Ayn Rand Fans Relationships Forum

[Matty_UK]

Came across this when reading "THE FORUM for Ayn Rand Fans."

Man, I don't know whether it's lulz or just quite sad. Sort of made me feel sorry for them, they all seem so desperately lonely and isolated. Check out this discussion - it seems like they all try to bring hard cold rationalism into social relationships, and unsurprisingly wind up seeming like there is something seriously wrong with them.

http://forums.4aynrandfans.com/index.php?showforum=31


How do I get someone to respect my time and desire to not be dragged into their emotional hysteria?

Is it wrong to intentionally try to offend someone or hurt their feelings merely for the purpose of ending a conversation which you've already stated you do not want to have, and to end the process of this person dumping their emotions on you?

Is this approach more likely to just feed the cycle of destructive emotionalism and keep them coming back, or do you think they would actually stop treating me as an emotional dumping ground if doing so results in me being borderline verbally abusive every time?

I'm really desperate here... I have no desire to hurt this person emotionally at all, but I value my time and my own emotional state and I can't take it anymore. These conversations are hurting even the relationship I have with this person, which she apparently views as just a vehicle for this exact undertaking as being its only basis of value.

My candid expressions (which have been repeated and unequivocal) that I do not desire these conversations have had no discernable impact on the person's behavior whatsoever, because this indivdiual feels entitled to not only my time and participation in this, but my implicit validation of those emotions.


If this is an accurate portrayal of the person, then you can't, because this person isn't respecting you. Sounds like it is time to be coldly civil, but not rude. Trying to drive her away by being intentionally offensive will just be bringing yourself down to her level. Try being coldly polite, and simply ignore the person. If the context is an office, then perhaps you need to ask someone higher in authority to intervene and get her to stop annoying you.
....

Then why do you actively maintain this relationship? It sounds like she isn't trading value for value here.

:blink:

Man... imagine being in an intimate relationship with these guys... wow. Makes revlefters seem well adjusted and emotionally healthy in comparison.

[Aurora]

Then why do you actively maintain this relationship? It sounds like she isn't trading value for value here.
She's a communist, leave her immediately.

[hatzel]

...I don't see anything wrong with this...what's the problem, exactly? :confused:

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

...I don't see anything wrong with this...what's the problem, exactly? :confused:

The first quote sounds to me like she's interested in him and he just isn't getting the hint. It looks like she sees him as someone she feels comfortable opening up to. But since details are sparse this is mostly speculation.

The second quote's advice isn't bad per se, but if followed may result in missing out on a lot, in my opinion.

Personally, if someone comes to me with a problem they'd like to talk about, I think the decent thing to do is to listen to what they want to say, and offer comfort and advice if at all possible. You lose only time, and if you insist on thinking in such terms then you can consider such events to be an opportunity to gain social capital.

[AnonymousOne]

There was an excellent article about the psychological damage that Objectivism can wreak on a person's sense of identity:

http://www.nathanielbranden.com/catalog/articles_essays/benefits_and_hazards.html

I disagree with a fair chunk of the benefits, but the harms and hazards he listed are very real and things I suffered with growing up.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

There was an excellent article about the psychological damage that Objectivism can wreak on a person's sense of identity:

http://www.nathanielbranden.com/catalog/articles_essays/benefits_and_hazards.html

I disagree with a fair chunk of the benefits, but the harms and hazards he listed are very real and things I suffered with growing up.

The thing about Objectivism is that if one is of more rational turn of mind, it superficially appears reasonable - certainly the first time I read an introduction to Objectivism, I wondered what the fuss was about; what it stated seemed self-evident.

However, with time and closer inspection, I realised that Objectivism makes a gigantic logical leap from it's reasonable-sounding premises straight into the embrace of sociopathy.

A=A, therefore "fuck you, I've got mine"? No. Just no.

[Susurrus]

This seems to me to be natural for objectivists, considering rynd aan's attitudes towards love. The sex scenes in her novels are hilarious, and here's quotes from her on women: "the essence of femininity is hero worship — the desire to look up to man" "an ideal woman is a man-worshipper, and an ideal man is the highest symbol of mankind."

[Commissar Rykov]

This seems to me to be natural for objectivists, considering rynd aan's attitudes towards love. The sex scenes in her novels are hilarious, and here's quotes from her on women: "the essence of femininity is hero worship — the desire to look up to man" "an ideal woman is a man-worshipper, and an ideal man is the highest symbol of mankind."

Not to mention the promotion of rape in her books specifically Atlas Shrugged and her interest in a serial killer. Ayn Rand was just fucking disturbed.

[Pioneers_Violin]

I know a Randroid or two.
Oddly, I didn't even know of their Rand affinity until I learned of Ayn Rand recently.

