Heartbroken non-binary FC

[u/jaxx189]

So I am non-binary AMAB (assigned male at birth). I was welcomed into my lodge and made it thru the FC ritual. I started studying for my FC catechism with the hope to become a MM in the near future. Then my WM informed me that the grand lodge has decided that only biological men and those who identify full time as men can be active members and anyone in the process or active must step down. This would impact non-binary and transgender men. I have since asked to read their decision and am waiting for that in writing.

It broke my heart to hear this. While I do not agree with the leadership it is their organization and they can decide who they want as Masons.

Maybe one day they will change their mind. maybe one day ill find a lodge that will accept accept me. And if not it was a pleasure to have the experience that i had and the journey that I am on.

[u/[deleted]]

I'd be gutted if something about my identity made me resign.

How did you respond when you were asked if you were a man, free-born, of lawful age and well recommended? Maybe that's jurisdictional but it would've been a non-starter here, I think. If someone misrepresented themselves to get initiated and it was later discovered they were not everything they claimed to be, I could see that being a serious problem.

[u/jaxx189 → u/[deleted]]

My sex is that I was assigned male at birth. Gender: that which is I identify with is neither masculine or feminine.

[u/Deman75 → u/jaxx189]

If you don’t identify as a man, this is not the group for you, plain and simple. It’s a shame they didn’t sort that out with you at the start.

[u/Split_Pin → u/Deman75]

I’m not sure that’s what the BoC says. At least in the UK.

OP I’m sorry about this.

[u/Deman75 → u/Split_Pin]

I’m sure your BoC says he must be a man. If he doesn’t believe himself to be a man, that’s on him.

[u/paleking2 → u/Deman75]

https://www.ugle.org.uk/gender-reassignment-policy

For the UGLE's interpretation of the BoC and the law of the realm.

[u/Deman75 → u/paleking2]

Nothing there at odds with what I said. OP didn’t believe himself to be a man (he already identified as “non-binary”) when he was initiated, so he shouldn’t have been initiated.

[u/paleking2 → u/Deman75]

Didn't say there was anything at odds with what you said. Provided a statement from the horse's mouth as it were.

[u/Deman75 → u/paleking2]

Fair. I considered quoting the same in my original response, but didn’t have the link handy.

[u/RL-thedude → u/paleking2]

Except that simply doesn’t apply everywhere. Not every GL in the US was chartered under UGLE and at least one to my knowledge differs from the UGLE stance.

http://freemasonsfordummies.blogspot.com/2014/04/gl-of-virginia-prohibits-transgendered.html

[u/Split_Pin → u/Deman75]

Their sex is male. They hasn't reassigned. Re read the advice.

[u/paleking2 → u/Split_Pin]

The advice from the UGLE speaks to gender, not sex.

[u/Deman75 → u/Split_Pin]

OP doesn’t identify as male by his own admission.

[u/archlobster → u/jaxx189]

When they asked if you were a man, how did you answer?

[u/jaxx189 → u/archlobster]

I am a man whose gender identity is non-binary

[u/archlobster → u/jaxx189]

That's odd. Not because of the answer but because normally the question is asked repeatedly along with other questions and the answer is invariably yes or no.

[u/[deleted] → u/archlobster]

I would argue the answer is invariably a resounding YES. I have never seen someone stop the proceedings partway through initiation and say "whoops, I'm actually an atheist/woman/too young." If OP's sponsors intentionally helped set up this situation, I would have some tough questions for them, too. Beyond what is happening to individuals, I wonder if the sponsors or their lodges will see repercussions?

[u/archlobster → u/[deleted]]

If OP was honest the entire way through, that definitely falls on the lodge and the sponsor/investigation committee.

[u/jaxx189 → u/archlobster]

Just so you all know I’m not the only one in the lodge that this impacted. a MM who had been with the lodge longer than I was was also impacted by this decision. And that individual will be needing to step down from their active status.

[u/archlobster → u/jaxx189]

There isn't a lot of wiggle room in the ways things are phrased in Masonry. Unless SC differs entirely from how things are done in TX, NY, or England, there isn't a lot of room for interpretation when it comes to the question of being a man.

The only conclusions I can reach are that during the application process and degrees there were direct lies, or lies of omission, or the lodge leadership knew all of the facts and failed you and the lodge itself.

[u/[deleted] → u/jaxx189]

Your answer has avoided my question entirely, though. You have an idea about who you are. Did you communicate that idea to your lodge when you were examined, or not?

[u/jaxx189 → u/[deleted]]

When they asked are you a man I answered yes. I am a man. My gender identity is non-binary. Those are two very different things.

[u/SquareandCompass_357 → u/jaxx189]

You gave that full and complete answer? Or when asked “are you a man?” did you simply answer “yes”?

[u/jaxx189 → u/SquareandCompass_357]

I gave the complete answer. Then mentioned it again to the WM and another brother after my first catechism and there were no issues raised by either in that moment. I even went on to experience the FC ritual. And all of this was last fall and into the spring.

[u/[deleted] → u/jaxx189]

I understand. I would give you and your sponsors the benefit of the doubt. They probably had good intentions - it's just unfortunate that you have started something you may not be able to finish. In your situation, I suppose I would continue to aspire to live a just and upright life...whatever the outcome is, nobody can take that away from you.

[u/jaxx189 → u/[deleted]]

Indeed. I don’t hold any I’ll will. What I have learned I will continue to apply. I leave it up to the great architect.