Surprise! The Masons now welcome Transwomen but not women

No worries! Well I'm not entirely sure, but I can tell you that you're blindfolded and there's a knife held pointing there. I did not realise this and got stabbed in the boob (not sure if that's meant to happen but it did). That bit's only for 10 seconds and you look a right knob anyway so probably not that bad :)

Breast baring!

Sorry on phone.

I think they are fairly safe because of the voting thing, easy to keep people out.

How do the self ID transmen you know deal with the best baring part of the erm, initiation I suppose it is.

That's really interesting puppies, thanks.

Hi! I'm a trans woman who was a freemason. My dad made me join when I was 18 because I was a bit too "fruity" for his liking (what with the whole "asking to be called Amy" and "taking estrogen" shtick) and he wanted me to "man up" so I got to hang out with a load of drunk old guys every few weeks . Anyway, I came out as trans to the whole lodge a few months later.

They're not actually welcoming of trans women, they just can't legally kick you out because you might sue them, they do very heavily imply you leave as soon as coming out.

Also: trans men are totally welcome - there was a trans guy at the lodge while I was there (and afaik he hadn't had any surgery) and my friend's boyfriend is at another lodge. You're more than welcome to self-ID your way in but you'd need to get two people to vouch for your character.

That said, I have no idea why that Edward Lord is even saying they're non-binary, except maybe their partner is and they decided they were too? I mean you can't blame a bunch of octogenarians for not realising someone who has a full on beard isn't actually a guy

And yes the same guy who thinks that anyone should be allowed into women's spaces on the basis of gender identity, also obviously bloody well knows full well that transwomen are obviously men. And doesn't care that women don't want men in their spaces.

It's a bit like the old 'I see them as women except for relationship purposes' types. Cherry picking to suit them, whilst screaming 'bigotry and transphobia' at any woman who dares to assert her own boundaries.

Oh and the Freemasons is a load of absolute bollocks anyway.

Transgender women are real women and have now been permitted to the Masons. No reason why all women shouldn’t be permitted.

@Hideandgo I can't tell if you are being deliberately obtuse here?

The reason that transwomen are allowed in the Mason's is because they are actually men!

I thought I read something which said that trans men are also allowed in. Which just leaves us boring smelly old women who aren't allowed.

It's also in the Guardian

The line that jumped out at me was, 'The rule changes have come after the Freemasons asked a senior judge among their members to look into the legal implications of gender reassignment ahead of an expected relaxation of the law, according to the Times.'

'Expected relaxation' makes it sound like such a done deal

I’ve only just read about this and I am very confused.

As I understand it transwoman are woman. There is no difference they are woman who just happen to have a penis.
So if transwoman are women and wish to be treated as such then surely they can’t join the masons.

From what I took from the Times article, the decision is that Masons have been told they legally have to allow any members who subsequently undergo gender reassignment to retain their membership since gender reassignment is a protected characteristic.

They are allowed to provide a single sex service, but not to discriminate against their membership. The impression I got is that they would rather have kicked out any transwomen but have been told it’s illegal, not that they are welcoming them with open arms.

This is all a moot point though, because trans women don't become women, they were always women. Therefore someone couldn't be a trans woman if they joined as a man, because they were never a man. Therefore there will never be any trans women in the masons. Ta-da!

This is the way it's going to go.

Some women will be privileged above others.

The ones born male and (possibly) the ones who go through surgery to emulate males.

Double standards yet again! However, this one goes against TRA, showing that TW are not women after all. Bad luck TRA but we have been trying to tell you. Thankyou Freemasons.

Just as an aside (with apologies)

I noticed that Sue Pascoe gave evidence to the Womens & Equalities Select Committee within a year of 'coming out' (her words):

Q180 Ben Howlett: Thank you ever so much for giving up your time to come in today. I thought it would be a warm-up question to ask about the good aspects and the bad aspects of being a trans person in the UK today. Sue, would you like to start?

Sue Pascoe: I am 55 now, and it took me until I was 54 years old to come out and have the confidence to lose pretty much everything in my life to be myself. I had to wait until my father and my mother had died, and divorce freed me from my duties to my wife, and then I could start to look at being myself. I told my wife before we were married that I had a feminine side to me, but she did not want it in our marriage and that became very difficult. I hid myself as Sue most of my adult life. I was made fun of when I grew up, and I knew with pretty much certainty that if I tried to come out when I was a partner in PricewaterhouseCoopers or in Andersen, that would probably be the end of my career. I had to wait for the latter part of my life to make those transitions.

