Thoughts on Calvin Robinson?

Yes, the Abrahamic religions are misogynistic. Is this some kind of shocking news to you?

In this case, CR is espousing bog standard conservative Christian views, based on what Ephesians actually says. Your argument here is with St Paul.

Nobody is in any doubt that CR is a conservative Christian.
Nobody ever thought he was a feminist in the first place.

'When he says biological sex is real', we agree because it's true. Unlike, for example, the Bible being the word of God.

The sky is blue, water is wet, sex is real, we're not stupid.

Being required to love someone basically means putting their interests before your own. It's not describing a kind of one-sided thing. There's lots written from a conservative h standpoint about why men and women's roles are described differently at all coming from a lot of different points of view, but there are people who think the command to love is actually more demanding in terms of self-abnegation.

I don't really think the assumption that it necessarily reflects a hatred of anyone is warranted.

Do you? I don't know. I mean, yes, the bible could be characterised as misogynistic, but I don't think CR is coming from a place of hate. I think he genuinely believes that both men and women belong to one another in marriage. He repeatedly points out that it works both ways.

I can't get upset about this, tbh. He's entitled to his beliefs.

I think telling women they need to submit to their husbands is pretty misogynistic.

Yes, heartbreaking. Still, Peter Murrell has time on his hands now...

dammit

I really thought we'd found the man who was going to lead us and make it all OK

I think so I'm afraid. Turns out he wasn't the leader of the GC movement after all.

Yet another false god. Typical.

They are desperate to get us women onside with their regressive gender movement .
Forget it!

I notice that the "long time lurker" OP never bothered to respond to anything posted here after starting the thread. I think we can take the supposed "Calvin Robinson is the face of GC views" thing as not being in good faith?

The thing about following the teachings of an old book, it’s gonna be full of old fashioned takes, innit? Hardly a surprise that a conservative Christian has some old fashioned sexist views on roles within marriage. It’s all perfectly congruent with the old books (and it’s not unique to Christianity).

Whereas vindictive ‘outing’ from someone who demands the LGB be force teamed with the T for evermore is far less congruent.

I don't think he's horrible about women? He gives a bible-based view which he also applies to men.

I agree with him about porn and also about the ways in which some women seek validation online being counterproductive. Dont see what's wrong with wanting to find a partner who's not on onlyfans and doesn't sleep around - fair enough, really. Don't really agree with him on the submit to your wife/husband bit, but then I'm not religious.

He doesn't say anything to make me think he's a misogynist.

The other guy gives me the creeps, though.

Well yes, that’s why I posted it, not for any of its nasty outing replies that I didn’t read. For the video, and for what Robinson says in it about women.

So we have to submit to our husbands, they have to love us. Doesn't seem very balanced to me.

I can’t really be arsed to watch a clip from The Lotus Eaters (Sargon
of Whatshisfaces ‘Conservatism for Lads’ project, my interpretation) especially not when it’s framed by India Willoughby as being something it isn’t (GB News) followed up by ’outing’ Calvin Robinson as gay.
IW’s racist and homophobic ‘slip ups’ are so common now it’s almost impossible to keep giving the benefit of the doubt on them. Frankly I’m amazed IW still gets any media work at all.

Yes, GB News and Lotus Eaters sometimes have common contributors, but no they aren’t the same thing.
GB News hosts voices from all over the political spectrum, including, as an example of a Labour-left voice, Oiley Moyley (LRM).

www.lotuseaters.com/the-podcast-of-the-lotus-eaters-610-15-03-23

m.youtube.com/watch?v=3VkWaYZQRWg

I’m not particularly keen on any of these people btw, but they all have a right to voice their own opinions (apart from declaring someone is secretly gay, that’s far beyond political opinion and into being personally vindictive - being gay is fine and thus not an insult to bandy about in a disparaging way, and saying it because you want to damage a religious person’s public reputation is beyond the pale. Far worse, imo, than some old fashioned conservative views about women and promiscuity!)

