by Leo Hesting
Revision: March 23, 2025
Mensa has an "Irascibility Problem". Since we are an association the main purpose of which is socializing, we have to deal with this problem.
Specifically, a good objective would be to ensure that nothing like this (a real post with names anonymized) ever happens:
On Mar XX, 2025, at YY o'clock, "Mensan 1" wrote:
From what I understand, he ran for a national non-geographical role so that he and his wife would have flexibility to move.
On Mar XX + 1, 2025 at ZZ o'clock, "Mensan 2" replied:
I wish he would move! He's a leading reason I don't participate in my local group.
Yes, I do know that to set as an objective, that no Mensan will ever have an experience like this: that's a tall order. But we can come close to it. Maybe not each and every single interaction will be positive, but each individual Mensan's experience as Mensans socializing and associating with other Mensans, can be positive and enjoyable overall; to a very great (and greatly satisfying) extent.
I joined Mensa just about 4 years ago, so I'm a newbie; some folks have been Mensans for 4 decades. Therefore when it comes to ideas and opinions the obvious thought occurs that I should just keep my mouth shut. However a combination of recent and current events, plus some prior positive comment, indicates that maybe some of what I have to say may be valuable to someone. Some of what I write here, is cribbed from other things I've posted in various fora and on mailing lists. Those posts were kind of on-the-fly; I've outlined this current effort and tentatively expect and plan to write 7 parts, of which this is the first.
Briefly, my own history is this: shortly after joining Mensa, there was a crisis in my local group, Northern Michigan Mensa (NMM); the nominating/election committee hadn't been able to assemble a slate of candidates for the new Executive Committee (ExComm). The call for help went out and I agreed to serve, with the stipulation that I knew nearly nothing about Mensa, or even NMM, and would be learning on the job. I agreed to serve as Deputy (or Assistant) Local Secretary (LocSec) since that position required that I'd keep the meeting minutes. I figured that that was a good way to learn. Shortly thereafter the LocSec bowed out of that position due to time-and-effort constraints, leaving me as LocSec. In case it isn't obvious, what I'm saying is, I didn't really have the experience nor the qualifications for the job. In the years since then I've tried to remediate this, with partial and/or limited success.
Right away when I first joined Mensa I noticed The Irascibility Problem. It was really off-putting! I went on to Mensa Connect and approximately the first posts I read were a couple of Mensans sniping at each other about some inane thing or other. One of them responded by insulting the other's intelligence; the insultee responded that he had his "smart person card." Personally I thought it was kind of odd for a Mensan to claim that another Mensan was of low intelligence. I haven't much interest in others' spats - nor in organizations, nor communications channels, that support such spats. So I summarily wrote off Mensa Connect, and didn't log on to it for a long time afterward.
As I learned more about Mensa I found an emphasis on the Ombudsman position that seemed odd to me, coming to Mensa from other organizations and endeavors. I'd heard of Ombudsmen before but they were relatively unusual. Then when reading American Mensa's Actions Still In Effect (ASIEs), I noticed what seemed even odder; a list of individuals expelled from Mensa with names named.
Putting this all together I came up with what I think we all know: we in Mensa have an irascibility problem. I have talked to many Mensans and read what others have written; there are many explanations of why this is the case. A lot of them are really good but they're:
There was a time, during my parenting career, when my young son complained that he didn't like, or get along with, one of his peers. I explained that this was the way of the world; that in every environment, there'll be one person - if not more than one - like that. I gave him examples - mostly from jobs I'd worked. While trying to be sympathetic I explained that one way or another, "you just have to deal with it" (or with them).
But as I thought of it more I realized that this isn't true in all cases. It's true - or is often true - in many cases, for example:
And I suppose there are other examples, environs. Common to them all is, you're stuck with the people in them, "you get who(m) you get". There is no choice, or perhaps limited or little practical choice. My friend Sally's extended family has an "interesting" history including all sorts of broken (and "re-formed") marriages, and actors/individuals of all sorts, plenty of whom have plenty of grudges. Sally hosts a big family reunion every year and her rule is "If you can't get along don't come." They all do. No, it's not going to be super comfortable picnicking with your ex-spouse, but one way or another they work it out.
How they work it out is actually straightforward. Don't like somebody? Don't engage with 'em.
There is a related problem here - a structural one. Mensa was conceived to be an association (a very good conception in my view) but we are structured like an organization. It's a bad fit. I will write more about this in Part 2.
Of course solutions to this sort of thing have been dreamt of since ancient times. I'm not sure about the really "ancient" ancients - from the little I know the Greeks and the Romans were pretty in-your-face about either dominating and vanquishing, or having those things done to you. But certainly Jesus' answer to the "7 wives" conundrum1 which can be characterized as "Hey, don't stress - once you're in heaven everyone will just get along" was along the lines I'm thinking.
A lot of utopian idealists have posited that if we could all get just one thing right, everyone could get along fine. Typically what's involved is removal of a resource constraint - somehow achieving a post-scarcity society. Robert Owen, John Humphrey Noyce and others tried to accomplish this with socialism, from what I understand. Though Noyce had an extra kicker: he promulgated the concept of a man bringing his female sexual partner to orgasm(s), apparently for an hour at a time.2 Apparently that worked out pretty well until things turned sour.
