myself that there will come a time when the sex will be received—what the conditions will be, I am not prepared to say, but many details will have to be worked out.C.U. Carruthers, in “Women and Freemasonry,” Sydney Lodge of Research, 1918 23/8/1995 When our Grand Lodge indicates its sympathy with your views [on admitting women] and decides to change its position, then that is the time when you can be assured of its support and can present your views as having the backing of the Grand Lodge.11/3/1996 I have long held the view (and expressed this publicly on radio), that should the time arrive when we admit women as Members, it will be because Regular Grand Lodges around the world have all agreed to make the change. I guess that part of my role as Grand Secretary is to encourage the establishment of the type of international Masonic forum where issues such as this can be aired and discussed rationally.Ian McCulloch, Grand Secretary of the UGL of NSW & ACT, at the time, to the author The time is not rightThe Research Lodge of New South Wales, “That Now is the Time to Admit Women into Freemasonry” Not “forcing” the issue will result in further stagnation and a greater contrast with the wider community’s norms, exposing us to the real possibility of mainstream Freemasonry becoming synonymous with misogyny. What a sorry end this would be for an institution which was in the vanguard of the Age of Enlightenment and helped establish the values and principles of liberty, equality and fraternity, which have reshaped society. Now is the Time!
|
|
jmd
Member
fourhares.com
Posts: 1,081
|
Post by jmd on Sept 15, 2007 23:32:37 GMT
Re.: "I have long held the view (and expressed this publicly on radio), that should the time arrive when we admit women as Members, it will be because Regular Grand Lodges around the world have all agreed to make the change" reflects rather poorly on the leadership of this GL - in other words, 'we'll follow as last once all the others have made a change'.
Unfortunately, of course, it seems to be the implicit stance taken by most other GLs as well.
But perhaps the statement made in 1918 in the Sydney Lodge of Research may be taken as a centennial forecast for which to execute the design that the heart has conceived and the head still needs to properly design.
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Sept 15, 2007 23:52:11 GMT
But perhaps the statement made in 1918 in the Sydney Lodge of Research may be taken as a centennial forecast for which to execute the design that the heart has conceived and the head still needs to properly design. I know you are asking today, "How long will it take?" (Speak, sir) Somebody’s asking, "How long will prejudice blind the visions of men, darken their understanding, and drive bright-eyed wisdom from her sacred throne?"Martin Luther King, Jr. [/url] Please bear in mind that as far back as 1783, a Provincial Grand Master of Kent ("Moderns"), wrote: From what has been advanced, not one doubt remains but the ladies may, and have an undoubted right to be admitted as members of the most ancient and most honourable Society of Free and Accepted Masons. Capt. George Smith, The Use and Abuse of Freemasonry: A Work of the Greatest Utility to the Brethren of the Society, to Mankind in General and to the Ladies in Particular, p.365
|
|
|
Post by tws on Sept 16, 2007 3:20:34 GMT
You fellows sound like a broken record. Trying a slightly different tack, though.
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Sept 16, 2007 3:25:57 GMT
You fellows sound like a broken record. Trying a slightly different tack, though. That's my choice: Joining in or not is up to you or others.
|
|
|
Post by tws on Sept 16, 2007 3:34:47 GMT
I enjoy sparring with you Phillip. You get wound up. ;D
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Sept 16, 2007 3:46:49 GMT
I enjoy sparring with you Philip. You get wound up. ;D Yheee Ahhh!
|
|
|
Post by leonardo on Sept 17, 2007 19:36:23 GMT
There may well come a time when every GL will eventually realise there is no earthly reason why women can't also be accepted as Masons. full stop. But the situation as it stands still means both sexes are catered for Masonically.
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Sept 17, 2007 20:03:55 GMT
But the situation as it stands still means both sexes are catered for Masonically. Bro. Leo, There are geographical limits to that catering.
|
|
|
Post by leonardo on Sept 17, 2007 20:27:03 GMT
But the situation as it stands still means both sexes are catered for Masonically. Bro., Leo, There are geographical limits to that catering. Agreed. But in time geographical limits will be narrowed.
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Sept 17, 2007 20:32:21 GMT
A graver consideration (speaking of my experience in the mainstream): I was disturbed by the strength of opposition displayed by a few, against being in the presence of women in lodge, to be beyond all reason. They tended in all or almost every case to be the same ones swearing, telling offensive sexist, racist and sectarian jokes and behaving in general like Good Ol' Boys. Until I spoke up, they made the most noise.