It is interesting. I made my decision to become permanently Sue in July last year, and I thought that I would lose all my family, my friends, my business and my farm, be ostracised by my friends, and need to go abroad for an operation and then start a new life with a new identity. That was the basis upon which I decided to become Sue. Amazingly, it has not really been like that. Most people who perhaps have not been in my life have been fantastic and that is the general response I get—former work colleagues. It has tended to be people who have been very close to me—knew me as Graham and now see me as Sue—that find it quite hard to make that mental leap, but that will come with time. What is clear is that going back into the workplace, which I am going to try to do—I just do not know how I am going to be responded to, but I thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak today. Graham never got to address Parliament, so this is one up for Sue. "

data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/women-and-equalities-committee/transgender-equality/oral/23159.html

I think the Masons argument is that if a person joined as a male, then their transition is protected under the EA, so they can't be asked to leave.
I would definitely show this to the Girl Guides and ask how this squares with their guidelines of asking girls identifying as boys to leave. My reading of the EA does not specify which direction of change that applies to.

Edward's pronouns are he

Indierockandroll
I believe Edward Lord currently prefers the pronoun they/them.

It may be that you've read an earlier document (it can be a bit of a minefield). Not sure when Edward Lord started preferring these pronouns / identified as non-binary.

See Andrew Gilligan Times article this weekend:
(extract)

"However, Edward Lord, the chairman of the City’s establishment committee who identifies as non-binary and asks to be described by the pronoun “they”, said there “shouldn’t be a debate” about the changes because they “shouldn’t be controversial”.

“Trans women are women,” Lord added.

The move follows controversy about some lavatories at the Barbican being made “gender-neutral” and a row about transgender women using the City-controlled women’s bathing pond on Hampstead Heath.

Hannah Clarke, a feminist involved in the Hampstead Heath protests, said: “This is mind-blowing. It effectively abolishes women’s protected spaces ... It is dangerous for women and girls.” (continues)

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ladies-loos-at-city-landmarks-may-open-to-trans-women-l5lxjjv0z

Also twitter.com/edwardlord

Its not uncommon though for some male born people to transition in their 40s 50s+ having being involved with very stereotypically masculine pursuits.

On the recent SKY News focus on the GRA one of the interviewees was Sue Pascoe.

Sue has talked about her transition and this aspect of it in a Daily Mail article:
"The former Master of a local Hunt who lived for 50 years as a man is now celebrating life as a woman after undergoing cut price gender reassignment surgery in India.

Successful businessman Graham Pascoe swapped his life as an alpha male, living on a 40-acre farm in North Yorkshire with his wife and two children, to become glamorous Sue after being diagnosed with gender dysphoria in August 2014.

The keen horse rider, who is the process of divorcing her wife, was left devastated when doctors told her she would potentially have to wait up to four and a half years to have gender correction surgery on the NHS" (continues)

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3163747/Master-Hunt-woman-age-54-marks-day-man-going-bowling-enjoying-burger-sons.html

Sue Pascoe in her own words:

Link to discussions about the many interviews on SKY News including Sue Pascoe, SwearyG, Heather Brunskell-Evans, Debbie Hayton, Heather Peto, Susie Green & Jess Bradley (NUS Trans Officer currently suspended pending investigation)
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3311038-Sky-News-9-30am-today-re-GRA

I would imagine a number of later transitioning transwomen may well have been Freemasons

Surely being called "brother" will be incredibly triggering and "literal violence" against them.

I expect that this has come about as a reaction to a few individuals already within the Masons who wish to remain so - and want to indulge their cross dressing fetishes at the same time.

They are also avoiding law suits.

Look at us all trying to make sense of this insanity. But no doubt more delusionists will be along to put us right about our womaning and sadly lacking knowledge of womaning.

Some very good comments under the Times article - with a number pointing out that this has been placed next to the article about finding the Monty Python lost sketches

Surely the Freemasons should be next on Man Friday's list? 'Cos if TWAW, then TMmustbeM...

So...so....let me see if I've understood this...

You have to be a man to be a Freemason.
If you then decide that you are a woman after joining, you can still be a Freemason (is this Self ID as a woman or full gender reassignment?) but if Transwomen ARE women surely this is hypocritical?
You will be addressed with a male noun "brother" (isn't that misgendering and literal violence?)
If you are a woman who decides to be a man (again self ID?), then you must have had full gender reassignment to apply (it's not a given that you will be accepted at this point).

If people who self ID are what they self ID as surely they don't need to have gender reassignment surgery to be able to be Freemason?

My head hurts....is it too early for something stronger than .

Reading that back I don't think I make any sense lol!

That's the way I read it, REOLay.

Presumably then there would then be no further need to bare a breast implant.

The whole scenario makes me want to puke, tbh.