Talk:Freemasonry and women
 | Freemasonry and women has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: October 8, 2013. (Reviewed version). |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Freemasonry and women article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| Archives: 1 |
| This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Which came first?
editI find nearly-identical content here. This isn't the first time I've seen a page that essentially copied Wikipedia wholesale; however, previously I've seen Wikipedia cited. So which page came first? Wikipedia's, or "NationMaster"'s? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.198.31.21 (talk) 21:28, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
- I just checked that, and it is cited to Wikipedia way at the bottom, so we're good.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 22:21, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
Woefully inadequate
editThis page is woefully inadequate. We read that: "Traditionally, only men can be made Freemasons in Regular Freemasonry." Yet the reality is that women were admitted to lodges before the innovation of regularity. Currently the earliest known ritual intended for women's participation is that of Loge de Juste in the Netherlands, dating from 1751, two years before the veritable schism in English Freemasonry of 1753. I wonder whether we would not be better rewriting the whole thing? What do people think?Harrypotter 23:39, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Eight years later, the article has improved but the introduction still does a disservice by framing the Premier Grand Lodge of England as orthodox and every other Masonic organization as heretical. There's no basis for that dichotomy. Certainly the scope of the article should include Masonic organizations that don't allow female members, but the one strain of Freemasonry is being given undue weight. This came to my attention, because this logic is being used to exclude biographies of women from being included in Masonic categories because they aren't "real". RevelationDirect (talk) 05:00, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
- The intro states "A few women were involved in Freemasonry before the 18th century; however the first printed constitutions of the Premier Grand Lodge of England appeared to bar them from the Craft forever." I don't see that this is undue weight, since it was the ONLY Grand Lodge at the time (1723). The result of this regrettable prejudice was all masonic lodges, of all classes and persuasions, became big boys clubs until 1893. Remember, the rite of the Premier Grand Lodge was erased in 1813 (as heretical), and it only persists in the Continental lodges it spun off, which are gradually starting to admit women. That's a mouthful for the intro, but suggestions are welcome. Fiddlersmouth (talk) 23:32, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
- Yeah it is clunky and makes no sense so I re-wrote it. Jjazz76 (talk) 01:48, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
Update to section on section on membership in the Ladies Oriental Shrine of North America. Relation to a Mason is no longer required if endorsed by two members in good standing. https://ladiesorientalshrine.org/join/
editAny Lady wishing to become a member of The Ladies’ Oriental Shrine of North America, Inc., must be related by birth, marriage or adoption to a member in good standing, or a deceased member who was in good standing at the time of death, of the Shriners International or a Master Mason; or have the endorsement of two (2) members in good standing of the Ladies’ Oriental Shrine of North America, Inc., and must be at least eighteen (18) years of age. 70.40.26.194 (talk) 19:12, 21 February 2024 (UTC)