Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum
moralist

Ayn Rand thinks like a man?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

I even have the impression the whole left-right political divide is roughly based on it (with the left leaning towards 'there is no free will, determinism' and the right to 'free will exists').

I share that impression.

The right being a masculine archetype, emphasizes assuming full personal responsibility for the consequences of autonomous moral choice.

Whereas the left being a feminine archetype, promotes the belief that people are helpless victims who feel entitled to blame external social political or economic forces for their own personal failure.

This is what made Ayn Rand so truly remarkable: She had the rare quality of being a woman who could think like a man.

*mod note* split from an earlier thread. -Eiuol

Edited by Eiuol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I share that impression.

The right being a masculine archetype, emphasizes assuming full personal responsibility for the consequences of autonomous moral choice.

Whereas the left being a feminine archetype, promotes the belief that people are helpless victims who feel entitled to blame external social political or economic forces for their own personal failure.

This is what made Ayn Rand so truly remarkable: She had the rare quality of being a woman who could think like a man.

Look up the word archetype. If your misogyny was an "archetype", everyone would agree with it. As it stands, you're probably the only person still alive who thinks this way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look up the word archetype. If your misogyny was an "archetype", everyone would agree with it. As it stands, you're probably the only person still alive who thinks this way.

Just to be clear, you are disagreeing that conservatism is a masculine ideology, and that liberalism is a feminine ideology.

In the last election, 67% of single women voted for Obama.

Liberalism is indeed a feminine ideology which appeals specifically to single women who need the government to be their default husband and default father to their spawn. Liberalism is anti gun because it is feminine. It champions victimhood and government dependence because to nurture is feminine. It feels in terms of the groups of race gender and class, because collectivism is feminine as well as emotionality.

In contrast, individual personal moral responsibility belongs to conservatism, because moral standards are masculine, and so is rationality, and objectivity.

Haven't you ever wondered why Ayn Rand had the ability to throw off so many sparks? There is hardly anyone in between loving her blunt masculine honesty... or hating her guts with a vengeance. And this is because she was a rare human being... a woman who could think like a man.

There's a movie line by Jack Nicholson that says it all:

"How do you write women so well?"

"I think of a man, and then take away reason and accountability."

Take away reason and personal moral accountability from the right... and by default you end up with the left.

Edited by moralist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to be clear, you are disagreeing that conservatism is a masculine ideology, and that liberalism is a feminine ideology.

No wonder both fail then - they're sexist and misogynist. What year is it, 1854? I don't even know how your post is relevant to this thread. Really, it's not even appropriate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to be clear, you are disagreeing that conservatism is a masculine ideology, and that liberalism is a feminine ideology.

Yes. I think Republicans like you (not conservatives, what you're saying isn't conservatism) are anti-woman, not masculine. There's a difference. Nothing about your posts is "masculine". You just hate women. Masculinity has nothing to do with hating women.

(and, totally off topic, Liberalism is feminist, not feminine)

Edited by Nicky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. I think Republicans like you (not conservatives, what you're saying isn't conservatism) are anti-woman, not masculine.

Not at all. There are females and there are women. It's moral values which distinguish a woman from a female. Same with a man and a male. Married women voted for Romney by a 12% plurality. So clearly the majority of females went for Obama on the left... and the majority of women went for Romney on the right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not at all. There are females and there are women. It's moral values which distinguish a woman from a female. Same with a man and a male. Married women voted for Romney by a 12% plurality. So clearly the majority of females went for Obama on the left... and the majority of women went for Romney on the right.

This is so off topic and not true. You already said you like Ayn Rand because she is a woman that thinks like a man. What does that even mean, except that you have a low view of women?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not at all. There are females and there are women. It's moral values which distinguish a woman from a female. Same with a man and a male. Married women voted for Romney by a 12% plurality. So clearly the majority of females went for Obama on the left... and the majority of women went for Romney on the right.

Unmarried women are immoral? Wow, you're a religious fundamentalist. Why did you hide it, all this time? Are you ashamed of it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unmarried women are immoral?

Of course not. I never said that all unmarried women are immoral. You need to calm down.

I said that single women voted 2 to 1 for a big liberal benefits dispensing government to support them as their default husband and to be a default father to their fatherless spawn. This fact identifies liberalism as a feminine ideology, as opposed to conservatism being a masculine ideology.