Science fiction writers love to describe utopias in which everyone gets along without being dominated by a central structure or government. They don't use the word "anarchy" - I suppose 'cause that word was tainted, back in the day, with images of bomb-throwing bearded Russians - but this is what their schemes amount to. Again, more about this organizational structure or scheme in Part 2; for now I'm sticking just to the interpersonal, socializing aspect.
In general we need to provide Mensans the ability to pick and choose whom they/we socialize, cooperate, mingle, and/or partner with. Especially due to the irascibility problem, the model of fixed groups consisting of any Mensan that wants to show up, is flawed. Note the quote at the top of this article, about one Mensan degrading another Mensan's experience and dampening their enthusiasm and willingness: that should never have to happen. Of course one can't eliminate all contact with anyone unpleasant - for one thing, how are you going to know you don't like 'em if you don't meet 'em; for another, circumstances (such as poor planning or a mistake) can throw you together despite your preferences. And - other than Young Mensans - we are, after all, grownups. We have to be able to exercise some ability to enjoy life even if someone bothersome's around. But the amount of this "putting up with" can - and I believe, should be - minimal. The Slavic aphorism "a spoonful of tar spoils a barrel of honey" does apply; so does the principle "bad drives out good." Ignoring this or pretending it isn't so, simply results in disengagement and non-involvement, often silent.
Currently, due to the structural mismatch, Mensa local groups generally follow the classic organizational model of putting on "all member" events, planning, scheduling, and announcing them publicly (to Mensans) in advance. That's a model practiced by many organizations but it is not the best practice for us. Attempts to pound the round peg (Mensans whose need is to associate) into a square hole (an organizational structure) result in too much pain, frustration, failure, and quitting - including its subtle forms such as non-participation. Such attempts get kind of ridiculous - though they are well-intended and sometimes exquisitely crafted. Consider for example this selection from Metropolitan Washington Mensa's "Copious Code" (which is similar in a way, to American Mensa's ASIEs):
Selection from the "Copious Code", from Metropolitan Washington Mensa (MWM), dated August 13, 2024
200: MWM Functions
General201.1 Mensa events are generally intended for Mensa members, particularly events that are funded by the chapter. There is an expectation that when Mensans attend a Mensa event, they are there to meet and socialize with other Mensans. Guests accompanied by members are welcome at any function, provided the host is OK with their attendance and they make the regular contribution (if any is specified). For any function funded by MWM, a guest or the Mensa member that invited them shall provide $5 to help cover the cost of the guest. This amount may be paid to the chapter directly, or (if the member is the event host) subtracted from their expenses when determining the reimbursement. Prospective members are welcome, at no cost, for a reasonable number of visits, as guests of Mensa members. The intent of the guest policy is to allow a member to attend with their spouse/significant other, or for other circumstances where bringing a guest is deemed reasonable, such as a new member with social anxiety bringing a friend to make the social situation easier. It is not intended to be an open-ended invitation to regularly bring outside friends, or to extend an invitation to a group of non-members. It is not acceptable for a member to declare their guests as prospective members for the purpose of regularly inviting them to events, or avoiding the $5 contribution for MWM-funded events.
202.1 It is up to the host or hostess of an event to determine whether smoking, drinking, etc., will be permitted. NO ONE ELSE has this right, without exception. However, the presence or absence of restrictions on smoking or drinking shall not affect the "open house" status of an otherwise unrestricted event.
203.1 A host or hostess shall tolerate neither illegal activity nor obnoxious behavior on the part of guests at MWM functions. Illegal behavior or substances are prohibited at any MWM sponsored activity. In the case of a non-official MWM function, the host or hostess has the right to refuse admittance to their home to any potential guest (for cause), and this right should be respected by all members and their guests. In addition, attendees at an event must honor the request that "the party's over - please go home."
203.2 The ExComm expects all Mensans and their guests to behave in an orderly, non-destructive fashion at all M-sponsored events.
204.1 When possible, members should avoid scheduling events opposite official MWM functions. Official MWM functions include ExComm meetings and the Election Party. The Programs Officer may request that a host or hostess consider rescheduling such a conflicting event so as to maximize attendance both at the host's or hostess' event and the official MWM event, but no one shall prevent the host or hostess from organizing and publishing such a conflicting local event.
205.1: MWM events may not be used to promote any outside organization or service. If a host/hostess or member wishes to promote or facilitate any such promotion, it should be approved by both the ExComm and the host/hostess in advance. If the promotion is a significant part of the event, the calendar entry should clearly convey this to prospective attendees.
206.1 For events where a contribution is expected, the host/hostess may invite personal or business acquaintances to the event and may specify that such guests are exempt from any contribution. However, the total exempted contributions shall be subtracted from their expenses when determining the reimbursement to the host/hostess from the collection. This paragraph does not create an exception to paragraph 201.1's policy against regularly inviting outside friends or a group of non-members to attend Mensa events.
