Objectivism Isn’t For Lovers

Alex Heigl provides yet another reason not to be a devotee of Ayn Rand. He pivots off her statement, "I am done with the monster of ‘we,’ the word of serfdom, of plunder, of misery, falsehood and shame," to argue that such sentiments preclude the deepest pleasures of love and sex:

I have to think Ayn Rand must never have had any truly satisfying sex in her life, because, as anyone who's ever had an orgasm can tell you, you're not really thinking Rand_ryan_cover2about yourself, and certainly not the glory of yourself, at that point. (Maybe later.) You're not really thinking about the other person, either, except for maybe with some vague gratitude. The point is that you're not thinking. Sex, and its occasional bedfellow, love, remains the great equalizer: everybody loses a little bit of themselves to their partner, and they get something back in return. The more you give, the more you get.

Love is the same way — when you've found someone you can't help but put above yourself, someone whose needs and wants and weird little foibles you would die to fulfill and preserve, you lose yourself as an individual. In this instance, Rand's "I" is the ugly word, the monster. People tend to give couples shit when they shift, all giggly and happy, into "we," but that's an important moment — it's a mindset shift as much as a romantic one.

For a dose of hathos, check out the Objectivist dating site he explored:

There's actually an Ayn Rand dating site. They elected not to take the low road (as I would have done) and name it "The Fountainhead," but went with the more restrained "The Atlasphere." Profiles include blurbs like: "You should contact me if you are a skinny woman. If your words are a meaningful progression of concepts rather than a series of vocalizations induced by your spinal cord for the purpose of complementing my tone of voice," and "I am rational, integrated, and effacious. So far, I've never met a person who lives up to the standard I hold for myself."

(Image by Benjamin Wheelock)