So which ideology needs government more? Conservative, which encourages people to govern themselves, or liberal, which nurtures the dependence on government to take care of you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You already said you like Ayn Rand because she is a woman that thinks like a man. What does that even mean, except that you have a low view of women?

No. It can only mean that I respect women with moral values. And it also means that I respect Ayn Rand.

Don't you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had a growing suspecion for some time now that this individual has been attempting to fly some "false colors". To me, that self righteous, strident, moralizing tone of his posts (which only seems to be intensifying) is highly indicative that, underneath everything thing else, this individual is simply another fundementalist religious fanatic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AbA, it has been suggested the 'C' word would not likely be used outside this introductory thread.

As Peikoff so delicately put it: The Objectivist position is the opposite of the injunction "Judge not that ye be not judged." Our policy, in Ayn Rand's words, is: "Judge, and be prepared to be judged."

Edited by dream_weaver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In contrast, individual personal moral responsibility belongs to conservatism, because moral standards are masculine, and so is rationality, and objectivity.

Haven't you ever wondered why Ayn Rand had the ability to throw off so many sparks? There is hardly anyone in between loving her blunt masculine honesty... or hating her guts with a vengeance. And this is because she was a rare human being... a woman who could think like a man.

Basically, you said it's rare for anyone female to be rational and objective by nature of being female. Fine misogyny there. If that's not what you mean, you have a lot of explaining to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the Letters of Ayn Rand

To Sylvia Bailey, a fan

July 5, 1943

Dear Mrs. Bailey:

Thank you for your fine letter. Perhaps I am not too far ahead of my time if I can find a reader such as yourself.

On the evidence of your letter, I don't think that you can be one of the "little people." Not if you respond as you did to Howard Roark. He is really a test for people—in my story and in real life. Only those with a sense of human dignity can and will like him.

I know that it is usually the most honest people who accept the doctrine of self-sacrifice as an ideal—with the most tragic consequences. If my book has helped you in any way to discard that doctrine and to find a different, positive faith in humanity, I am grateful to know that the book has accomplished its purpose.

By the way, perhaps your mistake is really a compliment—I am not "Mr." Rand, but "Miss." But I am glad if my writing sounds like that of a man.

There is another, stronger instance of her making a comment about writing like a man but I can't find it yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At one point in her recorded Fiction Writing lectures, AR compares passages written by several different authors, including herself. She says about her own: "Mine is the most masculine" — meaning the most clear, precise, rational and accessible, while the others tended to be looser, often with a "dreamy" element to them.

This comment doesn't seem to have made it into the book version of the lectures (The Art of Fiction), and I don't have access to the recordings at the moment. Perhaps someone can locate this comment and transcribe what she said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are females and there are women. It's moral values which distinguish a woman from a female. Married women voted for Romney by a 12% plurality. So clearly the majority of females went for Obama on the left... and the majority of women went for Romney on the right.

Unmarried women are immoral? Wow, you're a religious fundamentalist. Why did you hide it, all this time? Are you ashamed of it?

Of course not. I never said that all unmarried women are immoral. You need to calm down.

...

Edited by Nicky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I found this sentence in The Art of Fiction, following a comparison of a portion of Atlas Shrugged with Victor Hugo's Notre-Dame de Paris:

"Of the two styles, mine is the more masculine, if by 'masculine' we mean a tight economy of intellectual content. Even if I write about violent emotions, I weigh every word for its direct meaning, for its connotations, for what it adds to the sentence. Mine is a more controlled presentation; Hugo's is much freer."

Bear in mind that these lectures were extensively edited for publication, and this might not be a verbatim quote from AR.

I also recall a statement, either from Rand or possibly from Leonard Peikoff, to the effect that in the early days AR often would receive fan letters addressed to "Mr. Rand," and that this pleased her greatly.

I find this issue personally interesting, but I don't think it's of tremendous significance.

Edited by Kevin Delaney

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the Letters of Ayn Rand

There is another, stronger instance of her making a comment about writing like a man but I can't find it yet.

I don't know if it is the one I’m thinking, I'll have to hunt it down, but I remember Mises once remarking that Rand wrote like a man and she took it as a compliment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Liberalism is a feminine philosophy while the conservative is a masculine one... THAt is totally absurd. Seriously, I reread this thread because I couldn’t believe moralist said that.

