Masonic initiation was awesome!!!!!!!!

Originally posted by Orangemonkey
if you had the intelligence , and nerve to join, you would not have to speculate

Umm... don't you also need a penis to join?

Welcome to the Fellowship. A thousand or so conspiricists around the internet will now be accusing you for secretly planning to take over the world.

So I just tell them, "Yeah, we do our plotting right after we finish collecting for the hospitals, youth organizations and the spaghetti dinner. I've got my sights set on Paraguay personally."

So ignore all that. You just joined the greatest fraternity on Planet Earth. Don't tell anyone there's no goat.

Originally posted by Codemaster_01
So ignore all that. You just joined the greatest fraternity on Planet Earth. Don't tell anyone there's no goat.

No goat? Betsy was bucking quite hard at my raising. She was very upset apparently because someone had change on them.

Originally posted by conflation
Umm... don't you also need a penis to join?

Nope. Not even one in a jar. You simply have to be a man. Eunuchs, individuals with birth defects, and those who have been attacked by their wives are also allowed in.

Originally posted by AlexKennedy

Originally posted by conflation
Umm... don't you also need a penis to join?

Nope. Not even one in a jar. You simply have to be a man. Eunuchs, individuals with birth defects, and those who have been attacked by their wives are also allowed in.

I assume that the term "man" does not apply to those with, shall we say "aftermarket" hardware?

[edit on 8/6/04 by The Axeman]

congrats on your journey form east to west,west to east and back again

Originally posted by The Axeman
I assume that the term "man" does not apply to those with, shall we say "aftermarket" hardware?

Unfortunately, as technology advances, social ideas we did not forsee are created. I would have no problem at all admitting a post-sex-change woman into our Lodge. The real issue, as far as I am concerned, is to avoid the complications of jealousy and sexual competition as far as is reasonably possible within the confines of the lodge. Since it is fairly unlikely that a post-operational transsexual woman -> man would lead to jealousy or sexual inpropriety within the lodge, I would not have a problem. Others may disagree. Nowhere in the ancient charges does it state that a member must be a "man by birth." In fact, the Regius poem refers to potential apprentices as "he or she," so who knows.

Originally posted by The Axeman
I assume that the term "man" does not apply to those with, shall we say "aftermarket" hardware?

Interesting you should bring that up. We were just discussing that the other day, whether a woman born and made a man through aftermarket hardware would be admitted to lodge. The general consensus seemed to be NO, though there was some debate about whether a man, made a woman through surgery would be admitted into a lodge... the general consensus seemed to be NO...

Originally posted by AlexKennedy
The real issue, as far as I am concerned, is to avoid the complications of jealousy and sexual competition as far as is reasonably possible within the confines of the lodge. Since it is fairly unlikely that a post-operational transsexual woman -> man would lead to jealousy or sexual inpropriety within the lodge, I would not have a problem. Others may disagree. Nowhere in the ancient charges does it state that a member must be a "man by birth." In fact, the Regius poem refers to potential apprentices as "he or she," so who knows.

I take your point, and while it probably would not cause jealousy or sexual impropriety, I could see it causing some rather uncomfortable moments, unless of course he/she/it kept it to him/her/itself especially where I'm from... Ah, well, different strokes for different folks, I guess. I doubt if the drafters of the ancient charges could even dream up such a situation!

Anyway, I meant it as a joke, You kind of caught me off guard with a serious response.

Originally posted by The Axeman
Anyway, I meant it as a joke, You kind of caught me off guard with a serious response.

Ah, I know it was a joke, but I do think it brought up an interesting point: what are the reasons behind sexual exclusivity in the Lodge. I think there are a number of very good reasons why only men are allowed, but each Mason has a duty, I think, to try to understand why the Lodge is what it is, and to understand how the Lodge should and should not be defended.

Originally posted by AlexKennedy

Originally posted by The Axeman
Anyway, I meant it as a joke, You kind of caught me off guard with a serious response.

Ah, I know it was a joke, but I do think it brought up an interesting point: what are the reasons behind sexual exclusivity in the Lodge. I think there are a number of very good reasons why only men are allowed, but each Mason has a duty, I think, to try to understand why the Lodge is what it is, and to understand how the Lodge should and should not be defended.

Someone said before, it might have been you even, that one good and readily understandable (to anyone who is married - or pseudo-married, such as myself) reasons is that if there were women in the lodge a man's wife would be alot less apt to allow her husband to go at all. That may be more of a secondary reason, but it is a good one nevertheless. My girlfriend is going to be hard enough to convince that Masonry is good without having potential mistresses (in her eyes, not mine) lurking about in the lodge, heheh. I'm still working on "Masonry is not evil" with her.

