What is your opinion on the fact that she was an adulteress, and a chain-smoker? Both seem rather contradictory to her philosophy. Ditto with her bigotry towards gays, and her open sexism.
Just curious, but why do you think that smoking, having sex outside a marriage, and recognizing the biological facts of the human animal (ie the physical superiority of males and the abnormality of homosexuality) are incompatible with objectivism?
I'm disgusted by some of her actions...smart, yes, good ideas, etc...but her life...that's a different story
As I had written elsewhere in ET, I think Rand's "philosophy" is overrated and "underthought." Her novels and writing style are way overrated.
If somebody said the sky was blue, but hung around with marxists, racists and terrorists and was a product of a corrupt Chicago political machine, would that make the sky not blue?
Adultery is breaking your word, and intentionally initiating emotional distress against 1 or more innocent people. Definitely not compatible with objectivism. Smoking is basically destroying your health, looks, and hygiene, as well as harming others via passive smoking. Definitely not compatible with objectivism. Homosexuality has existed since as long as humans have, so it cannot be called abnormal. And being abnormal is not wrong, if you are not harming others. In any case, she did not call it abnormal, her words were much more harsh. Judging people on their group identity is collectivist, the exact opposite of objectivism. Judging people purely by their sex is also collectivist. There are woman who are stronger than some men, for example. Or smarter, or better leaders.