This completely invalidates the concept of free will – The idea that people are products of predetermined genes or physical nature. I seriously doubt the Founding Fathers found themselves talking ideas with Elizabeth Warren or Feinstein. I mean, really?

Second, modern day liberalism is in place because of some very prominent men, Wilson to Rawls come to mind.

But wait, let’s look at the conservatives with a few quick examples:

1. Agree with liberals on restricted freedom of speech, they choose a different subject to point the gun at (like porn or the internet).

2. They believe in government control of property (just replace guns with drugs for the easy example)

3. They agree on guilt as a social contract to force people to work together (slave restitution versus the idiotic original sin is an easy example)

4. Duty to the collective (socialism versus nationalism)

5. Perpetuation of the welfare state (George Bush committed one of the largest increase in government social programs in history until Obama came along – Think No Child Left Alone and the Prescription plan)

6. A priori supernatural beliefs - materialism versus God(s)

Perhaps liberals and conservatives share so many similarities that you should quantify them as transgender. Gender confused is even better.

But one more thing. This nonsense doesn’t even pass the basic common sense scratch and sniff test. My wife didn’t vote for the egalitarian and I didn’t vote for the inflatable doll, and my wife is certainly as female and last time I took a shower I was a male, so much for that.

Edited by Spiral Architect

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AbA, it has been suggested the 'C' word would not likely be used outside this introductory thread.

As Peikoff so delicately put it: The Objectivist position is the opposite of the injunction "Judge not that ye be not judged." Our policy, in Ayn Rand's words, is: "Judge, and be prepared to be judged."

Peikoff is spot on.

And Ayn Rand correctly interpreted that verse. We are judged by the same judgements we place upon others. "Don't judge others" is the amoral liberal interpretation. She is solidly with the men in this regard. No one can live unless they are constantly judging one thing to be better than another.

Edited by moralist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had a growing suspecion for some time now that this individual has been attempting to fly some "false colors". To me, that self righteous, strident, moralizing tone of his posts...

Have you noticed yet that my screen name is moralist? ;)

I clearly stated exactly what I am in my introduction when I first visited here, and for you to suggest anything else is being less than honest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if it is the one I’m thinking, I'll have to hunt it down, but I remember Mises once remarking that Rand wrote like a man and she took it as a compliment.

...and she should have. For it is a remarkable and rare quality when a woman has the ability to think like a man. This is one reason she sold millions and millions of books. She appealed to the rational moral values and sense of justice of decent men. In contrast, males who think like females are a dime a dozen.... they're called liberals. ;)

Edited by moralist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"By the way, perhaps your mistake is really a compliment—I am not "Mr." Rand, but "Miss." But I am glad if my writing sounds like that of a man."

Bingo.

See?

She knew.

And she also knew it was a valuable asset... because it was a powerful advantage which she did not hesitate to utilize to its fullest potential..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There are females and there are women. It's moral values which distinguish a woman from a female.

Okay, a woman is a morally good female according to you.

Haven't you ever wondered why Ayn Rand had the ability to throw off so many sparks? There is hardly anyone in between loving her blunt masculine honesty... or hating her guts with a vengeance.

Here, you're saying thinking like a thinking masculine has blunt honesty. Since you say masculine, you are also including rationality, and objectivity, by your own definition of what is masculine. This could be metaphorical.

And this is because she was a rare human being... a woman who could think like a man.

This where you go off on the deep end. It's one thing to be metaphorical, but it's another to be literal. You already said a woman is a morally good female. Here, you're saying it's rare for a morally good female to think rationally and objectively. By your definition, to think like a man is to think rationally. The only other ways to think are not at all, and irrationally. Therefore, you're saying it's rare that morally good females will think rationally.

I think it is sensible to say Rand was responding to general misogyny more than anything regarding the letter response, perhaps she was only responding to one aspect of being acknowledged as rational. I don't know though, it's just a thought. Plenty of people probably thought as you did: "a woman who talks about rationality is a rarity! She must have the mind of a man!" Underlying presumption? Women are inferior thinkers to men. I hope you see the implications of your words.

Edited by Eiuol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×