Welcome to Magus Masonica

Livin' in hater's minds rent free - since 2006

"I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: 'O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous.' And God granted it."-

In the past 13 years since the inception of this site, we've NEVER received as much e-mail (cumulatively) about one individual as we have about Mr. Brad Cofield- Ed King-Masonicinfo.com

It may seem that we are being harsh to this individual, but only because everything he stands for flies in the face of our sacred traditions.
-inactive Mason and rabid fanboy Bryan Caldwell

Monday, November 15, 2010

The Hidden Danger of Choice

It is a trend amongst "progressive" Masonic orders to employ a "three tiered" approach. That is to allow both gender equal and gender segregated (male only, female only) lodges to work within the same system. The pitch on this type of set up is said to be one that would allow the individual lodges the freedom of choice. To determine for themselves who and how they want to work.

The 1613 Nation is all about self determination and choice. Then the question has to be asked, why doesn't the 1613 Nation allow gender segregated lodges within the community?

Well the answer lies in the practical operation of a three tiered model. This reveals the fatal flaws of such a system.

While in theory, allowing lodges to choose what would make them "comfortable" sounds like a grand idea. In practice it simply doesn't work. What it leads to is segregation. I will give an example to help illustrate my post.

Lets say you have a new progressive Grand Orient. Grand Orient X, and within the GOX there is an enthusiastic three tiered model. Well, we know through complied data that the progressive and alternative Masonic community is small. So, the idea that only one lodge of the Grand Orient X in a given metropolitan area is a reasonable goal. Especially in the beginning years of the order. If that lodge is not gender equal, it will be excluding potential seekers of light do to a condition of birth. How in any way can this be justified?

A rebuttal will be "we could help him/her" establish a new lodge. The first question I would have is how? How is he/she to be made a Mason in the first place? What if the next lodge that will be able to accept him/her is a substantial distance away? What if it is not economically feasible for him/her to travel to such a lodge? Are you then forced to accept only members (in this situation) of substantial financial means? Would this not be another form of discrimination?

My second point would be why? If you already have a functioning lodge, why displace a potential candidate or have to divide resources to create another lodge to accommodate a seeker that could just easily be welcomed into the already functioning unit? In a neonatal organization, don' t big decisions such as expansion have to be made as to not set up the new lodge to fail?

My third point would be how? A single seeker trying to create their own lodge can be as difficult as trying to swim on the beach. This is at the very least an uphill battle and will more than likely lead to burnout and disillusionment. A potential seeker just slipped through the crack. Potential for failure, very high.

Another point is , if we would fight so hard for racial equality, why would we allow those more "comfort" in a single gender environment, let alone actively encourage this practice? After all, how is it not a parallel case of discrimination?

Another problem of a fractured Order can easily come into play. Let's say Brother Jane Doe moves from her gender equal Grand Orient X lodge in San Francisco to Denver to take a new job. In Denver, the only Grand Orient X lodge in the area is male only. What is she to do? Will she be denied membership and affiliation within her own Order? How does this not spell total disaster?

I could go on and on as to why the three tired system simply doesn't function in a practical way but I think you dear readers are getting my point. The 1613 Nation is set up to be practical, accessible and with high functionality. Given these parameters we made the only decision that could be made. All lodges 100% gender equal.


No comments: