Objectivism takes a strong position on sexual morality to clarify that sex is good. That this philosophy makes that idea explicit is a positive thing, as with all issues, one must assert positions on the essentials. And essentially, sex is good. However, I have profound problems with Ayn Rand’s concretization of that abstract principle. And let me make it clear that sex is good. Sex is definitely good.
But on first reading The Fountainhead, before knowing anything about Objectivism per se, I was bothered (as so many are) by Roark’s relationship with Dominique and their odd sexual arrangement. While it is perfectly understandable that a loving relationship could grow out of something as vile as a rape, in the context of Roark and Dominique the rape is glamorized and held up as a kind of ideal form of sexual encounter.
It is such an irony that a philosophy that advocates freedom from coercion also admires the rapist. In answer to this Miss Rand makes it clear in a sense that Dominique was “asking for it,” that the rape in The Fountainhead occurred by “engraved invitation.” While it is true that Dominique was sending signals to Roark of her attraction, that fails to justify his taking her by force.
Even if she liked it.
While all sorts of justifications can be made for the rape in The Fountainhead, it is much more challenging to justify the description of the one in Rand’s play The Night of January 16th. The following is the testimony of the heroine, Karen Andre, regarding her first day of work in the office of Bjorn Faulkner:
KAREN: He seemed to take delight in giving me orders. He acted as if he were cracking a whip over an animal he wanted to break. And I was afraid:
STEVENS: Because you didn’t like that?
KAREN: Because I liked it….So when I finished my eight hours, I told him I was quitting. He looked at me and didn’t answer. Then he asked me suddenly if I had ever slept with a man. I said, No, I hadn’t. He said he’d give me a thousand kroner if I would go into the inner office and take my skirt off. I said I wouldn’t. He said if I didn’t, he’d take me. I said try it. He did. After a while, I picked up my clothes; but I didn’t go. I stayed. I kept the job.
Again, the rape is glamorized here. In addition, the act of forcing himself sexually on the woman wins her undying admiration and eternal devotion.
How can this rather twisted view of sexual morality be considered part of an otherwise integrated philosophy based on individual rights and in particular, the freedom from coercion via the initiation of force?
| 
