I was just wondering. It seems pretty ludicrous to me but I was wondering if anyone would provide an argument for it.
For instance the idea that love cannot be self-sacrificial because the object of love gives pleasure to the individual, therefore whatever you do to protect/support your loved one is really protecting the way they make you feel and your own happiness. It seems really unrealistic though from the perspective f wanting to maintain long term relationships because those take compromise, both partners can't follow their own self interest all of the time. Also, that love is only the recognition of your own qualities and values in another person seems like it has undertones of narcissism.
Also I couldn't seem to find much on her views of parenthood. Reproduction doesn't have much worth in terms of immediate self interest. You have to redirect funds toward the continuation of another persons survival and interrupt your life to care for a helpless being. If all actions are supposed to serve self interest having a child seems like it can only be justified as a way to create a source of 'love' by creating a person you can imbue with all of your qualities and values. Which creeps me out.
Another thing too I don't understand is objectivism stance on the use of force. From my understanding she thought use of force on others was wrong because it robbed them of their capability to use reason. However if the most important thing is my own self-interest and happiness why should I care about anyone else's ability to reason or their rights.
I honestly want some perspective, not looking for a fight.