Apologies if this has already been posted but this is yer man Calvin Robinson, right here:

twitter.com/IndiaWilloughby/status/1636798445607370758?t=bNd7X7dcvhg76EMgAdbpXA&s=19

This is a great explanation of what happened to the left by Freddie deBoer, a US writer and old-fashioned Marxist:
Wokeness” centers “the personal is political” at the heart of all politics and treats political action as inherently a matter of personal moral hygiene - woke isn’t something you do, it’s something you are. Correspondingly all of politics can be decomposed down to the right thoughts and right utterances of enlightened people. Persuasion and compromise are contrary to this vision of moral hygiene and thus are deprecated. Correct thoughts are enforced through a system of mutual surveillance, one which takes advantage of the affordances of internet technology to surveil and then punish. Since politics is not a matter of arriving at the least-bad alternative through an adversarial process but rather a matter of arriving at the least-bad alternative through an adversarial process but rather a matter of understanding and inhabiting an elevated moral station, there are no crises of conscience or necessary evils.

If she published a book I would buy it - I am a huge fan ❤️

This is superb. Thanks for bringing Rachel Irischild into my life, Merida46 - I hadn't seen any of her work before. I've now found some more online:

irischild.blogspot.com/2018/03/menstruator-and-other-words-that-rhyme.html

Menstruator, and other words that rhyme with 'hate her'
if you wish to be inclusive
please amend your language usage
'woman' has now been disabled
this is how you shall be labelled: ....

It's worth visiting her site to read more! I've been poring through page after page of witty, incisive feminist verse.

Tried to find out if she's published any in book form but I couldn't find anything in a quick search. I know it's hard to get feminist writing (real feminist writing that doesn't toe the trans line) published these days: the books so many of us are reading and recommending are by a very small number of women who have broken through.

You can see when people like this talk about specific issues, they tend to assume differences of opinion on social issues are somehow all about "hate". If you disagree about some topic in feminism, you must hate women, if you disagree about the purpose of marriage, you must hate homosexuals, if you disagree about EDI, you must hate ethnic minorities, etc. The assumption is that there is no argument, it's just a justification for hatred, and usually people like that can't articulate the argument of those who disagree.

Damn, no I didn't receive it. And I also haven't had my payment from the US religious right, which I thought they sent to everyone who says human beings cannot change sex. As for the Peking Gold I was meant to be paid, years ago as a leftie activist -- that would have come in handy when I was a student, but again it never reached me.

I blame the postal service.

I actually think I broadly agree with what you are saying. I was trying to make a point in answer to a question and I was a bit black and white in expressing myself.

I obviously didn't articulate myself very well.

Forgive my sarcasm but I think there is a lot of black and white thinking about 'the left' on here lately. There is no 'the left' in the UK but there are specific groups that are moving the political debate in a very totalitarian direction.

Many of them are very right wing- the last decade has seen a huge accretion in government power to censor and limit speech push by the likes of Reece-Mogg and Braverman. Some are old hard left of Corbyn's ilk.

The bulk are neither. The people who've ruined Stonewall, the Lib Dems, Oxfam, the Guides and many more aren't uniformly left wing (even the ones who loudly claim they are communists). They are a weird mix of social marxism crossed with neoliberal capitalism and postmodernism. This bizarre philosophy- spreading cruelty in the name of being kind- is infecting everywhere.

I accept this third lot are quite loud in the Labour party and I agree with your analysis of what motivates them but I think it's a huge error if we describe the fight against self ID as a left/right thing and I think if we leave left wing people behind we will lose the argument.

I don't think that Doyle's position is so black and white. His concerns about Lineker's tweets seem to be around BBC impartiality and whatever contractual obligations Lineker may have? m.youtube.com/watch?v=tieMUVKcuD0

surely on a programme with that name you'd expect them to be pro free speech?

I would expect Doyle to be pro free speech because otherwise he's a hypocrite.

Generally the quality of the actual guests varys wildly as they try to represent a broad range of views. I've seen detailed discussion from genuine experts in the field and lots of empty talking heads like CH, many of whom just say whatever they think gets them attention.

I obviously didn't articulate myself very well. No I don't think that the whole of the left think that. That's why I used the word "tendency". And I don't think that people on the left are all bad people. I am able to disagree with people without thinking badly of them. Also politically I am on the left and most of my friends and family are politically on the left.