Originally posted by theron dunn

Interesting you should bring that up. We were just discussing that the other day, whether a woman born and made a man through aftermarket hardware would be admitted to lodge. The general consensus seemed to be NO, though there was some debate about whether a man, made a woman through surgery would be admitted into a lodge... the general consensus seemed to be NO...

I would think that it would be the same for either way... someone may flame me for it, but I believe God makes men and women what they are for a reason, and changing that by surgery I find to be morally reprehensible. That, however, is a discussion for a whole other forum methinks...

Originally posted by AlexKennedy
Nope. Not even one in a jar. You simply have to be a man. Eunuchs, individuals with birth defects, and those who have been attacked by their wives are also allowed in.

Wow, how progressive of you.

Originally posted by conflation
Wow, how progressive of you.

Wow, how intelligent and thoughtful of you. Why, that response must have simply taken hours to write. Perhaps you'd like to call us "phallocentric?" Would that scratch your itch? After all, any group of men which wishes to meet as a group of men, must de facto be sexist, in the same way, I'm sure, that every man is a potential rapist. Monks, for example. Why, they must be the biggest sexists in the world.

You must be very strong... the argument of wishing to avoid sexual jealousy; or the possibility of men meeting to discuss their own issues as men; or the idea that wives of Masons might not wish to send their husbands out twice a month to a long evening meeting that could also involve women; none of these arguments can reach you. After all, you have a big nasty patriarchy to fight against. In every possible conceivable situation, when men have enjoyment that women do not share, that enjoyment MUST be extinguished. To allow men happiness that is not dispensed and controlled by women... that's just wrong and "not progressive."

The ancient charges were indeed written with sexual exclusivity in mind, remember we as Masons were originally practicing, not speculative as we are now women had more important things to accomplish other than building S****#@s temples after all they "women" had their place and did it well.

Originally posted by Orangemonkey
The ancient charges were indeed written with sexual exclusivity in mind, remember we as Masons were originally practicing, not speculative as we are now women had more important things to accomplish other than building S****#@s temples after all they "women" had their place and did it well.

Well, perhaps. But the ancient charges were written long after the Craft became wholly speculative, I feel. In fact, it's hard to say for certain that Masonry is indeed descended from the operative craft... John Robinson certainly seems to disprove that in the beginning of "Born in Blood." (Although, I should say as a caveat that I don't agree with his conclusions in this book).

I agree to some extent , but we must remember that the precepts of masonry, and there traces have been found to have at least 4 if not 5 points of possible inception. These dating to several hundred years after christs assumed death, to templar inception early middle ages. There were texts and laws written throughout these periods

Originally posted by Orangemonkey
I agree to some extent , but we must remember that the precepts of masonry, and there traces have been found to have at least 4 if not 5 points of possible inception. These dating to several hundred years after christs assumed death, to templar inception early middle ages. There were texts and laws written throughout these periods

Indeed but non of which have been proven to be the origins of which our contemporaries descended from. There are many theories some even claiming a line of tradition and teaching going back long before Yashua/Jesus/Christ, however without concrete proof, and the stamp of approval from the Grand Lodges its simply speculation, interesting and thought provoking, but speculation non the less.

I wonder why the grand lodge has never endorsed a defined point of origin for practicing/speculative masons, has origin points for cojoining affiliates ie: templars,royal arch,rosy cross etc.

Originally posted by TrueLies
I'm sorry but people who wish to join the masons I believe are insecure, it's human nature to want to belong especially from an early age like 8 months.
It's like an insecure prick joining the police force to get back at the world, or a border patrol who never got to be prom king or queen, secret groups are just the same, if thats what will make you feel special, by all means go for it, I just see it as a tad pathetic. It's not your fault if your parents weren't there to build your confidence up as a baby. All the feelings you learn you learn at an early age. It seems to be secret societies are there for an ego stroke, for those in life who grew up without much pride or confidence.

Look at the guy who started this thread: "Masonic initian was awesome!!!!!!!"

Translated: " I belong to a secret society which is a mystery to everyone else who isn't one and I am now part of something. I feel special"

There, you got your comfort and security need met...

Well good for you, congratulations...
people need to have different needs met, and some people need the rung of belonging filled , maybe someday you'll get to the rung of self actualization.


If and when you make it to the fifth rung, you will be able �live your REAL life.� The need for self-actualization and inner meaning is not always recognized until you have endured a period of discontentment.

good luck to you...

Btw, if you think your at the top, your really on the second step.. When you get to what I just mentioned, you'll be on step 5 thats when you know you've really achieved something... Again, i'm sorry if you never got chosen for prom king, and i'm sorry if everyone used to target you in dodgeball, indeed it can be a cruel world out there..

truelies...

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! What a silly post. Thank you for tickling my funny bone ! ! !

...now beam back to your own world....