Femeia, ca si evreul, e un produs secundar al evolutiei umane. Ca si tiganul, iubeste muzica, dar numai in masura in care acea muzica ii permite sa danseze. Creierul femeii, ca si al negrilor, este cu cel putin o treime mai mic decit al barbatului. Femeia nu este la fel de puternica, de inalta, de abila ca barbatul. Femeile nu vor putea practica niciodata anumite meserii, ele nu vor putea fi niciodata mineri, piloti de avioane, soferi de curse, nici macar bucatari profesionisti. Oricit de bine ar gati o femeie, barbatii sint cei mai mari bucatari, asta se stie. Femeile nu au ce cauta in arta. Femeile nu stiu nici sa scrie, nici sa picteze, nici sa compuna muzica, decit la nivelul lejer al intretinerii unui mediu placut in casele lor. Femeile ar trebui tinute in casa. Ele sa-si vada de educatia copiilor lor, desi cei mai mari educatori, tot barbatii au fost. Femeile sint incapabile de abstractizare.

Femeia este facuta numai pentru procreare, asta se vede clar din dispozitia anumitor organe in trupul ei. De aceea, femeile sint stapinite de sentimente, pe cind barbatii – de ratiune. Femeile iubesc sexul, de aceea nu trebuie lasate sa exagereze. Femeile, ca si ciinii, trebuie tinute la respect cu mina forte. Ca si ei, ele trebuie dresate de mici. Fetitele, mai ales, sint niste animale foarte periculoase. Nu va lasati fermecati de dragalasenia lor. Se vor transforma in niste mutanti, circotase, rele de gura, cicalitoare, se vor ingrasa si le va creste par pe fata lor cea astazi atit de dulce, sinii le vor cadea si vor face varice. Trebuie sa vedeti in orice fetita, femeia care va deveni nu peste mult timp.

Din pacate insa, statistic vorbind, femeile traiesc mai mult decit barbatii. Asta mai ales fiindca femeile nu se sinucid aproape niciodata. Ele nu sint capabile sa asimileze valoarea, nu stiu ce inseamna curajul, demnitatea, onoarea, discretia, modestia, controlul, fermitatea, munca, suferinta. Femeile nu sufera, ele mimeaza suferinta. De aceea, spre deosebire de barbati, stiu foarte bine sa plinga.

Femeile ar trebui inchise in rezervatii. Ar trebui hranite, ajutate sa se dezvolte, aduse in conditii bune pina la o anumita virsta, ideala procrearii. Pe urma, pe la 40-45 de ani, odata ce si-au terminat menirea, ele ar trebui eutanasiate cu blindete. Orice barbat ar merita sa aiba in patul lui, tot timpul, femei intre 15 -30 de ani. Cele peste 30 ar fi date barbatilor care nu mai pot procrea, ca sa se mai distreze si ei cu ceva. Nici o femeie peste 40 de ani nu merita sa mai traiasca. Ele nu aduc decit nefericire barbatilor lor si ii impiedica sa traiasca linga exemplare tinere ale speciei.

Femeile nu se deosebesc intre ele. Nu conteaza ce alegi, pina la urma tot acolo ajungi. De aceea, n-are nici un rost sa preacurvesti.

LD: Faptul ca poarta verigheta si din cand in cand se uita timorat peste umar (de frica sa nu vina sau sa-l auda nevasta) dovedeste cu cata frica in suflet citea de pe promter… Ah, femeile astea. Cum pot domina si de la distanta! )))

C: Mi-a placut cum vorbea tipu’. Ar fi fost un actor desavarsit, dar ideea discursului mi se pare penibila. Cati dintre voi aveti langa voi o femeie pe care o iubiti si pe care o respectati? Va dati niste tauri, ca voi sunteti cei mai mari si cei mai tari, dar fara o femeie … Nu zic ca nu este asa si in cazul nostru. Asa cum voi aveti nevoie de noi, asa si noi avem nevoie de voi.
Mi se pare deplorabil sa spui ca femeia este un produs secundar al evolutiei umane…deja incalca limitele bunului simt. Sunt curioasa cat de frustrat este tipul de spune astfel de aberatii- verigheta de pe deget ma face sa cred ca acasa il asteapta o femeie care sterge cu el pe jos si care il pune cu botul pe labe fara probleme. Vedeti un erou in el? Eu vad un barbat disperat de atentie, frustrat, care a fost refuzat la viata lui de femei mult prea bune pentru el.
@ pentru barbati: virginele sunt zdrente si femeile care au viata sexuala activa sunt curve, nu? La asta se limiteaza gandirea ta bag de seama. Trist!

(..) apreciez modul cum a jucat rolul, am si spus ca ar fi un actor desavarsit. Ce nu apreciez este piesa. Scrisa de o femeie sau nu, eu nu pot accepta ca o femeie sa fie denigrata in asemenea hal.

Both family and sexuality are rather hideously portrayed. First, is it ridiculous to call a woman a misogynist? Rand seems to rail against the “keep ‘em barefoot, pregnant, and in the kitchen” mentality, but also manages to put women very firmly in a subordinate position. Sexual activity (tame as it is) seems to be more of an “acquiescence to rape” than any kind of romance. (One also suspects that Rand was into bondage, considering a great many of the descriptions and comments.)

Marriage vows in an objectivist church would probably run along the lines of “Do you promise to attempt to dominate and subdue this woman until such time as you grow bored?” “Maybe.” “Close enough. And do you promise to applaud this man`s production until such time as you find someone with a bigger … corporation?” “Whatever.” “By the power vested in me by having scammed you guys out of a marriage license fee, I now pronounce you man and appendage. May you be unencumbered by small persons.”

Understanding Rand’s point of reference, her major female characters are prodigious – born into wealth and success, but possessed of the will and nerve to maintain reputations free of stereotype. Indeed, in terms of occupation and behavior, Rand’s women are deliberately more masculine than feminine. This woman-as-man character is feminine only when she chooses and primarily in terms of sexuality (Dagny and Dominique) or as a means by which to gain unsavory respect and favors (Dominique). This is both progressive for the era, by suggesting that women both can achieve great goals and deserve the chance to do so, and regressive – it only sees women as successful if they are successful in the same ways as men and never as the ultimate establishers of revolution and progress.

In each book, the male alone, the perfect male (the one I firmly believe Rand would have been attracted to, were he alive), succeeds in fully changing society: rising above all expectations and pre-conceived patterns through his own individuality and self-confidence or by founding a private utopia to restore vitality and innovation to the world. He begins with incorruptible ideals and even she, his counter-part, must learn from him: to abandon society’s opinions and ignorance or it’s slovenly greed nestled behind altruism. He studies hard math or science (Roark – Civil Engineering; Galt – Physics and Philosophy); he is physically fit, tall, sharp-boned and striking. Galt at least, with his blond hair and blue eyes, could be Russian in physiognomy, by description. (Though not so, Howard Roark, whose most outstanding physical characteristic is his redheaded-ness.)

In Atlas Shrugged, in particular, Dagny overpowers men in almost every field. Except for that of sexuality. Here, she is submissive almost to a fault, seeking only to be used for the male protagonist’s pleasure. Even when Hank Rearden believes his desires towards her degrade her, she wishes only to be “degraded”. In Dominique’s case, she even wishes to be “raped” in order to feel more completely owned by Roark. This, perhaps, is Rand’s way of showing that sex is not disgraceful, that a woman may succeed within her career but still have womanly instincts. But must womanly instincts be also submissive instincts?