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Sept 17, 2007 20:57:34 GMT
Agreed. But in time geographical limits will be narrowed. "How long will it take?" Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Bro. Leo,With membership declining (and becoming increasingly out of step), the limits are more likely to widen.
|
|
|
Post by leonardo on Sept 17, 2007 21:49:43 GMT
Bro Phillip I prefer the more optimistic view that there will come a time when all GLs will have better relations and a deeper appreciation for each other. Perhaps this is naive in view of my very limited knowledge but it is non the less an aspiration on my part. The one thing I would have difficulty with is anyone, any GL being "forced" to cooperate. In time I feel there will be a more natural progression towards a coming together. This I feel would be better for all concerned.
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Sept 17, 2007 21:57:27 GMT
Bro. Leo,
While I agree that your's is a preferable option, I do not see it as likely to happen (without any "force," however firm or gentle). There I hope we can agree to differ on the best of terms.
|
|
|
Post by mike on Sept 17, 2007 22:25:15 GMT
Phillip, The funny thing about this is that you do appear to be in a minority due to the fact that you don't seem to want to let the natural evolution that is already taking place within Freemasonry occur. Granted you may just be trying to add a catalyst, but you don't come across that way there seems to be something all too personal in your words.
You rail against the "old guard" that is already fading and soon to be replaced by those of us with far more progressive ideas and opinions, that just doesn't seem to be enough for you. You continue to try and set up a hue and cry of "Now, we want it now by whatever means regardless of the damage it could cause". An approach more likely to enhance resistance than co-opt support.
This approach is all well and good when people are having their real freedoms or even their existence put at risk but for freemasonry, nah. I just don't think you're looking at freemasonry the way you should. It isn't a political hobby-horse and it changes without outside interference, it is just old and big.
If your concern is just that there isn't equality where you are and you are really concerned that women are being prevented from being made Freemasons, why don't you do something positive and apply to Charter a Lodge under LDH or the Eastern Order where you are and help in getting one started. This would provide you with far more satisfaction in the long run.
However, if your real agenda, as mentioned in the other topic, is just the destruction of masculine Masonry, I see no peace for you even if you were to succeed.
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Sept 18, 2007 1:09:21 GMT
Bro. Mike,
I find speculation as to my intentions to be somewhat curious and I suggest that simply taking what I say at face value may be more fruitful. Personally, I do not see the “natural evolution,” of which you speak happening, (consider the disproportionate responses even on this exceptionally egalitarian forum). I see a continuing, unprincipled indulgence of unwarranted discrimination. What progress has been made has only been achieved in the face of strong resistance and what we have is the very LEAST that could be possible at this time.
I see that resistance as becoming increasing entrenched, as mainstream Freemasonry attracts more and more applicants who like it, at least in part, BECAUSE it excludes women. The "right" time to admit women is long gone, as is any reasonable period in which to wait passively for change to simply happen.
While there are always younger members coming in with different attitudes, there is also the constant aging of the existing members, who were once young and fresh and upon whom hope for future change once depended (we find that, often accompanying old age, is an ossification of ideas and a fear of change). By analogy, the River Jordan constantly supplies the Dead Sea with relatively fresh water but, with evaporation, the result is that sea becomes increasingly salty.
|
|
|
Post by maat on Sept 18, 2007 1:32:43 GMT
What progress has been made has only been achieved in the face of strong resistance and what we have is the very LEAST that could be possible at this time. Where does democracy fit into this "forcing" argument? We get really peeved when we see a democratically elected government pushed aside by an usurper. Maat
|
|
|
Post by hollandr on Sept 18, 2007 2:41:40 GMT
I wonder whether the exclusion of women by "regular" GL is implicitly a denial of the spiritual nature of Masonry
Thus, if Masonry is a profound spiritual path, on what basis does any GL refuse access by half of the human race?
But I expect that such arguments will not get far
Russell
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Sept 18, 2007 3:22:54 GMT
Where does democracy fit into this "forcing" argument? This debate really is going around in circles: I say it is odd to speak of a democracy in which half of humanity has no say, because that half is excluded from participation, and odd to speak of a democracy which “forcibly” prevents it members from choosing or not to admit people on the basis of individual merit, rather than on the basis of class or category. The proposition that Freemasons behave according to their precepts is not earth shattering and nor is the prospect of men and women (or of mixed races) sitting together in lodge. I can understand people being upset at the undemocratic denial of that freedom but the passion with which such freedom is “forcibly” opposed gives me cause for concern.
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Sept 18, 2007 3:24:36 GMT
Thus, if Masonry is a profound spiritual path, on what basis does any GL refuse access by half of the human race? Good question.
|
|