Very cold, calculating and ruthless. I judge them unhappy as well.
I find it hard to imagine having any kind of successful personal relationship with such a person.

I imagine their "relationships" are based upon mutual gain as in:
Party "A" has sperm available while Party "B" has eggs available. Both parties realize that replacements will eventually be needed so a partnership for mutual gain is formed.
Great relationship tactic for robots but for people? Even the most stone-hearted Randroid has some human feelings, needs and desires.

Randroids are the modern version of Quakers and will probably die out from lack of intercourse.


Oh! RevLeft has some of the most well-adjusted people on the web that I've met so far... mostly.

[Susurrus]

Randroids are the modern version of Quakers and will probably die out from lack of intercourse.

I believe you mean the Shakers, Quakers are still alive and well, and to my knowledge do not mind intercourse within marriage(or, in some schools of thought, outside of marriage).

[AnonymousOne]

I know a Randroid or two.
Oddly, I didn't even know of their Rand affinity until I learned of Ayn Rand recently.

Very cold, calculating and ruthless. I judge them unhappy as well.
I find it hard to imagine having any kind of successful personal relationship with such a person.

You, have no fucking idea. You're constantly exhorted that you're some kind of mythical greek hero, that you can fully be rational and intelligent. Strong etc. All the time.

The big problem is that you're not. You make mistakes, you act irrationally. So you have this unrealistic ideal that you're striving towards and it destroys your self-esteem.

You try to be John Galt. You literally think WWJGD?, when ordering at a restaraunt you think what would John Galt order? What would John Galt drink? What would John Galt wear? Who would John Galt date?

Ayn Rand condemns homosexuality, so you begin self-repression.

Shit is so fucked up. I would wish Objectivism on no one.

[Susurrus]

The irrationality of her ideology is hardly surprising, considering she was addicted to Benzedrine. The one book of hers I was able to finish, The Fountainhead, was mostly written before she started taking the drug.

The main problem I find with her(besides the attempted sociopathy) is the disregard for reality she has. In the world of objectivism, the entire world is evil, lazy, and petty except the objectivists, who are emotionless ubermenschen who can do no wrong and whose reasoning always makes perfect sense(to nay nard), and the villians of objectoworld, the "altruists," have about as much ideology as Snidely Whiplash, being strawmen for her to unleash her fury upon.

Also, how is one to be independent when every action must be in honor of their glorious leader, Rny Dnaa, who they must all obey at risk of being called an altruist?

[Lobotomy]

Emotionalism? Is that a thing?

[Zanthorus]

Emotionalism? Is that a thing?

Apparently it's a bluegrass album by The Avett Brothers. Maybe Rand wasn't so crazy after all, anyone who listens to country music is surely lacking in the rationality department.

[Pioneers_Violin]

You, have no fucking idea. You're constantly exhorted that you're some kind of mythical greek hero, that you can fully be rational and intelligent. Strong etc. All the time.

The big problem is that you're not. You make mistakes, you act irrationally. So you have this unrealistic ideal that you're striving towards and it destroys your self-esteem.

You try to be John Galt. You literally think WWJGD?, when ordering at a restaraunt you think what would John Galt order? What would John Galt drink? What would John Galt wear? Who would John Galt date?

Ayn Rand condemns homosexuality, so you begin self-repression.

Shit is so fucked up. I would wish Objectivism on no one.


Yes, that sounds like my two Randroid friends.
Overpoweringly "strong". All the time, just as you say.
While of course still being a fallible human.
When I heard about Rand I asked if they had ever heard of her and it was like "she's my hero!"...

[L.A.P.]

I could only imagine that libertarianism and objectivism only alienate someone from their own nature. I always wondered if libertarians thought of themselves as "lazy, greedy, selfish" just like their outlook on humanity.

[CHE with an AK]

"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs."

[Honggweilo]

thats why libertarians pay for sex; stone cold emotionless objectivist sex as a commodity

[Tim Cornelis]

I thought it was already well established, from left to right, from liberal to Rothbartian, that Objectivism is nuts. Why keep reminding oneself?

[The Intransigent Faction]

I know a couple of objectivists at university, and honestly they're decent people until you get into a talk with them about politics. Or maybe they're just exceptions...Then I found a copy of "For the New Intellectual" mixed in with some of my dad's old books *shudder*. I never got more than 100 pages into Atlas Shrugged. Nothing to say that isn't obvious, really---objectivism is crap. Honestly I've got no problem with putting reason above emotion, but Ayn Rand can hardly be called reasonable.

By the way, I'm still waiting to hear one of these objectivists explain to me the abysmal failure of "Atlas Shrugged Part 1" at the box office.

[Susurrus]

By the way, I'm still waiting to hear one of these objectivists explain to me the abysmal failure of "Atlas Shrugged Part 1" at the box office.

Their current party line about that is that it wasn't marketed well enough.