Reading the above, I can see all sorts of loopholes and other opportunities (or "fodder"?) for irascible or unpleasant types wishing to cause trouble, gain attention, start a "conversation", turn a social event into an impromptu adjudication, etc. For example section 203.2: what does "orderly, non-destructive" mean? Or "obnoxious behavior"? What if the guest makes a pass at the hostess? I'd certainly call that "obnoxious" (and I've witnessed a case of a man throwing out a guest who did just this) but what if the pass is made in a very refined, subtle, discreet manner? Think of a well-bred, well-groomed, European gentleman with fine manners.
I actually like the "Copious Code" - it's a masterpiece of fine craftsmanship in its way. And there's plenty to like! It's a long document. The excerpt above is just half of what it contains, about how to run social events. Some of it is really good; for example a section I did not quote prescribing quarterly new member orientation meetings. A good idea!
But, really. All these rules? And you know they aren't gonna really work. How about boiling it all down to:
In Part 7 I intend to write more about adapting to current-day reality. For now I'll just say, we may or may not like this fact, but nowadays people don't feel obligated to put up with others. They may have good reasons, bad reasons, dumb reasons, or even no reason: "I just don't like him/her" accompanied by not wanting to participate and/or interact with that person. This aspect of current-day reality applies to us; whether we like it or not, we have to accept things, including the existing social milieu, as they are.
I repeat - in an organization (thinking a department of a university) - someone (e.g. department head) might need to invite the whole department over, perhaps annually or quarterly. Like it or not! In a voluntary association this does not apply, nor should it.
I actually feel a little funny, using the term "Freedom of association", since it could possibly in coming years become tarnished by the fact that certain groups (thinking white separatists) are starting to use the term. I'll use the term anyway simply 'cause it's apt; and also, any hostility we Mensans may incur, we're already incurring anyway. I'm referring to the large proportion of the general population which seems to reflexively consider us to be snobbish elitists (if not anti-human Nazi eugenicists and/or wannabe overlords), and severely disdain us based on this.
Certain problems are naturally solved by humans, simply by the principle of voluntary association. Consider for example the freeloader problem, within a circle of friends who enjoy inviting one another over for dinner. If Freddy the Freeloader never invites the rest of the group over, the problem may be naturally solved simply by group members ceasing to invite Freddy over for dinner. There doesn't need to be any kind of group decision-making process - not even an informal one. Nor any rule, official or unofficial, written or unwritten. Nor any tracking nor enforcement mechanism, appeal process - none of that! Nor does there need to be any spirit of rejection, any rancor, any ill will. Some group members may still invite Freddy for their own reasons (perhaps he's really nice, or a sage who's taken a vow of poverty, or is the life of the party, or is pitiful), while others don't. Maybe Freddy gets invited to/included in other activities, just not invited over for dinner.
I have been writing in generalities, but this particular scenario is one I've lived with and practiced successfully for years at a time. I was part of a like-minded community centered around a food co-op; we enjoyed good food, good company, cooking, eating, socializing, the pleasure of active generosity and the spirit thereof. Incomes and personal circumstances varied quite a bit. Different hosts had different preferences and personal predilections; including differing tolerances for freeloading and/or particular individuals. The group changed ("morphed") and reformed with time, there were occasional split-offs and rejoinings. It worked out very well. Did the fact of someone going uninvited due to personal (or personality) circumstances beyond their control, tug at heartstrings, even sadden? Yes, indeed, sometimes. And if you felt that way you could invite that person over and into your own house when it was your turn, and feed them.
If everyone in the group is aware of this principle of voluntary association, and if it's applied judiciously, thoughtfully, and kindly, this can work. Of course hurt feelings can occur: preschools and elementary schools often have a "no invitations" policy to address just this. Other negative outcomes could include cliques, ossification, and/or fragmentation. So this principle - of voluntary association - needs to be counterbalanced by a general prescription for and presumption of inclusivity - we must actively work to get and keep other Mensans involved in what we're doing, enjoying. And from time to time, "mix it up" - try to attempt to bring together what may be disparate subgroups. But not to an extent or in such a way as to ruin others' experiences. Where and how to draw the line? In the end that must be up to each Mensan, either as an individual or as a group member.
There is no formula here because so much depends on individual personalities, and other characteristics (I'm thinking of autistic Mensans, agoraphobics, people with demanding standards as regards religion or politics, people sensitive to scents or who have allergies - or are just "sensitive persons"3 generally). But a principle that Mensans can form informal groups that are open to other Mensans by invitation only, is probably going to be necessary. There will always be a certain category or set of experiences that you as a Mensan are entitled to participate in - decision-making/ExComm meetings are an obvious example. But there are also "friend groups", organized organically and informally.
Really, this is just a natural part of life. And an integral - or even defining - part of what Mensa was conceived to be: a voluntary, agenda-less, mission-less association. More about that, in Part 2.
2Many sources document this; here's one: https://www.laphamsquarterly.org/flesh/reinventing-sex
3See for example this article: https://aeon.co/essays/what-does-it-mean-to-be-a-highly-sensitive-person
You are free to republish this article according to the Creative Commons "Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International" or "CC BY-SA 4.0" license, the details of which are described here: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/