"Etsy offers the 'unstoppable' quote on pendant necklaces and inspirational posters decorated with flowers adorned in curlicues. Yoga retailer Lululemon once distributed a 'Who Is John Galt?' tote bag. Pinterest boards dedicated to affirmations are littered with Rand.... Initially, I was surprised to discover Rand had become a leitmotif of modern mass-market feminism. 'I’m a male chauvinist,' she told an interviewer who asked her about women’s liberation. 'I am profoundly anti-feminist because it’s a phony movement,' she told another. The prospect of a female president disgusted her: 'She would become the most unfeminine, sexless, metaphysically inappropriate, and rationally revolting figure of all: a matriarch.' Nevertheless... [t]he slogans of rational self-interest are indistinguishable from affirmations designed for women with low self-esteem: 'To say "I love you," one must first be able to say the "I,"' reads a Pinterest-popular Fountainhead quote... Of course, whereas Objectivism promotes selfishness in the name of a brutally ruthless worldview, female-centric media encourages self-indulgence as a palliative to cultural forces encouraging meekness...."
From "Ayn Rand, Girl-Power Icon" at New York Magazine.
२२ टिप्पण्या:
That's a funny quote, because within her own movement Rand was THE Matriarch. She was the Fuhrer of Objectivism.
You followed her, and applauded her pearls of wisdom or you were out.
Period.
Better Rand quotes than blather from that lumpy troll Lena Dunham.
Ayn Rand was strongly opposed to the government discriminating against people on the basis of sex.
So, naturally, she was an enemy of the feminist movement.
Rand would hate this, but quite a bit of her philosophy is better in pieces rather than a whole.
After Rand met with Galambos, each pronounced the other insane.
Carnage in the fish tank.
Feminism Carnage in the Fish Tank
whereas Objectivism promotes selfishness in the name of a brutally ruthless worldview
I don't care much for Rand or Objectivism, but this is a Cliff Notes reading of her philosophy.
Would you ever read such words as a brutally ruthless worldview about Marx, even though it would be just as true as for Rand? No, because he's on the approved list & she isn't.
"Would you ever read such words as a brutally ruthless worldview about Marx, even though it would be just as true as for Rand? No, because he's on the approved list & she isn't."
I constantly read about "rabid" anti-communists, but never "rabid" Marxists (or communists). I wonder why?
I'm not sure that Rand herself would object to "brutally ruthless". She was a lot more Nietzschean than most of her intellectual progeny are.
@PZ,
I don't think Nietzsche is brutally ruthless, either. I don't think Nietzsche means for the ubermensch to rule over others by force of violence. For instance, in Thus Spake Zarathustra, Zarathustra feels contempt for the "last men", but he never says they should all be eliminated, only that the wise man makes his life over & above their petty concerns.
I do, however, think that both Marxism & National Socialism are brutally ruthless because both are political doctrines that see the state as the expression of either class or racial consciousness, and their belief in the historical inevitability of the class or race struggle makes the violence the state inflicts on their enemies the expression of historical forces.
Poor old Nietzsche and Marx. Tragically misunderstood.
We need to keep trying until we implement their philosophies the RIGHT way.
There are only two kinds of people:
1) People who misunderstand Rand and;
2) Those who agree with her.
My screen name should tell you that I am a 2.
How rational self-interest gets skewed into a brutally ruthless worldview is beyond me.
""In an elegant stroke of free-market irony, self-proclaimed enemy of feminism Ayn Rand has become a girl-power commodity several decades after her death.""
So-called "logic" and "consistency" are merely tools the patriarchy uses to try to keep women down. Fight the Power, grrrrls!
rcocean,
You're joking, right?
Everybody knows it's "rabid" anti-communists, vs "bloodthirsty" communists.
Don't they?
"The slogans of rational self-interest are indistinguishable from affirmations designed for women with low self-esteem..."
Sly dig, that. On the one hand, there's actually a real point buried in the passive-aggressive invective that writer spews forth: There's irony in the appropriation of an icon by those whom the icon was disgusted with. It rather reminds me of Carlos Santana admiring Che Guevara, a man who'd quickly and shamelessly snuff Santana and his music out without a second thought.
On the other hand, this is basically nothing more than a screed over something that was likely done superficially. Some "designer" somewhere probably just saw the misquote, looked up who supposedly said it, then ran with it as "grrl power" merchandising without thinking any deeper than "that sounds cool". I'd view this whole "Rand Branding" article less as documenting genuine malappropriation, and more as writer just looking to get off a diatribe and choosing to imbue cheap retail symbology with actual feminist intent in order to do so. As with most NY Mag or Times "intelligentsia" tirades, this is much ado about nothing.
Rand may or may not have professed herself an "enemy of feminism", but the portrayals of women in her novels were arguably some of the most heroic, individualistic and anti-patriarchy as any in history. Her heroines - and many of her minor female characters - were thoroughly first-handed. They thought for themselves, acted in accordance with their ideals, and were disdainful of the (many) male villains.
As with her male heroes, they didn't care much what other people thought of them. They set their own course, chose their own professions, ran their own love lives.
Isn't that the essence of what feminism should be?
People who say "rabid" anti-communists generally don't say "bloodthirsty" communists, and people who say "bloodthirsty" communists generally don't say "rabid" anti-communists.
Perhaps rccoen missed the latter group because respectable media is pretty much limited to the former.
"whereas Objectivism promotes selfishness in the name of a brutally ruthless worldview"
That seems a poor description of Objectivism, but a pretty good description of actually-existing contemporary feminism.
Roger Sweeny wrote:
"People who say "rabid" anti-communists generally don't say "bloodthirsty" communists, and people who say "bloodthirsty" communists generally don't say "rabid" anti-communists."
The only correct term for communists, in my mind is: Gawdam fucking red Chinese, Cubans, Norks, Europeans, South American or American Academics.
Rand will continue to be read long after all the reds are dead.
What was the "brutally ruthless worldview"? That a person's life belongs to him/her self? O horror! Enough people start believing that, real freedom could break out! Run for your lives!
By the way, would that worldview be more or less brutal than "liberalism" (and by "liberal" I mean of course "tax-happy, coercion-addicted, power-tripping State-fellator")? After all, Objectivists just leave you alone wherease "liberalism," being statist and coercive, grows out of the barrel of a gun. Just wondering.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा