Objectivism and homosexuality

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Objectivist movement
A statue of a muscular man holding a hollow globe on his shoulders. A skyscraper towers above the statue in the background.
  • Philosophy portal

Ayn Rand, founder of Objectivism, held controversial views regarding homosexuality and gender roles. Although her personal view of homosexuality was unambiguously negative, considering it immoral and disgusting, Rand endorsed non-discrimination protection for homosexuals in the public sphere while opposing laws against discrimination in the private sector.

Ayn Rand

Moral views

In 1971, Rand published The New Left, a collection of essays that attacked feminism and the sexual liberation movements, including the gay rights movement. Rand called them "hideous" for their demand for what she considered "special privileges" from the government. She addressed homosexuality in the course of an attack on feminism, stating that "[T]o proclaim spiritual sisterhood with lesbians... is so repulsive a set of premises from so loathsome a sense of life that an accurate commentary would require the kind of language I do not like to see in print."[1]

In response to questions from the audience at the two Ford Hall Forum lectures she gave at Northeastern University, Rand explained her views in more detail. In her 1968 lecture, she said, "I do not approve of such practices or regard them as necessarily moral, but it is improper for the law to interfere with a relationship between consenting adults."[2]

Harry Binswanger, of the Ayn Rand Institute writes that, while Rand generally condemned homosexuality, she would adopt a somewhat modified view of it "when she was in an especially good mood."[3] Further, intellectual heir Leonard Peikoff stated that there were people with whom Rand was "just as close, knowing full well that they were homosexual" and that "she certainly regarded some of them as Objectivists."[4]

Political views

She endorsed rights that protect gays from discrimination by the government (such as sodomy laws), but rejected the right to be protected from discrimination in the private sector (such as employment discrimination).[5][6][7] The stated basis of this conclusion was that it was a product of her stand on property rights, not related to her feelings about homosexuality. Rand supported the right of a private property owner to discriminate, even on a basis that she condemned as immoral, such as racism, and that any act of the government to change this would be an intrusion on individual rights.

On sex roles

Rand asserted that "the essence of femininity is hero worship – the desire to look up to man" and that "an ideal woman is a man-worshipper, and an ideal man is the highest symbol of mankind."[8] In other words, Rand felt that it was part of human nature for a psychologically healthy woman to want to be ruled in sexual matters by a man worthy of ruling her. In an authorized article in The Objectivist, psychotherapist Nathaniel Branden, Rand's extramarital lover and onetime "intellectual heir," explains Rand's view as the idea that "man experiences the essence of his masculinity in the act of romantic dominance; woman experiences the essence of her femininity in the act of romantic surrender."[9]

After Rand's death

After Rand's death in 1982, her heir, Leonard Peikoff, publicly disagreed with some of her views. Peikoff argued that homosexuality itself is not open to moral judgment. Other contemporary Objectivists generally continue to support the view that, while government should not discriminate for or against homosexuals in any way, private individuals and private organizations should be free to do so.

In 1983, Branden wrote that Rand was "absolutely and totally ignorant” about homosexuality. Branden added that he saw her perspective "as calamitous, as wrong, as reckless, as irresponsible, and as cruel, and as one which I know has hurt too many people who ... looked up to her and assumed that if she would make that strong a statement she must have awfully good reasons."[10]

According to an FAQ from The Atlas Society (formerly The Objectivist Center):

While many conservatives believe that homosexuality should be outlawed and many liberals believe that homosexuals should be given special rights, Objectivism holds that as long as no force is involved, people have the right to do as they please in sexual matters, whether or not their behavior is considered by others to be or is in fact moral. And since individual rights are grounded in the nature of human beings as human beings, homosexuals do not deserve any more or less rights than heterosexuals.[11]

Objectivist psychotherapist Michael J. Hurd supports gay marriage as falling under the rights of individuals to associate voluntarily. Unlike Rand, however, he does not view homosexuality as immoral, stating that "a gay marriage... though unconventional and highly controversial, can be a loving and highly satisfying union between two individuals."[12][13]

Objectivist psychologists Ellen Kenner and Edwin A. Locke expressed opinions similar to those of Hurd.[14][15]

Objectivist Party

Chartered affiliates of the Objectivist Party have the power to adopt their own platforms regarding issues they feel strongly about. The following affiliate platforms have been adopted by the referenced affiliates:[16]

The platforms of Objectivist Parties of New York, Arizona, Indiana, and North Carolinia oppose government sanctioned discriminate against any one on the basis of that person's sexual orientation, support the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act, and the military's policy of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell". On a state level, they support full recognition of same-sex marriage so long as the government continues to issue marriage certificates to heterosexual couples, while the ultimate goal is to get the government out of the marriage business.

The platforms of Objectivist Parties of Georgia, Connecticut, and California oppose all forms of prejudicial discrimination, including discrimination based on sexual orientation, and advocate the immediate and unconditional legalization of same-sex marriage nationwide.

The platforms of the Objectivist Parties of Washington D.C. and Pennsylvania support the legalization of same-sex marriage.

See also

  • Libertarian perspectives on gay rights

References

  1. ↑ "The Age of Envy"
  2. ↑ Ayn Rand Answers, p. 18
  3. ↑
  4. ↑ http://www.peikoff.com/tag/sex/page/2/#list
  5. ↑ http://www.atlassociety.org/ayn-rand-100-will-businessmen-learn-her-lessons-about-politicians
  6. ↑ http://www.theobjectivestandard.com/ayn-rand/objectivism.asp
  7. ↑ http://capitalismmagazine.com/1998/05/anti-discrimination-laws-destroy-human-rights-and-institutionalize-bigotry/
  8. ↑ Mehr Freiheit
  9. ↑ The Psychology of Self-Esteem, Nathaniel Branden, 1969
  10. ↑ "Ayn Rand and Homosexuality" Paul Varnell, Chicago Free Press reprinted
  11. ↑ Moskovitz, D. (January 5, 2002). "Homosexuality". The Objectivist Center. Retrieved November 23, 2008. 
  12. ↑ Hurd, Michael J. (April 24, 2004). "Gay Marriage". Capitalism Magazine. Retrieved November 23, 2008. 
  13. ↑ Romance: Bringing Love and Sex Together (CD)
  14. ↑ The Rational Basis of Homosexuality, Kenner
  15. ↑ Dr. Kenner on Romance
  16. ↑ Affiliate Platforms
  • Sciabarra, Chris Matthew (2003). Ayn Rand, Homosexuality, and Human Liberation. Cape Town, South Africa: Leap Publishing. ISBN 0-9584573-3-6. 
  • "The Female Hero: A Randian-Feminist Synthesis", Thomas Gramstad (1999)

External links

Bibliography
Novels
Non-fiction books
Screenplays
Essay collections
Other
Philosophy
Influence
Biographical depictions
Film adaptations
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike; additional terms may apply for the media files.