Quote:
Originally posted by punkworld
Why do you think altruism is fundamentally misogynistic? I think altruism in it's purest form is completely gender-neutral, it doesn't discern between sexes and stuff like that.
I think the main effect of works like Rand's isn't so much that women gain an anti-male posture, but that they cast off what Nietzsche would consider a slave morality in favor of an egocentric one.
Ofcourse, an immediate effect of that would be them refusing the traditional attitude and behaviour expected from women, and some people might consider that becoming "bitchy".
By the way, why do you consider a lack of beliefs in things bigger than oneself a negative thing? In my opinion, it is the only thing which truly liberates people, and allows them to become creators of their own world and morality.
|
Of course, in theory, altruism is gender-neutral and wholly GOOD. It's in practice and application that the ideas of necessary servitude and noble suffering become capriciously associated with the latest System of Power -- and since it's usually men who are defining and enforcing those associations (between compliance and virtue), the implications for women (again, in practice, not in theory) are always enslaving and objectifying. Of course, as advice against this treatment, Rand's Objectivism is absolutely correct.
And yes, I do agree with you that (most of the time) belief systems (whether secular or sprititual) do rob the individual of power and self-determination. But, it is my personal opinion that GROWTH for human beings requires a constant struggling with the question: "Am I God, or am I subject to God" -- just like Milton illuminated in Paradise Lost.
j-